Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
What promise? There were next to no details given on what form of exit would transpire. That was one of the major talking points of Brexit.
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
What promise? There were next to no details given on what form of exit would transpire. That was one of the major talking points of Brexit.
As the debates inevitably increase about an improvement of relations between the EU and the UK, I'll be watching out for those voices trying to sow division. It's pretty clear that Russian influence was all over the referendum. That same influence is everywhere (including on this platform).
All they want is more conflict and more chaos to weaken opposition to their world domination ambitions. In this global game of Traitors and Faithfuls I'm keeping my eye on those who want to divide. It could be along political lines but also taking advantage of racial tensions too.
Unfortunately here in the UK we've got the Reform party that's doing exactly that. They keep getting caught doing corrupt things and their Welsh leader is still in prison for taking money from the Russians. Somehow though, their popularity has not diminished as much as it should have. I guess the lure of a simple enemy (immigrants in this case) to blame is too attractive for a lot of people.
Regardless of all this I am optimistic for the long term. I think there's going to be a huge upheaval before we get there but it feels like pivotal things are about to happen that will most likely be triggered by the upcoming likelihood of a massive Republican defeat on Tuesday.
their Welsh leader is still in prison for taking money from the Russians. Somehow though, their popularity has not diminished as much as it should have
Reform supporters believe that the idea of Russia being a threat has been made up by the liberal media to distract everybody from immigration. I wish I was kidding.
The question was “in or out”. Britain (mostly England) chose “out”, because evidently they don’t teach history in the schools.
What the campaigners promised wasn’t linked to the reality of the EU treaties UK had signed when the EI formed, or the reality of needing to negotiate with the EU from a significantly weaker position.
Maybe another negotiating team would have gotten a sweeter deal, maybe not. In any case, it’s the deal UK voters asked for (by electing successively worse governments).
You could argue it's a deal that some Brits voted for, but definitely not all Brits of course.
Only 51.89% of those who voted in the Brexit referendum in 2016 voted for Brexit.
In 2019 there was a general election, and during that election campaign, Boris Johnson promised to "get Brexit done", but only 43.6% of voters in that election voted for Johnson's party, the Conservatives. So a majority of voters in that election voted against the Conservatives.
It would have been possible to leave the EU while staying in the single market and/or customs union, but the Conservatives chose a particularly hard version of Brexit, cutting more ties than necessary with the EU.
Who said this? “Brexit is a con, a trick, a swindle, a fraud, a deception that will hurt most of those people it promised to help, a dangerous fantasy which will make every problem it claims to solve worse ... Friends on this side of the House tell me to appease Labour voters in industrial towns - the former miners, the factory workers, those who feel they’ve been left behind. I say we must not patronise them with cowardice, let’s tell them the truth - you were old a lie. Immigrants have not taken your jobs, our schools and colleges failed to give you the skills, hospitals are not crumbling because of health tourists but decades of austerity that ground them down to the bone, you cannot afford a house because both parties failed to build, not because of Mohammed down the road who moved in, and wealth was hoarded in London when it should have been shared across the country. Blame us, blame Westminster, do not blame Brussels for our own country’s mistakes and do not be angry at us for telling you the truth, be angry at the chancers who sold you a lie ... Just as I speak plainly to the government this time around, let me also speak to the opposition about some home truths. There is no leftwing justification for Brexit. Ditching workers’ rights, social protections and ending environmental cooperation is not progressive. This is a project about neo-liberal deregulation, it’s Thatcherism on steroids pushed by her modern-day disciples. Leaving the EU will not free us from the injustices of global capitalism, it will make us subordinate to Trump’s US. Socialism confined to one country will not work, whether you like it or not, the world we live in is global, we can only fix the rigged system if we cooperate across border lines. The party of Keir Hardie has always been international. We must not let down our young supporters by failing to stand with them at the biggest issue of our lives."
Google tells me that David Lammy said that in early 2019. Anyway, I think he was right about this bit:
Leaving the EU will not free us from the injustices of global capitalism, it will make us subordinate to Trump’s US.
I totally agree. The new prime minister has pledged to end decades of neoliberalism. It is both rare and refreshing to hear any UK PM say any thing like this. I am fearful about the extreme ignorance, simple mindedness, and gullibility of some of the electorate. They are completely blind to the effects of neoliberalism, which is the main guiding force behind the bumptious and odious Farage, and fascist/racist Reform party (and many Americans) who believe that competition is the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that “the market” delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning. Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulation should be minimised; public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve. We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages – such as education, inheritance, and class – that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances. As written in today's Observer, "People don't want much. They want someone to love, somewhere to live, somewhere to work and something to hope for.” And Tim Forcer added "That would be a welcome change from much of UK politics, where many promote views that assume we mostly want someone to hate, someone to envy and someone to despise.”

Please use paragraphs. Your posts are hard to read, especially on small screens.
What is it about Americans and paragraphs? Is it because of the responses to questions from ChatGBT or Claude?
I agree with you. Successful people often don't want to recognise how much good luck they've had. Childhood privileges that others don't have, job opportunities that others haven't had, etc.
If we applied their thinking to every situation, we'd say something like "if a child in Gaza dies from an Israeli bomb, it's the child's fault, because they didn't try hard enough to avoid the bomb".
Even if a right-winger admits that children can have different circumstances, they might have an attitude of "once you hit 18, we're all equal, and your effort is what determines your success in adult life". But that's not true. Some adults have a lot of privilege behind them, while others don't. Some adults have health conditions which can be very difficult to manage in some cases, taking up time and money and effort, while other adults don't have to worry as much about their health.
all 20 comments