Leaving out that the left decided not to stay in the race in those regions, are you ? And how that was what made defeating the FN possible ? Stop twisting everything to make the left appear worse and maybe you can talk about people "not having the slightest clue what is going on".
Is Britain about to leave the EU?
- Thread starter Mega Tsunami
- Start date
- Status
Leaving out that the left decided not to stay in the race in those regions, are you ? And how that was what made defeating the FN possible ? Stop twisting everything to make the left appear worse and maybe you can talk about people "not having the slightest clue what is going on".
The moderate left stayed out of the race to help defeat the far-right. The commies that Lexicus loves so much didn't move a finger to help the Republican right against the far-right.
Of course I don't know for sure what exactly enabled defeating the far-right, but I'm guessing a sustained and unprecedented blitz by business on all major media outlets explaining that a vote for the FN was a vote against jobs played a big role.
I also know for a fact it wasn't the commies who defeated the FN, in fact the commies were swallowed by the far-right and keeping repeating their old record (only now with the addition of identity politics) that nobody cares about, most of all the "working class".
My point that businessmen are doing far more to fight the far-right than useless Marxists is certainly an undeniable truth.
And I don't need to try to make the left look bad, it's doing a great job on its own in Europe. Just compare the platform Hollande run on to his actual policies, in the Valls government.
In 2012 the far left leader Mélanchon tried to fight MLP directly, both in the presidential campaign and in the legislative (congressional) campaign by racing in her district. He lost both times but you can't say that "useless Marxists" aren't doing anything to fight the far right.
By running directly he is actually helping the far-right. Staying out of races and endorsing republican candidates where the far-right is the favorite to win is the more responsible strategy, because the dinosaur Mélanchon can't win an election for syndic of his building. That's how much the "working class" cares about his message.
I also think if anything useless people like Mélanchon are making the far-right stronger, because by repeating their 19th Century mantras now colored by identity politics, they make working folks angry and hateful of the whole political class. The 5% of people who vote for the likes of Mélanchon are college kids who never worked for a second in their lives, not "proletarians".
He may be completely out of touch with everything but at least he tried. In the second round he did endorse the moderate candidate who won by a narrow margin. I think that without him in the race the result might have been inverted.
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
good God capitalists
people voted to leave the EU right across England and carried the referendum for the leave side.
I'm a Londoner and voted remain
Its 2016, capitalists should start to pay attention, people don't buy your message anymore, see Trump/Bernie
HAND
Armchair Philosopher
It might not be over yet. There is talk that Article 50 might not be triggered at all, even if it seems unlikely at the moment. There is also talk there will be a general election and possibly a second referendum (although what it will be in it precisely about is anyone's guess). There could be new deal offered as well. It may be speculative or wishful thinking but a possibility.
The FT's Gideon Rachman is thinking along these lines too here:
https://next.ft.com/content/8f2aca88-3c51-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a
The EU is a Geo-political project as well as a political-economic one so keeping the UK in might be worth the price of a new deal from the EU's point of view.
The FT's Gideon Rachman is thinking along these lines too here:
https://next.ft.com/content/8f2aca88-3c51-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a
The EU is a Geo-political project as well as a political-economic one so keeping the UK in might be worth the price of a new deal from the EU's point of view.
That was kind of my point. The shift to the far right is against the interests of business, who are kicking and screaming about it.
Lexicus was using the tired old Stalinist line that fascism is the "defense of the capitalists" against socialism, as if bosses were exploiting racism and xenophobia of the working poor to their advantage. But there is no "socialist threat" for business to defend against. This is 2016, not 1926.
Reality is bosses are fighting against racism and xenophobia, but they're losing the battle. Indeed the economic elites are completely out of touch with the working poor, as are left-wing politicians and the college kids who vote for them. This was my point all along.
Repeating idiotic Marxist mantras that were ridiculous 50 years ago is just clownish now.
Verbose
Deity
Except that risks killing the egalitarian structures of the EU — the one that tends to be denied by Eurosceptics.
It's not that all EU member states are totally equal in all ways. Clearly Germany by dint of numbers and wealth carry considerably more influence that anyone else. (And then Germany due to size and wealth also has leadership trust upon it, it's required to act as hegemon, taking everyone's interests into account about things it might otherwise prefer to ignore.) About the same goes for the Big Boys France, UK, Italy, with and Spain maybe even Poland tacked on. BUT within the framework of the EU as it has been set up, the member states ARE technically equal. It tends to need to be like that, or everyone should be expected to start looking for whatever they can get above and beyond someone else, treating the EU as a zero-sum game.
And as a zero-sum game does seem to be how too many in the UK now regard the EU. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy then. One of the great threats to the EU is precisely it turning into a massive tragedy of the commons. To some extent, when discussing what deals the UK would like with the EU, it certainly does look like the assumption is that nothing at will change with the EU, and whetever benefits there might be for the UK from membership is still going to be there for the taking, because the EU is this immutable common good that anyone should just be able to tap into. If there are maintenance costs, someone else (Germany?) will just pay them indefinitely.
Funnily enough, that is by the look of things also the primary Russia position on the EU. Sure the EU can be disparaged and generally despised, but in the end it's assumed to just be there, ticking over, with a certain demand for stuff to be filled, and offering trade at a certain level, regardless of what political argy-bargy might be going on.
Concessions on migration were offered before the referendum - they were rejected by the public.
Practically I don't see the 27 making further concessions on what is a fundamental principle to keep the UK in.
Momentum is behind leave now.
I saw a headline stating that Cameron told the EU that they must deal with the UK's migration concerns - he really isn't in a position to lecture anyone.
Practically I don't see the 27 making further concessions on what is a fundamental principle to keep the UK in.
Momentum is behind leave now.
I saw a headline stating that Cameron told the EU that they must deal with the UK's migration concerns - he really isn't in a position to lecture anyone.
EnglishEdward
Deity
I very rarely read the Daily Express e.g. if on broken train, someone has left a copy,
and I have already read everything else.
I tend to buy the "1" most days, which in my opinion tries hard to be neutral
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_(newspaper)
The thing is there has been very little coverage by the BBC that I have seen concerning
the issues of Self-Determination for the UK and the Democratic Deficit in the EU.
And please remember that the BBC is the UK government broadcasting corporation,
that remaining in the UK was official government policy, and that David Cameron's
Prime Minister's Office and Cabinet Office were determined to ensure that the UK
government in its wider sense promoted Remain.
There is also the elite problem in that those at the top of the BBC are by definition
those who have been personally successful over the last 40 years and therefore
take a rosy view of the EU. They and such like at top of Church of England, CBI,
TUC can not take an objective viewpoint and have an inherent bias towards
what was the then status quo.
If we were to interview people or conduct an opinion poll on the benefits of the UK
National Lottery, we would hardly regard those who have won millions of pounds
as constituting a representative sample.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I mean, immigrants are mostly working class, too. Unless we take it for granted that white, English working class people are of a higher priority than non-white or non-English working class people, their rights and well-being carry just as much weight someone who happens to have been born in the right place, to the right family, with the right shade of skin.
Certainly, the far-right are all for prioritising certain sections of the working class above others. Perhaps that's why they're successful in winning a certain kind of working class voter. But it's traditionally one of the points on which commies and Nazis do not see eye-to-eye.
British incompetence has been the greatest ally the Republican movement ever had, so it would certainly be keeping with tradition.
What you're missing is that in both cases, "the oldies" saw themselves as voting against change, while "the young" saw themselves as voting in favour of change. Yes, in the EU referendum, "the old" vote may have taken the superficial appearance of constitutional reform, but the meat of it was staving off political change in the form of the perceived erosion of British sovereignty, economic change in form of Britain's exposure to a single European market, and social change in the form of a more diverse and pluralistic Britain. Likewise, "the young" saw themselves as voting for change, for a more open, progressive country. They may each have been mistaken- I'd say that the former group are frankly deluded- but that's what most voters seemed to think their votes represented. And each has a clear analogy to the two sides of the Scottish referendum: the "Better Together" campaign on behalf of the status quo and the "Yes" campaign on behalf of something different. Again, you can debate whether either position was realistic, but it's what people thought they were voting for.
The difference between the referendums is that, in the first place, the vote was whether a particular project should go ahead, and in the second, whether a project already underway should be aborted, so in the former, independence appeared a progressive goal, and in the latter, it appeared a reactionary goal. In each case, the underlying clash of imagination was pretty similar.
EnglishEdward
Deity
Under EU rules 450 million largely white Europeans had the inalienable right to come
and reside in the UK, apply for free education, jobs, house, benefits and free NHS
and sue us in court on the grounds of discrimination if we did not provide them such;
while 4,500 million largely non white people from outside of Europe had no such right.
I can therefore argue that voting Remain was voting for a white people's European
Union and therefore voting Remain was racist.
However I do not believe that many Remain voters were so motivated, but as people
here are quoting the hypothetical consequences of Leaving, I do so for Remaining.
If you believe that, you are fooling yourself: This is exactly the kind of deal that the EU cannot afford to make. They would like to keep the UK in, but they cannot make any further concessions.
EnglishEdward
Deity
Most of us are not one worlders.
We take the view that the UK government should prioritise the
interests of its UK nationals over foreign nationals in many respects.
We expect the Japanese government to prioritise the interests
of its nationals over UK nationals in many respects.
We expect the EU governments to prioritise the interests of the
EU nationals over the interests of Chinese or Indian nationals
in many respects.
It is not in all respects, for instance if a foreign national is accused
of murder here, they should have equal right to trial by jury, or injured,
they should have equal right to emergency treatment; the many aspects
includes things such as subsidised housing and long term benefits payments.
EnglishEdward
Deity
This "oldie" takes the view that Leaving is a change and knows very well that it is a
disruptive change. He also remembers that the argument for the Remain camp was
that David Cameron had done a deal which would mean that Remaining was no change.
I don't disagree. It's a conundrum for the left: how to say you're all for the poor if you ignore the plight of the poorest of the poor (the illegal immigrants)?
OTOH, importing hordes of low paid workers isn't going to be very popular with the native working poor, the traditional basis of the left. Considering immigrants don't vote, at least in the medium term, this strategy poses obvious electoral challenges. The people rebelling against unrestricted immigration are not the rich, who benefit from it, it is the lower and lower-middle class folks.
Verbose
Deity
Quite. What I hear out of Brussels is that there's a shell-shocked sense down there right now, as if the place had somehow been attacked. BUT it's already geling that the British are out, and should be out. Meaning if the British want to remain after all, they are really going to have to offer something. More demands based on assumptions of British importance to the EU will just tick people off worse by now. The referendum did reject the EU after all.
Possibly the British government (scratch that: A British government...) might make the rounds to the inidvidual member states and try to drum up support for... something. But to the extent the UK is going to negotiate centrally with the EU structures, the trend is very much against it.
And it's not as easy as just making a deal with Germany. The way this works, Germany might entertain something like that only if the German government knows there's a demand from enough EU member states for it for there to already be position of leadership to step into. If there isn't, even Germany will just end up hurting itself.
HAND
Armchair Philosopher
Well, I posted the FT/Rachman article(hopefully everyone is reading it) as a talking/speculative point rather than suggesting it's going to happen. Looks like Merkel doesn't agree anyway, so that's that I think.
Edit:
Although, John Kerry isn't so sure, albeit for perhaps different reasons:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/29/john-kerry-brexit-could-be-walked-back-david-cameron
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
Who are "the native working poor", though? It seems to be taken for granted that there's some Platonic ideal of the British worker: white, straight, Protestant, socially conservative and anti-communist, but it's a fiction, a bedroom ceiling fantasy invented by the last ruined dregs of the One Nation movement. It's as much a fantasy as the Stalinist ideal of the worker- coincidentally white and straight, religiously agnostic and socially moderate-to-liberal, pro-communist if only you can get the right pamphlet into his hands- a fiction!
The working class is, if it is anything at all, diverse. It's not inherently prone to voting UKIP any more than it's inherently prone to voting for- well, whatever cobbled-together socialist coalition is running this time around, I can never keep track. It's white and it's black and it's brown, it's straight and it's gay, it's Protestant and it's Catholics and it's Muslim and it's no-religion-specified. It's native born and it's immigrant, it has ancestors in the Doomsday Book and it got here yesterday. These are all true, because a class is not defined by any of these characteristics.
The image of a conservative middle-aged white person living in a post-industrial small town or suburb conjured up by the phrase "white working class" describes maybe a quarter of the actual human mass that make up the working class, and that's being generous. So why is it that "the working class vote" only becomes a cause for concern when it's talking about that demographic?
- Status
Similar threads
