Brexit at Glastonbury 2016 - a video compilation

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

If Remain won, would I be making these arguments? Well it would depend what was happening.

Ok, so you think you're consistent.

But, I think, you're also saying that the result should consistently meet your wants, and the wants of people expressed via their vote should count for fuck all.

From one angle I'm right there with you. Everyone wants what they want in preference to what others might want.

But that doesn't mean they should get it. If everyone is truly equal, your voice (and mine) counts for nothing more than anyone else's and the numbers just don't support our wants.

[Matt42]

On 7/1/2016 at 4:07 PM, russycarps said:

You have got your freedom in much the same way as william wallace did. 

 

 

How I imagine leave voters

 

[MadScientist]

And I will try to fix the EU...

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, incident said:

I'm not saying we shouldn't accept the vote under any circumstances. If the EU stay silent on the issue, sterling largely recovers and the economy doesn't tank (all of which are actually possible), then ultimately there'd be no justification for a 2nd vote.

All I'm ultimately saying is that one could be legally and morally justified if some relatively simple steps were taken, the economy continued to slide, resulting in a clear shift in public opinion etc.. And more specifically that it wouldn't need to be 10 years+ down the line, as there's precedent from elsewhere for holding a 2nd vote relatively quickly.

Which ends up being about how quickly any changed public opinion over time should be acted upon.

We're quite happy to accept 5 year terms for a govt, despite the fact that it's normally the case that after a year they no longer have the support that brought them to govt.

I don't think that's an irrelevant part of the consideration. We have to agree to follow thru on the decisions that get made to some agreed threshold, and at least as far as common practice goes things aren't on the side of your point here.

And of course your point is driven by the fact of you (and me) being on the losing side, and nothing really about a more representative democracy.

 

4 minutes ago, incident said:

I'm not sure what my opinion of Corbyn has to do with anything, I don't think I've ever commented on him on here, more often than not, I tend to swerve the political threads on here past the first few pages as they go round in circles. But for what it's worth - I like a lot of his policies. But I don't think that they or he can play to anywhere near enough people to win an election and so ultimately he needs to be replaced at the earliest opportunity, ideally before the tories get their shit in order. Of course I want politics to be honest and straightforward. But I've never seen it happen. Including and especially in this referendum. And including Corbyn.

It wasn't anything particular aimed at you, but at Jezuits in general.

They spend so much time claiming a better politics of themselves, and that they represent a better democracy, but as soon as the politics go in a different way to what they'd like they reveal themselves as more politically heinous than those they habitually condemn.

Jezza's policies don't bother me, and Jezza might even be decent if he threw off the morons or even had them listen to him. Sadly, that's not how its working out.

[Matt42]

On 7/5/2016 at 9:53 AM, russycarps said:

The problem with democracy is that it gives too much power to thickos.

 

 

Russy you're smashing it!

This ref should never have happened, a decision was given to millions of people who don't have a fucking clue what it means!

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Russy you're smashing it!

This ref should never have happened, a decision was given to millions of people who don't have a fucking clue what it means!

yep, in a democracy the people just can't be trusted.

So who is going to be our benign dictator to save us from the evils of democracy?

PS: it's rhetorical question. You don't get a choice over who is your dictator, and that's the better world you want.

Edited July 6, 2016 by eFestivals

[Matt42]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yep, in a democracy the people just can't be trusted.

So who is going to be our benign dictator to save us from the evils of democracy?

PS: it's rhetorical question. You don't get a choice over who is your dictator, and that's the better world you want.

 

I'm in such a shit state right now - if I'm absolutely honest right now i'm dislillusioned with democracy, but i'm aware what the alternative is?

Surely there's some sort of middle ground?

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

I'm in such a shit state right now - if I'm absolutely honest right now i'm dislillusioned with democracy, but i'm aware what the alternative is?

Surely there's some sort of middle ground?

there's no middle ground to a binary-choice democratic decision.

The only choices are to accept that democratic decision, or reject democracy.

I'll just point out here how some countries have chosen to go when in this situation - Germany, and Italy are two, you might have done them in school history.

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Ok, so you think you're consistent.

But, I think, you're also saying that the result should consistently meet your wants, and the wants of people expressed via their vote should count for fuck all.

From one angle I'm right there with you. Everyone wants what they want in preference to what others might want.

But that doesn't mean they should get it. If everyone is truly equal, your voice (and mine) counts for nothing more than anyone else's and the numbers just don't support our wants.

I don't think it is that. I see what you're getting at but say, 2010 elections - I wasn't happy with that, but I could accept the democratic mandate. My side has to do better next time. I feel different about this one, partly because I think it wasn't a fair fight (and you can either blame Leave for lying or Remain for not lying well enough) and because it's a one-way option.

To break that down - in terms of a fair fight... had Remain lied as blatantly and Leave hadn't, and it was this close in the other direction then yeah, I'd like to think that I'd support the argument that it was unfair. I wouldn't be making that argument myself but I wouldn't deny it.

In terms of the one-way stuff - I probably would always look to err on the side of caution on a vote this close. If we were not in the EU, I don't think a 52% vote to join would sway me. It was 67% vote to get us in. If this was a 67% vote to leave, I wouldn't be having these arguments either.

[eFestivals]

22 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

because it's a one-way option.

when you fart it's a one way option, but it doesn't mean you can reject farting.

If one way options aren't to be allowed we can never have democracy.

22 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

In terms of the one-way stuff - I probably would always look to err on the side of caution on a vote this close

I don't disagree, but if that's how its to be that's an argument to make and win BEFORE the vote, and not to only protest about afterwards because you've lost.

I'm pretty damned sure that a Scotland that voted for indy would very quickly have buyer's regret - cuts three times bigger than tory cuts on top of the tory cuts are going to hurt, very very badly - but if they decide themselves to take that risk, fuck 'em. It's their choice to make the terms of their vote and to live with the consequences of their choice.

I don't feel it should work differently anywhere else, and I certainly don't think the rules should be warped after the event in the favour of the losers of any contest.

Edited July 6, 2016 by eFestivals

[brettredmayne]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36721689

 

Not good reading 

[eFestivals]

21 minutes ago, brettredmayne said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36721689

 

Not good reading 

It's not, tho plenty of doom-mongers have been predicting the final meltdown each and every year for at least the last twenty, so if there's a modicum of truth in their doom this isn't particularly about brexit and brexit is merely the trigger.

Without claiming this as the final meltdown or even necessarily anything more than a small blip, I'd take a guess that that's about right. There's been a recession every (I think it's) nine years in recent decades, so we're due one brexit or not, and those property funds that have been reported in cash-flow (but not bankruptcy) trouble in recent days were showing the first signs of going this way before last may's election. It's certainly not all due to brexit.

Edited July 6, 2016 by eFestivals

[blackred]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

yep, in a democracy the people just can't be trusted.

So who is going to be our benign dictator to save us from the evils of democracy?

PS: it's rhetorical question. You don't get a choice over who is your dictator, and that's the better world you want.

Come on Neil, this is bullshit and you know it. We already have an alternative, it's called representative democracy. We vote for our 'benign dictators' every 5 years (since the FTP act anyway). History shows us where mob rule leads and why we don't use this system.

Edited July 6, 2016 by blackred

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, blackred said:

Come on Neil, this is bullshit and you know it. We already have an alternative, it's called representative democracy. We vote for our 'benign dictators' every 5 years (since the FTP act anyway). History shows us where mob rule leads and why we don't use this system.

PR doesn't alter a jot about the euref vote tho. There is a winning side and a losing side.

Where's the mob rule? In a result that you disagree with?

 

[blackred]

26 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

PR doesn't alter a jot about the euref vote tho. There is a winning side and a losing side.

Where's the mob rule? In a result that you disagree with?

 

Not sure where you are getting PR from, wasn't mentioned once in this string of quotes!?

The mob rule is the referendum (if treated as legally binding), its direct democracy in the exact form Plato argued against under this term. Rejecting the result of the referendum is only rejecting one type of democratic system, and not the one we live under (for good reason - your 2 examples feed nicely into that)

You seemed to suggest to @Matt42 that the only 2 systems available are mob rule or dictatorship - you know this is false, hence me calling you out on this as bullshit. I'm going to leave the rest of this thread as you are clearly being intellectually dishonest to support your contrarian positions.

[Peroni]

I agree the reason it seems so bitter is due to the fact that it doesn't feel right given there wasn't a true majority... most of the people I know who voted leave did so under due to propaganda...and they feel duped.

Others had undertones of xenophobia feel no remorse.  They also now form "shut up and deal with it" camp.

I am proud to say I voted remain in heart and mind and when the news broke I was gutted as were many around me.   I was relieved at least I didn't have to face it for a few days and the festival felt like a safe space to try and process the change.

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, blackred said:

Not sure where you are getting PR from, wasn't mentioned once in this string of quotes!?

Sorry, you said representative democracy. I presumed you meant PR elections from that.

 

11 hours ago, blackred said:

The mob rule is the referendum (if treated as legally binding), its direct democracy in the exact form Plato argued against under this term. Rejecting the result of the referendum is only rejecting one type of democratic system, and not the one we live under (for good reason - your 2 examples feed nicely into that)

Democracy is the will of the majority. It doesn't get any more clear.

The will of the majority doesn't get to mean by default that all minority opinion is suppressed. It's all about how you operate it, and anyway the will of the minority (the alternative to te will of the majority) is very definitely not representative.

That aside, in a binary decision, the only sensible representation that can occur is for the majority to get their wish.

How the fuck do you think "representative democracy" is meant to work? By not representing people's views?

 

11 hours ago, blackred said:

You seemed to suggest to @Matt42 that the only 2 systems available are mob rule or dictatorship - you know this is false, hence me calling you out on this as bullshit. I'm going to leave the rest of this thread as you are clearly being intellectually dishonest to support your contrarian positions.

If it's false, tell me the democracy alternative. I don't believe you can.

And if someone calling me intellectually dishonest makes these unsupported claims and runs away, wtf does that make you?

[eFestivals]

29 minutes ago, Peroni said:

I agree the reason it seems so bitter is due to the fact that it doesn't feel right given there wasn't a true majority.

In the vote? Then you  don't understand what a majority is.

 

30 minutes ago, Peroni said:

most of the people I know who voted leave did so under due to propaganda...and they feel duped.

And you don't think people voted remain due to propaganda?

If they've been duped, who duped them, and how? And what stopped you being duped?

If their intelligence is such that they can be duped into voting leave, then they're just as likely to be duped into supporting remain. If someone is daft enough to get duped they don't have the mental capacity for the decision no matter which way they might lean.

Do you fell robbed by stupid people? Yep, me too. As I do after every single vote during my lifetime. That's the result of stupid people, not of any failing in democracy.

 

[eFestivals]

34 minutes ago, Peroni said:

Others had undertones of xenophobia feel no remorse.  They also now form "shut up and deal with it" camp.

And if remain had won it would have been so very different....?

The losers of any democratic vote have to suck it up. That's what losing does and how democracy in all its forms has to work.

[Mardy]

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

And if remain had won it would have been so very different....?

The losers of any democratic vote have to suck it up. That's what losing does and how democracy in all its forms has to work.

I think that's the bit I'm struggling with, being simultaneously told by people in the media/on social networks to simultaneously 'suck it up' at the same time as being told 'we need to heal the divisions'.

 

I think I've found the solution, mind. it's summer, the sky is blue, birds singing etc, ignore the media and turn off fbook and twitter. Just go for a walk along the beach instead

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, Mardy said:

I think that's the bit I'm struggling with, being simultaneously told by people in the media/on social networks to simultaneously 'suck it up' at the same time as being told 'we need to heal the divisions'.

If remain had won, exactly the same message would have been going towards the leavers.

One side had to be the losers and get nothing of their wish. That's how democracy works.

[Peroni]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

In the vote? Then you  don't understand what a majority is.

 

And you don't think people voted remain due to propaganda?

If they've been duped, who duped them, and how? And what stopped you being duped?

If their intelligence is such that they can be duped into voting leave, then they're just as likely to be duped into supporting remain. If someone is daft enough to get duped they don't have the mental capacity for the decision no matter which way they might lean.

Do you fell robbed by stupid people? Yep, me too. As I do after every single vote during my lifetime. That's the result of stupid people, not of any failing in democracy.

 

I do understand... maybe I shouldve have said a marginal majority.

 

Re duping... I think there was deliberate mid communication on the leave side re £350mil to the NHS and that leaving would close the borders... many of leavers voted on that basis.  I voted remain due to what I view as important and wanting to protect those rights.   

 

I was out voted. But like you said...thats the risk of having a democracy and above all I'm glad we've got that right.

Edited July 7, 2016 by Peroni

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Peroni said:

I do understand... maybe I shouldve have said a marginal majority.

Yep, it's marginal - but the rules were that the side with one vote more than the other would be the winner.

I'm no fan of constitutional changes via a simple majority, but I'm even less of a fan of trying to gerrymander the rules after the event because the side I supported lost.

I wouldn't tolerate it the other way around if the result had gone the other way, so I'm not going to be a hypocrite and be that same bad loser. Accepting democracy is about accepting when you lose as much as it's accepting when you win.

 

Quote

Re duping... I think there was deliberate mid communication on the leave side re £350mil to the NHS and that leaving would close the boarders... many of leavers voted on that basis.  I voted remain due to what I view as important and wanting to protect those rights.  

there was bullshit from all sides, but ultimately the responsibility is on the individual to use their own intelligence in deciding how to vote.

If the people are stupid, we get a stupid result. That's *exactly* how it's meant to work.

Edited July 7, 2016 by eFestivals

[Peroni]

21 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Accepting a democracy is about accepting when you lose as much as it's accepting when you win

Tolerate more like. Will always feel a bit gutted and under duress but I don't doubt that the leavers would feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot.

I honestly think though for the leavers if we'd voted remain would suffer less than the more tangible impact that Brexit will now have on those who wanted to remain... but then again I don't have a crystal ball....so what do I know.

 

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, Peroni said:

Tolerate more like. Will always feel a bit gutted and under duress but I don't doubt that the leavers would feel the same if the shoe was on the other foot.

I honestly think though for the leavers if we'd voted remain would suffer less than the more tangible impact that Brexit will now have on those who wanted to remain... but then again I don't have a crystal ball....so what do I know.

 

you're perhaps right .... but democracy isn't about making the undeniably-right choice, it's simply about having a choice.