advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... X

Status
Not open for further replies.
They do exist. The Lib-Dems promised to revoke A50 without a referendum at the last election and got 3.7 million votes (over 10% of the total). That's a significant anti-democratic, hard-Remain rump, even if not all Lib-Dem voters were comfortable with that policy.

There were certainly people on this forum who defended the Lib-Dem position. I remember it vividly because it was the most upsetting moment of the entire election campaign for me - the moment I knew that all was lost, and that we were condemned to at least five more years of far-right Tory government and a hard Brexit.

In any case, my definition of a "hard Remainer" would be a little broader. Some people voted Remain in 2016 and got on with the rest of their lives when the referendum result was announced; others spent four years complaining about the result and fighting it any way they could. The latter are hard Remainers (degree of hardness varies). And a lot of the former voted to "Get Brexit Done" because they were fed up of the latter.
I don't see much difference in democratic eqivalence between running on completing an advisory implementation of a manifesto pledge, and a manifesto pledge to reverse another parties manifesto pledge.
So less of the anti democratic crap, the anti democratic act was using an advisory referendum to sidestep democratic safeguards.
 
I don't see much difference in democratic eqivalence between running on completing an advisory implementation of a manifesto pledge, and a manifesto pledge to reverse another parties manifesto pledge.
So less of the anti democratic crap, the anti democratic act was using an advisory referendum to sidestep democratic safeguards.
I don’t think the Corbyn shadow Cabinet were bad people, it’s just that they made some very bad decisions and Brexit finished them. I mean, who would have imagined seats held by Labour continuously for virtually a century being turned over by their voters to an out of control, far right Tory government? Something went very badly wrong.
 
There were certainly people on this forum who defended the Lib-Dem position. I remember it vividly because it was the most upsetting moment of the entire election campaign for me - the moment I knew that all was lost, and that we were condemned to at least five more years of far-right Tory government and a hard Brexit.

There were even people who actually defended the floundering Corbyn position! A “leader” who managed to haemorrhage votes simultaneously to Tory, Farage’s Brexit Party, SNP, Green and Lib Dem! It really takes a special kind of loser to be so fundamentally incoherent and ideologically oblique in position that votes leave both to the far-right and left! Even Jo Swinson, a terrible Lib Dem leader IMHO, took many votes and some seats from Labour! By saying that Corbyn also managed to lead his party to defeat against the woefully inarticulate and morally compromised Theresa May, the architect of Windrush and a woman who makes a Texas Instruments Speak & Spell sound like the very model of human compassion.
 
Hoping someone else will solve a self inflicted problem? Because let's face it, in your normal dishonest way, you don't mean minds on this side of the channel.
That is the real world Steve, Brexit will be a footnote in history. Did i mention about driverless cars in 20 years and with it unemployment, well(page 21 Times) the Department of transport report quotes 72% of cars driverless within 15 years. A changing world and the British Leyland union attitude that prevails on the bridge of the federal USE Titanic is what will send this project into the depths.
 
That is the real world Steve, Brexit will be a footnote in history. Did i mention about driverless cars in 20 years and with it unemployment, well(page 21 Times) the Department of transport report quotes 72% of cars driverless within 15 years. A changing world and the British Leyland union attitude that prevails on the bridge of the federal USE Titanic is what will send this project into the depths.

Colin I lose track of your distractions, the common theme is to look anywhere bar at what you are actually doing. Oh and the constant forlorn hope of worse failure for others, of course.
 
I don't see much difference in democratic eqivalence between running on completing an advisory implementation of a manifesto pledge, and a manifesto pledge to reverse another parties manifesto pledge.
So less of the anti democratic crap, the anti democratic act was using an advisory referendum to sidestep democratic safeguards.
A policy that turned out to be a masterstroke of good luck for the Tory party. I don't recall Labour distancing themselves from this view so maybe it did not help their figures either.
Here again is the monumental blunder: (1 minute in)
 
Colin I lose track of your distractions, the common theme is to look anywhere bar at what you are actually doing. Oh and the constant forlorn hope of worse failure for others, of course.
It is my reasoning why leaving was worthwhile and as with Scottish independence it was a once in a generation opportunity.
 
Colin I lose track of your distractions, the common theme is to look anywhere bar at what you are actually doing. Oh and the constant forlorn hope of worse failure for others, of course.
Do you give any credence to the notion that a smaller nation state can be more nimble than a larger union?

Whilst not convinced on the Scottish independence idea, this is one area where I can see how a smaller entity can change it's policy quicker to match rapidly changing world dynamics.

The EU is still quite a disparate set of entities.
 
Colin I lose track of your distractions, the common theme is to look anywhere bar at what you are actually doing. Oh and the constant forlorn hope of worse failure for others, of course.
It’s the funnies- the inept metaphors. The EU is now British Leyland/ The Titanic. That’s a projection in its simplest form. How about “the Johnson ship of fools EU” or “Gove at the controls of the Boaty McBoatface EU”?
 
Last edited:
Do you give any credence to the notion that a smaller nation state can be more nimble than a larger union?

What do you mean nimbler? Less regulated, lower standards, poorer protection, reduced rights, more malleable population with fewer choices?

Do you give any credence to economy of scale, bulk purchasing power, fewer trade barriers, pooled resource, shared facilities and services?
 
What do you mean nimbler? Less regulated, lower standards, poorer protection, reduced rights, more malleable population with fewer choices?
Nimbler means more able to respond to change quickly.

The things you mention could occur in a large entity too.
 
By voting Lib Dem then, you would have known what you were getting - how is a party standing for election on a commitment anti-democratic? It may have been crass strategy but it wasn't anti-democratic. Getting in without standing on it, producing that plan once in office without having campaigned on it, now that would be.
That's all true but I think it subtly shifts the goalposts. The claim is that some remainers (the hardest of the hard) never accepted the referendum result and tried to overturn it in a way that was essentially anti-democratic. The fact that many individuals voted for a party (the LDs) that promised to do just that proves the point conclusively, in my view.

Flip it. Suppose Remain won in 2016 and then a resurgent Brexit Party promised to leave anyway and won the 2019 election on that basis. At a global level that's a democratic outcome (just as it would have been had the LDs been victorious in 2019). However, it's quite obvious in that scenario that the Brexit voters of 2019 do not accept the result of the democratic referendum in 2016.

Arguing for a second referendum to confirm the actual deal was a principled position although, with the benefit of hindsight, I think it was the wrong one; but that's quite different to the Lib-Dem position.
 
Isn't a Hard Remainer someone who fully buys into the EU project, including it's longer term goals?

That sounds logical to me.

I'd suggest that any person living here, who is of that philosophy, has possibly chosen the wrong place as their European home.
There are much more obvious candidate locations.

That option has been removed from us by the leave voters—apart from those who can continue afford to live anywhere.

Stephen
 
That's all true but I think it subtly shifts the goalposts. The claim is that some remainers (the hardest of the hard) never accepted the referendum result and tried to overturn it in a way that was essentially anti-democratic. The fact that many individuals voted for a party (the LDs) that promised to do just that proves the point conclusively, in my view.

The term in this thread doesn't apply, it's used purely as a pejorative deflection. It doesn't shift the goalposts it's a straw man in the context of this thread unless someone can point to where a contributor advocated just ignoring the referendum result. Still waiting on that.

Flip it. Suppose Remain won in 2016 and then a resurgent Brexit Party promised to leave anyway and won the 2019 election on that basis. At a global level that's a democratic outcome (just as it would have been had the LDs been victorious in 2019). However, it's quite obvious in that scenario that the Brexit voters of 2019 do not accept the result of the democratic referendum in 2016.

Like insisting that 52-48 Remain would be "unfinished business" you mean? Remind me, who was that on the very evening of the ballot. UKIP/BP should have stood for election on this issue instead of a referendum, we all know why they didn't.

Arguing for a second referendum to confirm the actual deal was a principled position although, with the benefit of hindsight, I think it was the wrong one; but that's quite different to the Lib-Dem position.

It is, but it was my position and plenty of others on here. You seem to be equating it with the Lib Dem manifesto which I,and as far as I can see, most others here thought was a disasterous tactic.
 
It is my reasoning why leaving was worthwhile and as with Scottish independence it was a once in a generation opportunity.

Too much of your slip has shown this week in terms of your Brexit motivation. The same arguments apply in both situations. Isolation is a backward step with almost totally negative consequences.
 
Flip it. Suppose Remain won in 2016 and then a resurgent Brexit Party promised to leave anyway and won the 2019 election on that basis. At a global level that's a democratic outcome (just as it would have been had the LDs been victorious in 2019).
That is exactly what the Brexit Party would have tried to do, and that's entirely democratic. The Labour Party has had policies that nobody wants to vote for for over a decade now. They still have a right to have it in their manifesto. If the Cons had carried on following a 48/52 remain vote and gone into the next election saying "we're leaving, it's in the manifesto" (or indeed an elected Brexit Party as you suggest) that would have been entirely democratic also. There's nothing forcing any party to put something in their manifesto because it's what people want. There has been a majority in favour of capital punishment for decades in the UK. It is declining now but for years it was a well known "will of the people" that no mainstream party wanted to adopt.

Political views shift. It was "the will of the people" to elect Labour in 1997. That "will of the people" changed over the subsequent years. One day it may shift back. When we get to the next GE, if there is a change of government will we be saying "but the will of the people is to elect Conservatives!"? Obviously not. The views of the people have changed.
.
 
Colin I lose track of your distractions, the common theme is to look anywhere bar at what you are actually doing. Oh and the constant forlorn hope of worse failure for others, of course.
We all know that Colin's view on Europe is that it's going to fail so we are better to jump now. This is a bit like me being on board a plane and jumping out now because I think it's going down sooner or later.
 
We all know that Colin's view on Europe is that it's going to fail so we are better to jump now. This is a bit like me being on board a plane and jumping out now because I think it's going down sooner or later.
The EU used to be a good source for cheaper labour, but the rate expectations have been going up.

So why shouldn't people look elsewhere for cheaper options? We are frequently told that we are in a global marketplace, after all.

That's not a case of the EU failing, just that it changes into something which no longer provides the same thing.
 
The EU used to be a good source for cheaper labour, but the rate expectations have been going up.

So why shouldn't people look elsewhere for cheaper options? We are frequently told that we are in a global marketplace, after all.

That's not a case of the EU failing, just that it changes into something which no longer provides the same thing.
We already did, pre and post Brexit. We had extra-EU immigration too, half the hospitals run on that. Nobody stopped us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top