The public should only be allowed a choice if they can get the right answer
1 Like
Although i disagree with the way the whole thing has been dealt with, i can’t disagree with that sentiment. Which reminds me of this article. Much i agree with, but there’s something wrong about it.
Starts off well, mentions the melign influence of Avvaz(always gets my attention), the dodgy dealings of the French state and the attempted shut down of free opinion and discourse. Then goes on to Brexit
“Turning to look at the UK, the triumph of Nigel Farage’s Brexit party is similarly the product of a populace wrestling with cognitive dissonance, forced to realize that the “constitutional monarchy” they believed they lived in isn’t so constitutional after all, having jettisoned its democratic mask to cling to the EU under the guise of good old British pragmatism (as well as a terribly convenient gridlock). Even passionate Remainers are happy to see “Theresa Maybe” go, though it remains to be seen whether her successor will be any more inclined to honor the result of 2016’s referendum and actually take the UK out of the EU.”
I’ve read it twice now and still can’t make my mind up about it.
This comment is not specifically aimed at the EU. There is plenty of what I am about to describe that exists all over the world.
The term fascism has lost almost all of its meaning over the years. Despite being of Italian origin, it, eventually came to describe the forms of government of several states, gradually becoming synonymous with Nazism (mad because apart from ye olde totalitarianism, were nowt alike), eventually losing all meaning when people used it to describe political positions they did not like.
But back in the old country of Italy, a rather crappy literal interpretation of fascism is “sticks”. A better interpretation would be the merging of state and corporate interests to achieve mutually profitable and pre-agreed aims, over and above anything the people might want.
We did nor get to that position in the same way, but that is where we are now. Facism 2.0. Secondments, revolving doors between corporations, the civil servants. Management accountants setting government policy which they then exploit, with the tacit approval of the minister that’ll soon be sitting on one of their boards. Wars started without our leave and despite our protest. Endless fucking propaganda to the point where shit can go down every fucking weekend in France and the BBC doesn’t report it.
As I said before, these are not problems unique to the EU. As long as humans have existed, corruption has too.
What makes the EU so dangerous is the scale of both government and corporate interests. The relaxation of capital controls has enabled a few very big firms to relocate, accumulate and dominate. That, coupled with the fact that we have a supra-national political concern that has developed zero interest in democratic practices over the past forty years is a real concern.
The word fascism comes from the Latin word “fasci” meaning a bundle of sticks (interestingly this is also the original meaning of the word “faggot”). It comes from the Roman Republic when senators would come together in voting blocs around specific issues, rather than ideological parties or cults of personality. Obviously Mussolini kind of twisted that definition somewhat.
Thought I’d hit this thread up as it isn’t strictly related to the recent European Parliament elections. The English Democrats are going to appeal a court decision after being told their case was wholly without merit.
Their case?
That we’ve already left the European Union. I am no lawyer, but I know a little bit about Parliament. Its last say on the issue was that Britain would leave the EU on the 29th March 2019. There has been no subsequent bill overturning the legislation. Every day we’ve remained, we’ve done so via Royal Prerogative.
Worth a watch on appeal, I reckon.
1 Like
If it all wasnt so embarrassing, that would be funny.
1 Like
What’s a little scary is the insta-dismissal of the original complaint.
Royal Prerogative in this context is essentially all about ignoring the people and allowing Parliament to do its thing.
And before anyone bothers to point it out, Parliament is not sovereign. The people are sovereign. Parliament is supposed to embody that sovereignty in 650 easy-to-count seats.
If Parliament keeps on ignoring the people, maybe we’ll need to revisit how that works too.
2 Likes
I’m done. Can we leave now?
1 Like
Fucking hell. Those are Owen Smith levels of attendance
1 Like
Interesting stuff from an expert and people still way to exit EU. Worth a listen but you’ll need to take your fingers out of your ears @pap
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1152846369943642112
I’ve watched all two minutes of this. He really ought to know better. The WTO was established precisely to establish the trading rules between nations.
The other thing I’d take immediate issue with is the way he frames exports. 80% of this country’s trade is internal. So he’s saying we definitely will lose 50% of that remaining percentage of trade? I’ll dispute this more in a bit.
My third point surrounds his treatment of the UK’s bargaining power in trade relationships. First off, as a member of the Customs Union, the UK has no formal bargaining power of its own. It cannot set independent tariffs with non-EU countries that might induce those countries to trade more with us. This is why his point about us losing 50% of our export trade is so speculative.
If the EU really does want to engage in this tremendous act of self harm, so be it. Another thing Pascal leaves out is that we buy far more from the EU than they do from us, and as one of the more prosperous countries in the club, we’ve got the money to pay for it.
Any move to impose prohibitive tariffs on UK goods will end up resulting in a tit for tat trade war, and you’ll soon hear arseholes squeaking across the Channel when the Germans can’t sell us cars, the French can’t export their agricultural goods and the Italians can’t sell our wine.
Perhaps what is missing, is that its not just about the tariff negotiations, but the impact of red tape at borders - inspections and the time (=money) that means whatever ‘deals’ ate negotiated , we add to COGS and this inevitably is passed to consumer. Yes we will be able to eventually get access to goods and services we have now, but in a situation where the pound is weaker and the goods cost more - things wont affordable… Exports lose their advantage of a weaker pound as red tape administration increases COGS as well… and this is something that can’t be negotiated out of as its the advantage of the single market.
Add in the fact that because of this UK becomes much less attractive as a manufacturing site for EU market and I am really interested in where our economic growth and industrial might will come from now we have our country back. To date no one has been able to provide any realistic idea on this… responses obscured by ambiguous ‘opportunity’ or should I say wishful thinking…
BUT Pap knows more than the former head of the WTO, so surely you can explain this with high levels of confidence that will stimulate the markets, ensure increased employment with higher wages and overcome us doubters?
Found this whilst reading about the Epstein case but useful to know for all those multi millionaires out there in post Brexit Britain:
Doubt it, but that’s not the point.
He was never going to provide a balanced assessment.
Thank fuck for the Irish antecedent then - 
I’m quids in.
He’s given an alternative view to your own narrative that you are going to ignore. I’ve no problem with that but anyone can choose the “facts ” to fit their argument; you, me, MoT in-fact anyone can and do. Doesn’t exactly help to change hearts and minds and that’s why we’re in this toxic, divisive mess.
Pascal Lamy is honorary president of a think tank dedicated to a united Europe, Notre Dame, which he also used to chair.
He is a committed Europhile. As such, I think his expert opinion needs to weigh in his political beliefs. He is an acolyte that believes Europe is the way.
I didn’t know this until today, but it really isn’t that hard to find out.
I’m sorry but I don’t really get your point (see my last post). You simply found something you disagree with to add to your argument against the EU.
I think it’s something positive that he is championing the EU. Also were you implying I hadn’t bothered to research him? I can use the inter web just like you…yes, really.
You still don’t get that not everyone is ever going to agree with you but at least you learnt something new about someone else who doesn’t subscribe to your personal world view, so I guess it wasn’t time wasted.
I assume that this doesn’t enter the minds of anyone wanting to rush headlong into Brexit?
Again, it is an article from a while back, so I guess people who want to leave the EU are losing no sleep over it…
Do I gave the posting gait of someone who thinks everyone else will agree with him?
You should have checked Pascal out. You didn’t. It happens, and while the man is free to exercise whatever political position he wants, it is important to find out where he stands.
Is someone that wants a United Europe going to have a balanced view on Brexit?
As your video demonstrates, no.