It’s far from historical revisionism on the part of Leave voters.
The present anti-democratic crowd are keen on pretending it was all written in pencil tho’.
So in your world a referendum on such a life changing decision for the country based on lies, misinformation and undisguised racism is democracy, but allowing another vote when people have facts and understand what the implications of the way they vote will mean is anti-democracy? Behave yourself!
1 Like
The problem with your stance is that you’re misbehaving yourself.
Racists, 33m thick cunts that can’t sniff out when a politician is lying.
Fuck me, it’s the Anti-Democratic Bingo Trope card!
Back at you, miscreant. You can debate better than this.
Nope…just enough to swing the vote.
1 Like
1.3 million?
And of course, no-one was frightened into voting Remain, or lied to by that campaign’s proponents.
It’s ridiculous, and if the purpose of this tactic is to make Leave voters look unintelligent, it’ll only ever achieve the opposite.
It is a stupid fucking argument advanced by too many supposedly clever people.
Really? I didn’t realise. 
Honestly sir, I would be embarrassed to be reduced to having that as my “pro-Remain” argument.
The astonishing thing is that it still seems to be the only argument the anti-democrats have left.
“Leavers are stupid”
Without, of course, understanding the fundamental tenets of democracy, such as the idea that without implementation, it’s just a fucking opinion poll.
Couldn’t make it up, etc.
It’s obvious that Leavers voted such for a multitude of reasons and undoubtedly some voted because they don’t like foreigners. However, the sweeping generalisations, primarily by Remainers, of mass racism, moronic populists, etc serve no purpose whatsoever. Equally, the schoolboy “Get over it”, “Butthurt” (whatever the fuck that is) and “Snowflake” terminology used by some triumphalist Leavers after the referendum served no purpose other than to provide evidence of their stupidity. Both served to create division that is still very much apparent and is not conducive to the resolution of the mass fuck up that is Brexit.
3 Likes
Which is why I don’t get supposedly intelligent people failing to make the distinction.
I agree that “get over it” probably sounds horrid in the ears of Remainers, but it’s probably the best practical advice they’re going to get.
There hasn’t been much abuse travelling in the opposite direction. The furthest I’ve gone is that it is deeply disappointing to see supposedly intelligent people taking on playground level debate to attempt to win their case.
You’ll never change minds that way. You’ll just entrench opinion further.
I blame these bad Remain losers for
a) the division
b) the fact that we’ve still got a Conservative led government
2 Likes
I think it might be fairer to say that in the referendum all sides told a load of bollocks. The question has been, and yes I contributed to it, about how much this may have influenced the result… when the the REAL question concerning democracy is NOT a whether it influenced the result but the fact it happened at all… same as the issues with possible Russian interference with the US election. In these cases it’s should never be about saying it’s ok because we don’t believe it effected the result, but we should be demonising that it happened at all because it’s is NOT democratic. In any other election on other countries, we USED to observe such practices and castigate them as undemocratic, yet in this case no?
Why?
No one has provided any satisfactory response as to why a subsequent ref with a more informed public would be anti democratic though… if everyone is so convinced there would be no change, what is the concern, if anything it might help unify as now so much more information is available we could at least accept there is more informed electorate…
Just putting this here, don’t bite the hand that feeds etc. etc.
That sounds too good to be true, in that it sounds like the EU has caved in to every whim when lots of people in the know have said we will be getting little of what we (when I say ‘we’ I mean it in a general sense) asked for. Anyone mind translating that without all the political spin?
Also take into account where refugees are placed as its to expensive in the South you can see why the disillusioned get stoked by extreme fringes. Hence Brexit, this was their chance.
Another interesting article.
… Its no surprise you like and rate this, its full of high ideals and wonderful passionate pleas tHat Britains deserve and must have transparent and ‘democratic’ government… lots of wonderful philosophical idealism that is great but plumped up with plenty of the naivety of youth.
She is right, we all do indeed desire and expect such a utopian political universe… and do you not think that if there as a a cat in hells chance of ever achieving such a thing, 99% of folks would not be fully behind it? And that is the crux, there is not. We do NOT have transparency or real democracy within our own lands…we have successive government that is gives itself a mandate to govern based despite often achieving not much more than 35% of the vote, will nearly all parties happy to play the same game as we saw in that piss poor referendum on electoral reform… with many not having a scoob how STV worked…
IT wont go away just because we are no longer part of the EU… we will just see more of the same closer to home with one less institution to blame for the shit we are in… No wonder Corbyn is a brexiteer… it means the folks in the shit in this country can no longer blame EU oddities, or migrant workers for the shit caused by Tory austerity and global financial crises… might get him a few more votes and if any of his supporters don’t believe that this is NOT part of his political strategy, then they don’t have a clue how these things work - EVERYTHING is calculated spin…( go find out who first circulated that pic of Corbyn getting moved on by police during his 70s protest… and the captions that went with the meme…)
Cynical? no. Realism. We all laugh about Boris telling folks about straight bananas… how its bollocks and trivial and has no impact. But even such simple dropped in soundbites have impact… its never about the trivial issue, but about seeding the idea of ‘interference’ in our lives by EU ‘idiots’ - made worse when not actually true… all planned, all calculated.
So, yes you can champion her idealism, champion how ‘smart’ she is for speaking ‘more sense than many people twice her age’ (and we get the not so subtle opportunity to have a wee dig), but she lacks the experience of age and thus it has a rather large hole in ignoring the realities of modern politics… they ALL feed at the trough, just some are more subtle about it.
2 Likes
None of that really addresses her central motivation though, does it? That power should be as close to the people as possible. This is serious stuff, @Map-Of-Tasmania, not something that we can simply accept because folks like yourself love the symbolism of it all or whatever.
The truth is that there is a massive disconnect between what the EU says it stands for and what it actually stands for, and that’s all the more remarkable because in pronouncements such as the Fourth Railway Package and its own constitution, the EU is almost brazen in what it says out loud.
Her plea to keep power close is all the more critical in the context of the EU. This is an organisation that has wrestled control of a continents’ food supply, half the continents’ financial systems and all internal immigration controls. It is an organisation that is openly seeking to create its own Army, beholden to the who the fuck knows.
Perhaps when British kids are being conscripted to fight in wars of the EU’s making you’ll see why keeping power close to home is a good thing.
Localised power has been a central pillar of the left for an age, and whilst it is a wonderful ideal, we no longer live in a ‘world’ where this is likely to yield much more than an illusion of control. I think what is missing form the debate is quite simple; All the issues associated with the shit you mention under EU control, are NO DIFFERENT from issues we have if decisions were made at home… there will still be a need for fishery Quotas, to maintain price and to preserve stocks, there will still be fisherman fucked off, some will win, some will lose, but instead of Blaming Brussels we will Blame Westminster… the financial systems re integrated globally and do you seriously believe that being outside the EU will protect us form the global financial vagaries?
As to the army… well, not sure the EU had much to do with The Falklands, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan… more to do with what they have desired accrues in Trumplands of the ‘free’… our new BFFs…