If we vote for Brexit what happens

Tromking

Another Country on mainland Europe finds solace in right-wing politics.
Do we want to continue the connection we have with this increasingly fascist continent?

mayonnaise

Tromking wrote: »

Another Country on mainland Europe finds solace in right-wing politics.
Do we want to continue the connection we have with this increasingly fascist continent?

Alternative Fuer Deutschland (AdF) received between 12 and 24% of the vote. That's on par with the vote share of our own extreme-right party.

angrypirate

mayonnaise wrote: »

Alternative Fuer Deutschland (AdF) received between 12 and 24% of the vote. That's on par with the vote share of our own extreme-right party.

Didnt realise the BNP had that much of the vote share!

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

There isnt anything to debate

You point to the american indians and cry...see this is what happens when a nation allows immigration all the natives die. When it was nothing to do with immigration and all to do with conquest. Also there was no governance or legal or political system in place in north america that you would recognise as such if there was you would probably see it as a few nation declaring war on north america and taking its land. Much like the borders of europe changed many many many times.

No one is saying we should allow a more powerful nation to send its soldiers and weapons here to take and hold land. You argument would be as stupid as calling hitlers armies marching into Poland as immigrants or any of the European wars in history as immigrants (armies) arriving and killing lots of locals. stupid beyond your norm

tell me where there has been free movement of people on a substantial worldwide scale without conflict

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

tell me where there has been free movement of people on a substantial worldwide scale without conflict

I only know of Europe where there is free movement between states and have yet to read about the hundreds of millions dead in Europe because of a few percentage population movement

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

I only know of Europe where there is free movement between states and have yet to read about the hundreds of millions dead in Europe because of a few percentage population movement

If you mean, by 'free movement of people' people, movement within a nation state or limited agreed free movement area then I would agree many such exist.

If however by 'free movement of people', you mean over substantial areas and nations then historically (or now) they do not exist.
Where there have been major movement of people they have usually been the result of conflict and wars.

Today I do not think the world is ready for the free movement of people.

danothy

Tromking wrote: »

Of course they should.

Why does accident of birth make it okay to require one set of people to contribute in order to be allowed to live somewhere but not require the same of another set for the same privilege?

Generali

cells wrote: »

I only know of Europe where there is free movement between states and have yet to read about the hundreds of millions dead in Europe because of a few percentage population movement

Did you never read of the massacre of the London plumbers? It was a battle waged between indigenous plumbers and Polish invaders.

Polish people came to Wood Green to fix pipework and so on only to discover that there were indigenous plumbers already plying their trade, albeit in shoddy fashion.

The Poles weren't to be discouraged. With pipe bender and welding torch they systematically went from house-to-house killing indigenous plumbers as they found them. The waste pipes of N22 streamed red with blood although it was noted that the waste pipes that the Polish plumbers had been working on didn't back up as much...

It was the beginning of the end. The homeowners of London armed with bottles of gin drove the indigenous plumbers into Northern Kent and Up North (it's grim up north) where they voted UKIP.

All that remains of the Indigenous Plumbing Tribe of London is a plaque to their Elder, Bazalgette.



RIP

mwpt

danothy wrote: »

Why does accident of birth make it okay to require one set of people to contribute in order to be allowed to live somewhere but not require the same of another set for the same privilege?

The answer to this is because it is practical. Your point is reasonable in theory and one that I buy in to, but from a pragmatic view I think it is impossible to allow complete free movement of people without a strong possibility of large scale violence and rise in right wing movements.

For the same reason, harsh decisions are taken on what seems to a liberal an unfair individual basis but which are better for the group as a whole.

danothy

mwpt wrote: »

The answer to this is because it is practical. Your point is reasonable in theory and one that I buy in to, but from a pragmatic view I think it is impossible to allow complete free movement of people without a strong possibility of large scale violence and rise in right wing movements.

For the same reason, harsh decisions are taken on what seems to a liberal an unfair individual basis but which are better for the group as a whole.

I don't think that "practicality" justifies racism, nor do I think that "pragmatism" of placating the racists that would be violent if we did not placate them justifies it either. It's telling how these people baulk at the idea that natives should be held to the same standards they advocate for non-natives.