Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    To be fair, the Remainers have been painting everyone who even dares to question them as small-minded, bigoted, racist, uneducated, far-right mongs.
    .
    When you see most of the pro Brexit comments on the Internet most people would come to that conclusion. There's plenty of idiots on the IN side, but a far lower percentage I think.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    To be fair, the Remainers have been painting everyone who even dares to question them as small-minded, bigoted, racist, uneducated, far-right mongs. It's like a typical Labour Party election campaign. I'm inclined to vote Remain at this stage and I'm almost certainly going to do so come referendum day. But the Remain campaigners haven't covered themselves in glory at all to be frank.


    Given that the remain campaign has been led firmly by our conservative Prime Minister and our Conservative chancellor and supported by former conservative Prime Minister John Major, I don't think one can say its a labour thing.

    The remain campaigners haven't covered themselves in glory no, but the leave campaign have been the far more embarrassing of the two. In the last week we've had Boris compare the EU to Hitler and much of the Brexit supporters support him.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    When you see most of the pro Brexit comments on the Internet most people would come to that conclusion. There's plenty of idiots on the IN side, but a far lower percentage I think.
    Or like the comments today from Michael Gove.
    The right wing of the Conservatives are morphing into UKIP at speed.
    It's actually made me respect and like Cameron a lot more, given that he's refused to join much of his party in dancing to UKIP's tune. He's come across very Prime Ministerial.
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Or like the comments today from Michael Gove.
    The right wing of the Conservatives are morphing into UKIP at speed.
    It's actually made me respect and like Cameron a lot more, given that he's refused to join much of his party in dancing to UKIP's tune. He's come across very Prime Ministerial.
    Cameron's just saying publicly what he's always said privately (usually- see 'loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists' ). David Laws (and Cleggs) recent account of the coalition shows that Osborne and Cameron privately confess how they thought the Tea Party faction in the party were nuts.

    Cameron knows he's standing down after this so he can say what he wants to an extent- same with Osborne who I think underestimated just how crazed half the party would get about it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Because Big corporates don't operate in 'sovereign' states like China, U.S. Etc...

    The only way these corporates can be mitigated is in pure isolation (like North Korea) or as part of a large collective-....
    The Corporates are not generally armed, and even when they are - for instance the East India Company - they can be easily tackled by a sovereign nation with the resources of the UK. If the people resist corporate "soft power" such as the bribing of politicians and parties and resist the corporate media the corporations can be controlled with laws.

    We mitigate corporates by ensuring that power is in the hands of the people. Sadly this is very difficult but worth the struggle. Corporations are the modern equivalent of the Aristocrats. The Aristocrats were magnates with large estates, mines, quarries etc. that yielded the cash that purchased power and influence, these estates were like corporations without managing boards.

    As I understand you, you seem to be saying that we should embrace government by corporations as an inevitable step forward. It is a step backwards.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Or like the comments today from Michael Gove.
    The right wing of the Conservatives are morphing into UKIP at speed.
    It's actually made me respect and like Cameron a lot more, given that he's refused to join much of his party in dancing to UKIP's tune. He's come across very Prime Ministerial.
    The Leave campaign are the rebels. The Establishment are always going to seem more Establishment. The "good" children do what the Establishment says and feel holy. But ask yourself why you favour creating a corporate utopia in Europe and subsequently in the North Atlantic. What good will that be to the people of this land? Or perhaps you do not see yourself as a guardian of our landscape and immobile poorer classes but envisage yourself in angelic flight across continents, a human humming bird, sucking the goodness out of wherever you alight and then moving on when you have exhausted its resources.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    To be fair, the Remainers have been painting everyone who even dares to question them as small-minded, bigoted, racist, uneducated, far-right mongs. It's like a typical Labour Party election campaign. I'm inclined to vote Remain at this stage and I'm almost certainly going to do so come referendum day. But the Remain campaigners haven't covered themselves in glory at all to be frank.
    It's more the New Labour centre ground area that exists in the Tory party as well.

    It's also true to a large extent. You certainly can be for brexit without being racist etc. But a large number of people are for brexit because it will get rid of the nasty polish people ruining their life.

    I don't really like the EU due to its none democratic nature. If we were to leave I would still want to continue letting in European immigrants. I don't think most UKIP voting people think the same as me.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    It's more the New Labour centre ground area that exists in the Tory party as well.

    It's also true to a large extent. You certainly can be for brexit without being racist etc. But a large number of people are for brexit because it will get rid of the nasty polish people ruining their life.

    I don't really like the EU due to its none democratic nature. If we were to leave I would still want to continue letting in European immigrants. I don't think most UKIP voting people think the same as me.
    The EU and Remain campaign portray anyone who believes in self government of nations as right wing and bigotted rather than as democrats who believe in sustainable societies and who might know the needs of the land and the people. It is a testament to the power of the Remain lobby that they have implanted "Nationalist=Nazi Internationalist=Saintly" when the converse is true (as Boris pointed out).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)


    Given that the remain campaign has been led firmly by our conservative Prime Minister and our Conservative chancellor and supported by former conservative Prime Minister John Major, I don't think one can say its a labour thing.

    The remain campaigners haven't covered themselves in glory no, but the leave campaign have been the far more embarrassing of the two. In the last week we've had Boris compare the EU to Hitler and much of the Brexit supporters support him.
    Did you actually read/hear what he said? He said that over the centuries, a number of people - including Napoleon and Hitler - have attempted to unify Europe under their rule, and that one of the reasons they've failed is because there is no real European identity; we don't identify as Europeans. Now which bit of this are you disputing? Because Hitler was indeed trying to form a European superstate, albeit through force rather than the political means of the EU. So everything Boris said was pretty much true.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    It's more the New Labour centre ground area that exists in the Tory party as well.

    It's also true to a large extent. You certainly can be for brexit without being racist etc. But a large number of people are for brexit because it will get rid of the nasty polish people ruining their life.

    I don't really like the EU due to its none democratic nature. If we were to leave I would still want to continue letting in European immigrants. I don't think most UKIP voting people think the same as me.
    Just as you can support brexit and not be a racist, you are aware you can also oppose immigration and not be a racist? You appear to be conflating the two.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    Did you actually read/hear what he said? He said that over the centuries, a number of people - including Napoleon and Hitler - have attempted to unify Europe under their rule, and that one of the reasons they've failed is because there is no real European identity; we don't identify as Europeans. Now which bit of this are you disputing? Because Hitler was indeed trying to form a European superstate, albeit through force rather than the political means of the EU. So everything Boris said was pretty much true.
    Hitter was trying to create a large German state.
    The European Union wants a collection of states which will not be one large German state

    Why even mention hitler? What relevance does it have at all?

    Comparing anything to hitler is loaded.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Hitter was trying to create a large German state.
    The European Union wants a collection of states which will not be one large German state

    Why even mention hitler? What relevance does it have at all?

    Comparing anything to hitler is loaded.
    The European Union does not want a collection of states. The European Union's end goal is most definitely one state (or superstate as people have taken to calling it), with centralised political rule. It's the same ultimate goal, just with a different means.

    I don't think the actual point was anything to do with Hitler, given as in the same sentence he also compared the EU with Napoleon's attempt to unify Europe under his rule. The point he was making was that people have tried in the past to unify Europe into a single entity, and that one of the reasons they failed was that there is no European identity. That was his point; that we don't feel any loyalty to Europe, certainly not the way we feel loyalty towards our nationalities. His mention of the Nazis was simply in passing, as an example of a group who tried to unify Europe under their rule.

    I'm pretty sure Boris would have rather not mentioned Hitler now, given the way people have jumped on it and taken it out of context.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    The European Union does not want a collection of states. The European Union's end goal is most definitely one state (or superstate as people have taken to calling it), with centralised political rule. It's the same ultimate goal, just with a different means.

    I don't think the actual point was anything to do with Hitler, given as in the same sentence he also compared the EU with Napoleon's attempt to unify Europe under his rule. The point he was making was that people have tried in the past to unify Europe into a single entity, and that one of the reasons they failed was that there is no European identity. That was his point; that we don't feel any loyalty to Europe, certainly not the way we feel loyalty towards our nationalities. His mention of the Nazis was simply in passing, as an example of a group who tried to unify Europe under their rule.

    I'm pretty sure Boris would have rather not mentioned Hitler now, given the way people have jumped on it and taken it out of context.
    It's an absurd comparison. The EU is not a superstate, nor does it want to be. It's a collection of states.
    Hitler's plan didn't fail because 'Europe has no identity' - it's because he was a genocidal dictator.

    I can see you really stretching to try and prove what he said was technically true. Even if it is, it's a moot point and completely irrelevant. Saying Cameron has two legs and arms like Hitler did, is true. But if someone said it you'd wonder why.

    Any mention of Hitler is purposely trying to emotionally effect people by drawing implicit comparisons. What relevance does it have? That because Hitler tried to take over Europe that the EU is a bad idea?

    It was an absurd point and his happy clapper supporters of course lap it up.
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newpersonage)
    I have now had many debates on the EU and can present the pro-EU argument:

    On sovereignty: Hardly any EU laws affect the UK
    On sovereignty: EU laws guarantee equalty, fair pay for women, freedom of movement.., we could not be without them

    On migration: We can protect our borders, we are not members of Schengen
    On migration: All EU citizens have a right to come to the UK just as we have the right to go there, yes refugees will become EU citizens

    On the eurozone: The Eurozone will succeed when it achieves political union and shares out the wealth fairly and is about to enter Stage 2 of political union
    On the eurozone: The Eurozone will never operate as a single political union and so govern the EU

    On defence: We need to be part of the EU so that we can stand up to the large countries such as Russia and guarantee the Baltic, Balkans and Ukraine. The EU Defence force is already being formed
    On defence: Dont worry, the UK will never let the EU have an EU army.
    You haven't mentioned trade, living costs, house prices, economy. I was once pro-EU until I found out how many lies the government has been hiding on migration and also the benefits to the City of London when we leave the EU.

    Where are you getting this information from anyway? The BBC? Hahaha, don't get me started on how swayed they are on this issue... absolutely ludicrous.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
    Just as you can support brexit and not be a racist, you are aware you can also oppose immigration and not be a racist? You appear to be conflating the two.
    Yep.

    A whole load of people who oppose immigration definitely have xenophobic tendencies though. They don't seem very willing to have a sensible discusion on whether or not immigration is having a net positive or negative impact on the country or whether certain types of immigration or worse or better than others. Or whether we should consider it from the point of view of say a polish person working a low wage job in this country as it pays more for them as the pound is a stronger currency.

    I don't think these people can even make a thought experiment where immigration is a good thing. They may not be racist/xenophobic/prejudiced but vindictively punishing people just due to your own sheer ignorance and nastiness essentially has the same outcome.

    If say I was against non skilled immigration as I thought it was hurting the english non skilled worker I would not harber a grudge against the polish worker coming over here. I would blame the system that allows them. I would understand why a pole would come over here. I would get spiteful towards the pole and talk of them as if they are a desase. If we were to stop that kind of immigration I would want to know that out country provide support for poorer countries like Poland, which is again something the average UKIP voter doesn't like. They don;t like it when we pay more to the EU than we get back so I can't see them agreeing to giving free money to Poland.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It's an absurd comparison. The EU is not a superstate, nor does it want to be. It's a collection of states.
    Hitler's plan didn't fail because 'Europe has no identity' - it's because he was a genocidal dictator.

    I can see you really stretching to try and prove what he said was technically true. Even if it is, it's a moot point and completely irrelevant. Saying Cameron has two legs and arms like Hitler did, is true. But if someone said it you'd wonder why.

    Any mention of Hitler is purposely trying to emotionally effect people by drawing implicit comparisons. What relevance does it have? That because Hitler tried to take over Europe that the EU is a bad idea?

    It was an absurd point and his happy clapper supporters of course lap it up.
    Hitler's EEC was the direct predecessor of the Common Market - the same people worked on both. See http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=4104861
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newpersonage)
    Hitler's EEC was the direct predecessor of the Common Market - the same people worked on both. See http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=4104861
    I'm not really interested in conspiracy theories and if you try hard enough you can compare anything or any situation to Hitler.

    He has no relevance to the EU. Bringing him up serves no purpose other than to try and get people to associate Hitler with the EU.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It's an absurd comparison. The EU is not a superstate, nor does it want to be. It's a collection of states.
    Hitler's plan didn't fail because 'Europe has no identity' - it's because he was a genocidal dictator.

    I can see you really stretching to try and prove what he said was technically true. Even if it is, it's a moot point and completely irrelevant. Saying Cameron has two legs and arms like Hitler did, is true. But if someone said it you'd wonder why.

    Any mention of Hitler is purposely trying to emotionally effect people by drawing implicit comparisons. What relevance does it have? That because Hitler tried to take over Europe that the EU is a bad idea?

    It was an absurd point and his happy clapper supporters of course lap it up.
    The EU most definitely does desire to achieve a superstate though. The ultimate goal of the EU is just such a construction. The desire for increasing economic and political union is enshrined in EU legislation, and the fact that we had to negotiate an 'opt-out' rather suggests that the EU's plan is for such union to go ahead.

    What he said was technically true. Of course, you're right in that it's hardly relevant to the debate and serves only to try and play on an emotional argument, but then it's politics. What are people expecting?

    The only real reason that the backlash against it annoyed me is the hypocrisy of the remain campaign, when not a couple weeks back we were told that the EU was the only thing that has prevented war in Eastern Europe and that ISIS and Russia would no doubt support the leave campaign. That's exactly the same as what Boris Johnson did, though even less factually accurate, and yet that is apparently okay.
    Online

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by newpersonage)
    The Corporates are not generally armed, and even when they are - for instance the East India Company - they can be easily tackled by a sovereign nation with the resources of the UK. If the people resist corporate "soft power" such as the bribing of politicians and parties and resist the corporate media the corporations can be controlled with laws.
    I haven't said anything about the TNCs being armed. What I am saying it is far easier for a TNC (or a hostile foreign power) to subvert, corrupt and intimidate a country than it is to do the same for a continent.

    It is far harder to cajole a powerful United body into doing your bidding than it is to play 28 far weaker governments against each other, by in particular , powerful media groups exposing false patriotism for their economic advantage.

    We mitigate corporates by ensuring that power is in the hands of the people. Sadly this is very difficult but worth the struggle. Corporations are the modern equivalent of the Aristocrats. The Aristocrats were magnates with large estates, mines, quarries etc. that yielded the cash that purchased power and influence, these estates were like corporations without managing boards.

    As I understand you, you seem to be saying that we should embrace government by corporations as an inevitable step forward. It is a step backwards.
    I am saying that retreating into the nation state isn't going to solve and will in fact exacerbate our situation. Our economies are interdependent on each other- and the cost to circumvent this will be far too high for it to be electable/ hence vote leave lying and saying it will all be fine and dandy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Yep.

    A whole load of people who oppose immigration definitely have xenophobic tendencies though. They don't seem very willing to have a sensible discusion on whether or not immigration is having a net positive or negative impact on the country or whether certain types of immigration or worse or better than others. Or whether we should consider it from the point of view of say a polish person working a low wage job in this country as it pays more for them as the pound is a stronger currency.

    I don't think these people can even make a thought experiment where immigration is a good thing. They may not be racist/xenophobic/prejudiced but vindictively punishing people just due to your own sheer ignorance and nastiness essentially has the same outcome.

    If say I was against non skilled immigration as I thought it was hurting the english non skilled worker I would not harber a grudge against the polish worker coming over here. I would blame the system that allows them. I would understand why a pole would come over here. I would get spiteful towards the pole and talk of them as if they are a desase. If we were to stop that kind of immigration I would want to know that out country provide support for poorer countries like Poland, which is again something the average UKIP voter doesn't like. They don;t like it when we pay more to the EU than we get back so I can't see them agreeing to giving free money to Poland.
    I don't really buy that argument to be honest. I mean, I agree that I'm sure some people who oppose immigration are racist or xenophobic, but it's a tiny tiny proportion. If the people who oppose immigration are racist or xenophobic, then why don't they have a problem with the large number of people who have come from Southeast Asia, for instance? If it's a fundamental opposition to foreigners on account of them being foreigners, surely they'd be more inclined to dislike people from Southeast Asia than those from elsewhere in Europe?

    I absolutely agree with you, in that I don't blame a Polish person who comes here to work for the better salary/quality of life one bit. I can of course understand why someone would want to immigrate to make a better life for themselves. But that doesn't mean we should allow them to. Else by that logic, we should wave in all those from North Africa and the Middle East who are currently on their way. The British government's mandate is to do what's best for the British people, not to do what's best for the people of Britain, Eastern Europe and whoever else fancies coming along.

    I also don't even think people are especially concerned about Eastern European immigration to be honest. It's not something I've heard people complaining about especially. Where people take the most issue is immigration from North Africa and the Middle East, and that's nothing to do with taking jobs. That's to do with people bring backwards cultures with them, refusing to integrate with Western society and frankly being a menace to our way of life.

    On the foreign aid point, I have just one question. Why should our government give billions of pounds in aid to, say, Poland, if there are British people slumming it on the streets? I have no issue with foreign aid, but as far as I'm concerned foreign aid should only be allocated once our own have been taken care of.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.