EU Referendum Discussion: Well That Worked Out Well Didn't It

[StoneHappyMonday]

I am inclined to disagree. Over here in the non-Dante's Inferno inspired desert of dingoes...

It really would be nice to read something by you that doesn't come across as being written by a precocious 12 year old trying to impress. Seeing as you're intent on spamming the forum. Just saying.

Everyone has an opinion and all that, fuck, some of them might even be entitled to one. But, as Shambles pointed out, this is a whole load of no choice whatsoever. A bit like most votes then. The funny thing is, should everything go horribly wrong for our lords and masters (it won't) and Brexit actually win, there will be those blaming the abstentionists in the same way SNP voters got blamed for Big Ed blowing the last election for Labour.

Just as fear of TTIP is no reason to vote for exit (yeah! Exit! Let's use the right fucking words) fear of giving the insular right wing loons what they want is no reason to vote for something that is essentially protection rights for capitalism (see article 106 of the TFEU which prohibits economic policies outside of a narrow strand of new-liberalism).

'We' don't need to be afraid. 'We' need to readily accept revolutionary change.

 

[StoneHappyMonday]

I'm not quite sure what you mean,

You, me and quite a few others and it's becoming embarrassing.

 

[Sprout]

I do apologise if my communication is unclear or, as is seemingly apparent, irritating to anyone...
Though I must admit I'd prefer a paraphrase of "I didn't quite get that, can you explain?" than unprovoked and unnecessary personal displeasure. Alas, my skin is a little thick for text on the internet to bother me too much, so it's your choice really...

I was attempting to make a possibly ever so slightly humourous allusion to the "Nationalism under Fascism during economic hardship" card that has been played once or twice before.

As I tried to detail earlier today my vote is one based on its impact on myself and my future, and that of those in a similar position, primarily.
Don't mistake my scant discussion of other factors as a lack of knowledge, or even awareness, of their importance.

Now can we all get back to playing nicely?

 

[gannetsarewe]

Immigration seems to be the Leave campaigns trump card, however the British Neo Liberal project is dependent on access to imported cheap labour for its continued existence. So you would have to imagine that Immigration will continue , but that people coming in will not enjoy EU workers rights and will exist in the serf like condition of certain foreign workers in the Gulf States.

 

[BlindHelperMonkey]

Theres no point in this poll

only cos bl is full of rancid leftwing filth

its a close thing
so vote

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

only cos bl is full of rancid leftwing filth

its a close thing
so vote

Why would you call people who choose to support social liberties with the goal insuring human dignity "rancid leftwing filth"? Maybe you are talking about anarchists? There aren't a whole lot of anarchists around bluelight.

You do speak volumes as to the type of person who is supporting the leave campaign. I feel confident knowing that people who refer to others as rancid filth will not have a good time spreading their opinions to good, ordinary people.

 

[Vurtual]

Why would you call people who choose to support social liberties with the goal insuring human dignity "rancid leftwing filth"? Maybe you are talking about anarchists? There aren't a whole lot of anarchists around bluelight.

You do speak volumes as to the type of person who is supporting the leave campaign. I feel confident knowing that people who refer to others as rancid filth will not have a good time spreading their opinions to good, ordinary people.

Ahem... anarchist here. And i'm wondering why you think anarchists wouldn't support social liberties and human dignities? (maybe you've got a distorted, johnny rotten (or murray rothbard) view of anarchists - i'm more of the spanish civil war, noam chomsky variety (but i'm probably on your side against BHM as a 'rancid lefty' )

(hi BHM - btw way i voted a 'rancid lefty' -out in this poll, though i'm still wavering (like the lily-livered pinko i am)

 

[Ceres]

Look at what the government is currently doing to attempt to destroy our human rights, workers rights, public services, education system - it already looks and feels like a corrupt as fuck dictatorship that doesn't give a fuck about anything or anyone except itself - at least within the framework of the EU there are some basic fucking standards, it's not perfect but its better than living in a delusional banana republic corrupt to the gills and falling apart at the seams.

 

[ponch]

Care to expand on why you would vote out?

 

[Vurtual]

I'm still wavering, but out has been my default position for years like corbyn, tony benn and bob crow, and for the same reasons (soveriegnty, and that the EU is a capitalist and latterly, neoliberal project). The UK government is terrible but it's probably easier to have an insurrection here than all of us going out to brussels. Tony Benn's five questions also apply:

In the course of my life I have developed five little democratic questions. If one meets a powerful person--Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin or Bill Gates--ask them five questions: “What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.

Saying all that i'm hovering over a pragmatic remain position after hearing yanis varoufakis' opinion (him being a person who i know understands the economy) among others. SHM's excellent post in the CEP thread covers most of where i'm at too.

One argument given to remain is how horrible the tories are - this doesn't persuade me as we can get rid of them - even if they try their hardest in the 4 years they've got, we can always poll tax them (in fact, masochisticaslly, the more horrible they are, the better for the vigour of the left); Yanis' argument to remain in to help keep europe together because what might replace it would be worse carries more weight.

But then, the scales bounce back when i think of the overall neoliberal/globalisation project of goldman sachs and the like and how key a federal europe is to that.

...then they flick back when i think of the Brexit tory crew who i suspect are on some Churchill-esque fantasy of empire revivial (maybe these neocons know there'll be an opportunity in a coming WW3)

...and again back they go when i smell the manipulation of a project fear coming from the BBC (remembering scotland's referendum)

Told you i'm wavering (i probably voted no in the poll cos i'd just heard o'bomber saying 'queue')

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Ahem... anarchist here. And i'm wondering why you think anarchists wouldn't support social liberties and human dignities? (maybe you've got a distorted, johnny rotten (or murray rothbard) view of anarchists - i'm more of the spanish civil war, noam chomsky variety (but i'm probably on your side against BHM as a 'rancid lefty' )

(hi BHM - btw way i voted a 'rancid lefty' -out in this poll, though i'm still wavering (like the lily-livered pinko i am)

My definition of anarchy is archaic, inflexible, and based on history.

1
a : absence of government
b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2
a : absence or denial of any authority or established order
b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>
3
: anarchism

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy


I hate ambiguous terminology, and I think the usage of a simple word for so many things is inappropriate. If someone calls themselves an anarchist without further defining, as you eloquently did, I will take them at their word. Your form of anarchism is a mistake of terminology dating back to some clever people who weren't creative enough to come up with new terms. I actually like the Catalan and Basque very greatly, but personally disagree that they are anarchists.

I think if people like you want to be taken seriously you need to find a new terminology for yourselves, because without further details, what is one to think? Anarchy as defined is only negative except with reference to definition 1C.

a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

This is what I feel much modern anarchist philosophy attempts to build upon, but there are much more accurate terms for such people these days. It is also important to define government.

So, I hope I made it somewhat clear as to why I do not believe a true Anarchist has any means with which to protect social liberties and human dignities.

We are disagreeing on terminology in the end, which is ok, but which is also why the "good/philosophical" types of anarchists will never be taken seriously.

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Varoufakis has been saying some interesting things recently. Being a person who has maybe had a peek behind the curtain, I respect what Varoufakis has to say.

 

[Shambles]

[things i would say if i was better at formulating political thought]

This is essentially my position to a tee. I think I've switched from IN to OOT and back again several times a day over the last couple weeks and for more or less the very same reasons. This is why it has the feel to me of a pointless vote. Or at least one with no clear good outcomes on offer.

Unfortunately the OOT options has been almost entirely co-opted by the Little Englanders of the fairly far right and anything that encourages them is deeply unappealing. Whilst there are traditionally left of centre voices dotted amongst them (wotsherface from the Greens made some good (if unlikely) arguments for OOT on Question Time t'other week) the concern I have with that is the fact that although they represent the most positive and hopeful outlook I must admit I find it about as realistic of happening in reality as the other lot's return to imaginary 1950s surburban fantasyland (complete with Empire still attached and Funny Foreigners attached firmly to the end of an especially lengthy bargepole).

Similarly unfortunately the IN option is entirely associated with those who claim to occupy the political centre despite it being massively skewed towards the neo-lib bankers 'n' backroom deals agenda. The vision of the EU as represented by Shimmer.Fade in this thread - also the one I have always been broadly in favour of the EU until recent waverings - sadly isn't the one that exists. In the past it has always seemed at least conceivable that it could exist but it really isn't looking that way at all these days. In reality t's actually looking more and more like it's heading more towards all those things that it used to protect us from with our own horrid governments.

And on the other other hand the vast majority of the OOT promoters mainly want us OOT so they can get rid of the genuinely good stuff the EU has provided in the past. Talk about a rock and a hard place

 

[Itsgoneundertheboa]

I'm poaching from SHM but he has mentioned the reasons for this vote and ultimately the result is already a forgone conclusion

Cameron needed votes. He didn't expect an outright win. He had to side with others. Others wanted exit. He won a majority. Now he has no option but to make good on promises made.

So what does he do? Firstly start his propaganda campaign spending £ 9 mil (of I believe the tax payers money?) to tell us one side of the argument (zero actual fact just propaganda and scare tactics).

Now we move to stage two. Media camapaign. Who owns the media? mega rich. Mega rich want in. So now we will have 2 months of further propaganda and scare before the vote. History proves that if you have the media you have control of thought of the populous. Especially if the subject matter is so grey.

There will be no exit. There will be no change. Get your bet on and thank me in June.

Personally I was always in simply down to two basic principles
1. playground politics - The bully in the playground bashes the little bloke but he never goes up against the group. Strength in numbers.
2. If we are to save ourselves from our own greed, jealousy and destructive nature we have to, as primal scream once said 'come together as one'.

 

[Shimmer.Fade]

Nice post Shambles. I am confused why you think my position doesn't exist. It is my reality. Are things really so bad in Britain?

I know the bankers and politicians have fucked up big time. The people are on to them, and we will not forget what is going on behind the curtain in the land of Oz. Another large Panama Papers release is scheduled for 9. May. What is their intent and goal? I don't know and I don't care. I value information.

What the bankers/politicians fail to understand is that they have driven their numbers so far into obscurity average Joe Blow is starting to hurt. It is WAY to early for that if they truly want to seize hegemon type power. It is like building a huge garden with pretty stuff, and you have no way in hell of keeping out the animals. They should have kept Joe Blow in his Brave New World for another generation, or two at least. Talk about fucking the long game.

 

[Ceres]

wikileaks claim george soros is partially behind the panama leaks. it got leaked to the corporate media so basically they can pick and choose and use it for a multitude of poitical purposes in various countries, that info should be in public hands so it can be seen for what it is and not used as a tool for further manipulation by cynical control freaks.

the one good thing about this EU referendum is the infighting it has inevitably produced in the tories, that and exposing what a bunch of lunatics most of them are, particularly the exit brigade.

not everyone believes the european project is beyond repair and that we should return to paranoid statism that existed before.

besides, england voting to take britain out of the EU means it will lose scotland.

look at the bigger picture.

 

[Shambles]

Nice post Shambles. I am confused why you think my position doesn't exist. It is my reality. Are things really so bad in Britain?

Not just Britain so much as worldwide and at a very fundamental level. Expanded upon a little below...

Personally I was always in simply down to two basic principles
1. playground politics - The bully in the playground bashes the little bloke but he never goes up against the group. Strength in numbers.
2. If we are to save ourselves from our own greed, jealousy and destructive nature we have to, as primal scream once said 'come together as one'.

I've always had much sympathy with these thoughts too. Difficulties I've had more recently is that the first is marred by the fact that the playground bully is starting to look a lot like the EU itself with the way it has treated Greece, Ireland & Spain. Then there's the complete mess surrounding the Syrian refugees - the whole Syria situation in general for that matter. Issues relating to democracy itself are also a concern (the "keep voting until you vote the right way" imposed on Ireland is a major red flag).

The "come together as one" notion is one I'm very keen on. A truly grown up and civilised species would be work together rather than being divvied up in to squabbling tribes whose allegiances lie with arbitrary lines on maps and artificial constructed party political divides which have little or no bearing on how things actually are. We are played for fools and mostly lap it up because having to deal with the reality - or even think too hard about it - is incredibly daunting. Especially when kept in a perpetual state of divided and conquered.

The EU, as it stands, seems to be heading down that oh-so-familiar road now too. Maybe it always was but it at least had enough good points to mask it. Maybe it still does have enough good points to make it preferable to remain in, but the mask as definitely slipped and what lies beneath is not at all pretty. But then again, that ugliness is representative of all mainstream politics which does make me wonder what the point of any of it is. I've always tended towards the burn it down approach. But to be a solution rather than just an especially boisterous Guy Fawke's Night something worth having to build from the ashes needs to be an option to make even that appealing beyond the basic pleasure of mischief.

 

[Ceres]

the mask slipping gives us an opportunity to begin tackling the underlying problems/reality that has resulted in situations seen in greece, portugal etc,

one depressing attitude i see around me is 'OMG SNOWDEN REVELATIONS' *shrug* *forget* *dont care*
same with the panama leaks

people are fucking distracted, lazy, dont give a fuck about other people and so on. yeah i know that is a generalisation and there a lot of exceptions to the rule.

there is a total lack of maturity in the level of intellectual debate surrounding politics at the moment from large sections of the populace aswell as the political class.

 

[Shambles]

I would agree with all of that, Ceres. The idealist in me can hope that you are right to believe that change is possible. The pessimist in me sees the truth in the rest of your post and despairs. To be fair to the masses, the state of perpetual apathy is very carefully engineered and maintained - even enforced if necessary and us plebs get even slightly beyond the grumbling stage. Whilst it is depressing, it's also hard to blame people who have been brainwashed for generations for falling for the same old schtick time and time again. Ultimately I do have faith in people to win out. It's a very big hill to climb though and although progress is certainly being made as far as awareness goes it is still very much in the minority. Hope does spring eternal despite all this.

 

[Shambles]

... I think the majority are still making decisions based on how politicians look and sound as opposed to what they are actually saying.
There are a lot of people out there who will decide on Cameron or Corbyn based on their suit ffs.

Unfortunately, in the vast majority of cases basing a decision on the suit they wear is as good a reason as any given the lack of fag paper room between what they stand for. Certainly more valid than trusting what comes out of their mouths much of the time. Can tell a lot about a person by the way they present themselves. Can tell a lot more about a person by observing their actions over prolonged periods. What they actually say - certainly when it comes to politicians - is far too often the last thing to take into consideration

Cameron/Corbyn is one of the frighteningly rare examples that doesn't fit with this but, again, I do have some considerable sympathies with people that are either so disillusioned with the whole smoke & mirrors show, or so disinformed they truly don't know any better. It's never past the point of saving, but it can certainly give enough of an impression of insurmountability that what to do and where to begin are not obvious.

Case in point, I still can't decide which side offers the least worst option - let alone what is actually for the best.