Brexit: Wrong Discussion, Wrong People, Wrong Arguments
- This topic has 7 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
G.G. Bain Immigrants arriving at Ellis Island, New York 1907 There’ve been a bunch of issues and topics on my -temporarily non-writing- mind, and poli
[See the full post at: Brexit: Wrong Discussion, Wrong People, Wrong Arguments]That must be like the worst critique one can get. Got to admit, it’s hard to get the drive and schedule back, to think: this must be out there today! And Brexit is a complex issue, a book about it, already now, is entirely possible. More articles coming up soon, and I may have found my miracle doctor (neurologist) here in Athens. Through a TAE reader, of course. How that connects is amazing. Guy’s the spitting image of Billy Connolly but had never heard of him. Sticks a needle in my arm once a day to heal a pinched nerve in my spine and I have faith in him. What can you do? I never express my love for all you regular TAE readers, do I? Here you go.
Nothing will change, Britain will remain within the EU which itself will be duct taped and wired together even as it loses relevance. All is to be sacrificed for the euro.
No euro = no gasoline. No gasoline = no cars … that is the end of the world, Europe without cars may as well be Syria or Yemen.
I’ve been in the UK for the past month or so and, you’re right, calling it a “debate” is highly questionable. I’ve heard precious little “facts”, though both sides claim to be giving us loads of them. I don’t think I’ve even heard Cameron detail what it was, exactly, that he negotiated for Britain, last year. In the end, it’ll be an emotional decision (it’s just not possible for it to be anything else) and the Remain crowd are certainly trying to scare people into voting to stay. I don’t live here, so it’s not for me to say but I don’t think the future looks rosy whatever the outcome of the referendum.
I am glad for what as you put it, you have “… seen in such sparkling bright light here in Athens”.
I agree just about totally with what you write about Brexit, but I still have problem in voting to leave EU. So for instance Osborne talks tosh and lies, but that has been his whole economic position since he took over the Treasury – the necessary ‘political lie’. So what?
First time round in 70s I voted to leave because even back then we dimly discerned a corporate future dominated by ‘market rules’, a bit like the one we got, and the dismantling of a social settlement. Arguably this time round we seem faced with a dissolving civilisation, dissolution perhaps not restricted to our Continent. (Britain is in Europe, period, even if globalisation obscures the fact.) The big decision could actually be about Russia, which is also in Europe. Luckily, or maybe it was Red Army discipline, or something, Russia did not break up in a civil war, but I can’t see anything EU did that helped much – just the opposite. I should have better grasped EU limitations, and worse, when I was intermittently working for EU in the Balkans 1997 to 2006; but there you go! These days? Man, it’s about NG pipelines and heating houses and fabric relying on electricity even if motor cars are a passing phase. And latter-day farmers must still get round those big fields with their giant machines and NPK for a while yet.
So why do I hesitate? Well, it’s like Corbyn is a better conservative than the fantasists and liars perhaps? The original conservative Edmund Burke supported the American Colonies but thought we ought to learn something from the French Revolution; like, “Be careful what you wish for”.
Best wishes for you down there in the kitchen!
PhilYanis wants to make use of the existing institutions of European unity in new ways. DiEM’s first requirement, transparency, would immediately transform business as usual there. After Ghandi, India retained much of the institutional infrastructure built there by Britain, which helped it unify into a nation. Yanis’s most recent book highlight’s the selfish, adversarial motivations behind the first version of the EU, which have become so plain today. A well-intentioned remodel of valuable institutional architecture brought about by educated, concerned citizens is what’s needed to salvage what’s good about Europe. No need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
I know what Yanis envisions, Daisy, but I very much question how feasible it is. The EU is not an institution that you can simply put different people in and everything will be whoopsy-daisy. I think Europe needs a whole new model, not a revision of the old one, and Europe is by no means the only candidate for that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.