Come the day, login into YouGuv, choose to be inny or an outey.
If you choose inny you don't need a visa to go to the continent, get to keep on with EU science projects and so on, get duty frees etc.
If you are an outey, you get independence from all that EU stuff.
Optional for innies is pay by Euro in the UK (but only by bank card).-- not_morrison_rm, Nov 04 2018 Space crime https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-49457912law applied on a per individual, rather than per geography, basis [calum, Aug 27 2019] Wiki: How to Start Your Own Country https://en.wikipedi...rt_Your_Own_CountryHow To Start Your Own Country is a six-part BBC Television documentary comedy series aired between August and September 2005. The show was presented by British writer/comedian Danny Wallace and followed his quest to start his own country in his flat in Bow, London. The micronation he created was eventually named "Lovely". [Dub, Oct 03 2019] IMDB: Passport to Pimlico (1949) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041737/// Residents of a part of London declare independence when they discover an old treaty. This leads to the need for a "Passport to Pimlico". // [Dub, Oct 03 2019] // get independence from all that EU stuff. //
... and Calais, Aquitaine and Anjou ?-- 8th of 7, Nov 04 2018 If I were an innie, would I get to keep my human rights, and other mod. cons?-- Loris, Nov 05 2018 No.-- 8th of 7, Nov 05 2018 You should just be required to have your belly button examined at all border crossings. Innies get EU benefits; outies get Brexit benefits. Elective conversion surgery is always available for those unhappy with their existing configuration.-- xenzag, Nov 05 2018 //would I get to keep my human rights// - if you're referring to the rights and obligations you have arising from the UK's membership of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR, established under the European Convention on Human Rights (also ECHR)), then the answer is 'yes', whichever side you're on, because the ECHRs are not part of the European Union and exist under a separate legislative framework. So, despite frothing-at-the-mouth Brexit supporters ranting at these strange foreign human rights (although the UK was a principal author of the ECHR) encroaching on their ability to be nasty to others, Brexit will make no difference in this area.-- hippo, Nov 05 2018 I thought that while in the EU you had heuman rights. Ha-- xenzag, Nov 05 2018 ^ wa waa waah
and you Beata believe it.-- not_morrison_rm, Nov 05 2018 iirc, being a signatory to the EConHR and therefore subject to jurisdiction of the ECofHR is a precondition to membership of the EU, so while the mouth-frothers will be able to continue m.-f.ing for a while, leaving the EU removes an obstacle to leaving the ECHRs, allowing them to dream still of being able to be mean to brown people without legal repercussions (this is particularly true of the current prime minister, who made much show of wanting to leave the ECHRs, primarily because (a) they made her job harder and (b) she kept fucking up compliance).
The idea itself is, I feel, just a worked example of the "what if you could choose what laws you are required to comply with?" thought experiment / stoner discourse. The nice thing about this example is that the EU was not really concerned with the realms of criminal activity (at least, not primarily) so adopting a maximally granular approach to EU membership doesn't run into mismatches about the right to get biffed in the beezer.
We can take a lead from the US Tech Giants by having for each and every person in the UK a file, the primary purpose of which is to record what their chosen jurisdictional framework is. This sort of colossal IT project is of course no problem for the govt. to manage, not least of all because there is the option of C&Ping the Chinese Social Credit Score system and sticking a crown on it.
Anyway, the reason for the file is to allow the state to provide the infrastructure for consumer- sorry, individual-led jurisdictional compliance and then make parts of it available to commercial organisations who are then able to bear the admin burden of compliance (just as admin burden of VAT is borne by companies, while (by and large) the cost is borne by consumers). For example, the Brexit-Elect will see prices for products which have WTO tariffs or bilateral-agreement tariffs attached where as the Brexit-Preterite will not have to worry about whether their new kettle has a plug on it or not.
In this model, for the Brexit-Preterite the state acts as a middle man between the consumer and the EU. For example, the state will fulfill the terms of the four freedoms insofar as the state can, but, when the Brexit-Preterite state-within-a- state falls into financial ruin, the state proper will enforce EU-mandated crippling austerity. As the state has shown itself perfectly capable of directing austerity so that it harms societal groupings that were even before austerity less likely to vote for the Conservative party, I don't doubt that it has the initiative to be only slightly more targeted about how it metes this out. Especially if we C&P the Chinese SCS system.
These primarily technical solutions have one critical added bonus: they allow the side by side comparison of the Elect and Preterite models and, if we're willing to take an anti-Calvinist approach to things, we might allow individuals to make a (limited) number of switches between the two groups, until one group reaches say 75% of the population and, having tried the both options, this supermajority of better informed Crown subjects is enough to fix the UK's position with reference to Brexit.-- calum, Nov 05 2018 Clever - rather than the traditional top-down means of setting laws, you're proposing a sort of organic, bottom-up clustering of emergent jurisdictional frameworks. I think these will naturally move from a chaotic soup of many bespoke jurisdictions to just a few, as people decide to go along with their friends, bow to commercial pressures ("5% off if you adopt the John Lewis jurisdiction while in store!"), or are forced into one by their employers ("You can only work here if you follow these laws").-- hippo, Nov 05 2018 This could get messy with families and immigrants and Gibraltar...
I picture a caste system kind of framework growing by default.-- RayfordSteele, Nov 05 2018 Some people will choose a framework with less taxes. How will they be selectively denied the related degree of government services? If you join a framework with 50% lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put you at a lower priority for health care? What about roads? If you want a framework with less government inspection of eating establishments are your complaints about seeing rats in the kitchen ignored? If your framework offers much smaller education costs will your business be forbidden to hire people from well-funded schools?-- Voice, Nov 05 2018 // If you join a framework with 50% lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put you at a lower priority for health care? //
Yes. It's called "The U.S.A."
// What about roads? //
It's part of Greece (small island in the Aegean, north-east of Crete, one of the Dodecanese), so will remain in the EU (until Greece crashes out of the Euro zone because the Krauts are fed up with picking up the tab).
Oh sorry, roads not Rhodes. Pay by use, run by a not-for-profit company independent of central government.
// If you want a framework with less government inspection of eating establishments are your complaints about seeing rats in the kitchen ignored? //
What, like they are now ? On the plus side, you can take your own .22 rifle and personally address the problem while waiting for your meal.
// If your framework offers much smaller education costs will your business be forbidden to hire people from well-funded schools? //
No; they pay higher taxes because they had better education, so you have to pay proportionately more for their services.
// Gibraltar. //
No problem there, once Britain invades and conquers Spain.
// to be mean to brown people without legal repercussions (this is particularly true of the current prime minister, //
That seems unfair; the current prime minister doesn't display such prejudice, in that she's mean to everyone without fear or favour - not just the heavily suntanned.-- 8th of 7, Nov 05 2018 Can't you guys stick to talking about our politics like you always do? Brexit, Shmexit-- theircompetitor, Nov 05 2018 Regrettably, the Trump Blocker filter ( NetLingo - chrome web store) means I have less than no information about US politics.
Paradoxically, even with the Trump filter on, the Trump filter page is still visible on the Chrome Store...-- not_morrison_rm, Nov 05 2018 // How will they be selectively denied the related degree of government services? If you join a framework with 50% lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put you at a lower priority for health care? What about roads?//So, not a little part of my commentary was nibbling around the amazing stupidity of Her Maj's Government's proposals for a series of *as yet not extant* technical solutions to the otherwise intractable problem of enforcing customs checks when you are unable to impose a hard border between Ireland and Norn Iron).
But! if we are willing to subject ourselves to a Xianjiang- like high tech surveillance state it should be really rather easy to ensure that:(1) ERDF-funded roads are accessible to only the Brexit-Preterite (which should not be a problem as the areas of the UK with ERDF-funded roads (viz. Scotland) were significantly in favour of remaining as part of the EU)(2) a lower priority for healthcare is also immensely doable: you queue here for the Brexit-Preterite NHS and here, by the bins, for the US-model Brexit-Elect private health service.3. The EU doesn't bother its arse too much with primary and secondary education (US: K-12, I think) but yes tons of good research cash is EU-backed and budding PhDs can choose their status to suit their chances of getting that funding.(4) I don't think that the EU gives a franco- germanic fuck about restaurant inspection - to them capers and rat shit are all the same - because the EU is concerned with its four fundamental freedoms within its borders. It is a trading bloc, it has always been a trading bloc. The social policy stuff is around ensuring that there a broadly unified approach to controllable issues which will affect whether people, goods, capital, establishment can move with the minimum of friction (recognising that geographic and cultural barriers are a significant issue, they focus on what can be managed). Restaurant inspection is what might be termed a devolved issue.-- calum, Nov 05 2018 // its four fundamental freedoms within its borders. //
Freedom for the french to have their own way on everything.
Freedom for the Germans to sit back and quietly analyse their two previous failures (the Schlieffen plan and Fall Gelb) so that they can eventually go for the "Third Time Lucky" option (Hint: don't fight a European land war on two fronts).
Freedom for politicians and bureaucrats to eat big dinners and travel everywhere First Class at everyone else's expense.
Freedom for the spanish to put the entire Atlantic ocean through a fine-mesh net, extract all the marine life down to diatom size, and then sell the resulting slurry as "paella".-- 8th of 7, Nov 05 2018 ^ Yes, but what about the bad points?-- not_morrison_rm, Nov 05 2018 Belgium will continue to exist.-- 8th of 7, Nov 05 2018 //Choose your own apres-Brexit status// Ah, the great illusion! Regardless of whether you are an inny or an outey, you will still be governed by the government. Faceless bureaucrats & populist politicians will still control your lives & demand that you either give them a good chunk of your wealth every year or be sent to prison. Choice of governments is no choice at all. So there! With knobs on! :)-- DrBob, Nov 06 2018 Hey! I'm a bureaucrat and I'm not faceless!-- hippo, Nov 06 2018 // //would I get to keep my human rights// - if you're referring to the rights and obligations you have arising from the UK's membership of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR, established under the European Convention on Human Rights (also ECHR)), then the answer is 'yes', whichever side you're on, because the ECHRs are not part of the European Union and exist under a separate legislative framework. So, despite frothing-at-the-mouth Brexit supporters ranting at these strange foreign human rights (although the UK was a principal author of the ECHR) encroaching on their ability to be nasty to others, Brexit will make no difference in this area.//
As an addenendum to what calum said, I have a referendum communication - a pamphlet addressed and delivered to me. It's called: "NOT SURE WHICH WAY TO VOTE ON 23 JUNE?"
On the back page there's a set of quotes, including one from Sir Richard DearLove, former Chief of MI6: "Brexit would bring two potentially important security gains: the ability to dump the European Convention on Human Rights ... and, more importantly, greater control over immigration from the European Union."
So there are several points which could be made about that, but I'll restrict myself to two:
1) That this guys career was in politics and spying rather than porn disproves nominative determinism to my satisfaction. 2) He may be an m.f.-er, but he's an m.f-er with significant influence in the department of being nasty to others.-- Loris, Nov 06 2018 You mean he's also worked in HR?-- RayfordSteele, Nov 06 2018 Just because someone is or has been involved in HR doesn't mean that they're automatically a petty, vicious, friendless misanthropic anally-retentive xenophobic psychopath with delusions of mediocrity.
Then again, a three metre long quadrupedal mammal covered in orange and black striped fur and with huge teeth and long sharp claws might not be a tiger; but the statistical evidence suggests that it probably is. The only way to be sure is to see if it tries to kill you. That will narrow the error bars quite a lot.-- 8th of 7, Nov 06 2018 Further evidence that NASA has multifarious benefits: the recent commission of the first Space Crime (see link) has revealed that there are developed world governments who are willing to countenance and implement a protocol for the application of law on a per individual basis. Our dream here can become a reality!-- calum, Aug 27 2019 I am interested in how the proposal put forward in this idea would be enacted in the case of environmental law. For example, thanks to the EU, British beaches are, for the most part, no longer covered in raw sewage. The only solution possible that ensures that, post-Brexit, 'remainers' continue to enjoy the benefits of EU membership in this way without conferring those same benefits on 'leavers' is to retain the existing environmental laws that keep our beaches clean, but at the same time have beaches patrolled by wardens who fling faeces in the direction of these leavers.-- hippo, Aug 27 2019 // British beaches are, for the most part, no longer covered in raw sewage. //
There are worse things than raw sewage; for example, illegal immigrants keep showing up on the south coast.-- 8th of 7, Aug 27 2019 Steady on, [8th]; that's the sort of remark that gives bigots a bad name: you're not going to assimilate many people with *that* sort of attitude.-- pertinax, Aug 28 2019 Sadly, there seems to be a great deal of irrational and ill-considered prejudice against bigots. What's worse, there seems to be no hesitation in voicing these ideas loudly and in public, which is quite frankly pretty disgusting. Other groups are protected from discrimination by laws and customs, but no-one seems to give a damn about bigots. Shameful, we call it. It's high time something was done.-- 8th of 7, Aug 28 2019 hippo's shit-in-the-kisser approach to the consistently granular application of the Brexit-elect / preterite split has many benefits, not least that it will create jobs, not just for jobby wheechers themselves but also to ensure that a quality British product is hurled into the pusses of the beachgoing Brexit-elect. Yes, farms full of free range gammon-fed Tories, chinos heaped round their ankles, straining to eject onto the Lincolnshire turf hard black pellets of keech, British, blue passport-having keech, which will be scooped up by British farm labourers, fed into the British supply chain and, ultimately, chucked in the British faces of those Britishers who want this.-- calum, Aug 28 2019 The other option is a geographically based self sorting approach with slurry blasted indiscriminately all over beaches in Brexit-voting constituencies, with the Brexit elect presumably all to happy to schlep across the country for the opportunity to squelch shite between their toes, waving flies away while slurping on the strawberry mivvy that they got for three rat pelts and a furtive tug at the ice cream man's penis. A grand day out.-- calum, Aug 28 2019 The latest good news is that parliament may be suspended.
We consider this excellent. Brexit or no Brexit, there should be sufficient supplies of chairs and rope to suspend all current and prospective MPs from lamp posts in the highways and byways of Westminster.
Perhaps some could be suspended around the Tower of London, so that the ravens can peck at their eyeballs. That would have the additional benefit of being interesting to tourists, who are always eager to partake of fine old English traditions. Placing the heads of traitors on pikes on Tower Green is well overdue for a revival.-- 8th of 7, Aug 28 2019 //parliament may be suspended.//
I think this is more face-value than reported. I'll bet the hot air inside has finally built to levels allowing significant buoyancy.-- bs0u0155, Aug 28 2019 Comes with a small houses of parliament, with an off switch.-- not_morrison_rm, Aug 30 2019 Disappointed this is not Schrödinger's Brexit-- theircompetitor, Aug 30 2019 <Starts charging main weapons systems so as to be ready if [tc] fails to correct the mis-spelling of "Schrödinger" within the grace period allowed/>-- 8th of 7, Aug 30 2019 I don't think it's controversial to point out at this stage that things are not going well in the Brexit camp.
They said it wouldn't be easy. It turns out it's quite difficult.
They said we'd have lots of new trade deals. Turns out we risk losing the majority of the ones we already have.
They said it was for the good of the common folk. Turns out, it's going to be them who are hit hardest.
They said it was two fingers up at the establishment - turns out the establishment are riding this wave all the way to the bank.
They said the economy wouldn't be effected. Until it was. Then they said it wouldn't be effected much. Until it was. Then they said "how about that Dunkirk Spirit?" as if that was a good thing. Turns out we'll be stockpiling food and medicine.
They lied, and lied, and lied again - forget the mess it's caused already. Doesn't anyone care about the bare-faced effrontery of the ever-moving goalposts sported by serial liars who, under any normal circumstances would have been facing investigation, criminal charges or at the very least, media-led shame and sanction by now?
Again, forget the actual nonsense that the Brexit idea was when it was first raised 3 years (3 years!) ago. We know there was a vote, with a marginal majority on the one side. How did we get from there to this objectively corrupt, cynical and sorry state of affairs? Where did competence go? Sense? Simple practicality? - All those things we'd normally espouse (perhaps inappropriately, given the recent evidence) as being "British" values?
I've *never* seen such venal, opportunistic and cynical behaviour in politics at any point in my life before this shit-shower - but the hi-jacking of the narrative by evidently corrupt and self-serving snake-oil peddlers/paid-agitators is something new, something utterly repugnant.
I've voted over the entire political spectrum in my time, but could never, ever vote Conservative again after this display. In hindsight, Ed Milliband would have been a far safer pair of hands - we should invest in some kind of time-machine and go back to 2015 and tell him not to eat that bacon sandwich.-- zen_tom, Aug 30 2019 //Corrupt// and //unelected// both fictitious I'm afraid [bigs] the EU is one of the most transparent institutions in the world and does more to actively combat corruption and shadow-money than any other in the world today. It's the backroom deals of the anti-EU forces that bankroll most of the un-democratic regimes in the world, as well as sponsoring terrorism, and stopping the rich from paying appropriate taxes.
It's a simple case of good vs evil, and Brexit is on the nasty side, I'm afraid.
But that's not the point - the point I was making was that *irrespective* of the incontrovertibly immoral and corrupt nature of Brexit - putting that aside - focusing only on how well everything is going - it's fair to say, having spent many billions on nothing, and with the pound withering further, raising prices and lowering living standards at home, the prospect of food and medicine shortages, turning Kent into a lorry-park, Swindon, Sunderland, Scunthorpe and other large industrial casualties, the banks making a packet and lawyers, back-room traders and spivs creaming off their piece, it's really not going well so far...
Yes, RT and other biased news-services will continue to spin the foreign propaganda (since it's clearly in their advantage to do so, geopolitically speaking) but the rest of the free world is, quite rightly, wondering what happened to our previously sane, sensible and free country.-- zen_tom, Aug 31 2019 //start of the end of the global economy// that's not a good thing. I know it's been twisted by many in the alt-media, but globalisation is a good thing. It can mean upheaval and change - but at least with the EU, a person is backed and protected against the worst of this, wheras, without a supra-national set of rights, protections and principles, any big corporation who wants to bung a small and desperate government a few shadowy dollars can muscle in on an unprotected populace and there's no come-backs. That's what Brexit will enable - big corporations moving in on small and unprotected communities, fracking, polluting, exploiting whatever weakness they can create in order to suck out whatever profit they can make after preying on the frightened local population. Hoovering up real-estate, putting small enterprises out of business and moving in, increasing their profit margins, and scalping any remaining profits in surrounding markets for longer-term gain. It's an incremental game, and without appropriate regulation - and being able to actively lobby small and weakened governments - they'll clean up - to everybody's detriment.
That's the legacy of Brexit - it's not going to be pretty, and the big businesses have already moved in on the government, they can smell the meat, and they've branded that smell "Dunkirk Spirit" - it does wonders in the focus groups.-- zen_tom, Aug 31 2019 The mistake was in ever having the referendum, it seems, and that's surely on Cameron. Nothing like this should ever have been contemplated without a significantly larger than 50 percent base of support. After all, even if things were going that way, they could have waited for a much larger majority in Parliament to attempt it.
On the other hand, what's really at stake here, and surely in the States, is does the nation state even matter. Should it even be a construct. Significant percentages of us seem oddly for that in some ways (e.g. no borders) while oddly against that (god forbid Facebook should have its own currency).
The [UK] will do fine either way, in the short to medium term.-- theircompetitor, Aug 31 2019 For me it's the natural extension of classical liberal principles to maximise freedoms at the personal level, while placing some limitations on the excesses of freedom at the very large corporate level. Since we now have corporations whose economies are far larger than the average nation state, it makes sense to extend governance and legislative scope on an international scale. Whilst certainly not perfect, the EU did seem to get the balance in favour of promoting the freedoms of the individual, while acting as a buffer to the externality-exploiting excesses of the larger corporations and dodgy money flows.
If you want to solve international problems without resorting to violence, you need international legislative bodies - ideally democratic ones like the EU, where everyone gets a fair say.-- zen_tom, Aug 31 2019 // If you want to solve international problems without resorting to violence //
But what if you like violence and see it as a rapid and expedient solution ?-- 8th of 7, Aug 31 2019 depends on your definition of democratic. The Senate and Electoral College (and even states govts. themselves) are widely viewed as un-democratic, but they are helping to preserve the union by preventing tyrannies of majorities.
For the EU to have a long term chance it needs a lot more revenue sharing from the rich states. In this climate that is certainly not going to happen.-- theircompetitor, Aug 31 2019 //But what if you like violence and see it as a rapid and expedient solution ?// Then carry on as we are - Brexit ahoy!
//Capitalism has been great to develop technology and efficiency but now the rewards all end up in multinationals.// Interestingly, one of the key benefits of business within the EU is that relatively small businesses can link up in complex supply chain networks and achieve more in terms of technological advancement than a single and inefficient multinational can do - benefiting the individuals up and down the supply chain. Those supply chain linkages that cross the new border will shrivel as the cost and instability involved in maintaining them makes them less viable, and as such many of the small to medium sized, technologically advanced businesses that hitherto worked so well will have to generalise once more, losing some of the high-tech advantage they had previously been able to attain through focus and specialisation.
Importing and exporting our food to and from America and the Southern Hemisphere anglophone countries is unlikely to do much for our overall CO2 footprint, vs relatively speedy just-in-time supply logistics already in place to deploy millions of fresh fruit and vegetables to supermarkets across the country.
It will be interesting to see what will happen in terms of lettuce and other fresh vegetables.
If a producer in Span or Italy can effectively deliver their produce to a supermarket in Weston Super Mare and still make it worth their while, benefiting as they do from near year-round sunshine, that's going to take a huge amount of on-the-spot logistics to be running like clockwork. It might be possible for a UK producer to produce a similar yield using heated greenhouses, perhaps. That's likely to take time to setup, plus all the infrastructure and logistics, in the meantime, I'd recommend getting a larger freezer. Fresh food is going to be more expensive/harder to come by.
Isolating ourselves might be attractive if you dislike capitalism, globalisation, progress, and opportunity. I can see that argument is self- consistent. I think while these things all have their downsides (and environmental impact is a big and serious one) - they could, on balance, with appropriate multi-national legal frameworks (like the EU) be improved and, I hope, see us through for the next however many millennia.
Contrary to how the Brexiters would have it, the "Dunkirk Spirit" is not to turn our backs on the problems in front of us and run away. It's to make the best of things and muck in, doing our duty and acting responsibly to try and make things better. Engaging with and using our considerable sway in the European Parliament is an opportunity to improve what we don't like. More, it should be our duty. *That* is proper Dunkirk Spirit.
Isolating ourselves isn't going to encourage anyone else to stop producing CO2, or to save the planet. We might be able to ignore it in the short-term, but it'll still end up pricing land at the top of hills at a premium.
Better to use our 3rd largest voice in the largest political-trading block on the planet and actually use that democratic mandate and power to do some good.
Instead, our idiot Brexit MEPs do nothing, they fail to turn up to represent us and argue our case. Fisheries, Farming, Environment, anything, and they make out the whole thing is some great foreign imposition. They should be earning their living by doing their job, which is to represent us. That's fucking democracy. Not whinging from the sidelines like a bunch of brats. (and I just realised, in case it's ambiguous [bigs] - that last is intended for the aforementioned Brexit MEPs in particular, and not a disparagement to be attributed more widely)-- zen_tom, Aug 31 2019 if there's one thing that unites all people it is that other people have to do their fucken job :)-- theircompetitor, Aug 31 2019 Yes - that is certainly a universal :)-- zen_tom, Aug 31 2019 // I don't like throwing whole families into poverty //
You should try to get invited on one of [MaxwellBuchanan]'s Winter Wanderings. When it snows, he orders out the coach-and-six and tours a small portion of his property portfolio. When he finds any residents who are behind with their rent, the men-at-arms following behind turf the occupants out into the road; their possessions, if any, are loaded onto carts in lieu of rent and interest payments.
He particularly enjoys the process if the tenants are widows with children; he spends hours in front of a full-length mirror in his top hat and tailcoat, practicing his MUHWHAHAHAHAs ....-- 8th of 7, Aug 31 2019 Boris loses majority, kind people in white coats and large butterfly nets are helping him look for it-- not_morrison_rm, Sep 03 2019 Hopefully there will be an election. There are several possibilities, all of them wretchedly bad for the established parties. Corbyn might be handed the Poison Chalice; Boris might get a thumping majority; best would be another hung parliament with the Brexit party holding the balance of power.
Remember how well the Brexit party did at the Euro elections ?
<The Sixth Sense>
" I see dead people ... Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're dead."
</The Sixth Sense>
If anyone's interested, we're running a special deal this week on canned foods and shotguns ...-- 8th of 7, Sep 03 2019 //small plastic cows// "OK Boris, let's go over it again.,These ones are small, and," gesturing out the window, "those ones, are *far away*."
It's been an interesting night, and yes, UK politics should never, ever be this interesting - I'm looking forward to one day when we can all enjoy a really genuine, all-round inclusive, national sigh of relief - and let everything go back to being tedious again - perhaps get it down as some kind of celebratory Bank holiday.
That's probably not going to happen for a good time yet, so in the meantime, for the fun of it - my preference would be an as-yet entirely fictional labour, lib-dem, snp and green coalition. Though no election would likely take place before the 31st of October - or until the exit date is expunged and can-kicked down the road to the next impasse.-- zen_tom, Sep 03 2019 The problem is, now that they've prevented Brexit (which they have), they instead have a large ungovernable population who have been told that their votes do not matter. This is far, far worse than any no-deal Brexit. Nobody is going to win out of this.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 03 2019 Er, Nigel Farage ?-- 8th of 7, Sep 03 2019 I think e's an 'im.-- MaxwellBuchanan, Sep 03 2019 I vote going back to the normal British politics, with some mp droning on about subclause 15b in a fisheries act...-- not_morrison_rm, Sep 04 2019 //UK politics should never, ever be this interesting//Indeed - this is the most depressing outcome of the whole Brexit omnishambles, that people are interested in, and following every labyrinthine twist and turn of, politics. They are doing this not out of an academic interest in the process or out of admiration for the noble personalities involved, but because they have to be, to see what kind of shit-smeared wool is being pulled over their eyes, to see what self-serving lies and spineless changes of direction politicians are making, to see what new divisions and hatred are being brewed up, and to see what new chaos the country is being plunged into.-- hippo, Sep 04 2019 There are precedents - the events of 1639-1641, which were followed by what Simon Scharma eloquently described as " ... a breakdown of deference of catastrophic proportions."
This is a typical Black Swan. It's pretty much the end of a 300 year old system, and in a few years, possibly only months, the whole "landscape" will be changed beyond recognition.-- 8th of 7, Sep 04 2019 It's not a //large ungovernable population//, it's a medium-sized, radicalised population, groomed on a diet of fear, manufactured outrage and faux identity politics.
There's no simple solution to the mental-health legacy that's been caused by whipping up this particular sub-group within the population - but pandering to it wont cure it of its damaging inconsistencies.
What's needed now is some brutal honesty, more than a little transparency, and the economic oomph that only a quick and definite revocation of the madness can bring about.
But, like dealing with a confused wild animal finding itself in unfamiliar surroundings - we need to do this cautiously. Yes, the wounded creature might well lash out in blind frustration - we've already seen the harm done by individuals driven mad by the topsy- turvy lies and rhetoric. Innocents have been hurt, even killed after the weakest of these sorry folks have snapped under the weight of the cognitive dissonance they've been spoonfed and forced to carry around with them for the last 3 years.
After we're free of the poison, we can enjoy the benefits of a new economic golden age, nationalise the railways, build loads of new houses, fund public services - enjoy all the benefits of a revitalised and reinvigorated economy. But we need to sort out the damaging toxicity first.
Yes [8th] we need to change the //landscape// That might well mean investigating the most dishonest media who've most eagerly collaborated in the radicalisation - the constant spewing of black-is-white and white-is-black until we're where we are now and nobody believes anything, no matter how objective anymore. They've worked exclusively on this unfortunate and vulnerable portion of the electorate who've been so cruelly used during all of this.
We should also demand a public inquiry into the abuses of power, open dishonesty and criminal profligacy of the political torch- bearers of Brexit - it should not be acceptable behaviour to openly lie without sanction - corporate bosses are bound by a legally enforced expectation of truth - political leaders should have similar obligations applied to them.
But the people? No, we shouldn't fear them, we should be doing all we can to gently rehabilitate them from the worst effects of the ongoing cultist abuse they've endured. You can't do that in the middle of a massive self-imposed, fear-induced recession.-- zen_tom, Sep 04 2019 //after we're free of the poison, we can enjoy the benefits of a new economic golden age, nationalise the railways, build loads of new houses, fund public services - enjoy all the benefits of a revitalised and reinvigorated economy. But we need to sort out the damaging toxicity first.//
when you're done, are you available for a few minor Middle Eastern skirmishes that need solving?-- theircompetitor, Sep 04 2019 seriously-- theircompetitor, Sep 04 2019 // a public inquiry //
By who ?
And who will trust the result ?
Thankfully, the credibility of the majority of governmental institutions has been damaged beyond repair, to the point where they will soon be unable to function at all; they're pretty much crippled now. Facts, facts, facts. Policy must be fact-based and be able to demonstrate an academically rigorous methodology, and be externally reviewed and validated. There must be no room for opinions, beliefs or ideology.
// a few minor Middle Eastern skirmishes that need solving? //
Very quick and easy to solve, by means of a few well-placed MIRVs. Simply vapourize Jerusalem and Mecca. That neatly removes many irresolvable sources of contention.
The Vatican is more problematic, but a couple of Davy Crocket sized tac-nukes should do the job. Care will be needed not to damage any of the really historic stuff in the vicinity.-- 8th of 7, Sep 04 2019 Deplorables suggests it's their fault - I don't think that's the case. They've just been used and polarised into a faith-based mindset that rejects information that doesn't fit their increasingly dislocated world view. It's the same pattern as that seen in cults and radicalisation the world over - the only difference being they're being worked on in plain sight, using the industrial-grade communications infrastructure owned, run and developed by a relatively small number of offshore foreign interests.
///Facts, facts, facts. Policy must be fact-based and be able to demonstrate an academically rigorous methodology, and be externally reviewed and validated./// Exactly - and precisely this. Any public inquiry should work on a rigorously and objectively monitored basis - the whole working of government needs to be moved to working like this.-- zen_tom, Sep 04 2019 Well done. You have recognized the new world order, and - more importantly - how it operates. What's more, the traditional institutions are uniquely vulnerable to that class of attack and they have (nor can they have) any effective defence against it because of they way they have evolved; the environment for which they were suited has been destroyed.
// the whole working of government needs to be moved to working like this. //
It does; indeed, it will. That means the end for politics and politicians, of course, but nobody will mourn their passing.
A public enquiry can establish "the facts", but in a bigger sense it's too late. There is no way back. In the same way that tanks, fluoroposphonyl chemical weapons and 3D printing cannot be "un-invented", it is not now possible to return to the status ad quem, no more than it is possible to go back to crop rotation under the three-field system or regular stagecoach services.
The world as you knew it has gone. Adapt or die.
If you do find a way to cram the large glowing mushroom cloud back into the nice shiny little plutonium sphere you had a few microseconds ago, we'd be fascinated to know how you do it.
To sum up: "We are the Borg. Resistance is Futile. Your will be Assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.Freedom is irrelevant, self determination is irrelevant. You must comply. Your life as you know it is over. "
We now return you to your regular programming ...-- 8th of 7, Sep 04 2019 So you're suggesting some kind of academic technocracy? Or a more nanobot-centric executive?
Many laws on the current statute books deal in the long-term delegation of legal powers to (independent, technically competent) technocratic institutions; The Bank of England, FCA, the many Ofxxx-s, Environmental Agencies of various descriptions, the CAA, ORR, and countless others.*
* I think many of the smaller ones of these used to be called Quangos, until the term became unfashionable - interestingly after their existence was questioned by the "TaxPayer's Alliance" (one of the anti- institutional lobby groups ("Think Tanks") running under many names, all operated out of 55 Tufton Street, and all promoting a right-wing, centralised, back-room style of powersharing for the connected - often by boosting unhelpful stories in the media and setting the narrative such that these kinds of centres of excellence were quietly dismantled)
After placing the crown-jewels of monetary policy and regulation out of harms way - there's normally not a great deal left for the government to do other than fiddle about with tax.
Similarly, much of the civil service remains the domain of a very bright and capable group of experts. For the Bannonites, these would be the "deep state" so hated by those who wish to wield raw and unfettered power.
The system is under attack - but interestingly it is these meritocratic, academically-robust bastions of our nation that have both prevented the worst of the excesses of the populist executive, but also that the same executive has spent the most time trying to dismantle and discredit. They seem to act like a kind of antibody system, rejecting foreign influence wherever and whenever it tries to infect the body of the nation. There is real hope there - that good people, with simple honest values, will stand in the way of schemers, liars and shennaniganisers wherever they may reveal themselves.
If that last cultural and institutional line of defense is overcome, then yes, a true transformative event awaits.-- zen_tom, Sep 04 2019 Undoubtedly yes.
The real question is whether there is anyone prepared to pick up a sword* or an axe and decapitate the designated victims.
Thankfully, the answer to that is also undoubtedly "yes" If you put up a sign at the main gate of the Tower saying "WANTED: Executioner to cut the heads off politicians. No experience necessary. £35,000 p.a." the queue would start at the portcullis and end somewhere around Putney bridge.
After all, £35,000 is only about £2900 a month; quite a lot of people would cheerfully pay that to get a chance to trim bits off some vermin.
*The sword is reserved for royalty; traitors get the axe, so get out there with your hatchet and practice on some firewood. It's all in the backswing.-- 8th of 7, Sep 04 2019 I have a confession to make: I am one of those people who has made money from Brexit. No, I did not vote for Brexit, nor fund Brexit, nor surreptitiously organize nor encourage Brexit, but I did see Brexit coming, and made financial dispositions accordingly.
This was possible because the roots of Brexit are much deeper than any scheme by evil plutocrats - though, of course, evil plutocrats have been involved. And, no, I'm not just talking about the GFC; it goes further back than that.
A clue can be found in the phrase "swivel-eyed loon" (or "swivel", for short), which is the most telling of the epithets used by Remainers against Leavers. A related clue can be found in the epithet "gammon". Some people have said that "gammon" is a racist slur on white people, but that's not quite true. To be gammon it is necessary, but not sufficient, to be white; to be gammon you must also lose your cool: the resulting distinctive pink flush is what makes someone gammon. That cool/uncool distinction is the clue.-- pertinax, Sep 04 2019 Just have everyone in the country fucking revote on Brexit already.-- RayfordSteele, Sep 05 2019 They're working on that, [Ray], they're working on it.-- pertinax, Sep 05 2019 Hope so - but now [pertinax] I'm intrigued by this coded link between a cool/uncool-driven event and how that can be turned into financial gain. I've been trying to think of products/devices that would highlight this particular split - but the best I got was the likelihood of falling out of fashion of "retro" objects - that until fairly recently had been gaining fetish-levels of ironi-coolness - but which increasingly might feel tainted with less than frivolous associations. Who wants a kitsch table-spread, or knitted tea-cosy anymore if they are now only reminiscent of food shortages, deprivation and xenophobia? But try as I might, I can't get from here to any actual profit.-- zen_tom, Sep 05 2019 Have you tried hocking Dutch tulips?-- RayfordSteele, Sep 05 2019 //a cool/uncool-driven event and how that can be turned into financial gain//
"Indirectly" is the answer. That is, the gain came from anticipating the outcome of the vote, and the anticipation came from an awareness of a previously unacknowledged "iceberg" of grievance, on the part of the uncool, against the cool. It was an "iceberg" in the sense that it was mostly out of sight.-- pertinax, Sep 06 2019 Declare HB a Nation State, issue passports and claim dual citizenship? Passport to Pimlico, anyone?Jutta as monarch, Danny Wallace as foreign secretary, etc...-- Dub, Oct 03 2019 Oooo ! Oooo ! <Frantic arm-waving/> Can we have the "Defence" portfolio ?-- 8th of 7, Oct 03 2019 [8th of 7], naturally... and a separate (bigger budget) for offence, too-- Dub, Oct 03 2019 Hey, I just realised that if we crash out, we don't have to do the Eurovision song contest. No more GB....nil points-- not_morrison_rm, Oct 04 2019 You've never "had" to do it ... it's like doing the Three Peaks challenge for charity, the pointless* suffering is an important and inherent part.
*pun intended.-- 8th of 7, Oct 04 2019 The difference is, with the 3 peaks challenge, the pointless suffering is restricted to the participants-- hippo, Oct 04 2019 random, halfbakery