Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Arklight

Herzlos wrote: »

Of course, but that opinion can still be garbage, no?



Absolutely, but do you think Anns speech will have got the UK anywhere?



May? Many times, but the problem there is that it's clearly a bluff and everyone involved knew it was a bluff. She wasn't stupid or bold enough to actually go for a no-deal.



Yup.






The UK negotiation position is weak purely because it doesn't know what it wants. Prominent Leavers promised contradictory and impossible things before running away. Parliament can't get consensus on anything because it doesn't want to make hard decisions. Everyone knows that a no-deal Brexit would be economically damaging, but at the same time it's apparently what the people want, and that's a tough one to deal with.

I think it's weak because the Tories won't be honest with British Leave voters about what they can have.

There's a substantial portion of the population aged over 50 who, whether they confess to it or not, are pining for Britain's unloved and long gone empire.

They believe that if plucky Britain were just allowed free rein to go gallivanting around the world again, those dark skinned foreigners would soon fall back into line and we'd have Empire 2.0 in no time. They're crying out for it, all those Indians and Africans. Just waiting for us to return and tell them what to do.

It mirrors the MAGA movement in the US, but where Trumps base there is genuinely disenfranchised (and completely hoodwinked by him), the elderly, white, well off middle aged Brexit loving man appears to have little to complain about in the UK. Other than the fact he was robbed of his birthright to wander around Bombay wearing a pith helmet while foreigners salaam.

The French, the Dutch, the Spanish and the Belgians all had substantial empires of their own, but they see them as part of their past. There doesn't appear to be this streak of colonial arrogance driving their own populist movements, like you see in the UK.

Takedap

Arklight wrote: »

The French, the Dutch, the Spanish and the Belgians all had substantial empires of their own, but they see them as part of their past. There doesn't appear to be this streak of colonial arrogance driving their own populist movements, like you see in the UK.

Maybe because they didn't convert their empires into a "Commonwealth"?

Tromking

Arklight wrote: »

I think it's weak because the Tories won't be honest with British Leave voters about what they can have.

There's a substantial portion of the population aged over 50 who, whether they confess to it or not, are pining for Britain's unloved and long gone empire.

They believe that if plucky Britain were just allowed free rein to go gallivanting around the world again, those dark skinned foreigners would soon fall back into line and we'd have Empire 2.0 in no time. They're crying out for it, all those Indians and Africans. Just waiting for us to return and tell them what to do.

It mirrors the MAGA movement in the US, but where Trumps base there is genuinely disenfranchised (and completely hoodwinked by him), the elderly, white, well off middle aged Brexit loving man appears to have little to complain about in the UK. Other than the fact he was robbed of his birthright to wander around Bombay wearing a pith helmet while foreigners salaam.

The French, the Dutch, the Spanish and the Belgians all had substantial empires of their own, but they see them as part of their past. There doesn't appear to be this streak of colonial arrogance driving their own populist movements, like you see in the UK.

You don’t half write some drivel sometimes.
Your description of Brexit as some sort of post colonial spasm is patently rubbish. If you could get past your own personal leftist antipathy to your own country, people might take your contribution to the discussion a little more seriously.
I know like a lot of aggrieved Remainers on here it helps assuage your anger if you lash out at people who had the bare faced cheek to vote differently to you, but give it rest it’s getting silly now.

Tromking

Looks like Arklight’s Labour is starting its journey to becoming the party of the liberal middle class. Magic Grandpa has finally caved in to his metropolitan MP’s and his leftist studenty party membership.
RIP the party of the working class.

SouthLondonUser

Tromking wrote: »

Your description of Brexit as some sort of post colonial spasm is patently rubbish.

And you know this because... ?

Tromking wrote: »

If you could get past your own personal leftist antipathy to your own country, people might take your contribution to the discussion a little more seriously.

Most press has, in fact, been mentioning imperial nostalgia as one of the reasons for Brexit.
The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/01/04/britain-clings-imperial-nostalgia-brexit-looms/

The Financial Times, too, e.g. https://www.ft.com/content/bf70b80e-8b39-11e8-bf9e-8771d5404543
Now, the Financial Times has been accused of being many things: too out of touch, too liberal, too metropolitan, too pro-elite, too unrepresentative, but leftist?

Journalists can be wrong, of course, but, even if you disagree with this opinion, you should at least recognise it has nothing to do with being 'leftist'.

Oh, by the way, remember the super-secret document of the Foreign office about the referendum in the '70s? As I pointed out a while back, Brexiters oddly forget to mention the bit where the FCO basically talks about nostalgia.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75785103#Comment_75785103


The British have long been accustomed to the belief that we play a major part in ordering the affairs of the world & that in ordering our own affairs we are beholden to none. Much of this is mere illusion. So we are dependent on others both for the effective defence of the United Kingdom and also for the commercial & financial conditions which govern our own economy. But this fact, though intellectually conceded, is not widely or deeply understood; instinctive attitudes derive from a period of greater British power.

This was written in the '70s but it seems to me that not much has changed since then!

I am curious: what's your comment on this bit? Did the FCO get it wrong? Did they get it right but it no longer applies?

PS Are you going to accuse this FCO document of being 'leftist', too?

BikingBud

And as offered in May, a few posts above the one you have linked to, I offer again:

There is also a point made about the technical legal aspects of sovereignty, both internal and external, and the realities of power. And goes on to say:

"It is therefore generally recognised that sovereign states can lose some degree of independence of action in external relations without forfeiting their international legal status. But it is always a question of degree in each particular case whether the restraints are so extensive as to be incompatible with continued existence as an equal and independent member of the international community..."

and

"and as having in certain fields exclusive legislative competence, so that our own legislature has none: "

and

"The loss of external sovereignty will however increase as the Community develops, according to the Treaty of Rome 'to establish the foundations of an even closer union among the European peoples'. "

and

"It would clearly be in the interests of the UK that British Parliamentarians should acquire a position of influence in the European Parliament against a day when it assumes effective powers"

So although loss of sovereignty may have been recognised and advised to politicians in 1971, there was a desire to leave it out entirely in any advice that passed on to the general population.

It seems logical to deduce therefore that at the time of the 2016 Referendum the UK electorate decided that they were no longer content with the loss of sovereignty and the lack of influence of British Parliamentarians in the European Parliament.

So we are going round in circles and not introducing anything new:lipsrseal:lipsrseal:lipsrseal

SouthLondonUser

I asked for a comment on the FCO's bit about nostalgia. I didn't get any. Was that point wrong? Why?
Sadly, no reply. Am I going to get the usual angry replies shouting back I am not entitled to an answer, if I stress that?

Like back in May, I'd be inclined to point out that only a hermit country like North Korea is fully sovereign. Any interaction with other countries involves giving up a modicum of sovereignty. The point Brexiters miss in their delusions is that, by going it alone, the UK would be less sovereign because it would have less bargaining power and would be forced to accept things which it can now deny by being part of the larger, stronger EU, like chlorinated chicken.

Tromking

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

And you know this because... ?

I have not met one Leave voter who has stated that their vote was driven by a nostalgic wish to usher in the return of the days of Empire. Most have simply said that they wish their country to rejoin the vast majority of other countries who decide their own **** and not to slowly be subsumed by a supranational entity like the EU.
I know it’s makes you feel better to portray Leave voters as negatively as you can, I personally couldn’t give a stuff about your anger driven pound shop opinions on the matter.
It’s been good sport for journalists local and foreign to append all sorts of nefarious motivations onto Leave voters, the more outrageous the more clicks they get and the more papers they sell.
We had a free and fair vote on our continued EU membership, you lost, I won.

SouthLondonUser

Ah, I see. So your opinion rests on the assumptions that:

1) the Leave voters you speak to are representative of ALL the leave voters in the country, and that

2) they were sincere and didn't hide their most racist tendencies.

You have completely blown me away with your bullet-proof logic!

Tromking

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

I asked for a comment on the FCO's bit about nostalgia. I didn't get any. Was that point wrong? Why?
Sadly, no reply. Am I going to get the usual angry replies shouting back I am not entitled to an answer, if I stress that?

Like back in May, I'd be inclined to point out that only a hermit country like North Korea is fully sovereign. Any interaction with other countries involves giving up a modicum of sovereignty. The point Brexiters miss in their delusions is that, by going it alone, the UK would be less sovereign because it would have less bargaining power and would be forced to accept things which it can now deny by being part of the larger, stronger EU, like chlorinated chicken.

Just to be clear, I don’t agree with the FCO sentiments expressed in your post, not least because it describes a country that existed circa 45 years ago. I’m old enough to remember 1970’s Britain, we are now a different country, trust me.
You do also realise there’s a middle ground between EU membership and North Korea !!!!!!?