Parliament must reject the latest Boris 'deal' proposal and call for a 2nd referendum Watch

Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#81
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#81
(Original post by ByEeek)
You are quite right. We had the opportunity to work anywhere in Europe from holiday rep or chalet host to grape pickers and more besides. To say nothing of all those people who have bought houses in Europe and live / commute. All closed off now. 20 years ago, the world was getting bigger. Now, with war and patriotism it is getting smaller and people are becoming ibward looking. Brexit is a gigantic screw you to the rest of the world.
It was a typical right-wing reactionary response to the financial crisis of 2008 and stagnating or declining real incomes. The left didn't respond clearly enough and it was easy for Farage and the rest of the toxic manipulators acting on behalf of a small group of global financiers to play on racist and xenophobic fears and cash in big. Now we are going to see the consequences - the many working people in post-industrial areas who voted for Brexit are going to experience even more economic depression. The only people who will benefit will be a tiny group of thieving hedge funds and vulture capitalists, many of them in places like Russia.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#82
Report 1 month ago
#82
(Original post by ByEeek)
You are quite right. We had the opportunity to work anywhere in Europe from holiday rep or chalet host to grape pickers and more besides. To say nothing of all those people who have bought houses in Europe and live / commute. All closed off now. 20 years ago, the world was getting bigger. Now, with war and patriotism it is getting smaller and people are becoming inward looking forgetting how much they depend others whilst vilifying those they depend on. Brexit is a gigantic screw you to the rest of the world.
Utter nonsense, nobody is closing off anything by not wishing to be part of a political union!

What total nonsense
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#83
Report 1 month ago
#83
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
Utter nonsense, nobody is closing off anything by not wishing to be part of a political union!

What total nonsense
Oh ok. So next year I will be able to work in France? Or will I have to go through lengthy application of work visas that make the whole thing more trouble than it is worth?
0
reply
Anonnorth
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#84
Report 1 month ago
#84
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
The deal that Boris and the Irish PM, Leo Varadkar, are now working on clearly indicates that the UK will leave both the Single Market and the Customs Union, leaving only Northern Ireland suspended temporarily in some sort of 'in/out' limbo acceptable to the DUP and Dublin.

Yet this deal, if passed, will wreck the UK economy.

Car manufacturers will leave in droves - only today, Nissan have warned in the strongest terms that the tariffs of 10% to be imposed by the EU on UK-made vehicles will make being in the UK unviable. This is almost a million jobs.

Food supplies and numerous other industries will be disrupted, as their current production models rely on smooth border flows, that will no longer exist cross-channel.

There will be massive extra burdens of bureaucracy on UK exporters, causing many to withdraw from exporting and adding to our balance of payments deficit.

The pound will plunge to new lows, causing inflation on both food and non-food items. The era of things like cheap imported computers, phones and other electronics will have ended.

The UK will not be able to call on large numbers of European workers who sustain the ordinary work of our economy and make the UK viable, doing all the many jobs that British people don't want to do.

It will be terrible.

This is OUR government planning to do this to OUR country.

Absolutely incredible and purely because a small, highly ideological, extremist faction have taken control of the Tory Party and are being served by their supine liar-in-chief with what they want to hear.

It will be a patriotic act for all existing MPs to vote this down.

We shall then see if Boris Johnson and the Tory extremist ERG are actual democrats, or not.
You do realise the same people said exactly the same things when the UK was deciding whether to join the Euro or not?

That has been proven to have been the best decision to say out of it.

As far as Nissan is concerned the only country in Europe that Nissan sells the UK made cars to is Switzerland they are then sold around the EU and back to the UK from there and the UK already has a deal in place with Switzerland in case we leave the EU.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#85
Report 1 month ago
#85
(Original post by ByEeek)
You are quite right. We had the opportunity to work anywhere in Europe from holiday rep or chalet host to grape pickers and more besides. To say nothing of all those people who have bought houses in Europe and live / commute. All closed off now. 20 years ago, the world was getting bigger. Now, with war and patriotism it is getting smaller and people are becoming inward looking forgetting how much they depend others whilst vilifying those they depend on. Brexit is a gigantic screw you to the rest of the world.
Why should the British state aid in exporting labour abroad. That means that output and tax are not being increased by this labourer in the UK. Your also ignoring the world outside of Europe, thousands of people now head to China to teach English ect..


Though I actually disagree with you and Burton, the number of opportunities has probably never been higher. It is the quality of those opportunities that is disputable (lots of service sector jobs but with only modest prospects).
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#86
Report 1 month ago
#86
(Original post by ByEeek)
Oh ok. So next year I will be able to work in France? Or will I have to go through lengthy application of work visas that make the whole thing more trouble than it is worth?
If course you will be able to work overseas, you may not have an automatic right too, but if an employer wishes to employ you in France who is going to stop you?

The paperwork maybe more complex but we are not going to build a impassable forcefeild down the english channel! Get a grip man jeezz.

The abilty to control seems to be a concept beyond the compresion of some fanatical remainers.
Last edited by Burton Bridge; 1 month ago
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#87
Report 1 month ago
#87
(Original post by Anonnorth)
You do realise the same people said exactly the same things when the UK was deciding whether to join the Euro or not?
Perhap. But predicting the outcome of no deal isn't a stab in the dark. If you export widgets to Europe tarrif free and then the next day they will incur a 20% import duty by the EU as clearly set out by their 3rd country rules, it doesn't take a genius to work out that British exporter is going to lose sales pretty quickly.

Same goes for just in time ordering systems. The outcomes of no deal Brexit are well understood and can be eadily predicted.

It is those who prefer to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that everything will be ok because it was ok 40 years ago when everything was completely different that need to worry. You are in for a massive shock and an even bigger told-you-so from all those remoaners very soon.
0
reply
Anonnorth
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#88
Report 1 month ago
#88
You do realise we buy more the EU than we export to them?
If the EU puts these tariffs in force dont you think the UK will do the same?
This will hit more EU companies than those in the UK, if we leave the EU will not kick themselves and their own businesses in.the teeth like that. There will be an agreement made between the EU and the UK tarrifs.
0
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#89
Report 1 month ago
#89
(Original post by winterscoming)
If the referendum result becomes legally binding (Parliament can ensure that happens), then it won't matter what any eventual government may want because it will have been enshrined in law, so there'd be nothing for the government or parliament to contemplate over, and no need to spend any more parliamentary time on it. It doesn't matter what the government wants or doesn't want because the decision will not be theirs to take; they will simply be the executors of the instruction whether they like it or not (I would imagine there would be a fairly clear-cut legal case in the supreme court for any government which decided not to comply).

I think the real problem with the first referendum was that the Leave outcome simply had no proposals behind it whatsoever with respect to what leaving really meant, aside from a fairly weakly-defined plan about the UK joining EFTA proposed by the official leave campaign.

The big difference would be a stamped, sealed, legally-binding document (which already exists - mostly, Theresa May's deal, plus whatever amendments that Boris can negotiate). This along with making it legally-binding pretty much removes any further scope for political deadlock because I would think that no government would be able to overturn it (Obviously I don't know for sure, since I'm not a legal expert, but I cannot imagine the UK Supreme court allowing a government to ignore a legally-binding referendum result).

The problem is really nothing to do with what the government or parliament wants, or even the fact that people voted leave, it's the fact that that the Leave outcome was so poorly defined that the Tory Government has used it as an excuse to reinterpret it in any way it pleases and has been trying to tell people that whatever they decide is "what people voted for" -- this (IMHO) is totally unacceptable and a totally undemocratic abuse of power by the executive.


No it doesn't provide a clear mandate at all. A general election only decides who our representatives are in parliament, but David Cameron took the decision away from parliament and put it to a direct vote instead.

The entire premise of leaving is predicated on the fact that a statistical majority of people in the country voted in favour of leaving, albeit without defining what leaving means. The only democratic way to be able to know whether a statistical majority of people still support the concept of leaving (now that leaving is clearly defined), is to have another ballot with essentially the same question again, but where both possible outcomes are clearly-defined, unambiguous, legally-binding, and where there's no room for any government or parliament to do anything other than just adhere to the result then move on and put the entire issue to rest.

A general election doesn't do this at all - firstly because an election isn't about a single issue (it's about a great many number of issues - many of which are far more important to most people in the country than the 'Brexit' issue which people are feeling increasingly bored and fed up with). Also because the way our FPTP system works is such that a majority government can be formed with only a minority of the votes - e.g. a government can be voted into power even when that party won less than 40% of the popular vote, which obviously falls a long way short of the statistical majority that would be needed in a referendum.

Then of course there's also the (highly likely) chance that a general election will do about as much to parliamentary arithmetic as rearranging the deckchairs on the titanic. Holding a legally-binding referendum is pretty much the only way to guarantee a definite answer either way, and to sort it out once and for all.
The first half is exactly what leavers thought during the and before the first refernedum - especially when they all recieved a letter through their door promisng that the result would be implimented, and saw parliment vote with a majority respect the outcome before the referendum. They felt like there was no way that if their side won, it wouldn't be carried out...

There are always ways, and there will always be routes for poltiicans to try and get their way. A legally binding refernedum, doesn't stop the goverment having another referendum 2 years later after rejoining.. unless you start to add amendments after amendments to the first, trying to predict exactly what ways leavers could try and overthrow the result.

Do you really trust Boris and Farage to relieved remain? Are you 100% sure that you can legally tie their hands, when they regain control of parliament, in a way that can stop them finding some way around it? If so, your as deluded as leavers who thought that we would trigger article 50 and leave the EU cleanly exactly as people wanted.

---

The other point I take issue with is the idea that it should be May's deal vs Remain... be honest with yourself, truelly honest. The reason you want that is because you know remain wins. I was a remain voter last time, and will be again this time.. but even I look at that and think 'that's a stitch up'. Its picking a plan that you know leavers hate and won't be motivated to vote for.

The idea that its the best possible plan, or the only plan? Doesn't hold any water. May has been widely panned and critised from voices across the spectrum as being a terrible negotiator and making a terrible mess of brexit for her 2 years in power. The idea that the best May (universally considered incompetant in her job) could do, is the best anyone could do.. is just laughably biased. An honest remainer would be able to admit that there probably was a better deal available, probably not all that the brexiteers dreamed of, but certainly a bit better than May's deal. Unless you believe that she was the best person for the job, and her stratagy was flawless.. to presume that May's brexit is the best possible brexit, is just wrong.

The issue with a second referendum is that (and again, if your honest.. you know this) it kills any chance at ever finding a better deal. As soon as the EU knows there will be a rerefernedum, any motivation for them to give us a better deal dies. It is 100% in their interest to keep the referendum between Mays deal and Remain, and given that the result would be binding, there is no negotiation for a better deal after, so as soon as you call the referendum you kill any chance at every getting anything better than May's deal. Again, you know this, and you know it would help remain win.

An election on the other hand gives us the best of either outcome:

Either the remain aliance wins a majority and can force revocation of article 50 through the house, and then see out 5 years of recovery/stability as they prove we are better in the EU

Or

The brexit aliance wins and they can go into a re-negotiation with the EU with a majority in the house, and the threat of a no-deal brexit firmly on the table.. and have 5 years to then prove that after leaving they can deliever all the new trade deals they have promised for so long..
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#90
Report 1 month ago
#90
(Original post by Anonnorth)
You do realise we buy more the EU than we export to them?
If the EU puts these tariffs in force dont you think the UK will do the same?
This will hit more EU companies than those in the UK, if we leave the EU will not kick themselves and their own businesses in.the teeth like that. There will be an agreement made between the EU and the UK tarrifs.
The No Deal tariff schedule abolishes tariffs on about 84% of goods globally.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#91
Report 1 month ago
#91
(Original post by Anonnorth)
You do realise we buy more the EU than we export to them?
If the EU puts these tariffs in force dont you think the UK will do the same?
This will hit more EU companies than those in the UK, if we leave the EU will not kick themselves and their own businesses in.the teeth like that. There will be an agreement made between the EU and the UK tarrifs.
This is too simplistic. As a whole the EU is our largest export market. But by country the UK is not the biggest export market for any other EU country. For example Germany exports more to the US and France than us. And as a proportion, the UK only makes up 6.6% of German exports. The same is true of all countries. Each EU country sells more goods around the EU than to the UK. So the loss of the UK market, whilst significant isn't anything as bad as our loss of access to EU markets.
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#92
Report 1 month ago
#92
(Original post by ByEeek)
This is too simplistic. As a whole the EU is our largest export market. But by country the UK is not the biggest export market for any other EU country. For example Germany exports more to the US and France than us. And as a proportion, the UK only makes up 6.6% of German exports. The same is true of all countries. Each EU country sells more goods around the EU than to the UK. So the loss of the UK market, whilst significant isn't anything as bad as our loss of access to EU markets.
We don’t lose access to the market
Last edited by paul514; 1 month ago
0
reply
winterscoming
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#93
Report 1 month ago
#93
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
The first half is exactly what leavers thought during the and before the first refernedum - especially when they all recieved a letter through their door promisng that the result would be implimented, and saw parliment vote with a majority respect the outcome before the referendum. They felt like there was no way that if their side won, it wouldn't be carried out...
They were misled by hollow words from politicians who lied to them unfortunately. It wasn't a legally-binding referendum - they were merely counting on the words of David Cameron who verbally promised not to resign and to implement the result. The detail of voting leave was totally unspecified - i.e. unlike the Scottish referendum where the SNP produced a detailed plan of what an independent Scotland would look like outside the UK, the Leave side had absolutely nothing, and Cameron also didn't make any such plans either because he didn't think there was any chance that Leave would win.

But this is all water under the bridge now. It doesn't really matter what people believed at the time if everyone now accepts that it was all untrue. Democracy is based on consent, but consent cannot exist when its based on deliberate deception and falsehoods.

People were duped into believing things by politicians who lied to them. there's simply nothing more that can be said about it than that. We can spend a lot of time revisiting the misconduct of people like David Cameron/Boris Johnson/etc, but really that doesn't get us anywhere, but it can be fixed by using a second referendum with firm legislation in-place to prevent it happening again. These issues can be trivially prevented a second time around by using the legally-defined document which already exists and describes exactly what it means to leave, and by making sure that the result of the referendum becomes legally binding.


(Original post by fallen_acorns)
There are always ways, and there will always be routes for poltiicans to try and get their way. A legally binding refernedum, doesn't stop the goverment having another referendum 2 years later after rejoining.. unless you start to add amendments after amendments to the first, trying to predict exactly what ways leavers could try and overthrow the result.
It doesn't really matter whether there's a 3rd referendum later on - they'd need to make a separate case for that, but whether or not that happens really doesn't matter right now. The point is that there would be a clear, unambiguous outcome on the specific issue of Leaving with a deal, without it being muddled up amongst the noise of a party's manifesto, tribal politics, tactical voting, etc. It would truly represent a majority of people in the country one way or the other, rather than being tied to maybe 40% of the country voting for one party in FPTP.

The point of another referendum is to get a clear answer to the central issue which is whether or not there's a majority of people in the country who want to leave with the current deal, given that the leave option from the original referendum (where a deal was promised, just one which looks totally different to what we have) hasn't materialised.

Really the problem is that our FPTP electoral system is not fit for resolving big constitutional issues like this. It's what we're stuck with now, but a general election is absolutely the wrong way to try and resolve the issue because the central question is not about whether there's a majority in parliament or whether government would be willing to implement the result (they'd be legally compelled to do so, and the courts can force them), but whether there's actually a majority in the country for it. Everything else stems from that question.

(Original post by fallen_acorns)
Do you really trust Boris and Farage to relieved remain? Are you 100% sure that you can legally tie their hands, when they regain control of parliament, in a way that can stop them finding some way around it? If so, your as deluded as leavers who thought that we would trigger article 50 and leave the EU cleanly exactly as people wanted.
You're making the assumption that they even get a majority, which is highly speculative and unlikely. In fact, the most likely outcome is that parliamentary arithmetic remains in deadlock -- so what do we do in that case? do we keep having elections and changes of government until someone can find a majority and where all the parliamentarians are going to stick to their manifesto commitments?

It also doesn't change the fact that a government can enter power with far less than 50% of the popular vote, so any government with a parliamentary majority which represents fewer than 50% of the electorate (which is pretty much every government which has ever been in No.10) wouldn't be seen as legitimately able to reinterpret or overturn the 2016 vote. It wouldn't resolve anything at all - we'd still be having the same arguments over and over because the central question about whether or not there's still a majority to leave, knowing what the current deal now looks like, will not have been answered.

I am sure they would look for any way around it if Tories had to contend with a remain vote, but if they did that upon a backdrop of a referendum where Remain had won - not only would there no longer be the excuse of "It's the will of the majority" based on a result for a nonexistent deal, but there would be constitutional issues at stake - we've already seen that the surpreme court is able to overrule the government on those matters. Don't forget that the Tory party is heavily split and will continue to be after an election - The party would still have a lot of Remain-leaning senior MPs like David Liddington, Damian Green, etc.

The only way they'd really have around it would be to have a 3rd (also legally binding) referendum and either propose a deal which is truly different to the Boris/TM deal, or to hold a No Deal vs remain referendum instead, which is fine because in both cases we'd be looking at ballots whereby noone would be able to contest the result nor its interpretation.


(Original post by fallen_acorns)
The other point I take issue with is the idea that it should be May's deal vs Remain... be honest with yourself, truelly honest. The reason you want that is because you know remain wins. I was a remain voter last time, and will be again this time.. but even I look at that and think 'that's a stitch up'. Its picking a plan that you know leavers hate and won't be motivated to vote for.
No, it goes right back to the the fact that the 2016 result was predicated on leaving with a fantasy deal which doesn't exist. People were conned into thinking that it would be possible for the UK to get a "better deal" (cake and eat it, etc.), and we now know for certain that deal doesn't exist. If people hate it, they can reject it, but this deal is effectively what their vote has turned into, even though they didn't actually know it at the time, or they thought they were voting for something else because some lying politicians told them that they were voting for something else. If that then leads to yet another referendum which involves Remain-vs-No-deal then that's fine too - again because the options on the table are clear and because the result is not open to reinterpretation.


And on the point of motivation, are you sure that the real reason you want an election rather than a referendum isn't because you suspect that the majority is now in favour of remain, and that you think the only way that leave can happen is having the Tories voted in with only 40% of the vote rather than getting a direct mandate in a yes/no ballot? That is the only real reason I can think of why anyone would object to a 2nd referendum.

I am quite happy to admit that I believe right now that there's a majority in the country for remaining, and I don't think the outcome would change at all whether the option is Remain vs No deal or Remain vs Boris' deal, or Remain vs EFTA, etc. This is pretty much the reason why I feel like a 2nd referendum is necessary because it seems to me that the "will of the majority" is not towards leave but towards cancelling the whole thing altogether and writing it off as a failed experiment.

(I'm also not in favour of the Lib dems stance of revoking A50 if they get a majority, I think that's a ridiculous and reckless thing to suggest, so I'm rather disappointed by their decision to do that because the only thing that could possibly do would be to ignite a great deal of resentment and feeling of betrayal across the country)

(Original post by fallen_acorns)
The issue with a second referendum is that (and again, if your honest.. you know this) it kills any chance at ever finding a better deal. As soon as the EU knows there will be a rerefernedum, any motivation for them to give us a better deal dies. It is 100% in their interest to keep the referendum between Mays deal and Remain, and given that the result would be binding, there is no negotiation for a better deal after, so as soon as you call the referendum you kill any chance at every getting anything better than May's deal. Again, you know this, and you know it would help remain win.
The reality is that there really wasn't ever any chance of the UK getting a better deal in the first place. Anyone who genuinely believes that having 'no deal' on the table makes any difference whatsoever to the EU is deluded. That line of false-reasoning is obviously popular among tory members and leave-supporting constituencies, but it's fundamentally untrue.

The real reason that Boris (and Theresa May before him) wanted no deal to be on the table is because that hard-line helps him defeat Nigel Farage in Tory-leave seats, helps keep his support from the ERG, and it satisfies all the leave-supporting Tory members/donors. The reality of where we're at and have been for over 3 years is that the Tory party is focused on its own survival, and not in negotiating a better deal with the EU.

Any strategy of trying to strongarm the EU never had any credibility whatsoever, but the Tories refuse to admit this. It will never work because the EU is far bigger than the UK, and the EU has no particular need to pander to the UK's demands. The EU views the UK's threat of crashing out as the UK pointing a gun at its own foot then threatening to pull the trigger. You need to look at the situation from the other side; they're not in any kind of state of political crisis or upheaval over the chance of the UK crashing out without a deal, the EU27 countries themselves are already fully prepared against whatever minimal impact they might feel from the UK's departure and will carry on business-as-usual without the UK, Brussels instutitions have already calculated how much money they're going to spend without the UK's contribution, and broadly speaking the EU already has much bigger and more important problems to worry about.


(Original post by fallen_acorns)
An election on the other hand gives us the best of either outcome:

Either the remain aliance wins a majority and can force revocation of article 50 through the house, and then see out 5 years of recovery/stability as they prove we are better in the EU
Except that won't work for the reason I mentioned above - the country voted to leave based on a direct majority of over 50% of the number of votes cast.

Any government could easily be swept into power with 40% of the vote or less simply due to the way our FPTP system works. That will open up the floodgates for years to come of "betraying the will of the people" because a general election manifesto commitment to revoke A50 isn't the same thing as a direct majority.

It solves nothing and would just lead to another referendum anyway because the people arguing in favour of leaving aren't interested in whether or not the UK is better off in the EU -- they know full well that the UK will be significantly worse off outside of the EU and they don't care, in fact they even seem proud of the fact that they're willing to "sacrifice" so many things just to get away from the EU - they just want to leave and that's that. They've already lost every single argument about why the UK should leave (all the old arguments about the economy, immigration, and even sovereignty have all been thoroughly dismantled) but they're clinging on to the "will of the majority" because 52% voted to leave in 2016, entirely ignoring the fact that what 52% of people voted for doesn't actually exist.

And there's also the fact that there will most likely be no majority at all, we're very likely to end up with yet another minority government with no ability to get any deal through parliament and simply be in exactly the same deadlocked position that we are already.
Last edited by winterscoming; 1 month ago
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#94
Report 1 month ago
#94
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
It was a typical right-wing reactionary response to the financial crisis of 2008 and stagnating or declining real incomes. The left didn't respond clearly enough and it was easy for Farage and the rest of the toxic manipulators acting on behalf of a small group of global financiers to play on racist and xenophobic fears and cash in big. Now we are going to see the consequences - the many working people in post-industrial areas who voted for Brexit are going to experience even more economic depression. The only people who will benefit will be a tiny group of thieving hedge funds and vulture capitalists, many of them in places like Russia.
I'm sorry explain that again, why have I been manipulated and why was my arguement right wing?

It's the exact opposite of right wing policy to wish to create training and job opportunities without lining the pockets of the wealthy owners of education establishments.
1
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#95
Report 1 month ago
#95
(Original post by paul514)
We don’t lose access to the market
Agreed. But that market will be less competitive due to tarrifs and will require additional paperwork checks and red tape.

Progress!
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#96
Report 1 month ago
#96
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I'm sure you'd say that about any questions.

Clearly, the point of a second referendum is to offer all those many voters who have now seen what the sort of Brexit that Tory and Brexit Party extremists want will really mean to reconsider.
The ERG aren't extremists, they're a mix of Thatcherites and Faragists. Please take your fearmongering nonsense elsewhere.
0
reply
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#97
Report 1 month ago
#97
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
It was a typical right-wing reactionary response to the financial crisis of 2008 and stagnating or declining real incomes.
Er... @Burton Bridge is a lefty and not a ”right-wing reactionary”?

The left didn't respond clearly enough and it was easy for Farage and the rest of the toxic manipulators (emphasis mine) acting on behalf of a small group of global financiers (ditto) to play on racist and xenophobic fears and cash in big.
”I can't believe it's not anti-Semitism!”

Now we are going to see the consequences - the many working people in post-industrial areas who voted for Brexit are going to experience even more economic depression.
Source? The Grauniad doesn't count.

The only people who will benefit will be a tiny group of thieving hedge funds and vulture capitalists, many of them in places like Russia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#98
Report 1 month ago
#98
(Original post by LiberOfLondon)
Er... @Burton Bridge is a lefty and not a ”right-wing reactionary”?
:lol: you are not wrong, you dont get much more left than me legally anyway.

Fullofsurprises in as nicer possible way, I'd love to know why have I been manipulated, why was my arguement right wing, not in a nasty way I'm just genuinely interested in why you think such?
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#99
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#99
(Original post by Burton Bridge)
:lol: you are not wrong, you dont get much more left than me legally anyway.

Fullofsurprises in as nicer possible way, I'd love to know why have I been manipulated, why was my arguement right wing, not in a nasty way I'm just genuinely interested in why you think such?
I'm not sure why you think I was talking about you, I was referring to the ways in which working class people are persuaded by extremely right wing forces to vote for things which are self-harming to those voters. The Tory Party never comes to office without such voters. You don't sound like one of them, but it is self-harming for many in the North and Midlands to support a Leave that consists of leaving the single market and customs union, because those things will have a severely detrimental effect on the bedrock industries of those regions and on employment and affluence across the board.
0
reply
Burton Bridge
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#100
Report 1 month ago
#100
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I'm not sure why you think I was talking about you, I was referring to the ways in which working class people are persuaded by extremely right wing forces to vote for things which are self-harming to those voters. The Tory Party never comes to office without such voters. You don't sound like one of them, but it is self-harming for many in the North and Midlands to support a Leave that consists of leaving the single market and customs union, because those things will have a severely detrimental effect on the bedrock industries of those regions and on employment and affluence across the board.
Because I was making the argument against ByEeek in #86.

As I said I genuinely think my sons generation have far less opportunities currently than I had, that's under the status quo I am trying to change. I dont think that's a standard right wing arguments, in fact wishing for opportunities to all people regardless of birth genetics and wealth, and wishing to regulate an industry that is making an immoral living on providing ....

Hold that thought I got too go, I'll be back
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

what's your favourite season?

Summer (65)
32.18%
Spring (37)
18.32%
Autumn/Fall (51)
25.25%
Winter (38)
18.81%
I love them all equally (11)
5.45%

Watched Threads

View All