That's the impression one often gets. The very people who argue for wanting back our "independence" seem to want to tie usin ever more closely above all with the USA but also with Canada, Australia, etc.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TheKnightWho
Established Member
As always, certain Brexiters present no argument when challenged. It's obvious this doesn't fit with your little anti-establishment narrative, so insults are the only thing you have.
Get real: you were conned.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,582
As always, certain Brexiters present no argument when challenged. It's obvious this doesn't fit with your little anti-establishment narrative, so insults are the only thing you have.
Get real: you were conned.
If I was conned, where does that leave you and the rest of the minority?
TheKnightWho
Established Member
If I was conned, where does that leave you and the rest of the minority?
Who were we conned by? I think free trade agreements are good. I feel you haven't thought this through very well.
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,582
At last something we agree on.
At least in the future you will have the pleasure of seeing the UK signing such agreements with like minded countries, free from the stifling influence of the EU.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I didn't realise that free trade agreements were on a par with being in the EU.
Perhaps that is why the EU has such difficulty signing them.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
So you want free trade agreements, so long as they aren't with our closest neighbours because a free trade agreement with them might affect our ability to trade with others, even though something like NAFTA apparently wouldn't? Seriously? Given we were trying to establish a UK-China special trade agreement before the referendum even happened, it does confuse me how Brexiteers seem to think being in the EU prevents trade with the rest of the world.
Also regarding your last part, I find it hilarious how Brexiteers moan about how supposedly undemocratic the EU is, but then crow when democratic mechanisms prevent agreements from being agreed as smoothly as they could have been.
It's just contradiction after contradiction here. It's almost like it's not actually anything to do with trade, economics or democracy...
furnessvale
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 4,582
Once again you bluster away. Which bit of free TRADE agreement do you not understand?
TRADE is the operative word, not freedom of movement, not EU regs applying to domestic consumption, not the ECJ, to mention but three ways the EU seeks to extend its power.
I will be very happy when the UK signs a free TRADE agreement with the EU. When we do that, everything we export to the EU will comply with EU regs, just as everything we currently export to the USA meets their requirements.
You can't accuse others of being unfocused and then come out with that.
No, the EU isn't just a free trade agreement.
No, NAFTA doesn't prevent the signing of other free trade agreements.
No, we could not have signed a bilateral free trade agreement with China as an EU member.
Last edited:
TheKnightWho
Established Member
How was it unfocused?
The EU does not prevent the signing of bilateral trade agreeements that do not subvert existing EU treaties, in exactly the same way as would be the case with NAFTA.
EM2
Established Member
Some years ago a young lady came into my circle of friends and acquaintances who didn't quite fit in. She was very active politically, and uncompromisingly ideological. She drifted from the Tories to UKIP, where she made news as a councillor in 2014 for stating that businesses should be allowed to refuse to serve "women and gay people", causing Alan Davies to make her into a minor Twitter celebrity. Her UKIP career thus stalled, she announced that UKIP were too damn lilly-livered and moved to work for Breibart.
Breibart styles itself a news agency, but is really a simple political front. Their UK Editor in Chief - Raheem Kassam - is Aaron Banks' choice for the next leader of UKIP, but rather more significantly, Breibart's executive Chairman - Steve Bannon - ran Trump's campaign, and is reported in today's press to be in line to become his Chief of Staff.
Today, she sent the following message to one of our group. This is a direct cut/paste, and I'm not going to editorialise on it at all. Take from it what you will.
That isn't to say that all this will all come to pass - Dubya didn't manage to implement the Project For The New American Century in two terms - but at the very least it speaks to intent.
Enough of me.
"
Hello. Don't know if you'll find this message beause of the way Facebook works now (ie, badly), but i thought i'd take a shot anyway, because Trump has just been elected, and because based on your post of June 22nd (which I can't comment on or I would), you're probably thinking "what the ****!" right now.
You work for international companies, and those companies are in the business, ultimately, of making money. I get that.
I write for a publication called Breitbart. You *may* have heard of it because our Editor in Chief ran Trump's campaign. Our business is smashing your overarching business model. I don't mean capitalism, we like that. Money is good. I mean globalism. Our company motto is #War. We mean it.
Let me give you an insider tip, because you're going to need it to navigate your way through the next few years.
We have changed the world order. Not just us of course (although i like to flatter myself I've played a small part); UKIP, Farage, Le Pen, Geert Wilders, Trump, AfD, Lega Nord.... all of these have tapped into a power that was already there. And that power is people.
As you may (or may not) recall, I love Thatcher. She did a lot of good for our country. But she didn't get it all right. She thought that if you liberated a country economically the rest would follow. She was wrong.
Globalism, which is what Thatcherism ultimately spawned, is great for some (you and your friends and colleagues, mainly) but it's not good for all. And specifically, it's not good for the working classes who have been left behind and shut out, seen their sovereignty and their way of life eroded. Globalism flipped their world on its head. They are angry and they have a right to be - they've lost literally everything they had, and they didn't have much to start with.
Brexit, and now Trump, are merely the old world order righting itself again.
I didn't put any money on Brexit because I didn't quite believe the country would go for it, but I won a tidy sum betting on Trump months before he even won the Primary, because i heard his rhetoric and recognised what it represented. It's the authentic voice of unabashed, unashamed western culture. And it's the pattern for the whole of the western world for the next 20 years.
Brexit was first, now Trump. I'm sceptical about Le Pen in France beause I think their country is too far gone, but Merkel will be out at the next election in about a year's time. The EU will be gone within the decade. It may not go entirely peacefully. Prepare for that possibility.
Economically all countries have overleveraged and we will have another big collapse within the next five years. Put your money in gold and silver now.
As for your business models; embrace the change, don't fear it. Brexit is fantastic for this country, tap into the opportunities it affords. But understand that the old ways of doing things, where people were treated as commodities or assets to be moved around spreadsheets is gone. Embrace patriotism, there's nothing wrong with it. Invest in people, particularly young apprentices.
Most of all, enjoy the ride we've created for you. It's going to be wild, but if you relax into it you'll love it as much as we do.
Any questions, feel free to ask."
So now you know.
Breibart styles itself a news agency, but is really a simple political front. Their UK Editor in Chief - Raheem Kassam - is Aaron Banks' choice for the next leader of UKIP, but rather more significantly, Breibart's executive Chairman - Steve Bannon - ran Trump's campaign, and is reported in today's press to be in line to become his Chief of Staff.
Today, she sent the following message to one of our group. This is a direct cut/paste, and I'm not going to editorialise on it at all. Take from it what you will.
That isn't to say that all this will all come to pass - Dubya didn't manage to implement the Project For The New American Century in two terms - but at the very least it speaks to intent.
Enough of me.
"
Hello. Don't know if you'll find this message beause of the way Facebook works now (ie, badly), but i thought i'd take a shot anyway, because Trump has just been elected, and because based on your post of June 22nd (which I can't comment on or I would), you're probably thinking "what the ****!" right now.
You work for international companies, and those companies are in the business, ultimately, of making money. I get that.
I write for a publication called Breitbart. You *may* have heard of it because our Editor in Chief ran Trump's campaign. Our business is smashing your overarching business model. I don't mean capitalism, we like that. Money is good. I mean globalism. Our company motto is #War. We mean it.
Let me give you an insider tip, because you're going to need it to navigate your way through the next few years.
We have changed the world order. Not just us of course (although i like to flatter myself I've played a small part); UKIP, Farage, Le Pen, Geert Wilders, Trump, AfD, Lega Nord.... all of these have tapped into a power that was already there. And that power is people.
As you may (or may not) recall, I love Thatcher. She did a lot of good for our country. But she didn't get it all right. She thought that if you liberated a country economically the rest would follow. She was wrong.
Globalism, which is what Thatcherism ultimately spawned, is great for some (you and your friends and colleagues, mainly) but it's not good for all. And specifically, it's not good for the working classes who have been left behind and shut out, seen their sovereignty and their way of life eroded. Globalism flipped their world on its head. They are angry and they have a right to be - they've lost literally everything they had, and they didn't have much to start with.
Brexit, and now Trump, are merely the old world order righting itself again.
I didn't put any money on Brexit because I didn't quite believe the country would go for it, but I won a tidy sum betting on Trump months before he even won the Primary, because i heard his rhetoric and recognised what it represented. It's the authentic voice of unabashed, unashamed western culture. And it's the pattern for the whole of the western world for the next 20 years.
Brexit was first, now Trump. I'm sceptical about Le Pen in France beause I think their country is too far gone, but Merkel will be out at the next election in about a year's time. The EU will be gone within the decade. It may not go entirely peacefully. Prepare for that possibility.
Economically all countries have overleveraged and we will have another big collapse within the next five years. Put your money in gold and silver now.
As for your business models; embrace the change, don't fear it. Brexit is fantastic for this country, tap into the opportunities it affords. But understand that the old ways of doing things, where people were treated as commodities or assets to be moved around spreadsheets is gone. Embrace patriotism, there's nothing wrong with it. Invest in people, particularly young apprentices.
Most of all, enjoy the ride we've created for you. It's going to be wild, but if you relax into it you'll love it as much as we do.
Any questions, feel free to ask."
So now you know.
Last edited:
TheKnightWho
Established Member
The biggest take away from that is that despite the tone of establishing a new way of doing things, it doesn't provide anything bar smashing what exists and war. I'm not convinced she really knows what she wants beyond blind patriotism and money.
One of the things it lacks the most is a circumspect perspective outside of the West, though: this in-fighting, if it does happen, will only hasten the rise of countries like India and China. This is not WW1 or even WW2: the West no longer holds overwhelming power that it can retain regardless of how much it beats itself up. Talk of the "old world order" and "Western culture" only makes sense in isolation, but in reality these feel more like the death throes of patriots who refuse to accept the West has lost its hegemony.
What it misses most of all is how disaffected so many people are. Trump was elected on a turn-out lower than Romney lost on, and Bremain is overwhelmingly popular with the young and those who didn't vote. They don't not-vote out of lack of caring, but because they don't feel part of a society that cares about them anymore. Why is this important? Because the young grew up in safety, without the fear of dying any minute and without resentment of their neighbours. They see older generations as digging up old conflicts that should be long buried, and they feel disaffected because politicians have systematically ignored them for their entire lives. Likewise, much of this is the same for minorities: people of colour, Muslims and immigrants have been systematically demonised by a sprawling media that has seen to set groups against each other. Again, turnout for these groups is low. Speaking of defending the ordinary person whilst ignoring so much of the electorate that doesn't vote is a farce; speaking of helping people whose lives have been turned upside-down whilst throwing anyone who doesn't fit in that bracket under the bus is not a noble fight.
Either Breitbart et al. are psychopathically pursuing war for profit, or they are utterly blind. Neither is good. The combination of these two misunderstandings (that Trump and Brexit are populism, and not a result of even more disaffected people, or that some idea of Western hegemony can be restored through isolationism) will make all of us poorer. Perhaps Breitbart wants the conflict, but I suspect in reality that if **** hits the fan then they will be the first to start kicking and screaming. I do think it's no coincidence that she equates "restorig the old order" with "Western culture": blaming anyone but themselves for the situation they're in is the perfect scapegoat, and their set of elites can demonise other elites, then it serves their paradoxical goal of being some of the most wealthy in society who have exploited, lied and tax evaded their way to the top, whilst being seen as defenders of those who are most screwed over by that.
This is a dangerous delusion. This not about helping the ordinary person: this is about helping one set of elites profit immensely at the expense of lives and livelihoods. The old world order cannot be brought back, and attempting to do so will only hasten a shift in power to countries who have no such fears of loss. I could pick apart many other assumptions in that piece (the thinly veiled racism; the total lack of understanding of the link between trade and globalism and trade and economic growth etc.), but really this boils down to a fantasy. She almost brags about how this has been harnessed by Breitbart and others, and this really shows how much this is about ideological control for the sake of profit.
One of the things it lacks the most is a circumspect perspective outside of the West, though: this in-fighting, if it does happen, will only hasten the rise of countries like India and China. This is not WW1 or even WW2: the West no longer holds overwhelming power that it can retain regardless of how much it beats itself up. Talk of the "old world order" and "Western culture" only makes sense in isolation, but in reality these feel more like the death throes of patriots who refuse to accept the West has lost its hegemony.
What it misses most of all is how disaffected so many people are. Trump was elected on a turn-out lower than Romney lost on, and Bremain is overwhelmingly popular with the young and those who didn't vote. They don't not-vote out of lack of caring, but because they don't feel part of a society that cares about them anymore. Why is this important? Because the young grew up in safety, without the fear of dying any minute and without resentment of their neighbours. They see older generations as digging up old conflicts that should be long buried, and they feel disaffected because politicians have systematically ignored them for their entire lives. Likewise, much of this is the same for minorities: people of colour, Muslims and immigrants have been systematically demonised by a sprawling media that has seen to set groups against each other. Again, turnout for these groups is low. Speaking of defending the ordinary person whilst ignoring so much of the electorate that doesn't vote is a farce; speaking of helping people whose lives have been turned upside-down whilst throwing anyone who doesn't fit in that bracket under the bus is not a noble fight.
Either Breitbart et al. are psychopathically pursuing war for profit, or they are utterly blind. Neither is good. The combination of these two misunderstandings (that Trump and Brexit are populism, and not a result of even more disaffected people, or that some idea of Western hegemony can be restored through isolationism) will make all of us poorer. Perhaps Breitbart wants the conflict, but I suspect in reality that if **** hits the fan then they will be the first to start kicking and screaming. I do think it's no coincidence that she equates "restorig the old order" with "Western culture": blaming anyone but themselves for the situation they're in is the perfect scapegoat, and their set of elites can demonise other elites, then it serves their paradoxical goal of being some of the most wealthy in society who have exploited, lied and tax evaded their way to the top, whilst being seen as defenders of those who are most screwed over by that.
This is a dangerous delusion. This not about helping the ordinary person: this is about helping one set of elites profit immensely at the expense of lives and livelihoods. The old world order cannot be brought back, and attempting to do so will only hasten a shift in power to countries who have no such fears of loss. I could pick apart many other assumptions in that piece (the thinly veiled racism; the total lack of understanding of the link between trade and globalism and trade and economic growth etc.), but really this boils down to a fantasy. She almost brags about how this has been harnessed by Breitbart and others, and this really shows how much this is about ideological control for the sake of profit.
Last edited:
125Forever
Member
No doubt I'll be in the minority on this, but I agree with her.
There's no point in lamenting and crying because things have changed, we just have to make the most of it just like we would had Remain won and if Clinton had won.
Times are changing, and whilst some won't be happy and see the present times as the death knell of liberalism (which personally I don't agree with - I think it needs to change a heck of a lot though) others will be happy and embrace what is to come especially those working class people who were ignored and called out for many years.
The people have spoken, so now it's their time.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
Who are the people? Everyone bar the minorities? Do they not count?
EM2
Established Member
How are times changing? There's always been a quest for globalism, almost since the dawn of human history. The Romans, the Mongols, the Vikings, the Huns, the Spanish, the Ottomans, the French. The British Empire used trade via companies like the East India to expand.
And as for 'understand that the old ways of doing things, where people were treated as commodities or assets to be moved around spreadsheets is gone', will there be no more zero-hour contracts? No more outsourcing labour to cheaper markets? No more screwing down wages? Of course there will.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
No outsourcing could arguably be better for developing markets: home grown and owned companies undercutting the West. The result will be the same for us though...
125Forever
Member
Did those voters who were ignored for years also not count?
You cry about the minorities (justifiably), but did you also say 'well what is happening to the disaffected people is also unfair.'
Society is more than just 'minorities' - it's about everybody having a say (even if you disagree with them) and a stake in the running of their country.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Zero hours contracts suit some people, but not others - I would give people who want zero hours the right to keep them.
Times are also changing because of the reasons you mentioned EM2 - that the majority want a different way. Whether they are wrong or not, the majority got their way and now democracy states that their wishes be granted.
Last edited:
TheKnightWho
Established Member
You can't justify violence and hate crimes with that.
If it truly is about everyone, stop legitimising hate against minorities them by pretending they're not important and that only the concerns of Trump/Brexit voters matter.
If this was truly about empowering ordinary people I'd be all for it - that's why I like Sanders. Instead, it's about playing the blame game against all sorts of people who already face wide-scale issues in society.
Last edited:
EM2
Established Member
Do you honestly, honestly believe that once the UK leaves the EU, and Trump takes power in the USA, that those things will stop? For example, that big companies like McDonalds and Starbucks will stop expanding into undeveloped markets to the detriment of local businesses? That big companies will no longer want to reduce their cost base and outsource their staff where possible?
125Forever
Member
EVERYBODY matters and not just some. As much as I am against hatred of minorities (believe it or not) I am also against hatred of the silent majority who have been ignored for far too long.
It's not always about special interest groups - it's about all people.
Interestingly, you mention hate crimes - are you also against the rancid left who are now threatening to kill Trump voters, and also will you say that those involved in the 'death to whites' movements in the USA are equally as disgusting and wrong and those involved deserve to be incarcerated?
Maybe you should also stop pretending that only the thoughts of Clinton/Sanders/Remain matter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Who knows - maybe those companies won't even exist in a few years time.
I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.
Last edited:
EM2
Established Member
If the majority are silent, how is anyone to know what they want? You can only ignore someone who speaks up.
So what does this majority want? Less immigration, I'm guessing. And what else? Not being told what to do by foreigners, maybe.
Now, there is more immigration to the UK from outside the EU than from within it, so how will leaving the EU change that?
The courts have made a decision about the legality of the process of leaving the EU. That's British courts, interpreting British law, with no interference from the EU. But the 'majority' aren't happy about that either.
So. What *exactly* do you (they) want and how do you (they) propose that it should be achieved?
The EU treaties and ECJ case law establish a common external tariff and common commercial policy, so any trade agreement which sought to alter those tariffs would be unlawful.
EM2
Established Member
From someone also in the same circle of friends and acquaintances as the ex-UKIP Breibarter:
Last edited by a moderator:
125Forever
Member
My thoughts:
Creation of an Australian-style immigration system where we only take in those needed.
We need a population balance within the UK, as we have a population of circa 66m yet we do not have the infrastructure to be able to cope. Now, why we don't have it is another matter (is it the UK Government or is it the EU?) but when hospitals are struggling to cope with patient demand, when schools are over-subscribed and when the police are so short-staffed that they will now not always respond to 999 calls then something is badly wrong.
You cannot add people and yet not spend on them - it is economic lunacy, and IF the EU had realised that the UK was not coping well with the migrant crisis and IF it had listened instead of demand we obey them then maybe we would not be exiting.
I think that people want fairness and for the ability to work hard and provide for their families. They want comfort and to know that they belong to their community and that they matter - and sadly many of them have felt that they do not.
They did speak up but the 'you are racist, shut up shut up!' brigade scared them into silence initially. However, once they get their voice and decided that they didn't care about being called names like 'racist' then they became more vocal and this is now the end result:
UKIP success in the EU referendum
Brexit
Donald Trump becoming the 45th President of the USA
As for the Gina Miller court ruling, I strongly suspect that the Government will win its appeal and Article 50 will come to fruition with a hard Brexit.
Creation of an Australian-style immigration system where we only take in those needed.
We need a population balance within the UK, as we have a population of circa 66m yet we do not have the infrastructure to be able to cope. Now, why we don't have it is another matter (is it the UK Government or is it the EU?) but when hospitals are struggling to cope with patient demand, when schools are over-subscribed and when the police are so short-staffed that they will now not always respond to 999 calls then something is badly wrong.
You cannot add people and yet not spend on them - it is economic lunacy, and IF the EU had realised that the UK was not coping well with the migrant crisis and IF it had listened instead of demand we obey them then maybe we would not be exiting.
I think that people want fairness and for the ability to work hard and provide for their families. They want comfort and to know that they belong to their community and that they matter - and sadly many of them have felt that they do not.
They did speak up but the 'you are racist, shut up shut up!' brigade scared them into silence initially. However, once they get their voice and decided that they didn't care about being called names like 'racist' then they became more vocal and this is now the end result:
UKIP success in the EU referendum
Brexit
Donald Trump becoming the 45th President of the USA
As for the Gina Miller court ruling, I strongly suspect that the Government will win its appeal and Article 50 will come to fruition with a hard Brexit.
TheKnightWho
Established Member
You haven't answered anything I said. In fact, you totally ignored the fact that I said I care about working class people as well to complain that I apparently don't care about them, which you've used to ignore the legitimised hate crimes by special interest elites who have pitted people against minorities for decades.
This is why I'm not convinced you genuinely care: you're constantly making yourself and people like you the victim instead of actually ensuring that all people are doing alright.
EM2
Established Member
And who decides who is needed?
The Governments haven't been spending on the infrastructure, have they? Are they hamstrung by the EU? I don't think so.
As for the 'migrant crisis', do you mean those that have come into the UK in the last two years?
http://www.redcross.org.uk/What-we-do/Refugee-support/Refugee-facts-and-figures
Not exactly a flood, is it?
Why don't they? What's stopping them from working hard? I do it, everyone in my family does it. We all provide for our families and feel that we belong to our communities.
There's a difference between saying 'you, the Government, are not doing enough to help people like me' and saying 'all the foreigners in this country means my life is rubbish' and the latter is what UKIP and Trump play on.
If we have no more immigration from tomorrow, not one person that is non-UK born enters the country, what will change?
125Forever
Member
With respect though, that is just your point of view as much as mine is mine.
You mention Nigel Farage and co. as Leavers who would be/are unaffected by the result of Brexit, so I suppose you will not hesitate to mention the Remainers who would have similarly been unaffected? Just in case you forget, a few of these socialist champagne drinkers are:
Sir Bob Geldof
Graham Norton
Gina Miller
Gary Lineker
David & Victoria Beckham
Billy Bragg
Simon Cowell
Jarvis Cocker
JK Rowling
Idris Elba
EM2
Established Member
And what's wrong with being a socialist champagne drinker? What's wrong with wanting other people to be able to afford champagne?
But the big difference between the ones that I mentioned, and the ones that you did, is that the latter group are not the ones telling the 'silent majority' that it's the foreigners that are causing the problems. They're telling them that it's the ones in the former group that have fomented division in this country and that have told them that it's all the foreigners fault.
And while I'm at it, a number of those in that list came from working-class backgrounds and worked hard to attain their current status (e.g. Elba, Rowling, Beckham D, Bragg, Cocker).
Last edited:
125Forever
Member
Shouldn't that read 'I'm not convinced you genuinely care, because you don't prescribe to my way of thinking?'
Sure, people like myself were treated very badly at one point in time - but guess what, we've moved on. Unlike some, I can forgive what happened and I don't allow that to hold me back and from living a good life earning a good salary.
As for making sure others are alright, well I do my part by doing a yearly triathlon for cancer charities and this year I raised £12,000. So, yeah, that's how much of a s**tlord I am.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Sounds a bit like 'ah, yes but it's okay because they're on my team and not yours.'
All very well them being pious and telling people what to do...
TheKnightWho
Established Member
No, it's because you seem to think it's acceptable that they get thrown under the bus.
Maybe you should take responsibility for your professed opinions, and not take the Breitbart-ian viewpoint that not taking them into account is "just an opinion". This isn't personal - I am not somehow persecuting you because I'm asking you to think through the consequences of your opinions.
Also, asking people to forgive and forget when hate against them is being legitimised by Brexit and Trump is just absurd. Totally divorced from reality. Shouldn't Brexiters being forgiving global corporations for globalism by that count?
EM2
Established Member
And Nigel and Donald and Boris didn't do that, of course...
But I'll ask the question again that you so studiously avoided. What's wrong with wanting other people to be able to afford champagne?
Last edited:
- Status