Jump to content
kalifire

Brexit at Glasto?

Recommended Posts

Attlee- "Socialism is not the invention of an individual. It is essentially the outcome of economic and social conditions. The evils that Capitalism brings differ in intensity in different countries, but, the root cause of the trouble once discerned, the remedy is seen to be the same by thoughtful men and women. The cause is the private ownership of the means of life; the remedy is public ownership."

Do you think Blair would have said something like that? Attlee was a real socialist, he believed in social ownership of the commanding heights of the economy. To dismiss his governments achievements as something the liberals did after WW1 is wrong imo. The house building was far more extensive, the nationalisation of the health service was far more than just bringing elements together, he increased the school age, he nationalised industries etc  

Attlee came in at a time when Britain was bankrupt and invested in industries snd infrastructure, nationalised, keynesian economics. If Blair had come in after the financial crisis is solution would have been similar to the tories, austerity. They're not the same ideologies at all 

Meritocracy is a fine principle, but you can't have equality of opportunity with huge disparities of equality of outcome. In fact meritocracy was original a joke, and yet Blair made it his mantra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, bombfrog said:



What would be awesome would be if 2 million people turned up to the march on Tuesday.

March is tomorrow (Saturday) - should that make it easier to get there....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Titters said:

March is tomorrow (Saturday) - should that make it easier to get there....

Yeah I was wondering why everyone was saying Tuesday!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Titters said:

March is tomorrow (Saturday) - should that make it easier to get there....

Farage has a March next Friday.

I wonder how the numbers will compare. :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the socialism debate, having spent some time in Russia and China, here's my take.

Socialism is lovely, but it's only lovely if everyone, every single person is a socialist. If that condition is not met, then it slowly but surely turns into a dictatorship where the ideology is forced on the people. Then it fails. The soviets call the era "the failed socialist experiment". They have had 2 disasters in the C20 - the failed experiment and perestroika (the process, not the fall of socialism). China, was communist, it isn't now - it's a control state, where control is the only objective, nothing ideological, the leadership simply wants control - again, because not everyone was a communist. Let's not argue on shades between ideologies and terminology - the fact remains that there is no successful, long term socialist state. That's not an argument for capitalism - because freedom being slavery, the requirement for growth just effs thing up in the long term - we can bubble burst, but it can't last.

There's an appetite in the country for change - that's so, so clear. But old fashioned socialism isn't the answer. Think up something else - because the oscillation between old ideas is tired and not fit for purpose. And if that void isn't filled the idiots will fill it - e.g. right wing knob heads.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr.Tease said:

My problem with this online petition is, if remain had won in the original referendum and 2 years later Brexiteers did an online petition demanding we leave, would any remainder honestly insist the online petition over ruled the referendum? Would you honestly buy that? Would the online petition carry any weight with you? I'm a remainder myself, but Im confused now as to whether the strategy is now a second referendum or just revoking article 50 outright? With today's EU decision, the urgency/rationale to revoke is now gone. 

Still think the bes strategy is to negotiate a Norway style deal then put that to a confirmatory vote. 

If somehow remaining had created the utter shit show we were in now and leaving would fix it then yes I would be asking for another referendum.

It’s not a matter of perspective. What we have now is shit. No one is arguing it is going well. Not a single person on any side is impressed by how it is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hfuhruhurr said:

On the socialism debate, having spent some time in Russia and China, here's my take.

Socialism is lovely, but it's only lovely if everyone, every single person is a socialist. If that condition is not met, then it slowly but surely turns into a dictatorship where the ideology is forced on the people. Then it fails. The soviets call the era "the failed socialist experiment". They have had 2 disasters in the C20 - the failed experiment and perestroika (the process, not the fall of socialism). China, was communist, it isn't now - it's a control state, where control is the only objective, nothing ideological, the leadership simply wants control - again, because not everyone was a communist. Let's not argue on shades between ideologies and terminology - the fact remains that there is no successful, long term socialist state. That's not an argument for capitalism - because freedom being slavery, the requirement for growth just effs thing up in the long term - we can bubble burst, but it can't last.

There's an appetite in the country for change - that's so, so clear. But old fashioned socialism isn't the answer. Think up something else - because the oscillation between old ideas is tired and not fit for purpose. And if that void isn't filled the idiots will fill it - e.g. right wing knob heads.

Nice post :) 

You've summed up why ideologically I'm a democrat before I'm a marxist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

If somehow remaining had created the utter shit show we were in now and leaving would fix it then yes I would be asking for another referendum.

It’s not a matter of perspective. What we have now is shit. No one is arguing it is going well. Not a single person on any side is impressed by how it is going.

Brexit's on the run =- because it always was the most utterly stupid idea in practice.

Let's keep it on the run and chase it out of town. Still a long way to go but we're getting there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Farage has a March next Friday.

I wonder how the numbers will compare. :P 

Things with more people attending that the Gammonball Run. 

1. Whiskey Joe and The Barrel's celtic-folk set in Toad Hall at 10.30pm on the Friday night. 

2. Cairngorm FC's season ticket holders Christmas morning quiz. 

3. Regulation in Insurance, an illustrated 4 hour lecture, this Sunday morning, Southwold Community Centre (bring own flask). 

4. The Nicky Campbell fan club annual hike over the bridges of Birmingham. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, hfuhruhurr said:

On the socialism debate, having spent some time in Russia and China, here's my take.

Socialism is lovely, but it's only lovely if everyone, every single person is a socialist. If that condition is not met, then it slowly but surely turns into a dictatorship where the ideology is forced on the people. Then it fails. The soviets call the era "the failed socialist experiment". They have had 2 disasters in the C20 - the failed experiment and perestroika (the process, not the fall of socialism). China, was communist, it isn't now - it's a control state, where control is the only objective, nothing ideological, the leadership simply wants control - again, because not everyone was a communist. Let's not argue on shades between ideologies and terminology - the fact remains that there is no successful, long term socialist state. That's not an argument for capitalism - because freedom being slavery, the requirement for growth just effs thing up in the long term - we can bubble burst, but it can't last.

There's an appetite in the country for change - that's so, so clear. But old fashioned socialism isn't the answer. Think up something else - because the oscillation between old ideas is tired and not fit for purpose. And if that void isn't filled the idiots will fill it - e.g. right wing knob heads.

Bang on. If you want to know why socialism will always need state control just watch people in heavy traffic or even worse, the Black Friday footage that news outlets love so much. Without instruction or control 99% of human nature reverts to "me first" :(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

not true. A single transferable vote could be used to offer up more than two options.

I'm quite comfortable with all options being offered, as it avoids claims of a stitch up.

I get that it's possible and the preferable option. I just struggle to see how it can be set you in a clear way that the Electoral Commission will sign it off. I think the moment you have to start explaining how a transferable vote works, you're already into a situation that is not clear and unambiguous for dottery 93yo Enid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mcshed said:

How do you feel if question 1 is do you accept May's deal? Then if no question 2 is no deal vs revoke and remain?

That isn't rerunning the first referendum.

If remain is anywhere on the paper, you're rerunning the second ref.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Avalon_Fields said:

Surely it is a bias against leave, having two leave options would split the leave vote and much more likely enable the remain option to win? Of course the reverse is true if there were two remain options.

You're quite right. Bias against leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I get that it's possible and the preferable option. I just struggle to see how it can be set you in a clear way that the Electoral Commission will sign it off. I think the moment you have to start explaining how a transferable vote works, you're already into a situation that is not clear and unambiguous for dottery 93yo Enid. 

lots of the UK already uses transferable votes. Because of that I can't see how the EC can have an issue with its use.

I reckon a vote with no-deal as an option won't be signed off because Parliament won't allow a no-deal (because it's fucking stupid), but I'd still prefer that it was an option to vote on. It would help stop a stitch-up myth from developing in the future.

Edited by eFestivals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Keithy said:

Re: Peoples Vote.

As someone who voted remain and would love a way out of this mess, I still don't quite get how the people's vote will work?

What are the options? It can only be 2 options; if you have remain, May's deal and No Deal then you are splitting the leave vote and the electoral commission will not allow that.

So if it's No Deal or Remain then any leavers will understandably be up in arms as you've chosen the extreme leave option which is patently unfair.

Similarly May's Deal or Remain will still have the leaves up in arms as you've chosen a universally accepted bad deal against remain.

So I don't get what the peoples vote would actually be short of rerunning the referendum with a yes/no option....and I'm not sure that actually solves anything.

I think that's why revoke A50 has taken off in the last 24 hours (although predominantly from remain areas) as the aim of the Peoples Vote is unclear other than having a vote on 'something'.

 

And therein lies the problem with the referendum in the first place. People voted for many types of leave. People had different visions n their head of what it would look like. It was presented as a binary referendum but leave has multiple options and if you look at the different versions of leave that people want then you see that actually remain as we are is the majority view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Keithy said:

If remain is anywhere on the paper, you're rerunning the second ref.

Nope.

Actual plan vs Remain is not the same as Ambiguous Leave vs Remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Keithy said:

If remain is anywhere on the paper, you're rerunning the second ref.

nope.

Voting for/against something (first ref) is an entirely different thing to voting in favour of a particular path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I get that it's possible and the preferable option. I just struggle to see how it can be set you in a clear way that the Electoral Commission will sign it off. I think the moment you have to start explaining how a transferable vote works, you're already into a situation that is not clear and unambiguous for dottery 93yo Enid. 

If transferable votes are impossible to explain to the public how did we manage to have a referendum on using them some years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Titters said:

 

4. The Nicky Campbell fan club annual hike over the bridges of Birmingham. 

 

To be be fair it is a cracking hike and Nicky sometimes makes a suprise appearance with cucumber sandwiches. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Keithy said:

You're quite right. Bias against leave.

if it's a single transferable vote the leave vote doesn't get split, and there'd be no bias against leave. :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would all be a lot easier if the Peoples Vote actually explained what their question would be. To me it sounds like make a decision to have a Peoples Vote and then we'll work out the detail of what that actually means at a later date. Which is the exact thinking that got us into this post ref mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Nope.

Actual plan vs Remain is not the same as Ambiguous Leave vs Remain.

 

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

nope.

Voting for/against something (first ref) is an entirely different thing to voting in favour of a particular path.

I suppose I'm looking at it (playing devils advocate) from a leavers view. Why is remain on the paper? We've decided to leave, we had a referendum.

I think it'd be a really hard sell to have remain on the paper and I'm not sure there's a majority of MPs to vote for it. Plus it's fuel the line that remainers have not accepted the first referendum. 

There's also the issue to address of what happens if remain wins? I'd bet the house that leavers would come out fighting saying that the Brexit negotiations were such a calamity that it didn't represent the true option of 'leave'. We'd have years of a Brexit party standing in elections with a 3rd referendum hanging over us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

If transferable votes are impossible to explain to the public how did we manage to have a referendum on using them some years ago?

When was that? I presume you mean AV in the 2010 election? I don't think that can be held up as a qualified success but that's just my opinion. I've not said its impossible to explain, I've said it has to be unambiguous, clear and to the point and easy to understand. That's the default guidelines from the electoral commission. We may not like it but people who struggle to open a packet of crisps from the right end will need to understand.

FWIW, if it was up to me remain would be on the paper and there would be transferable votes. I just don't see how we get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Keithy said:

I suppose I'm looking at it (playing devils advocate) from a leavers view. Why is remain on the paper? We've decided to leave, we had a referendum.

remain would be on the paper because the way it's played out it's clear that the last vote was flawed. No one knows what 'leave' actually meant. It was undefined, there was no plan.

Don't forgot, it's not remainers in Parliament who are ultimately blocking brexit but leavers - because the biggest advocates of leave (Mogg, IDS, Redwood, Cash, etc) won't vote to leave. Because it's THEM who are disputing what leave means, not remainers. And they still don't actually have a plan for how to leave, they just want to throw us off the cliff instead.

(and even if they got their perfect brexit they'd blame everyone else when it went wrong. There's no appeasing the stupid).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Keithy said:

I've not said its impossible to explain, I've said it has to be unambiguous, clear and to the point and easy to understand. That's the default guidelines from the electoral commission. We may not like it but people who struggle to open a packet of crisps from the right end will need to understand.

You're very definitely over-playing the difficulty.

STV is already in use in the UK, in Scotland, NI, & Wales. 

It has been successfully explained to those parts of the UK already. It can quite easily be explained to England to those who don't already understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...