Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

lawred2 · 07-09-2019 07:36AM

Strazdas wrote: »

Would be a disastrous move. There's a fair number of closet racists and bigots among their ranks.

I'm not sure that they are in the closet about it

murphaph · 07-09-2019 07:45AM

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

What would be the options in the second referendum?

No deal crash out/revoke/May's deal. Those are the actual options the country has.

Rank them in order of your preference as with an Irish presidential election (instant runoff). If they still choose the crash out option good luck to them.

listermint · 07-09-2019 07:46AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

I would prefer an good and equitable Free Trade Agreement which means that the UK would not be in the Customs Union and have access to, not membership of, the single market. This essentially would be like other Free Trade Agreements. If this is not on offer then I would be happy to leave without a Withdrawal Agreement. This was my position before and during the Referendum, it's still my position now.

Beforehand....

It was never your position. I'd be quite sure you had no real feelings on the EU prior to 2015

Pretty much like any UK citizen. It's all been nothing but feelings and bluster since. I suppose that's what makes it ghastly for some but utterly hilarious for others. It's like making absolutely infactual nonsense 'feelings' dictate your entire thought process and life.

listermint · 07-09-2019 07:52AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is more likely than ever having heard the words today(yesterday) about a "gradual" introduction of rules that Ireland are expected to implement or otherwise other EU nations are to "back stop" these expectations if Ireland is unable or unwilling to comply with due to the political issues with separating NI from Ireland.

That's the least likely thing to happen. But there are idiotic posters on here with a hard on for it. Who might I have have been shown up time and time again. The same idiots who think irexit is a good thing and that anti EU sentiment is growing here despite positive sentiment at over 85%.

In short.

Ha

First Up · 07-09-2019 08:01AM

ThePanjandrum wrote:

I would prefer an good and equitable Free Trade Agreement which means that the UK would not be in the Customs Union and have access to, not membership of, the single market. This essentially would be like other Free Trade Agreements. If this is not on offer then I would be happy to leave without a Withdrawal Agreement. This was my position before and during the Referendum, it's still my position now.

They can negotiate a trade agreement but it won't be free trade and it won't allow for the free movement of goods and services into and out of the UK.

That is a game changer for time sensitive industries.

I wish those beating a drum for Brexit would take the time to understand how business actually works in the 21st century.

murphaph · 07-09-2019 08:01AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The proper choice is easy.

The first referendum decided that the UK should leave.

Leaving under article 50 means leaving with a Withdrawal Agreement or Without one.

Therefore, to be consistent the choice needs to be between leaving with an agreed Withdrawal Agreement and leaving with no Withdrawal Agreement.

Putting Remain on the Referendum when it has been rejected is undemocratic.

So putting Labour on the ballot paper at the next general election would be undemocratic as the people rejected Labour in favour of the Tories 2 years ago?

Or asking the Irish to vote again on divorce in 1995 after they had voted against it in 1983 was undemocratic was it?

People change their minds. David Davis said a country where this is not allowed is not a democracy.

listermint · 07-09-2019 08:04AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

My partner registered to vote yesterday. She lives in Angus, currently Tory. She is voting Tory as the only viable option to keep out the snp and try to prevent independence. She is 31. Make of that what you will.

Tory candidate won a 6.6% majority in 2017. It's her first time in parliament and she is one of the youngest MPs at 30 years of age. Asked how she voted in the 2016 referendum she stated she 'didn't vote as the choice was too difficult'.

The youth ladies and gentlemen. Don't be expecting too much from the under 35s.

With all due respect. Your partner wouldn't be indicative of what's going on in the wider Scottish vote all polls indicate that. And the style of your posting here would also suggest a very leavery conversation set despite your assertions of the opposite.

So I'd expect nothing more.

You however brushing those feelings onto the rest of the younger vote is very questionable

fash · 07-09-2019 08:16AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

I deny any of it met the definition of racist. What with us being of the same race and all.

Since "race" is a social construct and not a precise scientific term of the art, one can make whatever assertions one likes as to where a dividing between groups of humans exist.

As the British actors who committed the various atrocities and acts of oppression against Irish certainly did believe that the Irish were "other", I would suggest that their beliefs in the matter- not yours -are more relevant.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 08:19AM

20silkcut wrote: »

Forty Seven wrote: »

I deny any of it met the definition of racist. What with us being of the same race and all.

As for Cromwell. Did he affect you in any way? Can I drag up the Germans shooting at my grandfathers for some outrage aimed at the eu? That was a bit more recent and a tad more deadly. How far down the annals of history do you want to go?

Deal with the current crisis and get off your pity pot. ancient history has no place here.

Well recent history has shown that since the formation of the EEC/EU, Europeans have stopped shooting at each other.
It has been the most murderous continent on the earth over the past few hundred years. Remember the age of imperialism and nationalism culminated in the industrial mass murder of human beings in purpose built facilities the likes of which this world has never seen before or since. And now we have politicians in the UK telling us that a return to nationalism is the way forward.

I too share concerns over the rise of nationalism. I made a post about it a few pages back.

Imperialism however is history. The empire is history.

07-09-2019 08:23AM

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are each treated as what they are, constituent parts of the UK.

Yet... Scotland has Holyrood, NI has Stormont, Wales has The Senedd.

If they really were constituent parts of the UK, England would have its own govt and parliament, and the UK would have it's own separate council.

HOC will always put English interests ahead of the UK, Scotland, Wales or NI.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 08:25AM

fash wrote: »

Forty Seven wrote: »

I deny any of it met the definition of racist. What with us being of the same race and all.

Since "race" is a social construct and not a precise scientific term of the art, one can make whatever assertions one likes as to where a dividing between groups of humans exist.

As the British actors who committed the various atrocities and acts of oppression against Irish certainly did believe that the Irish were "other", I would suggest that their beliefs in the matter- not yours -are more relevant.

I would suggest anyone willing to stoop to 'race is a social construct' to attempt to win a losing battle has very little to add to any debate. A good day to you sir. I hope you get over your hatred of my ancestors one day. Hating the long dead is unhealthy.

McGiver · 07-09-2019 08:27AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

ElectronVolt wrote: »

So was the Soviet Union, so was Rome, so was Turkey not that long ago too. Circumstances can change enormously when idiots get into power.

At present it's a minor world power, comparable to France in reach and scale and that's all it is. It's not the British Empire, nor is it the US or China. It also amplified a lot of that power through the EU arrangements in terms of economic and diplomatic clout.

A bit of perspective is very necessary. It could well end up being a world power like Australia, only without the natural resources and entirely dependent on trade.

What's going on is without precedent. So the outcome is likely to be somewhat unpredictable and chaotic but none of the forecasts look positive, except for the imaginary ones.

It could also go the other way with the eventual break up of the EU. Uncharted territory goes both ways. I do appreciate what you are saying but we have a lot going for us going forward, once we get through this current problem, we have survived much, much worse as a nation.

Hypothetically but facts point to the opposite.

The EU is in the ascendancy.
The UK has been in decline since 1945.

fash · 07-09-2019 08:30AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

I would suggest anyone willing to stoop to 'race is a social construct' to attempt to win a losing battle has very little to add to any debate. A good day to you sir. I hope you get over your hatred of my ancestors one day. Hating the long dead is unhealthy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
"Modern scholarship regards race as a social construct..."
But as you were.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 08:35AM

listermint wrote: »

With all due respect. Your partner wouldn't be indicative of what's going on in the wider Scottish vote all polls indicate that. And the style of your posting here would also suggest a very leavery conversation set despite your assertions of the opposite.

So I'd expect nothing more.

You however brushing those feelings onto the rest of the younger vote is very questionable

I am a remainer resigned to my fate. There is no way we will stay in the EU now. This is too far gone. My sole wish now is to not see Scottish independence. Just because I am pragmatic about my situation and can see both sides of an argument does not give you the right to imply I am anything more than what I claim to be.

I offered some anecdotal evidence to a one sided debate that you don't like. It does not make it false or my intentions suspect. I did give you some specifics so you could check for yourself. It is the only option to keep out the snp. She is not a Tory. Some of us have more to think about than simply brexit. The break up of the union is just as catastrophic. Voting Labour in this seat will not stop brexit. It might stop the SNP gaining a seat.

As for the polls, and with all due respect to you, would you care to remind me what the polls said of Trumps chances?

Seth Brundle · 07-09-2019 08:35AM

Arlene apparently won't stand in the next election (as I assume she knows she probably won't get in due to her pro-Brexit stance doesn't go down too well in her constituency).
However she also.claims that the Brits won't put in any border infrastructure as that is what the UK government has said :rolleyes:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-49616134

listermint · 07-09-2019 08:40AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

I am a remainer resigned to my fate. There is no way we will stay in the EU now. This is too far gone. My sole wish now is to not see Scottish independence. Just because I am pragmatic about my situation and can see both sides of an argument does not give you the right to imply I am anything more than what I claim to be.

I offered some anecdotal evidence to a one sided debate that you don't like. It does not make it false or my intentions suspect. I did give you some specifics so you could check for yourself. It is the only option to keep out the snp. She is not a Tory. Some of us have more to think about than simply brexit. The break up of the union is just as catastrophic. Voting Labour in this seat will not stop brexit. It might stop the SNP gaining a seat.

As for the polls, and with all due respect to you, would you care to remind me what the polls said of Trumps chances?

To be clear. You are fully aware the younger vote has consistently shown always to be pro remain.polls and votes.

So you have zero basis for your assertion based on your partner alone.

I've no idea what trump has to do with anything can you explain a bit more how trump polls have anything to do with the younger voter being pro EU.

Please

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 08:47AM

McGiver wrote: »

Forty Seven wrote: »

ElectronVolt wrote: »

So was the Soviet Union, so was Rome, so was Turkey not that long ago too. Circumstances can change enormously when idiots get into power.

At present it's a minor world power, comparable to France in reach and scale and that's all it is. It's not the British Empire, nor is it the US or China. It also amplified a lot of that power through the EU arrangements in terms of economic and diplomatic clout.

A bit of perspective is very necessary. It could well end up being a world power like Australia, only without the natural resources and entirely dependent on trade.

What's going on is without precedent. So the outcome is likely to be somewhat unpredictable and chaotic but none of the forecasts look positive, except for the imaginary ones.

It could also go the other way with the eventual break up of the EU. Uncharted territory goes both ways. I do appreciate what you are saying but we have a lot going for us going forward, once we get through this current problem, we have survived much, much worse as a nation.

Hypothetically but facts point to the opposite.

The EU is the ascendancy.
The UK has been in decline since 1945.

Granted but laws of unintended consequences tend not to follow trends by their very definition. Nobody knows how this is going to be viewed in the history books. We can but speculate. The national nature of boards and our shared history has at times resulted in this discussion becoming a bit of an echo chamber. A bit of devil's advocacy and alternate opinion cannot be bad for debate.

Polls are often wrong, outcomes are often unexpected. The referendum itself being a case in point.

devnull · 07-09-2019 08:51AM

Latest from Iain Duncan Smith:
Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith encouraged Mr Johnson to break the law, saying he would be seen as a Brexit "martyr" if judges opted to put him jail for breaching Parliament's terms.

Honestly it's going to full out dictatorship being encouraged now and the Telegraph are now saying that Labour are to blame as they are forcing Boris to break the law and causing a constitutional crisis.

If Boris disobeys the law there will be very ugly scenes I predict. All out full civil war and mayhem on the streets.

listermint · 07-09-2019 08:54AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

Granted but laws of unintended consequences tend not to follow trends by their very definition. Nobody knows how this is going to be viewed in the history books. We can but speculate. The national nature of boards and our shared history has at times resulted in this discussion becoming a bit of an echo chamber. A bit of devil's advocacy and alternate opinion cannot be bad for debate.

Polls are often wrong, outcomes are often unexpected. The referendum itself being a case in point.

Ah yes. We should use the illegally infiltrated referendum as a guiding light of outcomes.

I wonder what he outcome would have been if illegal dark practices were not deployed with foreign money and influence.

You'd almost think a rerun of it would work.with the former leave promoters who participated in literal illegal activities banned from working in any capacity

listermint · 07-09-2019 08:55AM

devnull wrote: »

Latest from Iain Duncan Smith:
Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith encouraged Mr Johnson to break the law, saying he would be seen as a Brexit "martyr" if judges opted to put him jail for breaching Parliament's terms.

Honestly it's going to full out dictatorship being encouraged now and the Telegraph are now saying that Labour are to blame as they are forcing Boris to break the law and causing a constitutional crisis.

If Boris disobeys the law there will be very ugly scenes I predict. All out full civil war and mayhem on the streets.

I'd look into Smith's investments , because frankly he's been extremely out spoken for the past year on a no deal.

McGiver · 07-09-2019 08:56AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

fash wrote: »

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

So did Newcastle's but Nottingham voted to Leave.

The Referendum was UK wide so the fact that different areas voted different ways is meaningless.

Neither Newcastle but Nottingham are subject to a peace treaty based on membership of the EU to resolve a centuries long racist murderous oppression and suppression of Irish people by British.

Irish are not a seperate race so you can shuffle that card right back into your pack.

Major revisionism in your posts.

In 19th century, the British, aka the English, championed pseudoscientific race theories, which they leveraged throughout the Empire. In fact, the whole Aryan race nonsense later on in Germany has a link to this - the later German "thinkers" were looking at previous English attempts and developed them further.

You may need to check the documented race "assessments" of Irish, Indians, South African etc from this period. Also kindly note that the English developed de facto concentration camps in South Africa. This is all well documented.

Now back to the Irish, from the Victorian period:

In much of the pseudo-scientific literature of the day the Irish were held to be inferior, an example of a lower evolutionary form, closer to the apes than their "superiors", the Anglo-Saxons.
...
John Beddoe, who later became the President of the Anthropological Institute (1889-1891), wrote in his Races of Britain (1862) that all men of genius were orthognathous (less prominent jaw bones) while the Irish and the Welsh were prognathous and that the Celt was closely related to Cromagnon man, who, in turn, was linked, according to Beddoe, to the "Africanoid". The position of the Celt in Beddoe's "Index of Nigrescence" was very different from that of the Anglo-Saxon. These ideas were not confined to a lunatic fringe of the scientific community, for although they never won over the mainstream of British scientists they were disseminated broadly and it was even hinted that the Irish might be the elusive missing link!

McGiver · 07-09-2019 09:15AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

McGiver wrote: »

Forty Seven wrote: »

ElectronVolt wrote: »

So was the Soviet Union, so was Rome, so was Turkey not that long ago too. Circumstances can change enormously when idiots get into power.

At present it's a minor world power, comparable to France in reach and scale and that's all it is. It's not the British Empire, nor is it the US or China. It also amplified a lot of that power through the EU arrangements in terms of economic and diplomatic clout.

A bit of perspective is very necessary. It could well end up being a world power like Australia, only without the natural resources and entirely dependent on trade.

What's going on is without precedent. So the outcome is likely to be somewhat unpredictable and chaotic but none of the forecasts look positive, except for the imaginary ones.

It could also go the other way with the eventual break up of the EU. Uncharted territory goes both ways. I do appreciate what you are saying but we have a lot going for us going forward, once we get through this current problem, we have survived much, much worse as a nation.

Hypothetically but facts point to the opposite.

The EU is the ascendancy.
The UK has been in decline since 1945.

Granted but laws of unintended consequences tend not to follow trends by their very definition. Nobody knows how this is going to be viewed in the history books. We can but speculate. The national nature of boards and our shared history has at times resulted in this discussion becoming a bit of an echo chamber. A bit of devil's advocacy and alternate opinion cannot be bad for debate.

Polls are often wrong, outcomes are often unexpected. The referendum itself being a case in point.

The EU is in continuous ascendancy since the 1951 Schuman declaration of the intent to (eventually) unite Europe.

The Euro is the second largest reserve currency. The Euro is also second largest IMF SDR at 31% of XDR basket, USD is 42% of the XDR basket - this confirms the prime reserve currency status. This was achieved in less than 20 years without any military domination or denomination unlike the USD status.

The EU is the largest single market in the world and with Japan deep FTA is now a free trade area worth of 21% global GDP (US is 24% and China 15%).

The EU consolidates further and is a global soft power able to take on the US or China.

Now how about UK since 1951? It's a story of continuous decline from former world super power. Ironically, the only period of a significant development and success is late 1980s to 2009 brought fully about by the EU membership and the ability of the UK government to leverage it.

lawred2 · 07-09-2019 09:18AM

devnull wrote: »

Latest from Iain Duncan Smith:
Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith encouraged Mr Johnson to break the law, saying he would be seen as a Brexit "martyr" if judges opted to put him jail for breaching Parliament's terms.

Honestly it's going to full out dictatorship being encouraged now and the Telegraph are now saying that Labour are to blame as they are forcing Boris to break the law and causing a constitutional crisis.

If Boris disobeys the law there will be very ugly scenes I predict. All out full civil war and mayhem on the streets.

That type of stunt pulled by some rogue actor in a failed state would have British people tut tutting over their breakfast muffins..

Wouldn't ever happen here of course

Just like naked populism wouldn't ever take hold here.. that's for 'Europeans'

murphaph · 07-09-2019 09:18AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

Irish are not a seperate race so you can shuffle that card right back into your pack.

Despite the best attempts of English cartoonists to show that we are actually a different species of course...

https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/images/cartoons/douglas3.gif

Irish people have been depicted as ape like in British newspapers up until living memory as the attached image shows.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 09:40AM

devnull wrote: »

If Boris disobeys the law there will be very ugly scenes I predict. All out full civil war and mayhem on the streets.

And if brexit isn't delivered? The side that feel they won a democratic vote will meekly turn the other cheek?

Righteous anger on both sides and no credible leadership for either. A very dangerous situation.

Irish Praetorian · 07-09-2019 09:46AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

And if brexit isn't delivered? The side that feel they won a democratic vote will meekly turn the other cheek?

Righteous anger on both sides and no credible leadership for either. A very dangerous situation.

I think people over-estimate the propensity of modern Westerners to stage revolutions. Lets look at Catalonia, which went through with a full declaration of independence and even had a little state repression and ended up snuffed out with little more than a whimper. I think in modern times control of the institutions of state has a good deal more importance than previous eras, which probably makes it important that they are representative and not artificially bound up in anachronisms like FPTP or Electoral Colleges.

Enzokk · 07-09-2019 09:48AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

And if brexit isn't delivered? The side that feel they won a democratic vote will meekly turn the other cheek?

Righteous anger on both sides and no credible leadership for either. A very dangerous situation.

The only way to break the deadlock is another referendum on the deal. If Vote Leave doesn't want the deal on offer then they should put forward no-deal against remain. But they don't want to do that so either we have a PM breaking the law or riots from Brexiteers.

listermint · 07-09-2019 09:49AM

Forty Seven wrote: »

And if brexit isn't delivered? The side that feel they won a democratic vote will meekly turn the other cheek?

Righteous anger on both sides and no credible leadership for either. A very dangerous situation.

Righteous anger ...

Frankly the leave side isn't as big as is made out on social media.

I'd say the large majority are sick of hearing about this crap and just want it washed from the news. That's deal or stay or no. No meaning it stays in the news.

So tbh. The whole resistance talk is absolute tosh made up on twitter and Facebook. People want to wash the word brexit from existence.

prawnsambo · 07-09-2019 09:53AM

Enzokk wrote: »

The only way to break the deadlock is another referendum on the deal. If Vote Leave doesn't want the deal on offer then they should put forward no-deal against remain. But they don't want to do that so either we have a PM breaking the law or riots from Brexiteers.

There's no chance Johnson will break the law. His whole life has been about avoiding personal responsibility and lying to preserve himself. The chances he'd 'martyr' himself with the possibility of jail are ludicrously small. Ironic that they're trying to goad Corbyn with 'chicken' insults. There's a yellow streak a mile wide down Johnson's back.

Forty Seven · 07-09-2019 09:55AM

McGiver wrote: »

Forty Seven wrote: »

fash wrote: »

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

So did Newcastle's but Nottingham voted to Leave.

The Referendum was UK wide so the fact that different areas voted different ways is meaningless.

Neither Newcastle but Nottingham are subject to a peace treaty based on membership of the EU to resolve a centuries long racist murderous oppression and suppression of Irish people by British.

Irish are not a seperate race so you can shuffle that card right back into your pack.

Major revisionism in your posts.

In 19th century, the British, aka the English, championed pseudoscientific race theories, which they leveraged throughout the Empire. In fact, the whole Aryan race nonsense later on in Germany has a link to this - the later German "thinkers" were looking at previous English attempts and developed them further.

You may need to check the documented race "assessments" of Irish, Indians, South African etc from this period. Also kindly note that the English developed de facto concentration camps in South Africa. This is all well documented.

Now back to the Irish, from the Victorian period:

In much of the pseudo-scientific literature of the day the Irish were held to be inferior, an example of a lower evolutionary form, closer to the apes than their "superiors", the Anglo-Saxons.
...
John Beddoe, who later became the President of the Anthropological Institute (1889-1891), wrote in his Races of Britain (1862) that all men of genius were orthognathous (less prominent jaw bones) while the Irish and the Welsh were prognathous and that the Celt was closely related to Cromagnon man, who, in turn, was linked, according to Beddoe, to the "Africanoid". The position of the Celt in Beddoe's "Index of Nigrescence" was very different from that of the Anglo-Saxon. These ideas were not confined to a lunatic fringe of the scientific community, for although they never won over the mainstream of British scientists they were disseminated broadly and it was even hinted that the Irish might be the elusive missing link!

I appreciate the time you have taken to further my education. I have always taken the side of the Irish having read the history and I'm well aware of the atrocities committed by my country in the past. I was however not aware of this particular vein of history. I concede. I was wrong about racism being used to demonize Ireland. I stand corrected.

I stand by my ascertation that imperialism was put to bed some decades ago and attempts at reconciliation have been in good faith. Dragging Cromwell and the likes into this present day debacle will not assist in anyway with the debate.

Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Comments