Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit referendum and negotiations 2016-19

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Fantom View Post
    yes that's what I thought?
    You're linked article correlates the percentage foreign born with the leave vote but a more pertinent statistic would be the percentage change in the percentage of foreign born since 2004.
    I meant perception of immigration.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics...l-but-decisive
    Please support Milford Hospice. Click here to donate.

    Comment


      Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
      I don’t think the UK can stop anyone from the EU coming to live in the country for up to six months without needing to register in any way. If someone comes to the UK from outside of the EU they have to register straight away or they are an illegal immigrant. I repeat I have no issue with immigration beyond my doubts about how healthy it is for the likes of Romania and Poland to be losing such a massive proportion of their working population, but nearly all of my encounters with Eastern European workers have been cash in hand. I am not alone in having my car/ house/ windows being cleaned for cash. That is the perception of immigration, which is beyond the range and remit of the statisticians, no matter how much they might claim to factor it into their calculations. And, of course, the complaints about undercutting come from British tradesmen who are seeing their “cash in hand” work being undercut by migrant workers. That the indigenous tradesmen were breaking the law in the first place is, obviously, ironic, but the overwhelming majority of people are happy to head to the cash point to save themselves a few quid.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
      Ah come on PP. I've never met a trademan who didn't want to do a cash job!

      The two biggest things for me were levels of education and the nudge effect of the right wing press. You could argue there is an symbiosis between the two. People with lower levels of education, with poorer incomes, and more economically disadvantaged were nudged by the daily barage of anti EU sentiment the moment they saw a newspaper.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7881441.html

      https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...xit-newspapers
      Please support Milford Hospice. Click here to donate.

      Comment


        Brexit referendum and negotiations 2016-18

        Originally posted by fitzy73 View Post
        Ah come on PP. I've never met a trademan who didn't want to do a cash job!

        The two biggest things for me were levels of education and the nudge effect of the right wing press. You could argue there is an symbiosis between the two. People with lower levels of education, with poorer incomes, and more economically disadvantaged were nudged by the daily barage of anti EU sentiment the moment they saw a newspaper.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7881441.html

        https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...xit-newspapers
        Academia is, almost universally, in favour of the EU, as is the civil service. The teaching profession is overwhelmingly in favour of the EU as well. With readership of all print media falling off a cliff, the idea the Brexit vote was down to a lack of education and the influence of a media, that no one reads, is more of the same middle class flight from the reality: Brexit is about immigration.

        It amuses me how everyone is so desperate to try and blame Brexit on everything apart from the actual issue. Had the country not been bankrupted in 2008 then dissatisfaction about immigration would probably have been averted until the next crisis, but, the English were f’cking dissatisfied with membership of the EU, and still are, imho, to the extent that a vote on EU membership was a matter of when not if.

        What intrigues me is whether a government would have the stones to keep the UK in the EU without a second referendum. The UK won’t be Brexiting, as I have said all along, and that could wind up being May’s legacy because, credit where it is due, she is no quitter, even if her judgement is deeply flawed, and she has never wanted to Leave (unlike St Jeremy).


        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
        Last edited by the plastic paddy; 31st-January-2018, 20:14.

        Comment


          Originally posted by AdolphusGrigson View Post
          Finding obfuscation is not straightforward - I suspect that even when found it will result in argument that it is the wrong type of obfuscation. Anyone who listened to the Brexit debate will know that each side kept away from the weakness in its own position and Remain largely refused to engage on the subjects of immigration (except to denigrate those who mentioned it) or on sovereignty to deny there was any loss by remaining in the EU.

          Quite a few examples of both on this thread - if you look back a bit.
          hahahahahaha - not sure if this is high art or total absurdity (by your track record I'll go with the latter).

          I assume the irony of the bolded part followed by 5 lines of obfuscation is lost on you.

          Comment


            Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
            Academia is, almost universally, in favour of the EU, as is the civil service. The teaching profession is overwhelmingly in favour of the EU as well. With readership of all print media falling off a cliff, the idea the Brexit vote was down to a lack of education and the influence of a media, that no one reads, is more of the same middle class flight from the reality: Brexit is about immigration.

            It amuses me how everyone is so desperate to try and blame Brexit on everything apart from the actual issue. Had the country not been bankrupted in 2008 then dissatisfaction about immigration would probably have been averted until the next crisis, but, the English were f’cking dissatisfied with membership of the EU, and still are, imho, to the extent that a vote on EU membership was a matter of when not if.

            What intrigues me is whether a government would have the stones to keep the UK in the EU without a second referendum. The UK won’t be Brexiting, as I have said all along, and that could wind up being May’s legacy because, credit where it is due, she is no quitter, even if her judgement is deeply flawed, and she has never wanted to Leave (unlike St Jeremy).


            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
            I don't think it is wise to say one thing alone drive 17 million votes. Having said that I would agree with you that the mix between immigration and identity were the major misunderstood factors, particularly in the context of austerity.

            I don't think everyone is desperate to try and ignore that. Some have characterized it as racist, which you don't like. But i don't think that many on this thread have ignored the issue of immigration.

            Comment


              Originally posted by AwayFromHome View Post
              I don't think it is wise to say one thing alone drive 17 million votes. Having said that I would agree with you that the mix between immigration and identity were the major misunderstood factors, particularly in the context of austerity.

              I don't think everyone is desperate to try and ignore that. Some have characterized it as racist, which you don't like. But i don't think that many on this thread have ignored the issue of immigration.
              I don’t like the racist connotations of the Brexit vote at all, but xenophobia was the driver for the majority of those 17 million votes. That yellow map is damning though. 60:40 in favour of Brexit in England, outside of London, is damning as well.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

              Comment


                Brexit referendum and negotiations 2016-18

                Originally posted by AdolphusGrigson View Post
                Her's a one for you amigo. This is a deliberate attempt to obscure the loss of sovereignty by staying in the EU.

                http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/0...ty-for-the-uk/

                "Ultimately, pooling sovereignty by being a member of the EU is the best way to shape trade, inside and outside Europe, according to UK interests. It is simply a myth that leaving the EU would give back sovereignty in a meaningful way."



                That article seems to me to spell out sovereignty in an EU context but factually stands up no? If UK wants to trade with EU but not be a member it will have EU rules forced on it but have no say in the creation or amendment of those rules.
                I presume you are defining sovereignty as something more than just the trade context with EU? What sovereignty do you understand has the EU taken that is important to an average brexit voter ?

                Originally posted by AdolphusGrigson View Post

                the headline of the article "[/FONT][/COLOR]Britain doesn’t need to ‘take back control’ of immigration. We already have it" is incorrect.

                How is it incorrect when you have already conceded U.K. Had controls but did not use them????




                I'm confused again.
                The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad.
                - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Upfront_1979 View Post
                  That article seems to me to spell out sovereignty in an EU context but factually stands up no? If UK wants to trade with EU but not be a member it will have EU rules forced on it but have no say in the creation or amendment of those rules.
                  I presume you are defining sovereignty as something more than just the trade context with EU? What sovereignty do you understand has the EU taken that is important to an average brexit voter ?



                  How is it incorrect when you have already conceded U.K. Had controls but did not use them????




                  I'm confused again.
                  Sovereignty is emotional not rational. You are fortunate, in Ireland, that you have been specifically consulted whether you want to be part of the process. I don’t think it is a coincidence that Ireland has such high levels of satisfaction with EU membership. The English were not, specifically, consulted for two generations whether they still wanted to be part of the game. That was a monumental mistake that allowed myths and propaganda to fester. When the UK ends up Remaining the bitterness will end up consuming the EU.


                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
                    Academia is, almost universally, in favour of the EU, as is the civil service. The teaching profession is overwhelmingly in favour of the EU as well. With readership of all print media falling off a cliff, the idea the Brexit vote was down to a lack of education and the influence of a media, that no one reads, is more of the same middle class flight from the reality: Brexit is about immigration.

                    It amuses me how everyone is so desperate to try and blame Brexit on everything apart from the actual issue. Had the country not been bankrupted in 2008 then dissatisfaction about immigration would probably have been averted until the next crisis, but, the English were f’cking dissatisfied with membership of the EU, and still are, imho, to the extent that a vote on EU membership was a matter of when not if.

                    What intrigues me is whether a government would have the stones to keep the UK in the EU without a second referendum. The UK won’t be Brexiting, as I have said all along, and that could wind up being May’s legacy because, credit where it is due, she is no quitter, even if her judgement is deeply flawed, and she has never wanted to Leave (unlike St Jeremy).


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
                    I can't agree with you. It wasn't a one issue referendum. All the post poll data shows that yes immigration was an issue, but so was giving the govt a bloody nose. As per other posts, there was also a significant "bloody foreigners" / "scrounging immigrants" vote as well.

                    It's also factual that the more education you had, the more likely you were to vote remain. The same with age, the same with race.

                    While it's admittedly harder to prove the link between the right wing press and the leave vote, there are correlation between readership of certain papers (particularly the Whail) and leave voters.

                    I'm not making these up, the reports are out there. I think it's a bit glib to dismiss them as middle class flight from reality tbh.
                    Please support Milford Hospice. Click here to donate.

                    Comment


                      Brexit referendum and negotiations 2016-18

                      Originally posted by fitzy73 View Post
                      I can't agree with you. It wasn't a one issue referendum. All the post poll data shows that yes immigration was an issue, but so was giving the govt a bloody nose. As per other posts, there was also a significant "bloody foreigners" / "scrounging immigrants" vote as well.

                      It's also factual that the more education you had, the more likely you were to vote remain. The same with age, the same with race.

                      While it's admittedly harder to prove the link between the right wing press and the leave vote, there are correlation between readership of certain papers (particularly the Whail) and leave voters.

                      I'm not making these up, the reports are out there. I think it's a bit glib to dismiss them as middle class flight from reality tbh.
                      The print media just doesn’t have that much influence anymore. And certainly not as much as the broadcast media which is dominated by the BBC, which is hardly slaveringly pro Brexit.

                      Yes, the more educated are more likely to be Remain voters, but that could be down to Academia being all but 100% in favour of Remain.

                      The uncomfortable truth is that decades of back patting about tolerance etc have singularly failed. As soon as the economic **** hit the fan in 2008 there was a resurgence of racism/ xenophobia.

                      It is much easier to talk about £350 million a week on the side of a bus than that stark and painful failure.


                      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by AdolphusGrigson View Post
                        Her's a one for you amigo. This is a deliberate attempt to obscure the loss of sovereignty by staying in the EU.

                        http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/0...ty-for-the-uk/

                        "Ultimately, pooling sovereignty by being a member of the EU is the best way to shape trade, inside and outside Europe, according to UK interests. It is simply a myth that leaving the EU would give back sovereignty in a meaningful way."

                        the headline of the article "
                        Britain doesn’t need to ‘take back control’ of immigration. We already have it" is incorrect.


                        If you have actually read that article and believe it is a deliberate attempt to obfuscate then you are an idiot (if further proof of that was needed at this stage).

                        You are entitled to disagree with the analysis of course but to say it is not reasoned or balanced is just nonsense. Saying that the world is complicated and that not being part of a club and its decision-making constraints does not immediately equate to more independent decision making authority is simply not obfuscation.

                        Finally even if the blog were obfuscating the issue I hardly think an LSE blog is a major representation of the public face of the remain campaign. I'm quite sure you could actually find many blogs which say actually ridiculous things like the being in the EU does not require any pooling of sovereignty and Britannia continues to rule the waves through her control of the EU (you couldn't even manage to find one of those though). However this would not indicate that such bullsh1t views had any impact on a referendum campaign if they are consigned to a fringe blog.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
                          Sovereignty is emotional not rational. You are fortunate, in Ireland, that you have been specifically consulted whether you want to be part of the process. I don’t think it is a coincidence that Ireland has such high levels of satisfaction with EU membership. The English were not, specifically, consulted for two generations whether they still wanted to be part of the game. That was a monumental mistake that allowed myths and propaganda to fester. When the UK ends up Remaining the bitterness will end up consuming the EU.


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
                          The issue is not consultation PP. The Irish electorate has twice rejected further integration before changing its mind. Even as an ardent supporter of the EU and of more integration it would be disingenuous of me to argue that these changed votes were because of rational debate. The reality is they are largely caused by a general subservience and need to give the "right" answer. The deep-seated Catholic need to be good boys and girls and do as the hierarchy says.

                          England, for all its faults, has a long history (from the Magna Carta to the Diggers to the split with Rome to the Levellers and Roundheads to the Restoration to the Suffragettes) of obstinately saying "you've gone too far get back in your box" to hierarchy. It is what has kept the odd balance of England together for a millennium when all rational analysis would suggest that it should be rend apart by its internal contradictions.

                          Ireland's high level of satisfaction with the EU is in my view down to three factors;
                          - one is economic, we know that we would be worse off outside the single market
                          - one is sovereignty; we know as a small nation we will never plough our own furrow completely and therefore it is best of be a small part of the decision making process than on the outside taking the outcomes of other peoples decisions
                          - one is an emotional sense of who we want to be; people know that the liberalization of a range of social issues would never have happened without EU membership

                          For England, the last two are not the general consensus of society. A large number of people feel the EU constrains their sovereignty and that England/UK is large enough to hold its ground in the world (I don't agree with this view but I don't believe that it is totally lacking in credibility). A large number also believe that being part of the EU diminishes Englishness (immigration is a driver of this feeling but so are a range of EU social directives - the anger at 'elf and safety fascists" overcoming good English common sense for example)

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post

                            Yes, the more educated are more likely to be Remain voters, but that could be down to Academia being all but 100% in favour of Remain.
                            I don't think it could. Not with the numbers involved. Graduates voted 70/30 to remain. There aren't that many people in Academia.

                            The "resurgence" thing is interesting. I think there is a degree of old fashioned racism involved. But there's something new too. It's far more amorphous than the racism in the 70's and 80's, which was very specific about particular communities. I think most of that racism has bled towards "Anti-Islamicism" now.

                            The rest is more a low level grumbling about how "we just can't afford it".

                            There's definitely some flat out xenephobia involved, but given the previous experiences of the black and asian communities, I'm not sure it's just a rebounding of the same thing.

                            Day to day, week to week, most diverse communities are functioning perfectly well.

                            The areas that are struggling are places like the East of England where (unusually), poverty and immigration collide. Poorly funded local infrastructure was an issue in the East before immigration, and rural poverty in England is massively under-estimated.
                            "We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven into an age of unreason if we dig deep into our history and remember we are not descended from fearful men" Edward R Murrow

                            "Little by little, we have been brought into the present condition in which we are able neither to tolerate the evils from which we suffer, nor the remedies we need to cure them." - Livy


                            "I think that progress has been made by two flames that have always been burning in the human heart. The flame of anger against injustice and the flame of hope that you can build a better world" - Tony Benn

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by AwayFromHome View Post
                              If you have actually read that article and believe it is a deliberate attempt to obfuscate then you are an idiot (if further proof of that was needed at this stage).

                              You are entitled to disagree with the analysis of course but to say it is not reasoned or balanced is just nonsense. Saying that the world is complicated and that not being part of a club and its decision-making constraints does not immediately equate to more independent decision making authority is simply not obfuscation.

                              Finally even if the blog were obfuscating the issue I hardly think an LSE blog is a major representation of the public face of the remain campaign. I'm quite sure you could actually find many blogs which say actually ridiculous things like the being in the EU does not require any pooling of sovereignty and Britannia continues to rule the waves through her control of the EU (you couldn't even manage to find one of those though). However this would not indicate that such bullsh1t views had any impact on a referendum campaign if they are consigned to a fringe blog.
                              lols x.


                              l'll wait a bit to see if there is any moderator intervention of your remarks -before replying. Hopefully not.

                              Although I much prefer to have a rational exchange, free of personal abuse - I always enjoy (your preferred) alternative.
                              ​​​​​​#GiveLeinsterTheHCupNow

                              Originally Posted by mr chips
                              AG gets the responses he does because he is a journalist..

                              Comment


                                Nail on head, this ...

                                Britain’s imperial fantasies have given us Brexit

                                In his recent book Behind Diplomatic Lines, Patrick Wright, a former head of the UK diplomatic service, provides an illuminating account of Margaret Thatcher’s worldview. The former British premier wanted South Africa to be a “whites-only state”, and believed the Vietnamese boat people should be pushed into the sea before they reached Hong Kong. In addition, the late prime minister was particularly gripped by “Germanophobia”.
                                “She seems to be obsessed by a feeling that German-speakers are going to dominate the [European] community,” Wright writes. “Any talk of German reunification is anathema to her.” At one point it got so bad that the former foreign secretary Douglas Hurd claimed: “Cabinet now consists of three items: parliamentary affairs, home affairs and xenophobia.”
                                So when the outgoing German ambassador to Britain claimed this week that Brexiteers were fixated on the second world war, he was on to something. Referring to the popularity of films such as Darkest Hour and Dunkirk, Peter Ammon said: “History is always full of ambiguities and ups and downs, but if you focus only on how Britain stood alone in the [second world] war, how it stood against dominating Germany, well, it is a nice story, but does not solve any problem of today.” (If the second world war taught us anything, it was that you couldn’t stand alone. They weren’t called “the allies” for nothing.)
                                There were some sound reasons for voting to leave the EU – although the campaign was rarely fought on them, and wasn’t won because of them. And this nostalgia for a particular, and peculiar, version of our history long preceded Brexit. Remarking on the chant “Two world wars and one World Cup” that rang out whenever England played Germany at football, academic Paul Gilroy wrote, in After Empire: “The boast to which the phrase gives voice is integral to a larger denial. It declares nothing significant changed during the course of Britain’s downwardly mobile 20th century … We are being required to admit that the nations which triumphed in 1918 and 1945 live on somewhere unseen, but palpable.”
                                But Ammon was only half right. For while the Brexit vote was certainly underpinned by a melancholic longing for a glorious past, the era it sought to relive was less the second world war than the longer, less distinguished or openly celebrated period of empire. For if memories of the war made some feel more defiant, recollections of empire made them deluded. Our colonial past, and the inability to come to terms with its demise, gave many the impression that we are far bigger, stronger and more influential than we really are. At some point they convinced themselves that the reason we are at the centre of most world maps is because the Earth revolves around us, not because it was us who drew the maps.
                                It was through this distorted lens (“Let’s put the Great back in Great Britain”) that a majority voted to leave. Ammon puts the fantasies down to war stories from Brexiteers’ childhoods. “Obviously every state is defined by its history, and some define themselves by what their father did in the war, and it gives them great personal pride.” But British history didn’t stop after the war. Empire was more recent and, for a considerable element of the Brexiteers’ campaign, more personal.
                                Douglas Carswell, the sole Ukip MP during the referendum, was raised in Uganda; Arron Banks, who bankrolled Ukip and the xenophobic Leave.EU campaign, spent his childhood in South Africa, where his father ran sugar estates, as well as in Kenya, Ghana and Somalia; Henry Bolton, the current head of Ukip, was born and raised partly in Kenya; Robert Oxley, head of media for Vote Leave, has strong family ties to Zimbabwe. One can only speculate about how much impact these formative years had on their political outlook, (Carswell attributes his libertarianism to Idi Amin’s “arbitrary rule”) but it would be odd to conclude they didn’t have any.
                                But if echoes of empire reverberated through the campaign, they have also framed our negotiating strategy. The past 18 months have illustrated the journey from hubris to humiliation. For a couple of generations, we have seen our attributes and others’ weaknesses through the wrong side of a magnifying glass; now our diminished state is becoming fully apparent, and, like Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, reciting Kipling in Myanmar, we are struggling to adjust.
                                This awakening would be funny (abroad they find it hilarious) if it were not so consequential. Johnson told the Commons the EU27 could “go whistle” for an extortionate Brexit bill. They whistled; now we will cough, to the tune of £35-40bn.
                                During her 2017 election campaign, Theresa May, channelling her inner Thatcher, boasted about being a “bloody difficult woman”. “The next man to find that out will be Jean-Claude Juncker,” she claimed. In fact Juncker, the president of the European commission, and his team have found May more overwhelmed and befuddled than overwhelming and belligerent. After one Downing Street dinner, European negotiators concluded that she “does not live on planet Mars but rather in a galaxy very far away”.
                                In a recent private meeting between May and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, the two leaders reportedly found themselves in a tragicomic conversational loop. May kept telling Merkel: “Make me an offer.” To which Merkel would reply: “But you’re leaving – we don’t have to make you an offer. Come on, what do you want?” To which May would retort: “Make me an offer.”
                                A change of leader won’t make this right. Lacking authority and coherence, haemorrhaging relevance and credibility, May is a faithful reflection not only of her government but of the country at this moment. Brexiteers have ostensibly got what they want: Brexit. They assumed we could dictate the terms; we can’t. They assumed we could just walk away; we can’t. They had no more plans for leaving than a dog chasing a car has to drive it. They are now finding out how little sovereignty means for a country the size of Britain in a neoliberal globalised economy beyond blue passports (which we could have had anyway). What we need isn’t a change of leader but a change of direction.
                                May is no more personally to blame for the mess we are in with Europe than Anthony Eden was for the mess with the 1956 Suez crisis – which provides a more salient parallel for Britain than the second world war. It took Britain and France overplaying their hand, in punishing Egypt for seizing the Suez canal from colonial control and nationalising it, to realise their imperial influence had been eclipsed by the US and was now in decline.
                                “France and England will never be powers comparable to the United States,” the West German chancellor at the time, Konrad Adenauer, told the French foreign minister. “Not Germany either. There remains to them only one way of playing a decisive role in the world: that is to unite Europe … We have no time to waste; Europe will be your revenge.”
                                Once again, Britain has overplayed its hand. Preferring to live in the past rather than learn from it, we find ourselves diminished in the present and clueless about the future.
                                Tis but a scratch.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X