Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I too think Parliament would be more likely to vote for Article 50 than against, however there is a possible third result which would be to vote for Article 50 to be invoked only after some clarity has been gained into the Leave plan.

IMO the Minister for Brexit should make a speech laying out the government's core aims and a programme for achieving them in rather more detail than "Brexit is Brexit", commends it to the house and calls for a division to approve a date for invoking Article 50.

Without this, the house might simply tell the government to go away and come back when they have done their homework.

I mean, Immigration control was a central plank of the Leave campaign. The PM thinks the current arrangements are not acceptable but she doesn't have any idea of how they should be changed. An issue like that really needs to be clarified. As a for instance, if the post-Brexit scenario allows EU citizens to move to the UK on payment of a £5,000 fee with no further questions asked -- would that be acceptable to a majority of the electorate?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I too think Parliament would be more likely to vote for Article 50 than against, however there is a possible third result which would be to vote for Article 50 to be invoked only after some clarity has been gained into the Leave plan.

IMO the Minister for Brexit should make a speech laying out the government's core aims and a programme for achieving them in rather more detail than "Brexit is Brexit", commends it to the house and calls for a division to approve a date for invoking Article 50.

Without this, the house might simply tell the government to go away and come back when they have done their homework.

I mean, Immigration control was a central plank of the Leave campaign. The PM thinks the current arrangements are not acceptable but she doesn't have any idea of how they should be changed. An issue like that really needs to be clarified. As a for instance, if the post-Brexit scenario allows EU citizens to move to the UK on payment of a £5,000 fee with no further questions asked -- would that be acceptable to a majority of the electorate?

A lot of people are forgetting that there are two sides to the Article 50 negotiations.

British Parliamentary sovereignty is not worth a bucket of horsegak to the French and German negotiators. Parliament's writ stops at Dover.

If Parliament tells May they want X Y Z, and the EU laughs at us and tells us to go away and come back with a different offer, then yeah, we've got Parliamentary sovereignty.

On reflection, If Parliament sets out red lines or tells May to try her best to get X Y Z, then fair enough, but any deal will ultimately hinge on EU approval, and Parliament should not over look that fact....

They should let Realpolitik guide them...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 r_squared wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
.... And I was shouted down by r_squared and AlmightyWalrus over it and yet, here's two prime examples....

Anyway, I'm not going to waste anymore time on you two with your sweeping generalisations, so you can also go on my ignore list.

Shouted down? I've not met you I'm sure. I'm also sure I didn't use CAPS!

I'm sure you may have already added me to your ignore list, along with your brother, but this thread is going to be a very sparse, and weirdly disjointed echo chamber if you keep blocking people whos opinions and arguments you dont like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...The Lords would be signing their own death warrant if they blocked Article 50.

As somebody who wants an end to the Lords, I dare them to block article 50, in fact, I double dare them

because nothing would be more sure to end the Lords than that.

Millions of British people would be asking why this unelected chamber is blocking Brexit. And I suspect a lot of Remain voters wouldn't be happy either.

Say what you want about parliament and parliamentary sovereignty - at least MPs answer to the British public.

If the Lords are smart, they'll abstain......

My understanding is that if they did try and block a Brexit Bill agreed by parliament, the Govt could use the parliament act to overrule their decision? I'm not 100% on that, but it is my understanding.

Yeah, the Commons would use the Parliament act, but they might also use it as an opportunity to reform the Lords as well. Or even scrap the gits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Nah, Parliament is trapped. They have to invoke Article 50. They can't jump up and down about Article 50 needing Parliamentary sovereignty, only to then block it. And if they did, they would be crushed at a GE.

As I and you yourself have said, the Tories have a lust for power and regroup very quickly. Running a GE on a Article 50 ticket would smash the Labour party and give the Tories a thumping majority.

The Tories will not turn that prize down....

There is no garentee that a GE would be won by a party based on a leave platform at all. If you look at the breakdown of leave votes many of them were from staunchly labour areas. I could see many pro EU torys voting for Lib Dem's, and many anti EU labour supporters being unable to stomach the thought of voting Tory. They will probably go to UKIP, but the question would be if there was enough. UKIP would probably also gain from people who might support torys now, but would see them (rightly or wrongly) as stalling the process, especially as I can see UKIP pushing that and damaging the conservatives. There is a possibility that we could end up with a lib/lab/snp pro EU mix, or a Tory/UKIP govenement.

I can bet either way we are going to end up with a general election before anything happens with leaving the EU. The government will put forward legislation, then it will be bounced around with parliament tableing amendments, the lords bouncing it back again and again with amendments. Some people will paint this as various groups blocking it, but it is part of our democratic system and how we get laws right.

All this will probably result in a general election which will effectively be a second referendum, but people will be voting on something more concrete. The big question is, will the torys go for a line of "we must leave, will of the people, don't vote lib/lab" or "we are the ones to get you through this safely, don't vote UKIP they will just rush through". I'm sure hey will do both to some extent, but which will be the main argument?

Ketara succinctly summed up the dilemma Corbyn would find himself in at a GE.

Divided parties Like Labour suffer badly at General Elections. History shows us that.

Skullhammer wrote:
And were back to generalizing all who voted leave as uneducated xenophbic racists. Which of course was the remain camps main stick to beat those who wanted to leave with.

I'm not sure that was really the intent. There is however a lot of bigotry against migrants and the anti-immigration message almost certainly 'won' (though noting previous points that it is probably within the statistical error) the vote for the Leave side. We are all bigoted to some extent (it's a natural human trait) but anecdotally it does appear that the better educated are more able to constrain that basic evolved bigotry of 'fear the invader'. Even from my own family/friends those with more 'harsher' bigoted views voted Leave, but none voted Remain, whilst most with the low bigoted views voted Remain (and a few voted Leave). It is also apparent that you could easily divide the group by education standards, where the less well educated were always in the anti-migration camp and the better educated didn't see it as an issue (and I'd probably put this down to lack of ability to challenge the headlines).

This generally is in agreement with various polls on the subject (with a caution on the errors). I hence think that the vote was 'won' on the anti-immigration message that the likes of Farage pedalled (and the likes of the distasteful poster). Even if we assume that only 50% of the UKIP supporters are bigoted to the point they think immigration was the key issue that was still enough to affect the result.

The vote also appears to have hardened the anti-immigration views and as justifying a more bigoted views. For lot of these people there seems to have been a move one step to the right as we have:-

A marked increase in race related crimes being reported
David Davis promoting unethical medical practices to check the ages of migrants
A Health secretary that wants to get rid of any doctor simply based on where they are from
A health secretary that wants to force young UK doctors to work in the UK for at least three years after being trained (effectively a form of state indentured service)
A home secretary that believes that companies should publish a list of their employees simply on their race (though rapidly backtracked), but it shows her general views

On top of this we now have a major tabloid (that is read by a large number of people that we must assume don't find the headlines unpalatable) that is promoting very bigoted views on foreign drivers http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/james-obrien-daily-mail-foreign-truck-drivers/; or
The same tabloid using wording not seen the days of Hitler or Stalin at the same time being homophobic and calling them "Enemies of the people" http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/gary-lineker-daily-mail-daily-express-article-50-front-pages_uk_581c3ad8e4b09d57a9a82b16?nzhjaigmk3q9w9udi&utm_hp_ref=uk (and if this article isn't on the border of inciting violence I don't know what is; whilst
The express compares the judges to effectively being the 3rd Reich.

And finally we have a Government that will not condemn such headlines (either showing they agree or don't want to upset a large media supporter).

There is hence going to be a 'guilt by association' thing going on that the low bigotry (again noting that we are *all* bigoted) Leavers effectively supported this type of behaviour (intentional or not). In some ways the whole thing is now becoming bigger than 'Brexit' on it's own and becoming more about the direction this country is heading.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 r_squared wrote:


I watched that program, and this is why context and nuance is important. I was surprised, and revolted when she said that, but it was obvious at the time that she had used a poor turn of phrase and she tried to correct it to support the argument she was making about concern for collaboration and funding for medical research.
It was a terrible slip up, as she was making a good point at the time, and the phrase she was looking for was something along the lines of hoping that no leave supporters children should get ill and need the funding and support that the research that they provide.
Now, to argue that she actually wants children to get sick, as a medical professional working in a children's hospital is a stretch and is used to make one rather biased political point and to hold it up as an example that all remainers hope leave kids get sick and die is hyperbole.

That's the unfortunate thing with responding when emotional (and perhaps stressful from the fact you know you are on live TV). But I'd agree that she was trying to make a point that with the loss of EU funding, scientific research is at risk which could lead to families suffering because previously funded treatments (or the foreign specialist doctors thrown out by Jeremy Hunt) are no longer available. The point she was trying to make was valid; the approach was unfortunately digging a deeper hole to try and get out of the one you are already in.

Regarding the whole "violence inciting" issue, I'll just take advantage of reds8n's post.

 reds8n wrote:
Obviously if something dramatic happens -- the WI brigade of UKIP eat a camp of refugees or Remainers kill every swan just to offend the Queen and then change the national anthem to "solidarity forever" -- it'll be brought up accordingly.

It's worth everyone taking a breath.

We don't want another Jo Cox situation do we now ?

Because as this reminds us, the "Brexit Brigade" already have blood in their hands. And it seems they want more.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
the dilemma Corbyn would find himself in at a GE.

Divided parties Like Labour suffer badly at General Elections. History shows us that.

In 24 hrs the Govt has lost in the High Court, lost its Brexit strategy & lost an MP.

.. and Corbyn has done what ?


Pissing about on snapchat about gardening or something or other ?


https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/794588224043761664

And it seems they want more.

Again, no one here is saying that.

Or defending it in a ridiculous manner

Yes there's plenty of people on social media calling for all sorts of exciting and fanciful things.

And I think the press coverage from some of the Brexit papers has been truly sickening in both tone and hypocrisy.

But seeing as the people posting here are not the papers nor are they calling for blood on the streets or whathaveyou there's nothing to be gained by endlessly covering this same ground.

 reds8n wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
the dilemma Corbyn would find himself in at a GE.

Divided parties Like Labour suffer badly at General Elections. History shows us that.

In 24 hrs the Govt has lost in the High Court, lost its Brexit strategy & lost an MP.

.. and Corbyn has done what ?


Pissing about on snapchat about gardening or something or other ?


https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/794588224043761664

Corbyn will lose a GE for the following reasons:

1) Scotland is lost to Labour

2) The old English heartlands will fall to UKIP

3) Blairites will happily see Corbyn burn, will undermine him, and see a defeat as short term pain, for the long term gain of moving back to the centre and ousting Corbyn

4) Middle England marginals, which decide Elections, will never vote for Corbyn and Abbott, or McDonnell.

5) Lib Dems will eat away at Labour, especially if they play the anti-Brexit card.

6) In his heart, Corbyn supports Brexit, has been anti-EU/EEC for decades, and any move to Remain, will be half hearted and phony. And the public will see through this...

In short, it's mission impossible for Corbyn....

The Conservatives also are a divided party on the EU issue.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The Conservatives also are a divided party on the EU issue.

They re-grouped pretty quickly after June 23rd!

Power trumps principals. They won't give up their perks, influence, and money, they get from being an MP.

For the record, what happened to Jo Cox was absolutely horrific. Everyone here agrees on that. I would say what I think should happen to the scum bucket who did it but it'll only further derail the thread.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Corbyn will lose a GE for the following reasons:

1) Scotland is lost to Labour

2) The old English heartlands will fall to UKIP

3) Blairites will happily see Corbyn burn, will undermine him, and see a defeat as short term pain, for the long term gain of moving back to the centre and ousting Corbyn

4) Middle England marginals, which decide Elections, will never vote for Corbyn and Abbott, or McDonnell.

5) Lib Dems will eat away at Labour, especially if they play the anti-Brexit card.

6) In his heart, Corbyn supports Brexit, has been anti-EU/EEC for decades, and any move to Remain, will be half hearted and phony. And the public will see through this...

In short, it's mission impossible for Corbyn....

I'm inclined to agree with the above. Red's comment above about Corbyn's recent actions is telling. Corbyn's heart just isn't in defending the EU, and that will hang him out to dry come election time. The Tories meanwhile, whilst split in some regards, have always been very good at doing their backstabbing in private and then rallying at the crucial points (usually around a new candidate, but hey-ho).

Since he can't come out and openly admit that he wants brexit, I feel like Corbyn's putting his own interest (being labour leader) above what's good for the country.

 Ketara wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Corbyn will lose a GE for the following reasons:

1) Scotland is lost to Labour

2) The old English heartlands will fall to UKIP

3) Blairites will happily see Corbyn burn, will undermine him, and see a defeat as short term pain, for the long term gain of moving back to the centre and ousting Corbyn

4) Middle England marginals, which decide Elections, will never vote for Corbyn and Abbott, or McDonnell.

5) Lib Dems will eat away at Labour, especially if they play the anti-Brexit card.

6) In his heart, Corbyn supports Brexit, has been anti-EU/EEC for decades, and any move to Remain, will be half hearted and phony. And the public will see through this...

In short, it's mission impossible for Corbyn....

I'm inclined to agree with the above. Red's comment above about Corbyn's recent actions is telling. Corbyn's heart just isn't in defending the EU, and that will hang him out to dry come election time. The Tories meanwhile, whilst split in some regards, have always been very good at doing their backstabbing in private and then rallying at the crucial points (usually around a new candidate, but hey-ho).

Not only that, if rumours are to be believed, Labour can't afford a General Election - their finances are in a bad place.

The Tories can get by with the time honoured tactic of a dodgy donor throwing them a few million in exchange for a peerage, but Labour will have to raid the piggy bank...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Since he can't come out and openly admit that he wants brexit, I feel like Corbyn's putting his own interest (being labour leader) above what's good for the country.

And that will hang around his neck like a millstone.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The Conservatives also are a divided party on the EU issue.

They re-grouped pretty quickly after June 23rd!

Power trumps principals. They won't give up their perks, influence, and money, they get from being an MP.

Two have in the past 10 days.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The Conservatives also are a divided party on the EU issue.

They re-grouped pretty quickly after June 23rd!

Power trumps principals. They won't give up their perks, influence, and money, they get from being an MP.

Two have in the past 10 days.

Goldsmith was always going to walk over Heathrow - it's nothing to do with Brexit.

Phillips seems to have thrown a hissy fit over lack of promotion, if the media is to be believed.

You may get the odd exception, but as a general rule, it's my view that most MPs are careerists.

 reds8n wrote:
Again, no one here is saying that.

Or defending it in a ridiculous manner

Yes there's plenty of people on social media calling for all sorts of exciting and fanciful things.

And I think the press coverage from some of the Brexit papers has been truly sickening in both tone and hypocrisy.

But seeing as the people posting here are not the papers nor are they calling for blood on the streets or whathaveyou there's nothing to be gained by endlessly covering this same ground.

And it was not my intention to say that. Of course nobody here is "asking for blood" or endorsing terror tactics (well at least in this thread, the Philippines thread on the other hand...).

My thoughts were more directed at the tabloids' attitude and inflamatory headlines. They know perfectly what this may lead to, yet they're carrying on and pointing fingers without any kind of shame or remorse.

If brexiters do not wish to be seen as a mob of ignorant xenophobic racists, perhaps they should avoid buying said tabloids, yet it seems they're precisely the tabloids' main target.

 Korinov wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
Again, no one here is saying that.

Or defending it in a ridiculous manner

Yes there's plenty of people on social media calling for all sorts of exciting and fanciful things.

And I think the press coverage from some of the Brexit papers has been truly sickening in both tone and hypocrisy.

But seeing as the people posting here are not the papers nor are they calling for blood on the streets or whathaveyou there's nothing to be gained by endlessly covering this same ground.

And it was not my intention to say that. Of course nobody here is "asking for blood" or endorsing terror tactics (well at least in this thread, the Philippines thread on the other hand...).

My thoughts were more directed at the tabloids' attitude and inflamatory headlines. They know perfectly what this may lead to, yet they're carrying on and pointing fingers without any kind of shame or remorse.

If brexiters do not wish to be seen as a mob of ignorant xenophobic racists, perhaps they should avoid buying said tabloids, yet it seems they're precisely the tabloids' main target.

The problem is the constant broad brushing in yourstatements. I've done my level best to avoid engaging with it, but considering more than one third of the country fall into the camp of 'Brexiter', you need to be made aware that you are being offensive. I voted Brexit in full cognition of the relevant facts, and made an educated choice on the direction of my country's participation in a supra-national entity. That does not mean that I'm now required to be an apologist in order to avoid being seen as 'part of a mob of ignorant xenophobic racists', anymore than you do.

In the same way that I don't point to your comments, or those of current newspaper articles as examples of 'why remainers are all whiny hypocritical intolerant closet facists' (because y'know, that would be a crass inaccurate generalisation), please do the other users of this board, and a third of the UK the simple common courtesy of not indulging in such over-exaggerated caricturization.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 Korinov wrote:
That, and the ridiculously hysterical reaction to the judges' ruling (with the tabloids at the helm), provides quite an insight regarding what the average "brexiter" looks like.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Based on the race crimes report that came out, they're into brown shirts or pointy white hats, fashionwise.

I said before that remainers love the EU because it's a great stick to beat so called 'less enlightened' people over the head with. It doesn't matter how bad the EU is performing or what whatever your reasons for wanting to leave it are, to the remainers you're just a bigoted xenophobic racist. And I was shouted down by r_squared and AlmightyWalrus over it and yet, here's two prime examples.

And remainers are such a nice group of people too who always keep it classy. It's not like they're wishing terminal or life threatening diseases on the children of people who voted to leave out of spite to score a cheap political point...oh wait.

Anyway, I'm not going to waste anymore time on you two with your sweeping generalisations, so you can also go on my ignore list.

I realize that I'm a few pages late, but since I'm being called out by name, I think it's only fair that I continue to "shout down" and point out that you go from condemning people for generalizing to generalizing yourself in two paragraphs. Again, if it's so horrible to paint people with a broad brush, why do you engage in such behaviour yourself? I'll again posit that if you don't want to be called out on generalizing people, the best way to achieve that goal is to stop generalizing people.

For what it's worth, the exchange you're refering to wasn't ever about whether or not the remain side uses the tactics you describe, but rather the fact that you're being a hypocrite. Go back and read the exchanges if you want, all I've done is point out that you're acting really upset about being generalized for someone that then turns around and does exactly the same thing back to your opponents.

 Ketara wrote:
The problem is the constant broad brushing in yourstatements. I've done my level best to avoid engaging with it, but considering more than one third of the country fall into the camp of 'Brexiter', you need to be made aware that you are being offensive. I voted Brexit in full cognition of the relevant facts, and made an educated choice on the direction of my country's participation in a supra-national entity. That does not mean that I'm now required to be an apologist in order to avoid being seen as 'part of a mob of ignorant xenophobic racists', anymore than you do.

In the same way that I don't point to your comments, or those of current newspaper articles as examples of 'why remainers are all whiny hypocritical intolerant closet facists' (because y'know, that would be a crass inaccurate generalisation), please do the other users of this board, and a third of the UK the simple common courtesy of not indulging in such over-exaggerated caricturization.

I'm not a remainer you see, as I'm not even english, or british. I'm one of those evil foreigners that once thought about moving to your country in order to steal all ur jobz*. I've been in contact with several non-english born people currently living in England, and while it's undeniable there are Brexit supporters/Leave voters who have actually made said choice having an educate knowledge of the matter, they certainly have not been the most vocal nor vehement. You may not be a racist, or an ignorant, or a xenophobe, but truth is you decided to join the same ship as many ignorant racist xenophobes, which weren't exactly hiding themselves at all during the campaign before the referendum.

What do you find "offensive" about my comments? Do you find the tabloids' headlines and stances on the matter acceptable? Do you endorse the threats and aggressions made by brexiters against anyone willing to oppose or criticise their beloved process? If you don't, then I don't see why you may feel offended by what I'm saying, because it was certainly not directed to you in the first place.

Thing is, the brexit engine has been powered, not absolutely but in quite substantial amounts, by ignorance, xenophobia, racism and hatred. Not every brexiter is a hateful and ignorant racist xenophobe, but a good chunk of them have to be, or else nobody would be reading the tabloids at this point (The Sun and The Daily Mail are still the most distributed newspapers in the UK).

* this is certainly not a rhetoric unique to the most rabid brexiters, it's been basically repeated over and over again by every xenophobic anti-inmigration group ever. My stance on it remains the same: if an inmigrant with no money, no contacts and (at best) a very basic knowledge of your language manages to come over and "steal" your job, please consider what kind of thing that says about you.

 Korinov wrote:
You may not be a racist, or an ignorant, or a xenophobe, but truth is you decided to join the same ship as many ignorant racist xenophobes, which weren't exactly hiding themselves at all during the campaign before the referendum.

I didn't join any ship.

Dr Rant



The best part of this is in the comments, the toilet roll, with which I wouldn't wipe my arse.

 Korinov wrote:

I'm not a remainer you see,

I never said you were. Merely that I don't point to your comments as proof of anything except that they are your comments.

I've been in contact with several non-english born people currently living in England, and while it's undeniable there are Brexit supporters/Leave voters who have actually made said choice having an educate knowledge of the matter, they certainly have not been the most vocal nor vehement. You may not be a racist, or an ignorant, or a xenophobe, but truth is you decided to join the same ship as many ignorant racist xenophobes, which weren't exactly hiding themselves at all during the campaign before the referendum.

Dear Lord. I like big breakfasts too. I'm pretty sure Hitler was fond of those. I'm not certain that means I'm embarked on the same 'ship' as him. This is terrible logic; 'Someone on the extreme political spectrum and you hold a similar point of view on something, therefore I should be able to conflate you at will'.

What do you find "offensive" about my comments?

The generalisations, primarily. Comments about the 'average brexiter' from someone who admits that they don't even live in England ring about as true as any comment I could make about the 'average feminist' in America. In other words, little can be said except that they are in favour of equal rights for women, or in this case, that some people voted one way in a referendum. You're just making crass, ignorant, and frankly ludicrous comments that would be laughable if you weren't drooling such vitriol all over the place (I mean, the "Brexit Brigade" wants more blood on its hands? Really?!)

Do you find the tabloids' headlines and stances on the matter acceptable? Do you endorse the threats and aggressions made by brexiters against anyone willing to oppose or criticise their beloved process? If you don't, then I don't see why you may feel offended by what I'm saying, because it was certainly not directed to you in the first place.

Which headlines? Which stances? Give me specifics, and I'll tell you on a case by case basis. Comments about the 'average brexiter' have to be aimed at me by default, being a working-lower middle class bloke in Britain who voted for Brexit. Trying to pretend like they don't is just backtracking. When you make a generalisation, you include everyone in the designated bracket in it (which is why it's a generalisation).

Thing is, the brexit engine has been powered, not absolutely but in quite substantial amounts, by ignorance, xenophobia, racism and hatred. Not every brexiter is a hateful and ignorant racist xenophobe, but a good chunk of them have to be, or else nobody would be reading the tabloids at this point (The Sun and The Daily Mail are still the most distributed newspapers in the UK).

Why do they 'have to be? In order to fit your view of the world? You're literally talking about a third of the country here. That's over twenty million people. The Sun and the Mail have a combined average circulation of about three and a half million. And I'll bet you that there are plenty of people in that collective figure who buy both or didn't vote. But according to you, 'the Leave camp seems to be filled with ignorant xenophobic racists' (filled with generally meaning that they comprise the majority of, so in this case that would be what, fifteen million people?)

But I mean, you talked to a few people who live here and read some stuff online. Nobody could be more qualified than you to pass generalised judgement on millions of people. Right?

It'd be nice if the Govt actually condemned the bs from the media and perhaps did something to calm things down?
But it seems whipping people up into a bigoted frenzy is acceptable now.

I am now genuinely worried at the direction this country is going in, the language and attitude is appalling, there seems to be endless anger, hatred and bile being spewed everywhere and racist groups and radical agendas are being supported and given air time.

What the feth is going on with our country?

 r_squared wrote:
It'd be nice if the Govt actually condemned the bs from the media and perhaps did something to calm things down?
But it seems whipping people up into a bigoted frenzy is acceptable now.

I am now genuinely worried at the direction this country is going in, the language and attitude is appalling, there seems to be endless anger, hatred and bile being spewed everywhere and racist groups and radical agendas are being supported and given air time.

What the feth is going on with our country?

I'll quote Ketaras previous post.

.........You're literally talking about a third of the country here. That's over twenty million people. The Sun and the Mail have a combined average circulation of about three and a half million. And I'll bet you that there are plenty of people in that collective figure who buy both or didn't vote......

I'm not suggesting that there isn't a problem with rags such as the mail and express appealing to the lowest common denominator, but come on, endless anger? Its being circulated in an echo chamber really.

 Ketara wrote:
Dear Lord. I like big breakfasts too. I'm pretty sure Hitler was fond of those. I'm not certain that means I'm embarked on the same 'ship' as him. This is terrible logic; 'Someone on the extreme political spectrum and you hold a similar point of view on something, therefore I should be able to conflate you at will'.

The generalisations, primarily. Comments about the 'average brexiter' from someone who admits that they don't even live in England ring about as true as any comment I could make about the 'average feminist' in America. In other words, little can be said except that they are in favour of equal rights for women, or in this case, that some people voted one way in a referendum. You're just making crass, ignorant, and frankly ludicrous comments that would be laughable if you weren't drooling such vitriol all over the place (I mean, the "Brexit Brigade" wants more blood on its hands? Really?!)

I know generalisations are bad, and I admit to be guilty of them as every other single member of the human race at some point. I'm sorry if you've felt offended by my comments, but from the outside, the British Picture looks quite depressing right now. Cases of foreigners (and even british-born people of foreign roots) been insulted, harassed or outright physically assaulted are popping in the news at an almost daily basis, and it's specially outrageous to see Leave voters refusing to acknowledge such things happening, or at least attempting to play them down as minor incidents (not aimed at you, just a general thought on the matter). I know the news offer only a very partial and distorted account of what's happening, but right now the UK is building a terrible reputation overseas, as a country of isolationist bigots and racists lead by hypocrital far-right liars like Farage.

As I said, perhaps it's not an entirely accurate reflection of the true state of things, but it's how it looks like from the outside. If you're fine with your country's image beign this one, then what can I say.

Which headlines? Which stances? Give me specifics, and I'll tell you on a case by case basis.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/04/media/brexit-ruling-daily-mail-enemies-people/index.html?section=money_topstories

Let's start with those ones.

Why do they 'have to be? In order to fit your view of the world? You're literally talking about a third of the country here. That's over twenty million people. The Sun and the Mail have a combined average circulation of about three and a half million. And I'll bet you that there are plenty of people in that collective figure who buy both or didn't vote. But according to you, 'the Leave camp seems to be filled with ignorant xenophobic racists' (filled with generally meaning that they comprise the majority of, so in this case that would be what, fifteen million people?)

You find three million and a half people a negligible amount in the population context of an european country?

But I mean, you talked to a few people who live here and read some stuff online. Nobody could be more qualified than you to pass generalised judgement on millions of people. Right?

Following this line of thought, basically nobody would be entitled to have an opinion about anything.

 Korinov wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Dear Lord. I like big breakfasts too. I'm pretty sure Hitler was fond of those. I'm not certain that means I'm embarked on the same 'ship' as him. This is terrible logic; 'Someone on the extreme political spectrum and you hold a similar point of view on something, therefore I should be able to conflate you at will'.

The generalisations, primarily. Comments about the 'average brexiter' from someone who admits that they don't even live in England ring about as true as any comment I could make about the 'average feminist' in America. In other words, little can be said except that they are in favour of equal rights for women, or in this case, that some people voted one way in a referendum. You're just making crass, ignorant, and frankly ludicrous comments that would be laughable if you weren't drooling such vitriol all over the place (I mean, the "Brexit Brigade" wants more blood on its hands? Really?!)

I know generalisations are bad, and I admit to be guilty of them as every other single member of the human race at some point. I'm sorry if you've felt offended by my comments, but from the outside, the British Picture looks quite depressing right now. Cases of foreigners (and even british-born people of foreign roots) been insulted, harassed or outright physically assaulted are popping in the news at an almost daily basis, and it's specially outrageous to see Leave voters refusing to acknowledge such things happening, or at least attempting to play them down as minor incidents (not aimed at you, just a general thought on the matter). I know the news offer only a very partial and distorted account of what's happening, but right now the UK is building a terrible reputation overseas, as a country of isolationist bigots and racists lead by hypocrital far-right liars like Farage.

As I said, perhaps it's not an entirely accurate reflection of the true state of things, but it's how it looks like from the outside. If you're fine with your country's image beign this one, then what can I say.

Which headlines? Which stances? Give me specifics, and I'll tell you on a case by case basis.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/04/media/brexit-ruling-daily-mail-enemies-people/index.html?section=money_topstories

Let's start with those ones.

Why do they 'have to be? In order to fit your view of the world? You're literally talking about a third of the country here. That's over twenty million people. The Sun and the Mail have a combined average circulation of about three and a half million. And I'll bet you that there are plenty of people in that collective figure who buy both or didn't vote. But according to you, 'the Leave camp seems to be filled with ignorant xenophobic racists' (filled with generally meaning that they comprise the majority of, so in this case that would be what, fifteen million people?)

You find three million and a half people a negligible amount in the population context of an european country?

But I mean, you talked to a few people who live here and read some stuff online. Nobody could be more qualified than you to pass generalised judgement on millions of people. Right?

Following this line of thought, basically nobody would be entitled to have an opinion about anything.

Korinov, The Mail and Express are echo chambers for a readership that continues to shrink. Looking specifically at the Mail, this is a paper which revels in what celebrities are wearing and how they look in bikinis at the same time running articles denouncing body shaming and the role celebrities play in corrupting our childrens values. As for the readership I'm pretty certain that its a minority of that that are even slightly outraged by our judges trampling of democracy (or whatever it is they are saying).

 Korinov wrote:

I know generalisations are bad, and I admit to be guilty of them as every other single member of the human race at some point. I'm sorry if you've felt offended by my comments, but from the outside, the British Picture looks quite depressing right now. Cases of foreigners (and even british-born people of foreign roots) been insulted, harassed or outright physically assaulted are popping in the news at an almost daily basis, and it's specially outrageous to see Leave voters refusing to acknowledge such things happening, or at least attempting to play them down as minor incidents (not aimed at you, just a general thought on the matter). I know the news offer only a very partial and distorted account of what's happening, but right now the UK is building a terrible reputation overseas, as a country of isolationist bigots and racists lead by hypocrital far-right liars like Farage.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that for the most part, not much has changed. There were a handful of incidents by emboldened nutters immediately following the vote, which have now been suitably squashed. I would argue quite frankly, that the perception shown by the media is divorced from reality in this, because the media has an interest in shock, scandal, and intrigue. There are no more racists here than there were two days before the vote. Reporting incidents related to such has simply risen to the top of the headline agenda because it's topical. If Brexit happened tomorrow, it would sink as a news item faster than the Titanic.

As I said, perhaps it's not an entirely accurate reflection of the true state of things, but it's how it looks like from the outside. If you're fine with your country's image beign this one, then what can I say.

Sadly, I have no control over what the gutter press publish. I trust that people with half a brain know better than to believe anything promulgated by the Daily Fail though.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/04/media/brexit-ruling-daily-mail-enemies-people/index.html?section=money_topstories

Let's start with those ones.

You just linked to headlines from the Mail, Sun, and Express, papers most people see best when adorning their fish and chips. Those papers talk crap. Next one?

You find three million and a half people a negligible amount in the population context of an european country?

Yes, because it wouldn't even be that many. If we discount people who buy two papers, the fact that the less educated are less likely to have actually voted and more likely to read crap like those, and the fact that the Express/Sun have halved their sales in the last twenty years, I doubt that more than a million referendum voters touch that rubbish. Of those million, how many actually voted Brexit? That'll take it lower still, because reading a paper doesn't equal a zombified slavish adherence to what they tell you to do.

And you know something? Considering the percentage of my country which was born back when black people were called less than pleasant names and raised with those attitudes (aka, old people), I'm pleasantly surprised it would be so low. I daresay not many other countries could say the same.

Following this line of thought, basically nobody would be entitled to have an opinion about anything.

There's nothing wrong with having a well reasoned opinion. But you are literally tarring over twenty million people as all sorts of unpleasant things based on an exceedingly weak statistical premise. And well, some of us don't particularly appreciate being told we're either facists or supporting such, just for choosing to exercise our right to determine our government's participation in a supranational body.

 r_squared wrote:
It'd be nice if the Govt actually condemned the bs from the media and perhaps did something to calm things down?
But it seems whipping people up into a bigoted frenzy is acceptable now.

The Govt aren't and won't do this. The Daily Mail is too much of a Tory supporter (both in terms of rhetoric and the owners support). If they condemn the paper then it could shift to being a UKIP paper (another one) and they won't want that.

However if JC has any sense then he should really be able to punish May at the next PMQ for failing to respond to this. He could spend the whole session on the issue and really make the Tory party squirm because undoubtedly there will be Tory MPs that are equally appalled but aren't yet ready to open the flood gates on May's direction.

 r_squared wrote:
I am now genuinely worried at the direction this country is going in, the language and attitude is appalling, there seems to be endless anger, hatred and bile being spewed everywhere and racist groups and radical agendas are being supported and given air time.

What the feth is going on with our country?

You and me both, the Country seems to be dividing down the middle by Liberalism vs Nationalism and it is getting ugly. Fortunately no person or group is tapping into this, but if they do I fear the worst. We have recent examples of what happens when a population of people is forced down a route they are vehemently against.

 r_squared wrote:

I am now genuinely worried at the direction this country is going in

The same one that is has been going in for years, its just a little more visible now.

Luckily for me I am essentially an 'economic migrant' in England and it is easy for me to uproot and move elsewhere when there is finally no further right to lurch to.

Well thats the end of labour.....

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-11-05/corbyn-labour-will-block-article-50-if-theresa-may-cannot-guarantee-single-market-access/

Skullhammer wrote:
Well thats the end of labour.....

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-11-05/corbyn-labour-will-block-article-50-if-theresa-may-cannot-guarantee-single-market-access/

Staying in the single market means that we're still in the EU, putting up with their rules and paying for it in the process only this time we won't have a say in it. It'll leave us in an even worse position than what we're in now. So again, Corbyn's idea is half baked.

Is is another worry of mine. Vested interests will, deliberately or otherwise, sabotage the brexit process.