Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

It's very hard to sway an emotional argument though, when everyone was "sick of experts".

What could Remain have done to change your vote, for instance?


Racist also has a very specific meaning that hasn't been diluted at all. It's being used a lot more often because immigration/foreigners seems to be the common denominator for the bulk of the Leave voters (forum members here excepted).

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

What could Remain have done to change your vote, for instance?

I didn't vote at all because both sides' arguments were poor and dishonest, either outright or by omission, but what Remain could have done to get me to support it was to explain

1/ Remain in what, exactly? and, relatedly,
2/ admit the goal of political and monetary union into the EU and explain why it would be good for Britain, or at the very least, why everything else about the EU is so beneficial that it is worth our eventually accepting political and monetary union.

As far as I recall, the first was never articulated at all. The lie-by-omission here was that we could somehow Remain in something identical to what we were in at that date, which of course was not possible; the trajectory has been that we become more and more integrated. In the wake of a Remain vote, further integration would have been demanded and justified on the grounds that we had voted to Remain.

That might be fine if someone were prepared to admit to that and explain why such integration post-Remain would be good. The history of the last 25-odd years, however, has been denial that any such thing is contemplated.

I think part of the problem Remain had was that when you've a 25-year history of lying about the EU and its direction of travel, to assert that your opponents are lying carries no weight at all even if you are believed.

That essentially was my issue with each side. What I wanted to hear advocated was studiously avoided.

Of course there were Leave lies too. Leave was obviously lying when it said that we could prosper trading on WTO terms outside the EU. Well, we could do that now with countries with whom the EU has no treaty, but do we? Er, no.

I have no real view either way except to note that, like trying to find WW1 on a 100-year time series of male mortality, it will prove surprisingly hard in the future to find Brexit on charts of economic indicators.

mayonnaise

Very interesting read on cognitive psychology and the Brexit vote.

We found that people who displayed higher cognitive flexibility were less likely to support authoritarian and nationalistic ideologies. They were also more likely to think the UK should remain in the EU.

Those who exhibited tendencies towards cognitive persistence were more likely to endorse conservative and nationalistic attitudes. They, in turn, were more likely to support Brexit.

http://theconversation.com/brexit-how-cognitive-psychology-helps-us-make-sense-of-the-vote-95031

iro

mayonnaise wrote: »

Very interesting read on cognitive psychology and the Brexit vote.



http://theconversation.com/brexit-how-cognitive-psychology-helps-us-make-sense-of-the-vote-95031

So what?

The usual remainer benign, leaver malign drivel.

Perhaps they should have done this study in 1940?

I would not describe those defending their country and their rights as 'nationalist and authoritarian' rather defending their hard earned freedoms from unwanted foreign interference.

If the view is that only the 'cognitive suitable' are entitled to vote then that is not democracy but the dystopian future that our EU masters had in mind for us before we sensibly voted for Brexit.

Posts such as this simply confirm my judgement in voting to leave.

500 years ago someone sat down to write the Book of Common Prayer, a publication that was designed to allow even a simple plow boy to access the philosophical underpinnings of the Engish refromed church, today posters like you seem to imply that the average Brit is incapable of understanding a simple question about leaving the EU.

More pathetic remoaniac straw clutching. .

https://howmanydaystill.com/its/brexit-6

mayonnaise

iro wrote: »

If the view is that only the 'cognitive suitable' are entitled to vote then that is not democracy but the dystopian future that our EU masters had in mind for us before we sensibly voted for Brexit.

Neither the quoted article nor me expressed a view that only selective groups should be entitled to vote? Maybe you meant to reply to a different post?

iro wrote: »

today posters like you seem to imply that the average Brit is incapable of understanding a simple question about leaving the EU.

6 in 10 Britons don't understand their electricity bill.
More than half do not know what 'interest rate' means. I hope that addressed your point.

iro wrote: »

https://howmanydaystill.com/its/brexit-6

Not sure why you're looking forward to the day on which nothing much will change, but if it keeps you entertained, I'm all for it.

iro

mayonnaise wrote: »

Neither the quoted article nor me expressed a view that only selective groups should be entitled to vote? Maybe you meant to reply to a different post?

6 in 10 Britons don't understand their electricity bill.
More than half do not know what 'interest rate' means. I hope that addressed your point.

Not sure why you're looking forward to the day on which nothing much will change, but if it keeps you entertained, I'm all for it.

17.4 million people rejoice at your acceptance we are leaving. lol

If you do not like them/ do not respect their decisions why not go somewhere else?


:rotfl:

Moby

kabayiri wrote: »

They are politicians, and they know how to play with peoples' emotions.

You seem surprised. You shouldn't be.

Can you recall how some of the independence campaigners up in Scotland campaigned in the run up to their referendum?

They played heavily on the idea of national identity and yes, taking back control !

It's the same narrative.

You only have to look at the Trump election and the Mexican issue, or the way Orban and co in Eastern Europe use their refusal to take migrant refugees as more examples.

It was the job of Team Remain to anticipate and counter any emotive topics. Sadly, they played the Racist card too often; too loosely; and it lost it's resonance.

Totally agree with you but some of us were more susceptible than others. Dog whistle politics only works on those who are sympathetic to the message.

iro

Dog whistle politics only works on those who are sympathetic to the message.

Note the use of the perjorative 'dog whitsle', voters are like 'dogs' ?

Is it illegal to be concerned about large scale, uncontrolled and chaotic immigration?

wunferall

mayonnaise wrote: »

Very interesting read on cognitive psychology and the Brexit vote.



http://theconversation.com/brexit-how-cognitive-psychology-helps-us-make-sense-of-the-vote-95031

Well this is wrong

Those who exhibited tendencies towards cognitive persistence were more ...... likely to support Brexit.

because in this thread it applies far more to remainers who can't let go of the EU's shirt tails.

For those with any knowledge of psychology (and from the comments it looks like I can rule the OP out) there have been numerous studies linking cognitive persistence to aggressive bahaviour which - again looking at remain posts in this thread - applies far more to remainers here too.

kabayiri

Moby wrote: »

Totally agree with you but some of us were more susceptible than others. Dog whistle politics only works on those who are sympathetic to the message.

It might be true about susceptibility, but I don't see what you can do about it.

Our politicians seem happy to accept the dog whistle when it comes to mobilising support for military campaigns, on evidence which wouldn't stand up to scrutiny here, never mind the learned chambers.

It seems easier to call people out as stupid for the way they voted, rather than going around the country and trying to understand why they feel the way they do.