Yawn.(Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
Keynes showed if you talk the economy down it has a tangible effect..something remainers are clearly happy to do. So much for putting your own 'private neurosis' above the national interests.
How convenient for Brexiters to abdicate responsibility for kneecapping the economy. I accept the premise that talking down the economy can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, but this is on a different scale. The overwhelming majority of economists and a huge swathe of captains of industry, including most of the big corporations, warned that they would find Britain a less inviting place to do business outside the Single Market.
If those who make money and employ people don't want to make money or employ people in Britain if you change a fundamental part of how Britain does business, that's not talking down the economy - that's business voting with its feet.
It would help if you put these replies next to the point you are replying to. Currently they are orphaned and I have no idea what you're talking about.Neoliberals.
Right, so totally irrelevant, and tangential.
Thankyou. All that needs saying on that.
Sure. And even if you weren't, millions of others would have. Farage made it clear that he would.I'm sure many remainers, who were pretty smug before the vote, would have been insufferable had they won. But I wouldn't have whinged on and on and asked for second referendums. I can swear on my life. Most of the time I accept what the foot stomping brats want with detached cynicism.
For the umpteenth time, you make these claims, but you offer no evidence to substantiate them. At least, you blow them massively out of proportion. Yes, the EU can reasonably be criticised as overly centralised, sure, but it's been making stride in the past few years to rectify that - in fact, the UK just this year secured the 'green card/red card' system for national parliaments to more directly interact with EU institutions. Besides, England itself is massively overcentralised, can I declare myself separate as a result?This last bit is just utterly hysterical. Where it is not hyperbole, it is just pseudo-sophisticated nonsense, the kind that pseudo-intellectual remainers love to use to try and sneer at people with. Great use of English, but little in the way of perspective or sense.
It's a very simple intuitive concept, independence for what will be a 100+million strong nation, in a country with a lengthy successful democratic history,(moreso than anywhere in Europe) versus a centralized, authoritarian, unaccountably 'governed' block of 500+million with disparate cultures and economies that operate on different terms that would be far better off running their own currencies to calibrate to their economy.
And how is it authoritarian? It has no means of enforcing its decisions - Member State civil services do that. I think you've swallowed a bit too much of the Express and the Sun's hyperbole.
And again - how is it undemocratic? We've discussed this before, and as soon as facts are presented to you, you throw walls of text about how the mean old EU is holding the UK back - you change the subject, basically. Face it - you lost this argument ages ago.
Is this your boner for Blair manifesting itself again? I have no idea where you get this from. Seeing as many Brexiters in Parliament were just as gung-ho for the Iraq War (such as Iain Duncan-Smith), I think you're being just a tad unfair.(btw, People who say the 'empire is over' to characterize leavers are talking shite-they are the ones with the imperial mission hangup, most of them advocate daft wars more than I. I only care about national life and interests, and self-determination, not globalist utopian zealotry)
And being directly ruled by an absolute monarch worked for 6 or 7 centuries before EU entry. Doesn't mean it works now. What a bizarre thing to say.It worked for 6 or 7 centuries before EU entry. It works all around the world. For India, Japan, China, Australia, Canada, the US. None of them are called madmen or racists for remaining in that state.
Read it again. I didn't say the UK was - I said the talents of Brexiters are nanoscopic.It is ludicrous to suggest we will be 'nanoscopic', we were never moreso than as a subject province of the EU.
And once again, we were never a subject province of the EU. We were - and are - a free Member State with huge influence. If we were a subject province, do you seriously think we'd be discussing leaving it right now? Seriously?
I've never derided the Commonwealth, but you need to recognise it for what it is - it's a club. A positive club, yes, especially for human rights and cultural exchange, but there is absolutely no ability - or desire - in the Commonwealth for it to become anything like an economic bloc.The EU-philes deride the commonwealth because it is greater, economically and culturally, than anything they ever managed. They have contempt for the UK and only want to use it to benefit their high handed, arrogant project.
The hell are you talking about? The EU has trade with Asia. It also has trade with China. What it tries to do however is warn countries like China that acting like a regional bully and troublemaker will harm is economic prospects here in Europe. Sounds eminently fair to me. Do you think we should encourage China's bullying habits?The idea we simply have to be inward looking because we left the EU is a pile of rubbish. What does our history show? Why does the EU have no trade with Asia, whilst China is queing up for a trade deal, the moment we leave, not to mention Australia, India and the rest?
False. Yes, there are inward looking nationalisms, conservatism and so on, but why on earth does that matter to us, here in the UK? Nationalisms manifest themselves in different ways and with different concerns, and the UK's nationalism (at least, England's), is bound up with a huge sense of parochialism.Europe is full of inward looking nationalisms, conservatism, people who only eat their own regions food etc, and racism, (Whilst we have the most interracial children and marriage in the west) but the 'little Englander' line is peddled thoughtlessly, just because cosmopolitan liberals like Europe and not much outside it.
The fact that no Brexiter has come up with any sort of plan for a post-EU UK makes it absolutely plain that they are parochial. If they were truly 'internationalist', as they claim, they would have given some thought at least to what kind vision they have. But they didn't.
And yet those businesses which keep this country rich don't see the EU as 'stultifying' the UK at all. In fact, they depended upon it. See Renault-Nissan's present dilemma, for example. See the broad consensus among most of business.The EU would sit on their hands and run their Franco-German, protectionist, bureaucratic economy, which would stultify us for years to come- it goes against all our political traditions and everything that founded the great anglosphere nations, that are, to this day, better to live in than the EU.
Seriously, on what factual basis do you make this claim? Because perception is not fact.
Just this morning I've seen articles on the BBC pointing out that not all of Brexit has been bad news. I'm tired of people calling the BBC biased. I have Remain friends who call it pro-Brexit biased. It's a tired, lazy argument for people who haven't got any arguments of their own so they make up excuses that the truth is being concealed. Trump's already doing it in the States.You would never even concede for a second that you are consuming biased media in the BBC, and that most positive stories are being ignored on their part. As for every remain prediction coming true, this is only a 6weeks after for god's sake. Don't be so biased. You hear what you want to hear, not the trade deals, or the new investments,or the pound falling being good for exports.
In any case, I don't rely on the BBC as my sole news source. I look at multiple sources. My, it's easy! And I'm afraid most don't show much good news about Brexit.
Perhaps, as you say, the situation will improve at some point in the future. If it does, great! I'll be relieved.
I can believe that you would have moved on, sure. But that's because the known status quo would have prevailed, and the economy would not have tanked, and also - and this is key - many of Leave's claims would not have been immediately exposed as massive lies.I can guarantee, I WOULD be getting on with my life and not complaining if Brexit lost. I spent the last 15years getting politics I didn't much want. I think if further political union had taken place with everyone against it being called racists, etc, as so many remainers were seemingly happy with I would have just gone to where more of our roots and ideals were,and where debates would not be framed in such a way, ie the anglosphere. Don't get me wrong, it's still depressing there are so many brainwashed people who are happy to conduct debates on that infantile level, and apparently hate the notion of democratic choice so much, being so sold on what they think is a progressive cause when it's the opposite.
That's what angers us Remainians, really. Not that we've lost the referendum, but that we lost despite actually winning the argument: we've been proven right on the economy and Leave have been proven to be full of manipulative liars.
And no, I sincerely believe that following a Remain vote, the UK would have been able to sidestep any attempts at political union by the EU, while still being a major player in it. I myself have no interest in a federal Europe, but I just claims about it happening as utter scaremongering.
And please so going on about brainwashing. Again, it's tired and lazy, just like your diatribes about the media. We're just as freethinking as you. We just - and I know this is hard to grasp - have a different opinion from you.
Seeing as many Conservatives support the EU, I have no idea why you're going on about progressivism.
I don't vote tribally either, but I can't see how on earth leaving the EU is a progressive decision. The majority of the world community said we should stay in the EU, and we chose not to. How can that therefore be seen as an internationalist action? We told the world to piss off, but then we hope they'll somehow make trade deals with us that are better than the ones we had in the EU.I don't vote tribally, there may have been old conservatives who voted Brexit, but theree were plenty of young conservatives, stuck in a different era, albeit a laterone, who can't see that Brexit was not a conservative vote. It was a bold, progressive one.
That's actually a reasonable observation, yes. People tend not to appreciate what they have until it's gone.The irony of it all is that no-one really wanted, after we decided to keep the pound, to enter the Eurozone, no one really wanted further integration. No-one really wanted French and German style integration. So was it to be a two tier Europe forever? People rejected Lisbon and were ignored, Greece was colonized by German banks and treated abominably. What did you people think the future was? It seems that in reality, the fervour for remaining has only really come about with the promise of leaving-people want something more if it can be taken away, or if it's inaccessible, disproportionate to it's worth- that's human psychology.
Not undemocratic. Not high handed. Although, I can get behind the complaint that it is remote. But then, that crisis touches all institutions. People, after all, are fed up with Westminster, and Scotland is ready to leave. So don't kid yourself that the EU's to blame for everything.Jean Monnet-
“There will be no peace in Europe, if the states are reconstituted on the basis of national sovereignty… The countries of Europe are too small to guarantee their peoples the necessary prosperity and social development. The European states must constitute themselves into a federation.”
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose but which will irreversibly lead to federation.”
And there is the EU's problem in a nutshell, high handed, deceitful, undemocratic, grandiose delusion in it's mission, even when well intentioned idealism. This is why European peoples are turning against it. It's not just London out of touch with the country, it's Brussels out of touch with people all across Europe, it's the North out of touch with vast poverty and unemployment in the South.
The Single Market is an objectively good thing. Think of it this way: you are a foreign country wanting to trade with European countries. There are 28 European countries, each with different standards and regulations. How expensive will trading with Europe be? Meanwhile in our reality, a foreign country can trade with EU with only one set of regulations. 'Stultifying' you called it. It's liberating.Europe was always better running it's own currencies, this most pertains to the very different economies and cultures of the south- they could look after their national life and interests better, rather than sacrificing all of that for the highly questionable benefits of the 'single market' or a superstate or an EU army 'foreign policy' presence in the world. (It's mad when you think of it that people are supposed to,or believed to care so much about such things, it's all about the dreams of silly politicians) -and that is a lot of what this is about to me.
Or how about this: you're a European country seeking to trade with a major foreign country. Said foreign country is vastly larger and richer than you. Larger, richer foreign country leans on you to give it enormous trade concessions in return for relatively little to your advantage, because you're desperate for trade and something's better than nothing. Meanwhile, in our reality, the EU pools sovereignty and negotiates as a bloc with said large, rich, foreign power, but this time on an equal footing. Foreign country has to bargain harder and give more concessions for it to trade. Overall, the trade deal is better for both.
Heavy handed? Try liberating.
And this is parochialism. What was that about internationalism earlier?Empathy with your own nation state, making your life better in a tangible local way, having more democracy, or whether you will sacrifice that at the alter of some unaccountable superstate, for the sake of foreign policy presence and the dubious benefits of a single currency and domination of MNC's, German banks, and further political union and less democracy. I hate most foreign policy ,I hate utopianism, don't care about being in a larger block*, definitely don't want less democracy, so it's a no brainer.
3 billion very poor illiterate people right now, and it hasn't improved literacy rates all that much since independence. (China has in some areas, but the hinterlands are still appallingly backward). This cannot be compared with a half-billion bloc of mostly literate and wealthy people right next door to you.*Funny how the wisdom is that 70(5?)million,rising to 100+million, is an irrelevance to the world but 500 million isn't. Well, The population of India and China combined is 2.7 Billion which I should imagine will rise to over 3 Billion.
Have you looked at whether Iceland's trade deal with China is in any way to Iceland's liking?The UK and EU are both minute fractions of this number.
Iceland has a trade deal with China. You can't ignore the holes in all of remain's gospels about the EU- love is blind in their case.
People were not lied to about integration. It's been a key aspect of the EEC/EC/EU since its inception in the '50s. When we joined the EC in 1972, there were huge debates about integration and Labour nearly split over it. It was, and has always been, forefront and plain in the EC/EU's fabric.And if we were not lied to in the first place, about integration, then there would not be an economy that was so intertwined with the EU, behind our backs and there would not be this situation where leaving to run ours independently would cause these economic jitters. Why would the public not be right in forming the conclusion they were being lied to again about integration, after the last time, and with all the evidence of the EU's consistent disregard for it's peoples democratic wishes?
Thatcher herself was a huge fan of it for its economic benefits, and pushed through the Single European Act in 1986 as a means of streamlining European decisionmaking.
This was busted as a blatant lie by Leave, and I can't believe you are now seeking to revive it.I think that is rather more significant than how much per week to the NHS there will be,which they all lie about all the time.
Camerons honours list for the 'remains' of establishment cronies Watch
- 10-08-2016 11:27
- Thread Starter
- 10-08-2016 15:23
It's not parochialism, it's looking after your national interests , defending your own civilization...it's what any sane country worth it's salt does all over the world and throughout history. Globalist utopianism and wanting an equal world, not to mention pouring endlessly money into this notion, is madness. I believe in civic, non ethnic nationalism..I don't care why other people vote, I don't vote tribally as I say, and I believe this country should be made as fluid and flexible to changing the status quo as possible- something many authoritarian remainers clearly dislike. I want England to be less conservative, I just don't believe the methodology of achieving that should be mass immigration or EU membership, or that the evidence supported the fact that this was working. We were becoming more stagnated as a culture and democracy not less. I want it to be less conservative about ideas that matter, like economics, something most people despise the notion of, (including most 'cosmopolitan'(in fact only Europhile in many cases) remainers, seemingly,) not just about whether people eat foreign food. I think you can only change it by education, and economics, and breaking down class roles, and with powers of self-determination.
I did not vote because of parochialism. You talk about lazyness, this is the most lazy remain caricature, and I'm afraid it is encouraged by the like of the BBC. It is not hard to imagine that the Beeb could receive funding direct from the EU or be convinced by government that finding would be affected by the absence of membership. That this could prejudice them. What's clear regardless of that is that they see this as largely about cosmopolitans and outward lookers vs provincials, a massive simplification, and you convey this view in your post. The likes of Tariq Ali, a highly thoughtful and interesting Brexit supporter who is of Pakistani heritage, were never interviewed once by them- doesn't fit the narrative and the stereotypes.
I voted because I want the entire EU to break up, and I want Europe to be full of Sovereign states running their own currencies. This would clearly serve southern Europe vastly better than trying to integrate their economy with the like of Germany and suffering as they do, for the dubious benefits of the single market. Don't say it isn't viable, because all these arguments rest on the difficulty of overturning the current paradigm, which I appreciate. Says nothing about long term viability. This position is only believed to be extremist madness because of the received wisdom of the current moment, and the tide of powerful opinion who wants to preserve the status quo.
It is no more a necessity to be in, nor an absurdity to be out of a political union with the EU, than it is absurd to be outside union with the USA or Russia. Large block superstates will become more authoritarian, and less accountable, that is the nature of the beast. Countries such as France and the UK that can have populations of over 100 million and their own nuclear arsenal simply do not have to take membership as a given, to have a voice in the world, (If you massively care about this, usually futile wars that put us at risk of terror- mad 'liberal interventionism' ) and they certainly shouldn't take it as a given that they should be in a single currency, that this is better for their economy. When you mention the education of China and Indias population, it is besides the point. The EU argument about the share of global population is entirely obsolete when you consider proportions. Its obsolete anyhow, I'm not an imperialist, my foreign policy would be isolationist, I think we are mad to do what we do the last 20 yrs.
I'm interested in the best for European economies, which need more independence and to run their own currencies. They are entirely different cultures with different needs, that get more democracy and economic flexibility by being a smaller nation state. Greece and Germany have less in common as cultures and economies than Germany and the USA. If there is no single market, this mythic gateway which is in fact the worst deal on earth, there will be no penalizing for being outside it. This is more important than a supposed might on a foreign policy stage, with homogenized policy and the makers of it unaccountable.
If it isn't an absurdity not to be in a protectionist trading block with the same currency with the USA or Russia or India, the it isn't one to not be in one with Europe. The only difference is Calais is 20 miles away. Northern Ireland is as close to Canada as Cyprus. The only (dubious)argument remaining in favour is the power of 500 million superstate in foreign policy and a single army, something most remainers claim to oppose.
The majority of 'the world' opinion that you refer to, meaning the majority of powerful financial institutions and globalist political class who are heavily influenced by corporate power. Not for example, ordinary Europeans or Americans. And anyway, since when was the rest of the world the barometer for our national interests? That is the mentality of the colonized. Can you imagine the US conducting their national debate on the fact that independence is parochial and they should listen to the rest of the world about giving law making powers away?
You claim you are not biased or wanting to talk the economy down, and yet you claim that all the evidence has confirmed we will we have a terribly weak economy outside the EU after just 6 weeks!! This is transparently ludicrous, and all I have to say on that matter.Last edited by SaucissonSecCy; 10-08-2016 at 15:59.