Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Westministenders: Boris is reminded of the Munich Post.

999 replies

RedToothBrush · 07/02/2017 11:36

The Munich Post was the 1930s German Newspaper that refused to normalise. It refused to bow to the threats and intimidation of the Nazi State. It was to eventually closed but it defended the truth to the bitter end.

With Trump’s systematic attacks on the Press and Judiciary we should take heed. We must stand up for our journalists who seek to serve the public rather than serve their masters and only chase profit.

We must ask why, right wing extremists when they make attacks are too frequently labelled simply as lone wolfs who exist within a vacuum, when it is widely accepted by intelligence services that Muslim extremists are often the products of online radicalisation and any element of mental history is totally irrelevant because of their religion.

The PM hiring advertising agents to try and deal with a problem of increasing racial tensions rather than talking to the newspaper executives who she has close relationships with, is a deliberate missing of the point.

It is an abdication of responsibility and is wilfully ignorant.

It is about time we addressed the hole of hatred in our society that exists properly. From all angles and approaches, from all parts of our society. The blind spot in failing to acknowledge how the media’s role in this only serves to fuel the divisions. It has become normalised. Powerful lobbying groups like the Freedom Association continue to deny that populism has contributed to a rise in hate crime pointing to a dislike for how incidents are recorded. Their influence in Westminster is too apparent.

Some of the comments made in the houses of commons and to the media by Tory MPs have been worryingly close to comments made by Trump and his associates. They have been worryingly close to online trolls. They have been laced with too many ‘alternative facts’ and full of exaggerated language about immigrants. Language, its use and context are important and powerful.

These are elected officials with a social responsibility. Instead they are continue to stir things. We no longer need Farage and worry about UKIP. We have a whole bunch of them in the HoC and a quick trawl though Hansard reveals them in all their glory. To a privileged white man they are Trump apologists. During the debate over Trump’s visit to the UK, one even thought it appropriate to woof at a female MP. In 2017.

We might be very British in the way our alternative facts are being expressed but the same threats are very much present within British politics as they are currently in US politics. We might not have anyone quite as brash and brazen as Trump (with the possible exception of Farage), but this makes it more not less dangerous. People like IDS and Johnson add respectably to the thin veneer of hatred and xenophobia.

A50 is likely to pass the commons, without amendment as things stand. (I think we need to watch the Lords with interest) We are perhaps likely to enter a period where things might quieten down in the UK for a time. We must be vigilant and not accept normalisation and continue to make noise about how we feel about the future of this country or we will be dominated by the agenda of these individuals who have little respect for the interests of anyone who is not part of their boys club.

Theresa May may not be one of them, but like Trump she craves their approval and does share many of their values. She is happy to pander to them, and them to her as she makes their toxicity somehow more acceptable.

What women do next is crucial. Do we want to accept this vision of the future? Now is not the time to fall silence and accept that things are equal now. We know the reality. And it affects all of us, regardless of how we voted on 23rd June.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
RedAndYellowStripe · 11/02/2017 12:17

Hmm, I now only believe what politicians do, not what they say or where they say they stand.

TM is saying that she is conservative. Middle of the road bla bla.

What she is DOING isn't though (from wanting to use th Henry VIII powers when she KNEW it was illegal - I'm sure she had plenty of advisors to tell her that- , the spying law, using NHS data to track immigrants and the general propaganda about the 'will of the people' or a 'red, white and blue britain')
The red, white and blue Britain for example would fit the french far right sayings very well.

The question of 'how late is too late' is an important one. Maybe we should ask the Germans about it....

CeciledeVolanges · 11/02/2017 12:17

I'm going to watch later Semi.

Meanwhile, I definitely don't think "if you are a citizen of the world you are a citizen of nowhere" or calling judges enemies of the people are either of them on the normal spectrum of right-wing political though.

CeciledeVolanges · 11/02/2017 12:20

Red I agree with you but I'm also a horrible pedant, please can I correct you on Henry VIII powers again? They are to do with the Great Repeal Bill and are a type of power conferred by Parliament on the executive which allows them to amend Acts of Parliament necessary.

I think you are thinking of prerogative powers, which include the powers of making treaties, creating peers and declaring war and are the residue of powers left over from when we had an arbitrary monarch. She also didn't know they were illegal, there was a lot of debate and most people thought that the High Court would go the other way.

On the other hand, I don't think she or her government are really being true to the spirit of Parliamentary democracy at all.

Corcory · 11/02/2017 12:27

NotDavid - I agree with you entirely and have spoken on these threads before about the language used, the idea that if you voted leave you are akin to the Alt-right has been the most recent suggestion I have tried to call out.
We have had the 'politically correct' situation where any suggestion of one or another community has a 'problem' would be offensive, so better to say nothing - Like in the Rotherham child abuse cases - social workers and others in authority have been the worst for this for fear of offending anyone of any ethnicity. Now we have the opposite position from some people where they think they have every right to spout racist views. I feel we need to get back to some 'middle ground' where we all don't jump on the bandwagon calling people all sorts of names and aligning them with extremist views just because they dared to say anything slightly opposed to our views.

We are generally a very open liberal country and we should get back to this ideal and call out anyone who suggests otherwise.

tiggytape · 11/02/2017 12:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CeciledeVolanges · 11/02/2017 12:31

And Trying, I am English. My family is English. About half of them are dyed-in-the-wool Conservative voters. I have a few acquaintances from overseas (four Canadians, all of whom with Uk citizenship as well) but most of the rest of my friends are from the Uk. I work with lots of people from the EU, mostly higher rate taxpayers (I am a temp at a City firm).

I happen to think that what is going on is deeply wrong in principle. I know I post too much and sometimes too vehemently, but I am willing to stick my neck out even though I am at no risk of being deported personally (although I am at risk financially and in employment terms from the Brexit economic damage). I know others like this.

SemiPermanent · 11/02/2017 12:34

Cecile, you post no more often nor more vehemently than most people on these threads.

We're all pretty ardent in our views.

SemiPermanent · 11/02/2017 12:35

That last post sounded curt, I didn't mean it rudely - just meant 'don't worry, we're all similar in that respect'.
Smile

Peregrina · 11/02/2017 12:51

The court was not being asked to stop May doing something she knew to be illegal but was asked to to decide what the law should be.

The initial ruling was clear, but she wasted time and taxpayers money by appealing. So OK now the judgement is even more clear.

She didn't condemn the Mail for calling the three Judges enemies of the people. She only talked about having a free press. Good, but there are lines which should not be crossed, but she made no comment about that.

howabout · 11/02/2017 12:56

The initial ruling was ambiguous and left the door open to lots of future challenges. I don't think there was any option but to appeal and have a much fuller ruling at the Supreme Court.

tiggytape · 11/02/2017 12:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CeciledeVolanges · 11/02/2017 13:02

Thanks Semi. I sound curt without meaning to a lot of the time too! I think the one thing we all have in common here is that we have strongly held beliefs and believe a lot is at stake. I think it is the trivialising, the minimising, the silencing of various views that goes on in some places that really upsets and worries me, but we don't have that here I don't think and that is a good thing. I would like it if we had even more people participating in a robust exchange of views really

boredofbrexit · 11/02/2017 13:03

I don't think we absolutely know that Tig

lalalonglegs · 11/02/2017 13:08

Breaking news - the government wants to create a new law that will mean journalists that print or broadcast leaked government material could be jailed. This is the only link I could find but just heard it on the midday BBC news.

Jailing journalists for doing their jobs is textbook authoritarian far right/far left tactics. I find it hard to believe the government is being this blatant about their intentions.

HashiAsLarry · 11/02/2017 13:11

So much for free press eh?

tig yes, it was good that they shored all that up. Also I was heartened that in a matter that important all supreme justices sat. It showed they cared a lot and that, although the decision wasn't unanimous, they all stood with each other. A very important move for them.

RedToothBrush · 11/02/2017 13:14

lalalonglegs, I suspect that will not get very far with the Lords.

Of course that assumes that the Lords survives too...

We shall watch how all these Conservatives who are obsessed with tradition suddenly become huge reformers and lead the charge to 'modernise'.

OP posts:
TheElementsSong · 11/02/2017 13:16

Careful lala don't want to be thought "hysterical".

tiggytape · 11/02/2017 13:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Peregrina · 11/02/2017 13:23

Jailing journalists is not new. Two of them went to prison after the
Vassal Spy case for refusing to reveal their sources.
Will journalists now be prepared to serve prison sentences?

tiggytape · 11/02/2017 13:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

boredofbrexit · 11/02/2017 13:31

Much 'news' is bandied around in SM..who could be held to account for that though, in the interests of fairness? Maybe the term journalists will be widened...to include...eeeek....mumsnettersShock

Kaija · 11/02/2017 13:41

"This thread is full of immigrants from other EU countries ( or their families) moaning because they do not like the way the British citizens voted. It beggars belief."

This is a really sad sentence to have to read on Mumsnet.

BigChocFrenzy · 11/02/2017 13:44

The HoC shouldn't try to reverse A50.
Constitutionally, they couldn't block a manifesto commitment of an elected government
However, the Single Market was also in the manifesto, so they are entitled to object to a govt abandoning that commitment to satisfy another.

The HoC would be failing in their constitutional duty if they don't scrutinise the legislation to ensure A50 is carried out as safely as possible and also not used by the govt to carry out actions that voters would never have directly approved, e.g. competing with the rest of the world by rolling back the welfare state and employment rights.

The HoL are entitled / required to propose safeguards, such as protecting the NHS or employment rights in any trade deal outside the EU.
Such issues are not part of the A50, but would be possible consequences of choosing a Hard Brexit.

The HoC can vote down any amendments and iirc after the 3rd attempt, the HoC has its way, regardless of HoL votes.

There is no need for a 2nd chamber if they just rubber stamp whatever the HoC decides.
So, if they completely chicken out, they might as well be abolished anyway.

lalalonglegs · 11/02/2017 13:44

There's a difference between protecting one's sources and being jailed simply for daring to print something that the government wants to keep secret though (I do not believe either course is right, however).

As for how far such a bill would get in the Lords, I hope you're right Red but I'd like to believe no government/parliament would dare to draft such legislation in the first place Sad.