• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The UK in the EU: "Brexit"

spacejunk

spacejunk

Bluelight Crew
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
19,976
Location
Melbourne
With the upcoming referendum to decide whether or not the United Kingdom will remain in the European Union or not - i wonder what people's thoughts on this are.
It seems like a complicated issue, and i'd love to hear some different perspectives on it.
 
Where to start? Chomsky?

I haven't seen any compelling arguments for Brexit and I suspect it (Brexit) will turn Britain into even more of a junior partner of the US. If I were voting, I'd vote to stay in. But without any enthusiasm.
Click to expand...

Or I could put it another way. In principal, pure unadulterated idealistic principal - vote to leave. In practical, pragmatic terms - vote to stay.

The EU has always been a friend of Capital, an institution to protect the needs of finance and the rich. This is why the mainstream Left, when we had one in the 1970's, lined up to vote 'No' to entry. Since then, times have changed. As have expectations. We are so buried deep now in the dominant culture, everything seen from a hegemonic perspective imposed by a ruling class drunk on the defeat of communism, which they see as the victory of capitalism, that we can't even trust ourselves to envisage change on our own terms. So workers rights enshrined in European Law become a big stick to beat the Left into the submission of staying. We are afraid to leave, afraid the minute we do these rights will be taken away from us, and without hope or belief that we can reinstate these things, or better, on our own terms, with our own self-determination, away from the bosses of European capital.

And look who we line up with if we go for Brexit. The extreme right. UKIP and Farage. Nutters from the fringes of the Tory party. And look who we line up with if we vote Bremain (boy are these terms shit). The IMF. Goldman Sachs. Cameron et al.

Devil and the deep blue sea.

I believe in socialism. Hell, to Droppers I'm probably a dangerous Maoist. So I believe in public ownership of the means of production. Nationalisation of industries, all of which have been taken out of nationalisation in the last 30 years. Article 106 of the TFEU (Treaty on the functioning of the EU), it is argued, makes renationalisation illegal. It goes against the free movement rules, which are dressed up as a freedom but actually can be seen to serve, when it comes to economics, as the constitutional protection of capitalism, making it harder, if not impossible, for individual national governments to pursue their own economic policies outside of a narrow range of basically neo-liberal options. Not good. Not to me anyway.

Look what happened to Greece when they veered from the road. Stitched. Although Yanis Varoufakis has actually said now is the wrong time to leave.

I don't know. If Chomsky doesn't know, I don't feel so bad about not knowing. But it's a frightening thought that a referendum of people who mostly have less of a fucking clue than even I do are going to decide this.

(Dying revolutionary lefties) the SWP (not your SWP, America) used to have a saying "Neither Washington, nor Moscow". It feels like this is "Neither Westminster, nor Brussels". But realistically where would that leave us?

It's hard to make a case for either, convincingly.
 
I've had a few beers, and am not going to go into detail yet as you have SHM, but what you say makes good sense.

The EU has until now, only given its member states benefits. Unemployment may be higher, right now, in Spain/Portugal, but what does that really mean? How is the quality of life? I know modern benefits have increased drastically in these countries. My sister-in-law gave birth to a premature baby in Lisbon and modern medicine made it possible for things to work out. Lisbon wouldn't have had access to that technology without the EU.

I have HUGE issues with the opacity of the political process. I have HUGE problems with the lack of at least primary indirect representation.

Then there is Germany. I love Germany. This place is freaking awesome. The Germans are huge idealists, and this fucks them time and again as they expect more from their western brothers. The get hurt over and over. Ironically, they have much in common with Israel in this sense. They have learned to shore their bets, and never allow a situation to occur where they are on the absolute losing side. The multiple, IMO geo-politically fabricated, crisis have led Germans, and obviously the Brits, to thinking about the Iron Laws again. I don't want to sound superior, but Germany has out compete its neighbors by such an extent in a relatively fair manner that certain nationalistic factions within certain EU countries are using this imbalance to create dissent.

In the end Europe needs the EU far more than Germany itself does. Germany will always be ok as long as they don't go nazi again, or out compete their neighbors to an intolerable degree. I don't think they would do this if they felt they could trust the union. The instability has pushed Germany into somewhat of a corner where they feel like they need to do the best they can right now. They would probably be happy chilling out a bit if they thought they could trust the union.

Then we have the bankers fucking everything up. The bankers are everywhere, and they are turning nation against nation.

Then we have Russia. Russia is on the same page as the bankers. They will only benefit from chaos as they are a pipsqueak with nuclear weapons and a busy propaganda division.

So. A unified EU is a strong EU is a stable EU is an entity that can protect the human rights guaranteed by the EU.

Edit: Ended up going into a bit of detail, and probably wrote some stuff I may have to defend. Let me know =).
 
Last edited:
Great posts, thanks.
The arguments against national unity have always struck me as reactionary. But i havent really given the particulars of this particular topic much consideration.
The Chomsky quote is good, and i am inclined to agree. Thanks.
 
spacejunk said:
Great posts, thanks.
The arguments against national unity have always struck me as reactionary. But i havent really given the particulars of this particular topic much consideration.
The Chomsky quote is good, and i am inclined to agree. Thanks.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by the arguments against national unity?
 
Oh, sorry - i'm referring to (for example) the hostility to the United Nations that exists in some countries, notably the US.
 
spacejunk said:
Oh, sorry - i'm referring to (for example) the hostility to the United Nations that exists in some countries, notably the US.
Click to expand...

Ah ok thanks. I view a lot of these organizations with ambivalence. Take the EPA for instance. They are corrupt and constantly screw up. However, if the EPA is gone, then what replaces it? I think any talk of abolishing something with a good function should only come when the plans for the replacement are nearly finalized.

Can also frame the Brexit this way. What is the fucking rush? It isn't like they couldn't do it again if the EU passes some law they don't like. Wouldn't it make sense to sort of already have new trade deals drafted? It will take forever to negotiate all the crap that needs to be negotiated, and if Britain thinks it will have upper hand in the negotiations against the biggest market in the world it may want to rethink its logic. The US isn't just going to be like, "Oh, poor Britain, have some of our money". Scotland will again vote to leave the UK, with more than likely a different result. Relations with Ireland would probably suffer as well. This is why many people see Britain shooting itself in the head and splattering its blood on the rest of Europe.
 
OK, apropos to none of the above (or maybe it is), here's a couple of more points of interest about this referendum. And actually, yes, I can relate this to Shimmer Fades "What's the fucking rush?" question.

This whole thing came about because, pre-election, Cameron panicked. UKIP appeared to be gaining ground (more of them in a minute) and, to garner a few more racist UKIP (there, that was a short minute) votes he promised to hold this referendum if the Tories gained an outright majority.

HE NEVER BELIEVED FOR A SECOND THIS WOULD HAPPEN.

Going to blow my own trumpet just for a bit here. Nobody, but nobody predicted a Tory majority. Except me. And I have the winnings to prove it. All polls, always, predicted a hung parliament. So when he made this promise he never believed he'd actually have to carry it out. I imagine winning the election outright was a double-edged sword he could live with on election day but now chickens are coming home to roost and the Tories are splitting spectacularly, something much more political capital would be being made of were it not for the Establishment's obsession with proving Jeremy Corbyn eats Jewish babies.

(I can see all you Americans are glazing over here, hold on, I'll try and get you back).

So. Promise he thought he'd never have to keep. Takes enough racist voters off UKIP (and, it has to be said, Labour) to win slim majority. Oh have your fucking referendum then.

So what does he do now? Because Brexit is seriously against the wishes and the interests of Capital. And Capital, in the name of Goldman Sachs, the IMF, et al, are sure letting the country know it (I'll provide links if you want but there is this thing called google too). So what can he do? Well, he can do what they did in the original referendum in the 70's. Spend x million pounds on getting the result you want, and z tuppence halfpenny on the leave campaign.

EU Referendum:£9million taxpayer funded publicity blitz pushes case to remain

Funny thing democracy.

Sorry, forgot I had two points. In the 70's, entering the EU was framed as an economic issue. It wasn't that difficult to spend enormous amounts on convincing Joe Public about the need for new markets, especially if, as they did, you kept quiet about any alternatives or whose interest it was really in.

This is different. Because, having scared the country shitless about 'immigration' for years now, we have a populace hung up on not letting the darkies in. So this time, the debate has already, for a lot of people, been framed around immigration and the need to control our own borders (like we don't do that already). So, hoist by their own petard, you're going to have a lot of racist nonces voting Brexit. So you'd better get spending even more money on leaflets and mass media campaigns Mr Capitalism.
 
^^...This is pretty much my take on it too. This is why I find it really foolish for Britain to be doing this, especially at this point in time. The problem is, is that many Brits are not pragmatic like many Germans (or, in the past, Capitalists). Many Brits are stubborn like many Americans. You tell them they WILL be punished, and it WILL hurt, and they say "cheers". I think this is one thing that is really hard for Germany, or Capitalists, to understand.

The Brits need to be told that they are needed, and that the EU needs some work, and that their fears of too many immigrants are not completely unfounded.

I just hope the Boris Johnsons, Putins, and Trumps of the world are not able to seize on growing instability to create more chaos.

I always have in the back of my head that all of this is playing out in the context of climate change and the predicted 2025 absolute water scarcity for 1.8 billion people. We should be preparing ourselves for the coming onslaught, and instead we fight and devolve.
 
Interesting post, SHM.
I never cease to be amazed at how easily "conservatives" like the current UK government are swayed by far-right/xenophobic populists such as UKIP.
Australia's tories have done similar things in the past; attempting to neutralise the influence of such political opponents by pandering to them, and making them essentially irrelevant by more or less adopting their policies.

I've felt all along that Britain leaving the European Union seems rather pointless, albeit in an uninformed manner - so thank you guys for giving me a little bit more to think about. I tend to agree with what you are both saying.
All things considered, it does seem extremely reactive. I find it hard to see what possible positive short term impacts could come from Britain leaving the EU - let alone long term.
Shimmer.Fade said:
I just hope the Boris Johnsons, Putins, and Trumps of the world are not able to seize on growing instability to create more chaos.

I always have in the back of my head that all of this is playing out in the context of climate change and the predicted 2025 absolute water scarcity for 1.8 billion people. We should be preparing ourselves for the coming onslaught, and instead we fight and devolve.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
Human complacency seemingly knows no bounds.
 
And one person's idea "survival" is another's idea of "ruin". It's hard to have compromise when issues are so polarised.
 
spacejunk said:
And one person's idea "survival" is another's idea of "ruin". It's hard to have compromise when issues are so polarised.
Click to expand...

I think that is a good point. I am content with super little (full belly, warm), especially in a situation where no one is sick or anything. The only reasons I actually have for being part of civilization is thought, medicine, and some other stuff I probably take for granted.
 
Having kept their own currency, I really don't see what the big deal is. Are there many real issues with remaining or leaving, or is it simply an immigration matter?
 
quiet roar said:
Having kept their own currency, I really don't see what the big deal is. Are there many real issues with remaining or leaving, or is it simply an immigration matter?
Click to expand...

The UK would likely be literally devolved to a second class nation if they choose to leave. Financial institutions in London have been drawing up plans to relocate to Paris, Berlin, New York, and Frankfurt ever since the leave campaign gained any steam at all. Germany has tied England to itself into a relationship in which if England leaves it falls of a cliff, but Germany doesn't. Scotland would more than likely have a new vote on independence, and being part of the EU, the UK cannot stop them. Relationships with Ireland would not benefit. The UK has probably billions of dollars in grants from the EU tied up in universities which would all be pulled out. EU scientists would be called back to their home countries, or spread to others where they can have the most effect. The UK would no longer have free access to certain technologies and scientific partnerships within the EU. The EU would bind itself stronger to the US as it would no longer have a primary English speaking representative, and as such would desire a closer relationship with largest military power in the world.

These are just some of the more somewhat obvious things I can think of off the top of my head. The world banks have warned the UK, and the UK would be made into an example, unfortunately, so that other countries/states don't attempt to disrupt certain unions.

Have a look at the Brexit supporters. That should give you the info you need.

One question I would have is how it would effect the TPP. I have a feeling it would change relationships so much, that the TPP would also have to be renegotiated. This isn't a bad thing actually, but not really worth the costs.

Edit: I always forget Berlin doesn't have a ton of economics more like a split between Frankfurt (the most) and Berlin/Munich for others. The cities will offer short term favorable conditions to speed up the process.

Edit2: Realpolitik is the only politic. All other forms are subservient. This should, rightfully, scare the shit out of people.
 
Last edited:
quiet roar said:
Having kept their own currency, I really don't see what the big deal is. Are there many real issues with remaining or leaving, or is it simply an immigration matter?
Click to expand...

I outlined this above but I'll put it into the words Jeremy Corbyn will use in a speech later on today.

n Thursday’s speech, he will say: “When the last referendum was held in 1975, Europe was divided by the cold war, and what later became the EU was a much smaller, purely market-driven arrangement. Over the years I have continued to be critical of many decisions taken by the EU and I remain critical of its shortcomings, from its lack of democratic accountability to the institutional pressure to deregulate or privatise public services.

“So, Europe needs to change. But that change can only come from working with our allies in the EU. It’s perfectly possible to be critical and still be convinced we need to remain a member.”
Click to expand...

It's almost like he's read my posts. :)
 
I wish the only sense didn't come from the person the entire British media is trying to slander. Abuse of free speech really pisses me off, and leads to assholes like me wanting to clamp down on lies, and the lying liars that tell them, which at some point becomes tantamount to censorship.
 
I'm only technically British - I'm a citizen of the UK (via Scotland) and my spouse is Welsh, but I've never lived in the UK myself, so I may be speaking from a place of ignorance.

That said, I favour Scotland leaving the UK but remaining part of the EU.
 
Had to come back to post on this topic.. I'm literally halfway through mailing back to 10 Downing Street the "Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the EU is the best decision for the UK" propaganda leaflet, which was mailed to every house in the country recently. Absolutely trash. Pretty much provides the lowest form of argument, appealing to the lowest IQ people out there.. which seems to be most people. It's all about your wallet..

It's a question of sovereignty. Period. That is the only issue as far as I'm concerned. All other issues are secondary and subordinate to it. The power to carve our own laws and own destiny is essential if we wish to continue calling ourselves a free and democratic nation. The EU is not much more than an (expensive) protection racket.

I shall be voting on principle, what is best for this nation and the future of my childrens children, not what is best for me and my fucking wallet.

If we vote to remain then the brakes come off and this country will be subsumed into political union with the EU superstate. Its what has always been at the heart of the EU project agenda; centralization and control. My dad seems to believe it was about creating stability and peace, as do a lot of people, but that's absolute bullshit. It's in the original documents.. they always wanted fiscal and political union, right from the very beginning.

The amount of deception, propaganda, money and everything else that goes with this force should make the hairs stand up on the back of your neck. Though to me it seems not many people these days have any sense of intuition left at all to be honest. Even Jeremy Corbyn showed his true colours.. Mr I Hate the EU.. done a 180 quicker than most politicians. Such is the force behind this EU project.


If we vote to remain I'm emigrating. The temporary disruption we will face if we leave will be nothing in comparison to what will happen if we stay. The EU is a sinking ship and dark times lay ahead. We need to steer our own ship, not be steered from beyond our borders.

I honestly can't believe how stupid and selfish some of you here appear to be, though I guess you're pretty much the representation of the general population.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top