The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked

[The Romulan Republic]

Perhaps, but I don't buy "other people do it to, so its okay". If I murdered someone and told the judge "But the Mexican cartels kill more people", I wouldn't expect to get off. If we presume that this is happening all the time, but this time we managed to expose it... we should be glad that we can finally nail somebody this time, not ignore it because other crimes were more effectively concealed.

And the 2016 election seems particularly brazen, and particularly catastrophic in the scope, and potential scope, of its consequences.

Not new in US politics, where presidential candidates and presidents themselves have been flat out assassinated.

Where in the quote above did I say it was ok? I said that people don't find it surprising. And while it's certainly important, I highly doubt that exposing potential Russian involvement with Brexit is going to stop it.

I don't think the outcome was inevitable, but I'm inclined to put the blame more on the self-serving cowardice, incompetence, and general lack of leadership of Pig Fucker Cameron (as well as the imbecility of roughy half the British voters).

This seems to be the general attitude of many Remainers, and IMO it is overly simplistic. Plus its the exact kind of attitude which helped directly lead to Brexit. The signs of the UK leaving were there for well over a decade before the actual referendum, if not longer.

But since this thread is discussing connections between the support for Brexit and Trumpians like genocidal apocalypse prophet Bannon, it seemed a good time to point out that both are but parts of a larger far Right movement, which represents a global threat.

While extremism (particularly on the right-wing but not exclusively so) is on the rise, I don't ascribe to the "Putin is the puppet master of the world" conspiracy theory. Will he take advantage of situations as they arise? Sure. Should we oppose those moves when they occur and try to stop them? Living in a western country I would think so. Is he secretly calling all the shots as some vast kind of "House of Cards" type schitck? I highly doubt so, especially given the points others have raised above.

My concern isn't so much Putin but that smug elitist arrogance that mainstream politicians and elites have been flouting for the past couple of decades. The rise of Trump and Brexit are symptoms of much larger problems, not a cause. While it's fun to pin all the blame on Putin, the fact that he may be involved is not the biggest problem IMO, things go a lot deeper than that. When the mainstream drops all pretense of being on the public's side, is it really all that surprising that a good chunk of the public will start throwing their sport towards "alternative' parties even if they are more extreme?

To the first point:

While an assassination is one one level a more horrific crime, since it involves actual murder, an assassination by a lone lunatic or extremist does not represent the same kind of existential threat to the fabric of our democracy, nor carry the same implications as interference by a foreign government.

Moreover, apologies if I misunderstood you, but it seems as though you are treating this somewhat as "business as usual", when... well, if it is business as usual, it sure as hell shouldn't be.

To the second point: Again, I am tired of being told that Brexit and Trump and so on are the fault of us on the Left, for not being understanding enough of the xenophobes, destructionists, neo-fascists, and the people who threw in with them. That strikes me as more a self-serving Alt. Right/third partier narrative than any thing else, though one that unfortunately some on the Left have bought into.

To the third point: At no point did I claim that Putin is the "puppet master of the world". He is one of many factors at work, albeit a particularly powerful and dangerous one.

I don't think he even cares to run every other country on a day-to-day basis. More likely, he just wants to make sure they don't interfere with Russian interests, or else sow chaos among them.

As to the rest... as dissatisfying as the status quo may be to many, the fact is that the status quo of recent years in the first world is vastly better than most of the world, both today, and throughout human history. Does that mean that we should be satisfied with it? No. But their are worse possible worlds, and we are going to get an up-close look at several of them in the coming years, I suspect. Is it surprising? No. Is it excusable? No.

So if people are so caught up in their dissatisfaction that they are willing to throw out the last hundred years of progress on democracy and civil rights on the basis that any change is better than what we have now, my sympathy is really fucking limited. Especially when people are still pushing this knee-jerk idiot line even after seeing how Trump is behaving as President, and how Brexit is threatening the very existence of the UK as a country.

If one really feels that the world today is such a terrible place that any alternative, even chaos and destruction, is preferable? Then why the hell should I listen to their concerns? They’re the God damn Joker- they just want the world to burn.

Its all very well to say "reach out to the other side". But why does that always seem to have to go one way?

You say people are tired of the status quo? I'll tell you what I'm tired of, as a liberal- being told that in order to win, the burden is always on us to "reach out to" (i.e. give ground to) people who, by and large, have no interest in meeting us half-way and are not amenable to reason. Weather they're on the Right, or fellow Leftists.

And I actually want to shake up the Centrist status quo. Which makes this counterproductive idiocy all the more infuriating.

[Tribble]

To the first point:

While an assassination is one one level a more horrific crime, since it involves actual murder, an assassination by a lone lunatic or extremist does not represent the same kind of existential threat to the fabric of our democracy, nor carry the same implications as interference by a foreign government.

Moreover, apologies if I misunderstood you, but it seems as though you are treating this somewhat as "business as usual", when... well, if it is business as usual, it sure as hell shouldn't be.

Yes I am treating this as more or less "business as usual" ableit it being an instnace where the people involved seem to have been caught in their attempts at interfering. And I agree it shouldn't happen. What I'm saying is I'm not surprised. And I certainly don't think I'm alone in that view.

To the second point: Again, I am tired of being told that Brexit and Trump and so on are the fault of us on the Left, for not being understanding enough of the xenophobes, destructionists, neo-fascists, and the people who threw in with them.

Re-read my above post. I didn't say that "the Left" was responsible for Brexit. I didn't even say that "Remainers" were responsible for Brexit. I said the attitude of many Remainers (and mainstream politicians in general) is a cause (though not the sole cause obviously) of Brexit. Even if you are absolutely right (to which I disagree), tarnishing all Brexit voters under the same brush regardless of circumstances will inevitably backfire. Pragmatically speaking its stupid, and if Remainers are hoping to swing people over to limit the damage Brexit will cause, this tactic likely won't work.

Again you are oversimplifying things. All of what you said did play a role, but they are not the sole cause of Brexit. From the way the UK entered the EU, Cameron bungling, the EU's own democratic legitimacy problems etc, everything played a role. Also while it appears that a lot more people on the right voted for Brexit than on the left it was hardly uniform - a lot of the left's traditional support base, aka the "working class" (or "stupid people" according to many Remainers) voted for Brexit too.

To the third point: At no point did I claim that Putin is the "puppet master of the world". He is one of many factors at work, albeit a particularly powerful and dangerous one.

I don't think he even cares to run every other country on a day-to-day basis. More likely, he just wants to make sure they don't interfere with Russian interests, or else sow chaos among them.

You have claimed many times now that the current US president, the most powerful man running the most powerful country in the world, is little more than Putin's puppet. Along with the UK. And by extension their allies. That sums up enough of the world right there that if true, Putin is essentially the puppet master of the world. I'm sure Putin tries to influence events as much as possible in his favour (and vice versa) but I don't see him being in that kind of positon, at least at the moment.

As to the rest... as dissatisfying as the status quo may be to many, the fact is that the status quo of recent years in the first world is vastly better than most of the world, both today, and throughout human history. Does that mean that we should be satisfied with it? No. But their are worse possible worlds, and we are going to get an up-close look at several of them in the coming years, I suspect. Is it surprising? No. Is it excusable? No.

So if people are so caught up in their dissatisfaction that they are willing to throw out the last hundred years of progress on democracy and civil rights on the basis that any change is better than what we have now, my sympathy is really fucking limited. Especially when people are still pushing this knee-jerk idiot line even after seeing how Trump is behaving as President, and how Brexit is threatening the very existence of the UK as a country.

If one really feels that the world today is such a terrible place that any alternative, even chaos and destruction, is preferable? Then why the hell should I listen to their concerns? They’re the God damn Joker- they just want the world to burn.

Its all very well to say "reach out to the other side". But why does that always seem to have to go one way?

You say people are tired of the status quo? I'll tell you what I'm tired of, as a liberal- being told that in order to win, the burden is always on us to "reach out to" (i.e. give ground to) people who, by and large, have no interest in meeting us half-way and are not amenable to reason. Weather they're on the Right, or fellow Leftists.

And I actually want to shake up the Centrist status quo. Which makes this counterproductive idiocy all the more infuriating.

There are enough legitimate concerns with the EU (such as the unelected EU Commission, Eurozone mess etc) that the idea of leaving it is not in and of itself an extreme position to take. More importantly, the continual lack of political will in mainstream politics to address these issues is a key driver which allowed for extreme parties to start taking hold. Desirable? No. But not surprising. Whether its right or not, people will eventually turn to "alternative parties" if they feel their concerns are not being met. Brexit didn't come out of the blue; the pressure had been building for at least the past decade or so, if not longer. It's the UK mainstream's utter failure to grasp that concept and try to address it which is what I find so frustrating, particularly given obvious historical examples.

Also, many of those who voted to leave still wished to maintain strong ties to Europe such as EEA membership (which even Nigel Farage supported) over a "Hard Brexit". IMO had EEA membership been on the referendum it probably would have been the winning option. While racism, xenophobia etc did play a large role, many who voted for Brexit were not racist, xenophobic etc. Remainers who choose to label all Leave voters under this brush regardless of circumstances are being counter-productive to their cause, particularly since they'll need some of these votes if they want to maintain as strong a relationship with the EU as possible.

Brexit is not as simple as "good voted stay, bad voted leave". This is, incidentally, coming from someone who hoped that the UK would have voted to Remain. I'm just not surprised at what's happening and saw it coming a long time ago.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yes I am treating this as more or less "business as usual" ableit it being an instnace where the people involved seem to have been caught in their attempts at interfering. And I agree it shouldn't happen. What I'm saying is I'm not surprised. And I certainly don't think I'm alone in that view.

Except I do think that this is beyond the norm, at least for America.

I suppose there's some tunnel vision/egocentrism there- Americans are shocked that it could happen to us. But I also think that the implications of a global power interfering in another global power are different than if it involves two smaller countries, for example, or a global power interfering in a smaller country. We are potentially talking about the second most powerful nation on Earth effectively highjacking and delegitimizing the government of the most powerful country on Earth. This is... well, its the kind of shit that you'd expect to happen in a spy thriller or a comic book, not real life. Yet here we are.

Re-read my above post. I didn't say that "the Left" was responsible for Brexit. I didn't even say that "Remainers" were responsible for Brexit.

Not exactly, maybe, but you do seem to echo a common attitude that the rise of the neo-fascists is the failure of the Left to understand and respond appropriately too "anti-establishment" sentiments. Is that correct?

I said the attitude of many Remainers (and mainstream politicians in general) is a cause (though not the sole cause obviously) of Brexit. Even if you are absolutely right (to which I disagree), tarnishing all Brexit voters under the same brush regardless of circumstances will inevitably backfire. Pragmatically speaking its stupid, and if Remainers are hoping to swing people over to limit the damage Brexit will cause, this tactic likely won't work.

I will agree that not all Remain voters are raging bigots, but at the very least, they chose to side with bigotry over the oppressed. At the very least, they were sending a signal that immigrants and minorities were, to some extent expendable for the things that they did care about. That or they just had no idea what they were doing, in which case, frankly, they ought to have exercised more care with their vote.

Same deal with Trump supporters.

Beyond that, I understand the importance of trying to win broad support, but it is a bitter pill to swallow to be told that we must reach out to those who threw so many under the bus, often in a knee-jerk reaction based on largely selfish motivations. Can you understand that feeling?

Again you are oversimplifying things. All of what you said did play a role, but they are not the sole cause of Brexit.

Where did I say that it was?

From the way the UK entered the EU, Cameron bungling, the EU's own democratic legitimacy problems etc, everything played a role. Also while it appears that a lot more people on the right voted for Brexit than on the left it was hardly uniform - a lot of the left's traditional support base, aka the "working class" (or "stupid people" according to many Remainers) voted for Brexit too.

No comment for the moment, beyond what I've already said.

You have claimed many times now that the current US president, the most powerful man running the most powerful country in the world, is little more than Putin's puppet. Along with the UK. And by extension their allies. That sums up enough of the world right there that if true, Putin is essentially the puppet master of the world. I'm sure Putin tries to influence events as much as possible in his favour (and vice versa) but I don't see him being in that kind of positon, at least at the moment.

Except that America and Britain's allies don't actually move in lockstep with them all the time (see Canada, among others, not joining the madness in Iraq 2003, for example). And you know, I think China, among others, might take exception to the claim that ruling American and Britain equals ruling the world. Even American culture's vaunted "Leader of the Free World" claim is more ego than fact.

That said, I also don't know if I'd call Trump Putin's puppet now. I think Trump does what he feels benefits his bank accounts, or his ego. Putin is, however, good at playing people, and picking people to back who's interests are likely to align with his interests.

I do think that Vladimir Putin arguably the single most powerful, and single most dangerous, person on Earth today.

There are enough legitimate concerns with the EU (such as the unelected EU Commission, Eurozone mess etc) that the idea of leaving it is not in and of itself an extreme position to take.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that, and I'd prefer to see it reformed than disbanded, but regardless, it was certainly not a pragmatic course for Britain to take, and a lot of the actual motives behind the people pushing hardest for it were very questionable, to put it mildly. Would you agree with that?

More importantly, the continual lack of political will in mainstream politics to address these issues is a key driver which allowed for extreme parties to start taking hold. Desirable? No. But not surprising. Whether its right or not, people will eventually turn to "alternative parties" if they feel their concerns are not being met. Brexit didn't come out of the blue; the pressure had been building for at least the past decade or so, if not longer. It's the UK mainstream's utter failure to grasp that concept and try to address it which is what I find so frustrating, particularly given obvious historical examples.

That is no excuse. Their are "alternative" approaches besides xenophobia, isolationism, and neo-fascism. Democratic socialism/progressivism being my preference, but its not the only one.

I do agree that the opposition needed to be more effective (obviously). See my comments regarding Pig Fucker Cameron and cowardly, self-serving incompetence, though I'm sure the blame can be spread around as well.

Also, many of those who voted to leave still wished to maintain strong ties to Europe such as EEA membership (which even Nigel Farage supported) over a "Hard Brexit".

Which, as it turned out, was wishful thinking.

IMO had EEA membership been on the referendum it probably would have been the winning option.

Maybe it ought to have been, since it looks like that's where its going anyway? And maybe its on Pig Fucker Cameron's head that it wasn't?

While racism, xenophobia etc did play a large role, many who voted for Brexit were not racist, xenophobic etc. Remainers who choose to label all Leave voters under this brush regardless of circumstances are being counter-productive to their cause, particularly since they'll need some of these votes if they want to maintain as strong a relationship with the EU as possible.

Brexit is not as simple as "good voted stay, bad voted leave". This is, incidentally, coming from someone who hoped that the UK would have voted to Remain. I'm just not surprised at what's happening and saw it coming a long time ago.

Maybe so, but whatever their motives, Brexit supporters chose to side with and strengthen the bigots, and sent a signal that their desire to kick the status quo in the balls was more important than the security and equality of immigrants and minorities, or the economic strength and political unity of their country. Or, at best, that they were unaware that that was the choice that they were making.

[Tribble]

Not exactly, maybe, but you do seem to echo a common attitude that the rise of the neo-fascists is the failure of the Left to understand and respond appropriately too "anti-establishment" sentiments. Is that correct?

No it's not. I was very specific using the deliberately "mainstream politics / politicians" rather than picking out one part of the political spectrum. Don't forget that mainstream politicians on the right were just as blindsided by events as those on the left, though it impacted them to a lesser degree.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that, and I'd prefer to see it reformed than disbanded, but regardless, it was certainly not a pragmatic course for Britain to take, and a lot of the actual motives behind the people pushing hardest for it were very questionable, to put it mildly. Would you agree with that?

I agree that I would prefer to see it reformed rather than disbanded. However, all indications are that major reforms are next to impossible for the foreseeable future, to which even Thanas would agree.

As for pragmatism, I've been well known for saying for some time now that remaining in the EEA is a pragmatic solution and could very well have been the winning compromise had it been on the table for the referendum. As it stands, I was opposed to Brexit for the reasons you cited as it was clear that if it happened the risk of a "Hard" Brexit was high. Not worth the risk IMO.

That is no excuse. Their are "alternative" approaches besides xenophobia, isolationism, and neo-fascism. Democratic socialism/progressivism being my preference, but its not the only one.

I do agree that the opposition needed to be more effective (obviously). See my comments regarding Pig Fucker Cameron and cowardly, self-serving incompetence, though I'm sure the blame can be spread around as well.

My concern is that in the end people will focus on the symptoms rather than the disease, and really the mainstream parties ought to have known better.

Maybe so, but whatever their motives, Brexit supporters chose to side with and strengthen the bigots, and sent a signal that their desire to kick the status quo in the balls was more important than the security and equality of immigrants and minorities, or the economic strength and political unity of their country. Or, at best, that they were unaware that that was the choice that they were making.

Which doesn't change the fact that unless they are disenfranchised they are still able to vote, and right now unlike Trump voters they are the actual majority atm. Also, Article 50 has been triggered. The train has already left the station and the odds of completely killing Brexit and going back to the previous status quo is low (though not impossible). IMO at this stage its a better use of Remainers time to try and get as many of the moderate Brexit supporters as possible to throw their weight behind something like the EEA than it is to try and kill Brexit outright. They'll never be able to convince the hardliners and the racists / xenophobes etc but IMO there's a fair chunk that could potentially be motivated to go along those lines. But I doubt that will work if they're all being lumped together into one big pile for the Remainers' pissing contest. Call out the racists, xenohpobes etc for sure, but at least acknowledge that there was more to Brexit than just that.

[The Romulan Republic]

I suppose.

I'll acknowledge that it is a different situation than in the US, where Trump did not and does not actually have popular support.

But I also wonder if, as far as handling Brexit, its something of a moot point, because my understanding was that the EU basically wanted a hard Brexit.

But I wouldn't know where to start with Britain, given the apparently decrepit state of your opposition parties, except to say that you need some new parties. And yeah, that's always a long shot, but since it looks like the Conservatives may actually gain seats despite utterly failing and setting the country on a course to ruination, I don't see that it could get much worse for trying to go that route.

[Tribble]

I suppose.

I'll acknowledge that it is a different situation than in the US, where Trump did not and does not actually have popular support.

But I also wonder if, as far as handling Brexit, its something of a moot point, because my understanding was that the EU basically wanted a hard Brexit.

Thanas may correct me here, IMO the EU would certainly be content with the UK staying in the EEA since it still maintains the 4 "fundamental freedoms". Jury's out as to whether or not the EU could force the UK to leave seeing as the EEA is technically a separate organisation and the UK is a signatory to it. I doubt they'd want to though.

But I wouldn't know where to start with Britain, given the apparently decrepit state of your opposition parties, except to say that you need some new parties. And yeah, that's always a long shot, but since it looks like the Conservatives may actually gain seats despite utterly failing and setting the country on a course to ruination, I don't see that it could get much worse for trying to go that route.

Well not my opposition parties exactly seeing as I live in Toronto, but yes. May was a Remain supporter initially, it's possible that one reason why she triggered the election was to make her majority big enough that she could safely disregard the real hardliners. I doubt that though.

Missed from earlier:

Except I do think that this is beyond the norm, at least for America.

I suppose there's some tunnel vision/egocentrism there- Americans are shocked that it could happen to us. But I also think that the implications of a global power interfering in another global power are different than if it involves two smaller countries, for example, or a global power interfering in a smaller country. We are potentially talking about the second most powerful nation on Earth effectively highjacking and delegitimizing the government of the most powerful country on Earth. This is... well, its the kind of shit that you'd expect to happen in a spy thriller or a comic book, not real life. Yet here we are.

Hmm, well it might be more public than it was before. Hard to say. Does Bush winning via his brother and friends at the Supreme Court count?

Except that America and Britain's allies don't actually move in lockstep with them all the time (see Canada, among others, not joining the madness in Iraq 2003, for example). And you know, I think China, among others, might take exception to the claim that ruling American and Britain equals ruling the world. Even American culture's vaunted "Leader of the Free World" claim is more ego than fact.

That said, I also don't know if I'd call Trump Putin's puppet now. I think Trump does what he feels benefits his bank accounts, or his ego. Putin is, however, good at playing people, and picking people to back who's interests are likely to align with his interests.

I do think that Vladimir Putin arguably the single most powerful, and single most dangerous, person on Earth today.

Oh I agree that Putin's a threat, but he's simpler to deal with since his ambitions are to increase power for himself, and increase power for Russia (which in his mind is probably one and the same) and those you can work around. While he'll push boundaries whenever possible, one thing he is not is suicidal. I'm willing to bet he's going to end up regretting backing Trump if he hasn't already.

Trump is willing to do whatever the hell he wants to satisfy his ego at any given moment even if its not in his own interests. That's much more dangerous if you ask me.

I will agree that not all Remain voters are raging bigots, but at the very least, they chose to side with bigotry over the oppressed. At the very least, they were sending a signal that immigrants and minorities were, to some extent expendable for the things that they did care about. That or they just had no idea what they were doing, in which case, frankly, they ought to have exercised more care with their vote.

Same deal with Trump supporters.

Beyond that, I understand the importance of trying to win broad support, but it is a bitter pill to swallow to be told that we must reach out to those who threw so many under the bus, often in a knee-jerk reaction based on largely selfish motivations. Can you understand that feeling?

I understand the feeling, and yes it's not easy. Again, were I British I would not have voted for Brexit. But IMO they are now past the point where mud-throwing will accomplish much, and if anything it will just alienate votes / influence that are needed. Call out the racists/ xenophobes etc, but acknowledge there was more to it than that.