The Silence is Deafening

[Crankley]

For the last however long, I have read threads and posts by Remainers stating confidently that the Prime Minister wanted a No Deal, would get a No Deal. Here are just a few quotes. Some Remainers may recognise their own predictions:

'He is going to give us No Deal and then fuck off into the sunset with millons in bungs from his crooked mates,'

'I'm pretty certain on no deal...'

'I fully expect a No Deal Brexit.'

'Bojo will 'deliver' no deal and then F off into the sunset'

'Boris Johnson and your disingenuous divs - How dare you try and spin a NoDeal'

'He was elected to not get a deal and to make his supporters feel good about the fact the had stuck it to the man (or something).'

There are lots more if you want them.

Now he has obtained a deal, where are all the threads by remainers? Do any have the the guts to hold up their hand up and say 'I was wrong'?

Have a look at the actual data here
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/920679/UK_Sea_Fisheries_Statistics_2019_-_access_checked-002.pdf
Page 50 shows what the UK imports and exports

Page 58 shows what it catches

Self sufficiency is NOT an option

People want what they want so the "there wouldn't need to be a protest vote (if...)" arguement is on shaky ground IMO. Your last 2 sentences come over to me as changing the terms of debate to deliver what you want, not what those who'd likely vote for Nigel Farage want.

From my point of view, Farage and other populists tend to thrive in unequal societies. In a more equal society, people don't feel like they are getting left behind. His vote seemed to be split between those who felt like they weren't being catered to and those well off enough to weather any storm.

From my point of view, Farage and other populists tend to thrive in unequal societies. In a more equal society, people don't feel like they are getting left behind. His vote seemed to be split between those who felt like they weren't being catered to and those well off enough to weather any storm.

Do you start from the point that populism is a bad thing? Populism being appealing to ordinary people and doing what they want. Your obsevation about the Farage vote, for me, was a pretty good assessment.

We should have had a vote on the deal. Leave should never have been undefined I the referendum, and a vote on the final deal would have rectified that utterly irresponsible framing.
It would have been absolutely democratic. Nobody would have lost their vote, but people would have had a clearer understanding of what they were voting for.
The Swiss, who operate though referendums, far more than we do, take it as a given that you run the referendum again if more information becomes available. And it was never democratic to go for the hardest of Brexit deals on a wafer-thin majority. It’s astonishing that people think we should just shut up and accept a worse standard of living.

People in the UK should never have had a vote on EU membership and def not on the complexities of the 'deal, it is beyond us all.

Just as we don't vote on UN, NATO, Trident or even HS2, these things can be altered via a GE should a party stand to change any or one of these things.

Yes, I agree jasjas. I think about 0.1% of the population had reasonable understanding. The rest of us, Remainers and Leavers alike, didn’t. Vote Leave lied and obfuscated. Remain were pathetic, because they couldn’t highlight the benefits of the EU without showing up the glaring deficiencies within the U.K.

Remain were pathetic, because they couldn’t highlight the benefits of the EU without showing up the glaring deficiencies within the U.K.

I would put that as Cameron and Co were deficient because it would have shown up how many problems were caused directly by their austerity policies.

I myself am now much much better informed as a Remainer, and I thought I was reasonably well informed before.

Do you start from the point that populism is a bad thing? Populism being appealing to ordinary people and doing what they want. Your obsevation about the Farage vote, for me, was a pretty good assessment.

I don't think it's a bad thing for the needs of ordinary people to counted at all. But so far, given the outcomes from it, it hasn't been a force for good. It has been harnessed by elites (I would class Farage, Johnson, Trump etc in this category) for their own ends.

It's a shame because it could be. A lot of us have overlapping needs and wants. Like good schools, healthcare system, a fair society where you are able to work your way up, good jobs that allow everyone who is working to have a decent standard of living and a society where we don't need to rely on food banks as wages aren't high enough.

Peregrina You have put it better than me, a lot of the issues associated with the EU were actually from the austerity policies and the decline of old industries from the 1980s after Thatcher.

Yes, that’s better put peregrina, but the effect was that the benefits of the EU could not be promoted.

In Switzerland there is a referendum nearly every month.
The Swiss have learned to vote on the issue written on the polling card

Brits are a LONG way from that

So maybe we need to bring in PR at council elections
and referendums on minor local issues
and then
build up to stuff that matters
so that people learn to read the ballot paper
and its supporting information
and
accept that if circumstances change
the vote gets run again
in a democratic manner

I agree listening, or just ban referendums like the Germans have, since they saw the terrible damage done by the unscrupulous.

Or at least restrict Referendums to what I would regard as trivia, like should we change the flag, or should we have a new National anthem?
Not have Referendums on things which potentially damage people's lives when enacted.

If we do as you suggest then the verdict of 1975 (a referendum remember) would stand unchallengable for evermore. Eventually, sometime around 2065 say, a point will be reached where no one who voted for the outcome is alive anymore.

People on hear frequently cite the subsequent deaths of assumed 'Leave' voters as somehow invalidating the 2016 result, yet a "no more referendums" position suggests strongly you are happy for the above scenario to play out.

The '75 Referendum as it happened, didn't change the status quo. We hadn't at that point got rid of Parliamentary democracy, so the situation adapted and was dealt with by our elected representatives. Why is that a problem? Referendums are quite foreign to our tradition.

I agree listening, or just ban referendums like the Germans have, since they saw the terrible damage done by the unscrupulous.

Or at least restrict Referendums to what I would regard as trivia, like should we change the flag, or should we have a new National anthem? Not have Referendums on things which potentially damage people's lives when enacted.

I would imagine the above suggestions would cause Nicola Sturgeon to self-combust!!

Why would she combust? I think most Scots are happy with the saltire, so it would be a resounding yes, and having a proper Scottish National Anthem would be good.

As one who lived in Wales once, I am perfectly happy with the Welsh dragon and we already have a National anthem, so I imagine it would be a non issue for most people.

I think that if Independence is right for Scotland, it will happen anyway, referendum or no. I don't think Ireland gained its Independence by a Referendum - I think they just took it. (But Irish posters please correct me, because my Irish history is sketchy.)

Why would she combust? I think most Scots are happy with the saltire, so it would be a resounding yes, and having a proper Scottish National Anthem would be good.

Because you said referendums should only be run on trivial matters (ie. flags and anthems) obviously voting on independence is not trivial. Referendum is the only way independence will happen for Scotland, certainly in the near future IMO.

I know that it's easier to just get angry and vent on the internet but really nothing of any significance is achieved by that (or by marching and/or petitions for that matter)

This criticism of Remainers of "still being angry" and the implication that they should shut up really puzzles me. Individuals can only use the resources available to them to express their voice/s.

JRM / DC / ERG et al had the luxury of sophisticated and far reaching resources other than marching or petitions. They had/have an actual place at the decision making table, a lot of money, and direct access to the MSP. They deliberately and systematically deployed their extensive resources to achieve their decades old ambition.

So it was acceptable for them to vociferously and continuously express their sentiments working towards leaving, but it is not acceptable for Remainers to express their sentiments in the midst of such tumultuous and far reaching change. Bit unfair, no? Also bit sly, feigned and disingenuous to ask 'why so angry'.

This criticism of Remainers of "still being angry" and the implication that they should shut up really puzzles me. Individuals can only use the resources available to them to express their voice/s.
I am just struck by the pointlessness of it, similar to the "Sue you're shouting at tea" episode earlier this year. The threads are only effective as a self-help group, so at least that purpose is served. They should be angry with their own leaders who repeatedly let them down so badly and with themselves for allowing their anger to turn people even further away from Remain whenever there was a chance to overturn the result. In that respect I think "why so angry" is really pretty justified.

Nicola S has excellent grounds to demand another referendum give the radically changed circumstances. A vote for staying in was very much influenced by anxiety about Scotland’s EU status. And now they are being dragged out against their will. I think the Swiss would endorse another referendum on those grounds.

Nicola S has excellent grounds to demand another referendum give the radically changed circumstances. A vote for staying in was very much influenced by anxiety about Scotland’s EU status. And now they are being dragged out against their will. I think the Swiss would endorse another referendum on those grounds.

No where have I said she doesn’t have grounds, I was responding to a PP who mentioned referendums should be for trivial matters only.

If Scotland want independence then fine, good luck to them.

Referendums are perfectly fine for serious matters but just like a local sports club or going on strike, they should be subject to min turnouts and majorities.

We would have left the EU if the majority had been just 1, that is clearly a ridiculous way to govern.

Scotland should have another vote purely because they were promised a remain vote would secure their position in the EU, that has clearly changed but no UK govt will ever give them one, so a moot point.

I was actually saying that they shouldn't have them at all, or if so, only for matters which don't cause a deterioration to other people's lives. You were really taking a pop at Nicola Sturgeon and Scotland.

was actually saying that they shouldn't have them at all, or if so, only for matters which don't cause a deterioration to other people's lives. You were really taking a pop at Nicola Sturgeon and Scotland.

No, I really wasn't. I actually have a rather unnerving admiration for Nicola Sturgeon as a politician (which I have said on other threads) she comes across clear and concise. However, I'm on the fence on independence, if people want it then that's fine, however, I don't live in Scotland so wouldn't have a vote so what I think on it doesn't really matter.

However, if you were of the thinking that Referendums should not be allowed then she would rightly be bloody angry don't you think?