advertisement


Lib Dems - Tories in Disguise

Just a thought, but I wonder if Swinson has publicly ruled out a coalition with either main party so as not to "scare" any potential LibDem voters, while privately being open to a coalition with Labour as a way to end Brexit.
 
But claiming neither Johnson nor Corbyn is 'fit for office', isn't really leaving her much wriggle room is it?
 
No - I wasn't defending Swinson - she seems "undiplomatic" and not party leadership material, just wondering out loud - if the situation were to arise, where a coalition with Labour could save the country from a hard Brexit, whether she would take that opportunity.
 
Tony L said:
Three years ago, and by idiots. It has proven impossible to implement without huge damage and cost to the nation. Any intelligent party would realise this and attempt to reverse out. Oh, wait, one is!

PS Winning a parliamentary majority with a clearly stated manifesto pledge *is* a mandate, obvs. I’m amazed so many Labour thicks are (deliberately) struggling with this.
Click to expand...

You main problem wrt the LDs stance is: what chance do that have of actually getting an LD *majority* in the HoC? i.e. one where they are even the biggest party in some kind of combination of parties? Their stance is more likely to weaken the opposition overall and add to the number of tories who get in.

We also need to keep in mind that if we want to survive as a society after we finally leave *or* remain wounds will need to be healed. Simply telling those who voted 'leave' last time to sod off would boost the extreme and alt-right. Gives the people behind them more 'evidence' for their cause.

Like it or not, we did have a referendum, and got the result we did. Yes, it is a pretty shakey result, but as it stands it is the *only* result on this point. So as a shakey result, it makes good sense to go for a "is this what you meant?" vote. *If* people want either 'yes, leave' or 'no remain' they can then vote for it. That's the only way to lance this boil and stop it festering on into the future, giving ammo to the alt right and their backers.

BTW I've been wondering if anyone else here has recently read Paul Mason's book "Clear Bright Future". I've been reading it recently/now and find a lot of it quite interesting and relevant. Not all of it, but it makes some good points about how the neoliberal rich have been using processes like Brexit and the rise of the alt right, etc. And some interesting ideas about how best to deal with it.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
it makes good sense to go for a "is this what you meant?" vote. *If* people want either 'yes, leave' or 'no remain' they can then vote for it. That's the only way to lance this boil and stop it festering on into the future, giving ammo to the alt right and their backers.
Click to expand...

I agree that a second referendum is less inflammatory than direct revokation of A50, but I don't think a second referendum will be particularly successful in lancing the boil as you put it, especially if hard brexit is not on the referendum. A Labour BRINO vs remain referendum would in no way placate ardent Brexiters.

It will take decades of hard work toward a more egalitarian society to lance the boil of Brexit.
 
Paul R said:
Corbyn and his supporters are vile human beings with no redeeming qualities. So I don't care.
Click to expand...
Coming from you, I'm inclined to take that as a compliment.

However, since I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, I'll report your post as a despicable slur against people who just happen to disagree with you.

I'll also self-report this post for the implied ad-hom attack.
 
droodzilla said:
Coming from you, I'm inclined to take that as a compliment.

However, since I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, I'll report your post as a despicable slur against people who just happen to disagree with you.

I'll also self-report this post for the implied ad-hom attack.
Click to expand...
I've been called a moron just now on a thread somewhere, being part of the 52%. There wouldn't be much left if all the childish stuff got deleted.
Post 15 on here. https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/saving-lives-at-sea.231761/#post-3763915
 
sean99 said:
I agree that a second referendum is less inflammatory than direct revokation of A50, but I don't think a second referendum will be particularly successful in lancing the boil as you put it, especially if hard brexit is not on the referendum. A Labour BRINO vs remain referendum would in no way placate ardent Brexiters.

It will take decades of hard work toward a more egalitarian society to lance the boil of Brexit.
Click to expand...

May's red lines have done a lot of damage in opening up the playing field for the hard right. I just can't see who is going to deliver that social reform you imply, even just the reversing of the coalition's benefit cuts, if people are not prepared to vote Labour.
 
I see Swinson's all dressed in blue for her leader's address this afternoon, she couldn't look more like her alter ego if she tried, maybe it just faded a little in the wash ;)
 
sean99 said:
I agree that a second referendum is less inflammatory than direct revokation of A50, but I don't think a second referendum will be particularly successful in lancing the boil as you put it, especially if hard brexit is not on the referendum. A Labour BRINO vs remain referendum would in no way placate ardent Brexiters.

It will take decades of hard work toward a more egalitarian society to lance the boil of Brexit.
Click to expand...

I agree that there is no magic wand that will quickly cure the bitter divisions which have been stirred by by those driving Brexit as a staging post on their intended trajectory. But another vote does seem the 'least bad' way forwards given where we are now. The LD approach of simply discarding the vote can be expected to be far worse in its consequences.

The way to undercut the headbangers is to ensure our society and economy is run in a fairer and more open way. The problem is the neoliberal dogma that 'justifies' austerity, privitisations, individualisation, etc, driven by the well-placed few who benefit from it. In that respect the EU actually need us just as we need them. So the real campaign thoughout should have been to reform the EU, not 'leave' and then still have to deal with it from a weakened position.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
The way to undercut the headbangers is to ensure our society and economy is run in a fairer and more open way. The problem is the neoliberal dogma that 'justifies' austerity, privitisations, individualisation, etc, driven by the well-placed few who benefit from it. In that respect the EU actually need us just as we need them. So the real campaign thoughout should have been to reform the EU, not 'leave' and then still have to deal with it from a weakened position.
Click to expand...

The EU is incapable of being reformed, both politically and economically - this book sets out Lapavitsa's thinking quite clearly on the subject. I've cited it before but nobody has indicated so far that they've read it...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1509531068/?tag=pinkfishmedia-21
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
sean99 said:
It will take decades of hard work toward a more egalitarian society to lance the boil of Brexit.
Click to expand...
I don't think the decades bit is true. If today we were to start talking about the actual causes of why the 99% are getting poorer and less secure in a wealthy country, the real reasons those behind brexit are funding and driving it along, start putting together a set of actions that people can get positive about to address what is actually wrong rather than misdirection towards emotive populist national nonsense,... it is likely to rapidly dissipate in a period of months. But it is absolutely essential that there is something positive to support and that something is a significant change rather than continuing as we are. Very few brexit supporters are going to support continuing as we are regardless of whether it is the least worst option for them.
 
gavreid said:
The EU is incapable of being reformed, both politically and economically - this book sets out Lapavitsa's thinking quite clearly on the subject. I've cited it before but nobody has indicated so far that they've read it...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1509531068/?tag=pinkfishmedia-21
Click to expand...

I'll ask our local library to get a copy. That means I can read it, and so can others. Without having (yet) read it, I suspect I'll agree with the basic analysis of what is wrong with the EU. But disagree about it being impossible to change it. That simply sounds like defeatism to me, and would suit the neoliberals. It is clear enough that many people in many EU member states want change. if enough do, it must occur.

However if it doesn't change and we leave we will *still* have to deal with it and cope with its behaviour, yet have no influence at all. Leaving solves nothing and makes it harder for us to change the EU and the other countries driven by the same damaging ideas.

FWIW One of the reasons I mentioned Mason's book is that he does suggest some ways we can tackle this. I was interested to see they chimed with ideas I'd had without being aware of a lot he points out.

N.B. for Tony and some others: Bear in mind that the term 'neo' above is used in the modern sense of 'not'. Example of how those behind the scenes , erm, 'improve' our language to influence what we can think. Shades of 1984... 8-]
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top