james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 1,287
|
Post by james100 on Oct 27, 2020 16:07:34 GMT
Little flashback for fun: blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/full-text-theresa-mays-conference-speech/"But if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means." Theresa May gets no brownie points from me. As I listened to that bit, I realised how deeply grateful I am to hold dual Australian citizenship 😁 |
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692 
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Oct 27, 2020 16:17:20 GMT
Although the endless months of 'get over it' were deeply irritating, insulting etc in the face of the clearly damaging choice it was, it is true that two wrongs don't make a right despite almost everything bad about this project coming to fruition and it being overwhelmingly tempting to rub peoples noses in it. Sure, if this was some abstract problem affecting somebody else, then saying 'I told you so' or 'rubbing peoples noses in it' might be tempting. But this is a problem that has the potential to destroy the livelihoods of family and loved ones. If that happens, I'm more inclined to get angry, then get even. But what value does it add being angry at people who have had no actual real say in the matter since June 2016, and continue not to do so? Surely it's the politicians who deserve it? (not to say that I'm not still wound up by the whole nonsense on occasion)
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,000
Likes: 5,137
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 27, 2020 18:04:17 GMT
But what value does it add being angry at people who have had no actual real say in the matter since June 2016 ... ? ...except for June 2017 and December 2019. Sure, the primary opposition choice was similarly unpalatable (and complicit-through-inaction in the 2016 result), but...
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Oct 27, 2020 18:40:55 GMT
Back with the logistics difficulties, I am in the thick of the problem with the software that is not ready. The situation is clearly outlined here:- www.computerweekly.com/news/252491144/Not-enough-time-to-get-software-ready-for-end-of-Brexit-transition-period-warns-industryPut simply, this CDS system for declaring goods movements was supposed to be being tested and implemented in February but is delayed. The system it is replacing, CHIEF, is not up to processing volume of submissions projected among other problems. CDS cannot be finalised because HMRC is unable to pass precise specification to the private companies it relies on to write the software to communicate with CDS and upload import declarations. Any government that was reality based would have screwed every last extension to the transition period out of the EU in order to make sure that the UK is actually prepared to leave. Instead they have made the decision earlier this year to chance it even though the pandemic was raging. Or perhaps they didn't understand the warnings they would have got about CDS from the civil service. Edit The point I'm making is that anything you hear from Gove about business 'not being ready' like it's our fault is blatant lying and arse covering. |
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Oct 27, 2020 20:07:20 GMT
I'm reminded of the last "reasonable worst case scenario", that being 200 Covid-19 deaths a day by mid-Nov. Let's hope the end of transition "reasonable worst case scenario" fares a little better.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 298 
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Oct 27, 2020 21:13:02 GMT
So I say don't estimate the draw of identity. Can you explain that to me, please? Are the French somehow "less French" for being part of the EU? The Italians somehow "less Italian"? Are Poles and Bulgarians and Spaniards somehow indistinguishable and inseparable from Germans or Irish because they're all part of the EU? Are Norwegians somehow more Norwegian for being outside, but Swedes less Swedish for being inside? Are Swiss somehow more distinct than Austrians, because they're on either side of membership? Why does Britishness preclude playing nicely with the neighbours? Too often in this country, this nebulous concept of "identity" seems to be tied solidly with exclusionism, bigotry, and lowest-common-denominator historically-inaccurate harking back to perceived past glories. "Two world wars and one world cup".Patriotism and nationalism are completely different things, and that gets massively overlooked - or the distinction deliberately blurred.  You cut out the rest of the paragraph that followed that sentence which is central to my point. For large swathes of the UK, for a number of reasons, their identity is tied to the past perceived glories, specifically what we "did". And this idea that those things were achieved due to inherent British qualities and actually, whisper it, being better than others. In some ways, what a very small island managed to achieve on the world stage in the past was remarkable. No wonder our education system over emphasised it. The EU (or even separate to EU, any attempt to add more detail to historic events) is seen as a threat by those people. This exacerbated by the fact that we live in a more global uncertain world, even before Covid came along. I would contrast that to the French. While the French obviously have some issues of their own, my experience has been their identity is tied more into specific ideas rather than specific historic events. It think it is harder to threaten something built on an idea. For us to move from here, my point is that we need to find a new and positive identity that replaces the current British tendency (for some) to only look back and get their sense of worth from there alone. The 2012 Olympics tapped into something positive. And I believe we can do it again, to fashion a new identity that is yes informed by the past but doesn't set it as the pinnacle of all that we are capable of, because we are much more than that. Brexit will do a lot of damage, of that I have no doubt. But that is no longer the pressing question. What can we do to fix the problems that are coming, is the question that matters more now. To genuinely fix things, we will need the country back where we feel more unified than we currently do.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 298
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Oct 27, 2020 21:23:18 GMT
I was/am a "remainer" but the country democratically voted otherwise. We on this side of the fence do need to do a better job of seeming to have accepted that vote. Repeatedly saying "I told you so" has never worked in real life and I can't see how this would be different. All that does is entrench positions and makes people defensive. I am willing to admit I don't know many people who did vote for brexit. But the ones I know, did expect things to get worse before they got better. And even if they don't eventually get financially better, they thought it was a price worth paying for Brexit. Yes they have been a little surprised we don't have a trade deal yet but can accept we may not get one. What has surprised them more and slightly worries them is the lingering impact on social cohesion that the vote seems to have caused. So I say don't estimate the draw of identity. If this vote is to be "corrected" in the longer term it needs it needs its foundation somehow built on a unifying positive message rather than a negative one of "you brought this on yourself" surely? I agree that name calling or broad characterisations of "Brexiteers" are counterproductive. So on the other hand is reiterating old tropes like dismissing any negative economic impact as "project fear" instead of debating the specific issue. I do think it's always good to hold politicians accountable. Pointing out specific promises that are not being maintained or problems that needs to be solved is only fair. It is interesting, while I do agree we should hold politicians to account. A part of me think that ends once the electorate strongly endorses that position. The conservative party are many things but were very clear on their brexit strategy/priorities and we collectively voted for that. I guess I see a distinction between saying "X is a problem, how are you going to fix it?" vs "X is happening because of Y, you made Y happen, it is your fault, how are you going to fix it". The latter utterly absolves the electorate which I don't think is fair on politicians.
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,045
Likes: 1,862
|
Post by littleoldlady on Oct 27, 2020 21:58:08 GMT
Are the French somehow "less French" for being part of the EU? YES The Italians somehow "less Italian"? YES Are Poles and Bulgarians and Spaniards somehow indistinguishable and inseparable from Germans or Irish because they're all part of the EU? NO but who said they were? Are Norwegians somehow more Norwegian for being outside, but Swedes less Swedish for being inside? The Norwegian people (as opposed to the bureaucrats) think so. They had two referendums on joining and voted against by large majorities. Are Swiss somehow more distinct than Austrians, because they're on either side of membership? YES Why does Britishness preclude playing nicely with the neighbours? It does not, but who said it did? Too often in this country, this nebulous concept of "identity" seems to be tied solidly with exclusionism, bigotry, and lowest-common-denominator historically-inaccurate harking back to perceived past glories. Well twice would be too often, but 2 out of 65 million would not matter much. People voted to leave for different reasons. I voted to leave because I rate the risks of staying in as greater than the risks of leaving. You will find it hard to find a serious economist who believes that the Euro is compatible with sovereign states. The founders of the Euro were well aware of this and thought that its introduction would force the states into a single political entity, the United States of Europe, overcoming all the problems of language, history and culture. Well it may do so. but if it doesn't, then a disorderly break up will ensue. just like the Soviet Union and every other comparable attempt to forge a single state out of incompatible elements has done in the past. I expected, and I still expect, a reasonable trade deal simply because of the 100 billion pa trade deficit. There will be some in the EU who are prepared to sacrifice this in order to punish the UK and discourage any other state thinking of leaving. There will be others who are more concerned about the welfare of their citizens and want to retain access to the UK market. We will soon know which side wins the argument.
|
|
mrk
Posts: 807
Likes: 753
|
Post by mrk on Oct 27, 2020 22:15:53 GMT
It is interesting, while I do agree we should hold politicians to account. A part of me think that ends once the electorate strongly endorses that position. The conservative party are many things but were very clear on their brexit strategy/priorities and we collectively voted for that. Well, the conservatives were clear in the last election perhaps, and got 43.6% of the votes then which is not exactly a vast (in fact not even a simple) majority of the electorate. In the 2016 referendum there was really no clear Leave plan; as Cummings himself put it "Creating an exit plan that makes sense and which all reasonable people could unite around seems an almost insuperable task" and "There is much to be gained by swerving the whole issue." Funny you mentioning identity and the need to unify above. I was just reading this "Common Ground and Division in 2020s Britain" report by Britain's Choice. Apparently "50 per cent of Britons feel that this is the most divided Britain has ever been", but "74 per cent think that the media often makes the country feel more divided than it really is".
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Oct 27, 2020 22:35:26 GMT
It is interesting, while I do agree we should hold politicians to account. A part of me think that ends once the electorate strongly endorses that position.... Aside from Brexit specifically, do you really mean that you think politicians should no longer be held to account once an electorate elects them with a decent majority? Implying that they could do whatever the fudge they like for the next 4 years without fear of scrutiny? Apologies if I've misunderstood what you meant, though if I haven't then I really couldn't disagree more.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Oct 27, 2020 22:56:30 GMT
I agree that name calling or broad characterisations of "Brexiteers" are counterproductive. So on the other hand is reiterating old tropes like dismissing any negative economic impact as "project fear" instead of debating the specific issue. I do think it's always good to hold politicians accountable. Pointing out specific promises that are not being maintained or problems that needs to be solved is only fair. It is interesting, while I do agree we should hold politicians to account. A part of me think that ends once the electorate strongly endorses that position. The conservative party are many things but were very clear on their brexit strategy/priorities and we collectively voted for that. I guess I see a distinction between saying "X is a problem, how are you going to fix it?" vs "X is happening because of Y, you made Y happen, it is your fault, how are you going to fix it". The latter utterly absolves the electorate which I don't think is fair on politicians. Does this analysis not disregard a big part of the picture though? Claiming that we collectively voted for the Conservatives because of their very clear Brexit strategy, is to me rather akin to saying that we voted for a slap in the face knowing what we were in for... but missing out that that was because the only alternative was a kick in the head. i.e. many people voted Conservative in 2019 principally (and reluctantly) because Jeremy Corbyn was regarded as any one/more of a danger to national security, antisemitic or tolerant thereof, or would herald a return to the 1970's economically speaking. Certainly many of my anti-brexit family voted for one or more of those reasons. I'm pretty sure the Tories would still win against Corbyn if there was an action replay today. That is still not one and the same as a strong endorsement for their Brexit strategy and priorities though, just a very unfortunate byproduct of avoiding something that we collectively perceived as even worse.
|
|
mrk
Posts: 807
Likes: 753
|
Post by mrk on Oct 27, 2020 23:08:22 GMT
People voted to leave for different reasons. I voted to leave because I rate the risks of staying in as greater than the risks of leaving. You will find it hard to find a serious economist who believes that the Euro is compatible with sovereign states. I don't understand that argument. The UK wasn't in the Euro.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2020 1:16:01 GMT
The founders of the Euro were well aware of this and thought that its introduction would force the states into a single political entity, the United States of Europe, overcoming all the problems of language, history and culture. Well it may do so. but if it doesn't, then a disorderly break up will ensue. just like the Soviet Union and every other comparable attempt to forge a single state out of incompatible elements has done in the past. Hahahaha, out of the unions in question, the UK and the EU, I would not be so sure that the EU will be the one to endure a disorderly break-up first  The Scots certainly don't seem keen on being trapped in a failing union with a bunch of xenophobic little Englanders any longer. And given the Brexiteers weird obsession with fish these days, it really would be doubly hilarious if the Scots flounce off and take half the UKs fishing waters with them
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on Oct 28, 2020 4:39:00 GMT
I decided not to vote in the Brexit referendum because I could see the point of arguments both for and against remaining in the union and this was the first vote I didn't take part in since I was 21.
The divisions Brexit has caused are distressing and unpleasant. How I wish Cameron had been able to make a deal with the EU before the referendum as I believe that, if he had, there would not have been a referendum. The EU were unshakable that the principles of the EU could not be paused under any circumstances.
My reasons for being undecided were that I believed the economic consequences of leaving would be severe in the next 10 - 25 years. What did concern me was the obvious lack of political "clout" GB had as evidenced by the need for flexibility when Cameron went begging for a deal. If a small but significant nation's needs cannot be accommodated for a short period of time in this large organisation how long would it be before other members of the EU imposed terms that were unacceptable to the majority of the population of GB.
There were lots of other reasons why I chose not to vote but I have outlined the 2 main reasons.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,000
Likes: 5,137
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 28, 2020 8:48:36 GMT
Can you explain that to me, please? Are the French somehow "less French" for being part of the EU? The Italians somehow "less Italian"? Are Poles and Bulgarians and Spaniards somehow indistinguishable and inseparable from Germans or Irish because they're all part of the EU? Are Norwegians somehow more Norwegian for being outside, but Swedes less Swedish for being inside? Are Swiss somehow more distinct than Austrians, because they're on either side of membership? Why does Britishness preclude playing nicely with the neighbours? Too often in this country, this nebulous concept of "identity" seems to be tied solidly with exclusionism, bigotry, and lowest-common-denominator historically-inaccurate harking back to perceived past glories. "Two world wars and one world cup".Patriotism and nationalism are completely different things, and that gets massively overlooked - or the distinction deliberately blurred. You cut out the rest of the paragraph that followed that sentence which is central to my point. I did, because that was the only bit I was replying to. You say "don't underestimate the draw of identity" - I'm asking you to explain that to me, and how playing nicely with other people somehow diminishes that "identity". So the "British Identity" is, iyho, somehow intrinsically nationalistic, exclusionary, and even xenophobic?
|
|
