Blair anti-Brexit speech

    • Thread Starter
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...tHxyIkL0w/edit

    It's pretty good.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Labour is history. 15 years time, " You remember the labour party and their last Prime Minister? ", " Who? "

    They made Britain more for the people, now we're not 1% good, 99% bad, labour has no meaning and as conservatives now accept the defeat of traditional conservativism they will now take labour as the " UK progressive paty "
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It doesn't matter how good the speech was, Blair has borne the brunt of everyone's struggles and complaints since he left office.

    There is more toxic politician in the UK, no-one who so unites left and right in contempt and no-one who prompts more bile and vitriol.

    His time is done. The best thing he can do for his cause now is to do nothing.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I agree that the best thing for Tony Blair is to keep his thoughts private. Or he becomes the Brexiteers best weapon.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That would have been superb (from someone else) a year ago, (ideal 15 years ago from him) and is now utter nonsense. I agree with a lot of what he says - notably the patriotism part- but what he hadn't grasped, other than his utter toxicity, is that this debate is over for a generation and that preventing it from happening will be a far far greater disaster than us leaving.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Tony Blair? More like Tony Bleaugh.
    Where was he when the left and the right were having a rabble about absolute f**kall? Bit too late, methinks.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    It doesn't matter how good the speech was, Blair has borne the brunt of everyone's struggles and complaints since he left office.

    There is more toxic politician in the UK, no-one who so unites left and right in contempt and no-one who prompts more bile and vitriol.

    His time is done. The best thing he can do for his cause now is to do nothing.
    As much as a lot of political types despise him for x or y i think a lot of people underestimate how he is remembered by the average joe. He polls pretty well in ex-PM polling.

    I don't think he'll have much impact but i don't think it's because he's toxic.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    As much as a lot of political types despise him for x or y i think a lot of people underestimate how he is remembered by the average joe. He polls pretty well in ex-PM polling.

    I don't think he'll have much impact but i don't think it's because he's toxic.
    Exactly.

    Blair has a lot of haters: mainly left wing Labour types over Iraq and the fact they felt that he was a sell-out to the modern globalised neoliberal economic order; and also Tories who resented him for the fact he is the only Labour leader who has ever completely dominated the Conservative party, from start to finish.

    Blair was dominant because he was very much in tune with public opinion during his time. Now at first glance people will say, that was a different era and Blair is out of touch with modern public opinion. But I am not so sure. Blair was certainly not the caricature of the politically correct left wing snowflake that people like to paint modern Labour/Lib Dems as being. Certainly his pro-EU stance goes against the grain of modern Brexit Britain but in other areas I wonder if public opinion is starting to shift towards his direction. On civil liberties and detaining terror suspects he was seen as dangerously authoritarian during the mid 2000s but I think this would be more accepted now. Also whilst he was much criticised for his military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, now we have got people saying the UK should have gone in Syria earlier and it was a sign of weakness not strength that Ed Miliband got Parliament to block Cameron from doing that.

    Also we have a generation of quite weak politicians today who just like to duck questions and rely on bland "lines to take" to fudge their way through situations. Blair had the same characteristic of Thatcher, that he didn't dodge questions or try to be all things to all people, he is decisive, has his strong views on things and he is willing to make the argument for his position even when he thinks this is in the face of opposition. This does get respect from the voter.

    Blair was a pretty unique politician, he became leader of the Labour party in 1994 and from that moment until he became PM he never looked for a minute like he would lose to the Tories, and from the point he became PM, despite the fact he had a lot of flashpoints where he was clashing with lots of opposition, on tuition fees, the Iraq war, he still never looked for a minute like he would lose to the Tories. The only way he was ever going to be forced out was the way Thatcher was, by his own party.

    He couldn't become Labour leader now because of their leadership rules BUT if he somehow became Leader of the Opposition tomorrow, you would see the opinion polls turn markedly and Theresa May would feel under a lot of pressure against him.

    He still speaks well and has the gravitas of leader about him.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    thank **** he's not on our side
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Clever man. What he said was completely right and no one seems to be capable of actually refuting what he said and instead try to undermine him by attacking him as a person.

    Sorry, but the referendum means **** all. there needs to be another referendum after the final deal is reached.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kurtreturns)
    Clever man. What he said was completely right and no one seems to be capable of actually refuting what he said and instead try to undermine him by attacking him as a person.
    I see so many left wing remainers just dismiss everything he said because of Irag.

    This is a good medium post on the troubling subject.
    https:[email protected]_francis/yeah...a6a#.6bzvzg461


    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    Also whilst he was much criticised for his military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, now we have got people saying the UK should have gone in Syria earlier and it was a sign of weakness not strength that Ed Miliband got Parliament to block Cameron from doing that.
    You are assuming these people are right that we should have gone in Syria. When/if that went the way of Libya they would all turn against it. People are fickle twits.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    this debate is over for a generation and that preventing it from happening will be a far far greater disaster than us leaving.
    It absolutely isn't over. There were only 4% more voters who voted to leave. Not exactly a landslide. I am the only person who remembers Farage saying that if he lost 52 to 48, it was still game on? Why should remainers therefore just lye down and take it.

    Nothing has actually happened yet, but some of the Brexiters seem hell bent on walking us off a cliff, and for what? Please do not forget that not quite half of those who voted did not vote to leave. If we are a truly compassionate, civilised society those with the argument will not ignore everyone else and wreck the place just because they think they have a mandate.

    We seem to be in a rather sad place in politics when it appears that just because you win an election, you can do what you like. You can not. We have a hopeless opposition right now, but democracy and politics is about holding those in power to account, not giving them carte blanche whilst everyone else buries their heads in the sand.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    It absolutely isn't over. There were only 4% more voters who voted to leave. Not exactly a landslide. I am the only person who remembers Farage saying that if he lost 52 to 48, it was still game on? Why should remainers therefore just lye down and take it.

    Nothing has actually happened yet, but some of the Brexiters seem hell bent on walking us off a cliff, and for what? Please do not forget that not quite half of those who voted did not vote to leave. If we are a truly compassionate, civilised society those with the argument will not ignore everyone else and wreck the place just because they think they have a mandate.

    We seem to be in a rather sad place in politics when it appears that just because you win an election, you can do what you like. You can not. We have a hopeless opposition right now, but democracy and politics is about holding those in power to account, not giving them carte blanche whilst everyone else buries their heads in the sand.
    The elected government rightly or wrongly held a referendum and pledged to respect the result. They are now doing so. Both they and the majority of those MPs (including labour) agreed to do so. If Brexit turns out to be a massive mistake then those responsible for advocating it can hopefully be held to account. By preventing this from happening you are only going to create even more distrust with our elected elites and establishment and probably going to turn off the majority of remainders, including g myself.


    I actually don't believe in democracy, especially referendums but I do believe in pragmatism and common sense. I still think Brexit was dumb, but I'm even more convinced any attempt to prevent Brexit short of holding another general election would be even dumber.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    By preventing this from happening you are only going to create even more distrust with our elected elites and establishment and probably going to turn off the majority of remainders, including g myself.
    I never said anything about preventing it. All we did was vote to leave. However there was no mention of what that actually means. Some reckoned it meant £350 million a week more spent on the NHS. Others thought it would mean the end of immigration. What we now know is that most of that was complete baloney. And that is the point. We still have to invoke article 50 and then have 2 years to make a deal with Europe. That deal is massive and if anyone has any sense, we should all have a say in that deal. That is what leaving the EU actually means. The idea that we should leave tbat deal tlo a few individuals is bonkers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    I never said anything about preventing it. All we did was vote to leave. However there was no mention of what that actually means. Some reckoned it meant £350 million a week more spent on the NHS. Others thought it would mean the end of immigration. What we now know is that most of that was complete baloney. And that is the point. We still have to invoke article 50 and then have 2 years to make a deal with Europe. That deal is massive and if anyone has any sense, we should all have a say in that deal. That is what leaving the EU actually means. The idea that we should leave tbat deal tlo a few individuals is bonkers.
    In practice any deal is going to be left to a few individuals, we're not going to have 60 million people round the negotiating table.

    What you could have is a yes/no referendum on the terms of that deal, with it made explicitly clear that a "no" vote then means staying in the EU.

    Whilst some will say "that's a travesty of justice, we had the referendum and the British people will never stand for it"...well that's the good thing about giving them a vote, they don't have to stand for it, they can come out and win 60-40% in favour of taking the Brexit deal and then that will end the debate and will give a measure of consent for the new arrangement.

    If we ended up with a reversed vote and stayed in the EU, then some would say what a gigantic waste of time, but it wouldn't have been a waste of time it would have been a historic democratic exercise where the British public had been involved in deciding their future to a degree that no other EU member state has done.

    The problem is at the moment (and I speak as a Leave voter here), too many on the Leave side have seen it as a "win" for our side over theirs, that they want to defend even if the public mood has turned against it, to argue on the technicality that "in 2016 the vote was for Leave and that's what counts". Well maybe, but if in 2019 the mood is against it, and in 2020 it's against it, and in 2021 etc, then we are going to have an angry and divided nation and especially with the generational divide we could end up with Remainers starting a campaign of trench warfare and campaigning to rejoin the EU. This would be mocked and scoffed at first, with it being seen as a bunch of fringe fanatics out of touch with the public mood, but this is exactly how the Brexiters were seen back in the 1990s when the first real organised Eurosceptic movements started following Maastricht. We wouldn't rejoin any time soon - but in 15 to 20 years you could definitely see the political compass switching and (providing the EU hasn't disintegrated), the UK going begging to the EU to be let back in and then it would be on their terms, no opt outs, fully in Schengen, single currency and whatever else.

    So I would rather get a Brexit deal approved by democratic consent and honestly, if a PM had the guts for it, I think that it would be winnable.

    The other question I suppose is, in the event of holding a referendum on a Brexit deal and losing, if we then reverted to staying in the EU does that mean that's the final referendum, whereas the 2016 one wasn't final? No - if you are being properly democratic you have to move with the mood of the people. So I would say in that case, there would have to be a referendum at any subsequent EU treaty, and keep the EU open to scrutiny from the public, able to be rejected.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    A mate and I were thinking the other day about our similar feelings towards Tony Blair and Michael Owen. They were both quite successful in their day, but now you just really wish they'd get off the TV and keep their **** thoughts/interventions to themselves.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by seagull36)
    A mate and I were thinking the other day about our similar feelings towards Tony Blair and Michael Owen. They were both quite successful in their day, but now you just really wish they'd get off the TV and keep their **** thoughts/interventions to themselves.
    You've just demonstrated in that post that sometimes vast overwriting can mask a very clear point put well.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reality Check)
    You've just demonstrated in that post that sometimes vast overwriting can mask a very clear point put well.
    Please demonstrate the best way I could have articulated this point. I love to learn.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by seagull36)
    Please demonstrate the best way I could have articulated this point. I love to learn.
    In my post I was congratulating you for articulating it extremely well! The point I was making is that sometimes you can write paragraphs and paragraphs of tight prose which does a reasonably good job of getting a point across. Or, and this is what you did, you can write something short, snappy and well directed which get the point across equally well. This is what your analogy with Owen did - it was extremely effective in my mind, and anyone who was reading it who knew who Michael Owen was would instantly recognise what you were saying!
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: February 21, 2017
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Electronic notes or handwritten notes?
Useful resources

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.