Jump to content

Politics


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, scoobos said:

My 2 cents is that it's that kind of black and white divisive thinking that gets us into this mess though.

Not everyone who voted Brexit did so out of being nasty or self serving , some saw it as a genuine opportunity  and expected , not unreasonably imo, that there was a plan ready to go.

 

I didn't vote at all as I was out of the country (helping (as the IT guy) someone short the pound and make over 3 million dollars in 7 hours , in an offshore tax haven on the night of the vote, for what its worth! AND I'm a socialist!)

 

I was a remainer, my main reasoning being that I believed it was the strongest reason for peace we had in Europe.  I actually wanted us to have a single European army, rather than NATO - as I think our affiliation with the US Military is too close. Feels like I was right, at this time in 2022 :(

I still remember being absolutely bowled over when they won, and moreso when all the people associated with it ran away the next morning. You couldn't make it up..

 

I sympathise with the thrust of this because it matches my thinking on other issues but for Brexit I can't make it fly. We did know Cameron would bail and run if he lost, it was a matter if some debate prior to the event and there was no way he would want to preside over the greatest calamity and omnishables of recent British history.

 

As Renton said, there were no good Brexits. There was one that was Brexit in name only, which would have been more or less the same other than being humiliating and removing us from all decision making within the EU. It would have been strategically pointless but less damaging. People got the only Brexit that really made any sense from the perspective of the vote, but one they hadn't been honestly told about the damage of.

 

As for the division - maybe you're right from a pragmatic standpoint - Starmer certainly seems to think so. But by the same token as you lamented the fact that the truth is not told in politics, I lament that truth cannot be accepted by the emotionally fragile. I don't see why I should bend for the egos of those who are demonstrably wrong about the virtues of this calamity, but who refuse to see this due to their own insecurity. If that causes division, I would contend that division comes from their denial of the truth, not my refusal to indulge them.

 

Pet peeve, sorry.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rayvin said:

 

I sympathise with the thrust of this because it matches my thinking on other issues but for Brexit I can't make it fly. We did know Cameron would bail and run if he lost, it was a matter if some debate prior to the event and there was no way he would want to preside over the greatest calamity and omnishables of recent British history.

 

As Renton said, there were no good Brexits. There was one that was Brexit in name only, which would have been more or less the same other than being humiliating and removing us from all decision making within the EU. It would have been strategically pointless but less damaging. People got the only Brexit that really made any sense from the perspective of the vote, but one they hadn't been honestly told about the damage of.

 

As for the division - maybe you're right from a pragmatic standpoint - Starmer certainly seems to think so. But by the same token as you lamented the fact that the truth is not told in politics, I lament that truth cannot be accepted by the emotionally fragile. I don't see why I should bend for the egos of those who are demonstrably wrong about the virtues of this calamity, but who refuse to see this due to their own insecurity. If that causes division, I would contend that division comes from their denial of the truth, not my refusal to indulge them.

 

Pet peeve, sorry.

It wasn't cameron I was talking about - Cameron didn't want Brexit - it was the Brexit team that all legged it, Boris Farage et all those numpties. Cameron resigned because he didnt have a plan for it winning, because everyone (Leave team too) really thought it would just be a protest vote. They won by betting on currency and market drops , but I strongly believe that they only wanted leverage against the EU motion to start controlling tax havens. 

Everybody has egos and no one is "right" . If people didnt go out and vote remain, that's their own problem - but democracy did dictate we had to do it . Lesson learnt for the future , if you have a referendum, you'd really better make it clear what percentage difference wins. Making such a huge change on 2-4% of the vote was mental. 

One mans truth is another man's lie - that's the essence of politics. Many people don't like education or facts or science, they like gut feelings and reckons. 
Now if thats a ewark quote I'm cutting me own throat I tell ya!

Edited by scoobos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm now at the point where I'm vaguely enjoying the implosion. Before I was just terrified at what they're doing to the country/economy. Now that it looks increasingly like she can't come back from this, the popcorn's coming out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's spent the last 3 weeks telling us all what a great mini budget it is and her and Kwasi are standing by it. She'd have to sack him if it gets scrapped and she'd still be seriously damaged by not just the fact she signed it off, but the fact that her first major act as PM has come to this. 

 

Maybe Johnson could recover from that public a display of incompetence, but not this charmless idiot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

She's spent the last 3 weeks telling us all what a great mini budget it is and her and Kwasi are standing by it. She'd have to sack him if it gets scrapped and she'd still be seriously damaged by not just the fact she signed it off, but the fact that her first major act as PM has come to this. 

 

Maybe Johnson could recover from that public a display of incompetence, but not this charmless idiot. 


 

Awkward u-turns and a new chancellor are more likely, though like you I would enjoy seeing her downfall

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best thing is it's the Tory Party that has paved the way for this. They've pushed the envelope again and again to redefine what's acceptable and what a govt can and can't get away with, and it's culminated in Truss announcing herself on the world stage like South Park's Timmy and expecting everyone to just be wowed by it. 

 

And the entire world has recoiled and gone "what.... the..... fuck" :lol:

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, scoobos said:

It wasn't cameron I was talking about - Cameron didn't want Brexit - it was the Brexit team that all legged it, Boris Farage et all those numpties. Cameron resigned because he didnt have a plan for it winning, because everyone (Leave team too) really thought it would just be a protest vote. They won by betting on currency and market drops , but I strongly believe that they only wanted leverage against the EU motion to start controlling tax havens. 

Everybody has egos and no one is "right" . If people didnt go out and vote remain, that's their own problem - but democracy did dictate we had to do it . Lesson learnt for the future , if you have a referendum, you'd really better make it clear what percentage difference wins. Making such a huge change on 2-4% of the vote was mental. 

One mans truth is another man's lie - that's the essence of politics. Many people don't like education or facts or science, they like gut feelings and reckons. 
Now if thats a ewark quote I'm cutting me own throat I tell ya!


But it didn’t, it was bent as fuck and if it had been a binding referendum it would have been annulled per the courts. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, scoobos said:

If people didnt go out and vote remain, that's their own problem - but democracy did dictate we had to do it .

 

Did democracy stop that day? Given the huge spectrum of leave options, from shit to catastrophic (the option we ended up with), was that democratic? Were the constant lies and labelling of Project Fear democratic? The targeting of individual demographics on social media? The rule breaking in funding, which had it not been an advisory vote, would have annulled the result? The Putin influence. The disregard of Scotland and NI. Don't fucking tell me it was democratic, and don't tell me the people behind it didn't know exactly what they were doing. 

Edited by Renton
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, scoobos said:

One mans truth is another man's lie - that's the essence of politics. Many people don't like education or facts or science, they like gut feelings and reckons. 

 

Those people should not be allowed to vote, frankly. They're voting based on nothing. This isn't a game, we have a duty to educate and inform ourselves before we undertake decisions that commit the country to years of a particular outcome - a responsibility that many don't take seriously. We all have access to the same information.

 

There are not multiple truths, just a single truth. Brexit will and is making us poorer. I don't blame people for voting for it so much as I blame them for refusing to see reality now. We are pandering to their reality instead of acknowledging truth. And as I said, that's where the division comes from - it's not on us to fix that, it's on them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

There are not multiple truths, just a single truth

 

Not quite true. There are positive truths, which are absolute (within the bounds of uncertainty). And there are normative truths, which are opnion. It's the misrepresentation of the former I have an issue with (as I suspect you do).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Not quite true. There are positive truths, which are absolute (within the bounds of uncertainty). And there are normative truths, which are opnion. It's the misrepresentation of the former I have an issue with (as I suspect you do).  

 

Yep - I'll listen to well reasoned arguments for anything, even Brexit, with an open mind as long as its tied to clear and accurate factual information with a logical framework. This has never been presented by anyone though. Not saying I have the monopoly on "correct opinion" but I am saying that the other side aren't putting forward opinions on equal factual footing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Yep - I'll listen to well reasoned arguments for anything, even Brexit, with an open mind as long as its tied to clear and accurate factual information with a logical framework. This has never been presented by anyone though. Not saying I have the monopoly on "correct opinion" but I am saying that the other side aren't putting forward opinions on equal factual footing.

 

My context for saying this is that what should not be tolerated in a democracy is out-right factual lies, such as "we will be £350 million a week better off" or posters of queues of brown people (knowing full well the refugee crisis is fuck all to do with immigration from the EU). If you want to argue that you don't want FoM for reasons of "sovereignty" then fine but you should not be allowed to lie about the huge economic disbenefits this brings the country, and the fact that it will mean you can't retire in Spain. Lies kill society, it's what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union, it's what is causing the destruction of Russia and Ukraine. And left unchecked, it will kill the UK. 

Edited by Renton
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to know the end of Charles's sentence in that video clip - "Now I never know how much they....." 

Not forgetting royal prerogative ensures the monarch has the right to be consulted, the right to encourage and the right to warn, I'd love to have been a fly on the wall in that meeting. 

She's going to be the Sam Allardyce of number 10 isn't she? God help who comes next but as is being alluded to, it needs to be a pragmatist intent on sorting the mess out, rather than an egotist intent on their own personal gain. Few and far between in the Tory party - anyone of that ilk was pretty much expelled by Johnson prior to the 2019 GE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So rumuors are the cunts are thinking of changing the leadership to a Sunak/Mordaunt team, don't know if that is a job share or Mordaunt would be deputy! Would bypass the party membership and parliamentary selction stages. Doesn't sound very democratic, so presumably would need an immediate GE. Basically, what @Gemmill suggested yesterday. At this stage it might be the least disastrous option.  

Edited by Renton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.