Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Maybe we should go back in time to the 19th century when everyone was equal, there were no poor people and wealth was equally distributed amongst the population.
But by Jove, Britain ruled the waves!

At least no-one had a smart phone or a TV and life expectancy was much shorter.
 
How many non-white people d’you reckon had the righteous ideological privilege of abstaining from the Trump or Brexit votes? Considering the largest demographic bulk that voted Dem in 2016 was black women, and the biggest Remain epicentres were Urban multicultural cities, I’d say it’s a pretty fair bet that those most at risk from the potential Right Wing tyranny we’re edging toward, voted near unanimously for their own preservation, over some vanilla hipster ideal of a future Socialist paradise...

Conversely, I’d be pretty confident the majority of those who abstained from either, or voted for the likes of Jill Stein, or Harambe, or just, like, “didn’t want to engage in the whole Neoliberal political circus!” etc, were near universally woke white dickheads who were more than happy to lose a battle they were never going to suffer from, throwing a slew of more vulnerable minorities under the bus in the processs, in the name of proving some smug nebulous 6th form point about politics ..(They’re all the same man!! Except when actual fascists get to chose life long law makers, but whatever!).. and then arguing how this is actually a really good platform for a new future leftist utopia... if only we can shame everyone right of us into compliance...and also actually win back power somehow. But let’s not worry about that too much for another 20 years or so. Because (and here comes the rewind!) we’re largely white, and don’t urgently need to worry about it..
Is there any data for this ? Who are these people ? Have you got a annoying family member who's just got into lefty politics ? I honestly don't know who your are talking about here. Someone with trotsky as their twitter profile calling a journalist a twat for criticising Corbyn doesn't equally a large voting base, there just isn't millions and millions of leninists you seem to think there are.

If you actually listen to people on the Left( politicians, activists & writers) then there's isn't any shamming, talk of incoming utopia or waiting for the working class to rise up etc but actual constructive talk of how we've got here into this political mess, what are the best efforts to engage with people and how to get and keep together a workable coalition of voters to get out of this mess.

The thing that seems to be alienating people in this thread anyway is Corbyn position on Brexit but for the millionth time it's mostly out of political need. Does anyone actual think that if Corbyn being a bit more pro Remain would get him into power he wouldn't do it. But I will say if liberals find it alienating or off putting that Corbyn and the Left isn't more pro EU or that Corbyn doesn't turn up at Pro EU rallies, well tough shit. Yeah it might be nice that your trip to France is hassle free but that doesn't take away the fact the EU is a undemocratic and deeply massively racist institution(Shock horror but these 'liberal' europeans are no better than Trump when it comes to racism)

. But it’s not working, is it? I mean, it’s really really not!

Of course it's not working out but so far the British Left(And little bits in the USA)is the best West can offer. Neoliberalism in terms of the political space is completely fecking done and over, which is actually really really fecking scary(To quote one of those vanilla hipsters - “The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born”). But there isn't another answer, there isn't a simply policy or change of party leadership that suddenly gives this new left easy election wins. So people have got a choice to either pick between ethic nationalism or a new but very weak radical left social democracy. That of course doesn't mean be uncritical but it does mean realising that politics has actually change.

And yeah I'm very supportive of the policy of calling Graham linehan a cnut although that has more to do with my viewing experience of his 'comedy' show Count Arthur.
 
Last edited:
Don’t blame it on the sunshine, don’t blame it on the moonlight - blame it on the Blairites.
Oh come on, it's fecking hilarious that they spent months saying you shouldn't listen to Corbyn on anything, gave Alan Johnson the job of heading the remain campaign and are now crying that nobody listened to Corbyn at the referendum.

Almost as funny as insisting Brexit needs to be stopped because it might lead to austerity, whilst marching alongside the likes of Chris Leslie who backed austerity until about 3 weeks ago and Vince Cable/Anna Soubry who have revelled in it for years. Only missing Nick Clegg crowdsurfing.
 
I’m largely of the opinion that history will always swing back and forth politically. A decade of Obama was always likely to yield a chance of a GOP Pres, just as a decade of Labour was likely to favour a dynamic new (but still obviously awful) Tory like Cameron... The hope was usually that the status quo would be slowly but surely pushed toward progress. Which it almost always has been. Save for, you know, the whole Dark Ages thing.

The difference now, is that while Cameron had to skew his Party left to react to the new status quo of the Labour 90s (such as legalising Gay marriage, etc) the modern Right have just rejected the entire notion of that, in favour of the political equivalent of shit posting, in an attempt to simply write off any Democratic/Labour position as almost apocalyptically evil. Rather than concede even the slimmest chance of compromise.

And in retaliation to this...rather than fight fire with fire, the left have decided that our public face should be wet and vague and inoffensive (e.g. Corbyn’s stance on Brexit) whilst our private face vociferously and exclusively goes after anyone who dissents within our own ranks!... It’s fecking mad! But, cool, whatever. It’s apparenly the new normal. It’s better to let the Right destroy democracy in real time, than try and win in the “wrong” way. Mmm’Kay?

Let’s all march toward destruction, safe in the knowledge we had ideologically good intentions. At least we’re white, ey lads? They’ll come for us last.

I don't think history swings back that quickly. From what I understand in the UK, there was a commitment to proper safety nets from 1945-1978, while the fight was about union strength (the left lost). Then from 1978 there's been a period where you look more at cost-effectiveness or rationalising or privatising the same resources, and the fight shifted to social attitudes (liberals mostly won). A series of catastrophes beginning on 9/11 or 2008 (depending on how you want to count it) have changed the economic situation and eventually changed immigration (which will finish liberal social attitudes soon) but haven't (yet) produced new politics.

As I've explained, it's not winning the wrong way that is a problem. If Nick was around, he could give you details of financial deregulation, NHS privatisation under Blair, and every single person knows Iraq. In the US, bank deregulation, drastic welfare cuts, and increase in sentencing were legacies of Clinton - that is when "we won." You can draw a direct line from those decisions to where we are today. "Our win" created the conditions for this defeat.
More recently, the combined work of Socialist Hollande and Third-Way Macron has broken the back of French labour, and it is likely that the next fight will be between right and far-right. In Canada, woke bae Trudeau is likely to be beaten from the right.

As long as we operate under neoliberalism, the wins for nominally left-wing parties aren't wins - they're ways to stop the bleeding temporarily even as the monster on the other side grows.

Your next post, about the privilege of sitting out:
FT_17.05.10_Voter-turnout.png

So that entire rant about Harambe and Stein and privilege - how d'you square that view of history with basic facts about voters?

What about looking at the policies of the Obama presidency, in handling the financial crisis: https://jacobinmag.com/2017/12/obama-foreclosure-crisis-wealth-inequality
Screen-Shot-2017-12-07-at-10.25.17-AM.png

Win!
 
Last edited:
If Momentum are starting to swing behind the idea of a 2nd referendum will the next battle ground for the Labour party be: 'are Momentum fawning enough towards Corbyn or should those Blairite cnuts be expelled?'?
 
Can we all agree that Nigel Farage is a cnut?

Yeah. But I think any politician who at best says nothing and at worse nods and agrees when he's on his "it's the immigrants!" tirades isn't much better either. Whatever terminology you want to use; liberal, left - it's depressing just how missing in action they've been in this massive lurch to the right we've seen in politics in this country in the last couple of years. Labour have effectively left the stage when the country needed them most, leaving behind angry extreme sycophants who just shout at people who dare to notice the party isn't there any more.
 
If you want to blame anybody for this blame kids. We all know that most millennials would have voted remain but a large proportion of them just couldn't be bothered to get out and vote. This is the main reason that the referendum wen't the way it did.
Any stats to back that up?
 
Could be going off piste here but it pisses me off when politics has to be dumbed-down for young people. It's not that difficult to get a vague sense of the issues of the day, you don't really need Rick Edwards and June Sarpong hosting a patronising BBC Three discussion programme that might as well be called: "Young people are think as shit, so we're breaking down this election for you as if you were 11 and watching John Craven's Newsround"
 
The hope was usually that the status quo would be slowly but surely pushed toward progress. Which it almost always has been. Save for, you know, the whole Dark Ages thing.

The "Dark Ages" is really a misnomer, and it's a bit of a myth that it was some kind of technological and cultural historical gap. Which I think might make your argument stronger!
 
Never got the 'it's what was voted for democratically and therefore must be carried out' argument, else presumably Labour would be voting for the implementation of every Tory manifesto pledge for the same reason.
 
Could be going off piste here but it pisses me off when politics has to be dumbed-down for young people. It's not that difficult to get a vague sense of the issues of the day, you don't really need Rick Edwards and June Sarpong hosting a patronising BBC Three discussion programme that might as well be called: "Young people are think as shit, so we're breaking down this election for you as if you were 11 and watching John Craven's Newsround"

It’s not dumbed down for young people, it’s dumbs down for dumb people.

You think Piers Morgan leading a political debate is aimed at intellectual adults? It’s the same thing, there are plenty of politically engaged, bright youth out there and they get their political fix from the same sources as “adults”, they also then apply critical thinking to it which is half the issue with the less bright lot.

They’re happy enough to parrot what Farage and Robinson say because they trust them. It’s not that they trust them as a single source of truth either, it’s that they trust they share an agenda and they’re smart enough forward that agenda as long as it gets support.
 
Any stats to back that up?

“The statistics from the polls that were done showed, [...] 73% of people under 24 voted to remain.”

David Dimbleby, 22 March 2017
 
A test sample of 2002 people is quite small but even that proves my point. 24% less young people voted than people over the age of 65 and 10% less than 55-64.
Voting turnout was almost identical from ages 18-54, so unless we're going to call a 50 year old bloke about to have a quadruple bypass a kid, it's not on the kids.
 
Voting turnout was almost identical from ages 18-54, so unless we're going to call a 50 year old bloke about to have a quadruple bypass a kid, it's not on the kids.
And if that 50 year old bloke was 3:1 times more likely to vote remain then I would blame him for not turning up as well.

Any way it was a stupid statement made after coming back from the pub on a Friday night so I don't know why I'm even trying to defend it.
 
Do you have the stats to prove this?

If you find the original tweet Sky Data posted their methodology in reply to it. It was a figure arrived at by polling people before the vote, taking their stated intention to vote out of 10 and then applying a filter to the data to make it fit voter demographics in the 2015 election.

It was complete guesswork.
 
Corbyn just said on TV he can negotiate a better deal because he has developed good relationships with socialist parties across Europe.

Is it just me or does that only work if socialist governments are in power?
 
Corbyn just said on TV he can negotiate a better deal because he has developed good relationships with socialist parties across Europe.

Is it just me or does that only work if socialist governments are in power?

Well that seals it, the EU are going to change the rules just for him. What a spineless moron.
 
Corbyn just said on TV he can negotiate a better deal because he has developed good relationships with socialist parties across Europe.

Is it just me or does that only work if socialist governments are in power?

Corbyn is more lovable, he looks like a friendly dad whereas May looks doesn't look or act human. Anyway wouldn't negotiating a better deal actually been easier if we had already solved the issues of freedom of movement and the Irish border? We're leaving it so late that there is far less time to negotiate the best deal when two huge issues still remain unsolved.
 
Corbyn is more lovable, he looks like a friendly dad whereas May looks doesn't look or act human. Anyway wouldn't negotiating a better deal actually been easier if we had already solved the issues of freedom of movement and the Irish border? We're leaving it so late that there is far less time to negotiate the best deal when two huge issues still remain unsolved.

What does Corbyn's looks or personality have to do with the deal.

Freedom of movement is not negotiable and the Irish Border is either hard (cliff) or not (CU/SM)

I'm still bemused at what both Brexieters and Remainers expect they can negotiate.
 
What does Corbyn's looks or personality have to do with the deal.

Freedom of movement is not negotiable and the Irish Border is either hard (cliff) or not (CU/SM)

I'm still bemused at what both Brexieters and Remainers expect they can negotiate.

The first part wasn't mean to be taken seriously. After that I was trying to say that lack of progress in talks only makes negotiating harder, especially when the UK is refusing to concede that certain things are non-negotiable. The UK cannot leave the SM and CU and have a soft border with Ireland. How can the UK and the EU negotiate further on thousands of issues when it is unclear which Brexit the UK will choose?
 
The first part wasn't mean to be taken seriously. After that I was trying to say that lack of progress in talks only makes negotiating harder, especially when the UK is refusing to concede that certain things are non-negotiable. The UK cannot leave the SM and CU and have a soft border with Ireland. How can the UK and the EU negotiate further on thousands of issues when it is unclear which Brexit the UK will choose?

Yes this has been the problem all along, kicking the can down the road.
But these first so-called negotiations are really the EU asking which (hard or soft) does the UK want which they still haven't answered. Other than citizens rights and the UK being told what the consequences of their actions are there's not much else to negotiate.

The future relationship afterwards will be the negotiations but that won't be until after the UK has left.
 
What does Corbyn's looks or personality have to do with the deal.

Freedom of movement is not negotiable and the Irish Border is either hard (cliff) or not (CU/SM)

I'm still bemused at what both Brexieters and Remainers expect they can negotiate.

I think Brexitieres somehow think that by having no deal and going to WTO rules suddenly countires will be falling over themselves to do amazing deals with us and the EU will be forced to grovel back to us and beg us to trade more with them giving up access to services and especially financial markets with no free movement in exchange

I think remainiers think that by having no deal it will be so bad for the economy we will have to have another referendum and that somehow europe will just let us back in with a rebate and no requirement to joing the euro

My gut feel - we will fudge a deal somehow for a transition period that will basically be not far from wto terms but giving people / businesses time to put paperwork in place... but ultimatley we will still manage to cnut it up (what was it may said no PM would agree the backstop position that well as its the back stop position has kinda been agreed and as we know untill its all agreed noting is agreed - so long story short it will fall apart)

say 10 years down the line when the economy is limping along and the pound is approx equal in value to the euro I fully expect another referendum this time to join the EU (but with no opt outs and we loose the pound) - so yeah a decade from here everybody will be seeing (cue Mark Kermode impression) "Danny Dyer" as some wise pundit and will basically agree... cameron = twat
 
I think Brexitieres somehow think that by having no deal and going to WTO rules suddenly countires will be falling over themselves to do amazing deals with us and the EU will be forced to grovel back to us and beg us to trade more with them giving up access to services and especially financial markets with no free movement in exchange

I think remainiers think that by having no deal it will be so bad for the economy we will have to have another referendum and that somehow europe will just let us back in with a rebate and no requirement to joing the euro

My gut feel - we will fudge a deal somehow for a transition period that will basically be not far from wto terms but giving people / businesses time to put paperwork in place... but ultimatley we will still manage to cnut it up (what was it may said no PM would agree the backstop position that well as its the back stop position has kinda been agreed and as we know untill its all agreed noting is agreed - so long story short it will fall apart)

say 10 years down the line when the economy is limping along and the pound is approx equal in value to the euro I fully expect another referendum this time to join the EU (but with no opt outs and we loose the pound) - so yeah a decade from here everybody will be seeing (cue Mark Kermode impression) "Danny Dyer" as some wise pundit and will basically agree... cameron = twat

I'd agree with most of that but to get the transition period a definitive decision has to be taken now/shortly and that decision will define the outcome of soft or hard but the hard will start in March.
 
I think Brexitieres somehow think that by having no deal and going to WTO rules suddenly countires will be falling over themselves to do amazing deals with us and the EU will be forced to grovel back to us and beg us to trade more with them giving up access to services and especially financial markets with no free movement in exchange

I think remainiers think that by having no deal it will be so bad for the economy we will have to have another referendum and that somehow europe will just let us back in with a rebate and no requirement to joing the euro

My gut feel - we will fudge a deal somehow for a transition period that will basically be not far from wto terms but giving people / businesses time to put paperwork in place... but ultimatley we will still manage to cnut it up (what was it may said no PM would agree the backstop position that well as its the back stop position has kinda been agreed and as we know untill its all agreed noting is agreed - so long story short it will fall apart)

say 10 years down the line when the economy is limping along and the pound is approx equal in value to the euro I fully expect another referendum this time to join the EU (but with no opt outs and we loose the pound) - so yeah a decade from here everybody will be seeing (cue Mark Kermode impression) "Danny Dyer" as some wise pundit and will basically agree... cameron = twat

We won’t vote to go back in in 10 years time if we are limping along as you say. I won’t be doing anyway.
 
We won’t vote to go back in in 10 years time if we are limping along as you say. I won’t be doing anyway.
Demographics would seem to very stringly suggest otherwise - though of course it depends how economies etc perform in that period but personally I think certainly in the next 20 years we will be back (well if europe will let is which I think isnt certain depending how much we throw our toys out of the pram over the next few months / years)
 
_90060774_mps_declare_eu_stance_22_06_16_624gr.png


Referring back to the 2015 election

When people voted they voted for their MP.
Unlike in France for example where you vote directly for the President and every vote counts , in the UK you are actually only voting for your MP.
So if one voted Tory you had a 57% chance of having a pro-Remain MP and if you voted Labour you had a 95% chance you would have a pro-Remain MP.

However, leaders of both parties are vigorously Anti-Remain and directing their MPs who you voted for to go against their beliefs .

In effect there are two dictators and there is not even a sniff of democracy anywhere in British politics.