Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


holystove last won the day on June 12 2017

holystove had the most liked content!

About holystove

  • Rank
    Art Vandelay
  • Birthday 21/06/1984

Profile Information

  • Location
    4.5052 ; 51.09539
  • Nation

Recent Profile Visitors

3,828 profile views
  1. Best one I've read is this one : I’m not saying there wasn’t a democratic mandate for Brexit at the time. I’m just saying if I narrowly decided to order fish at a restaurant that was known for chicken, but said it was happy to offer fish, and so far I’ve been waiting three hours, and two chefs who promised to cook the fish had quit, and the third one is promising to deliver the fish in the next five minutes whether it’s cooked or not, or indeed still alive, and all the waiting staff have spent the last few hours arguing amongst themselves about whether I wanted battered cod, grilled salmon, jellied eels or dolphin kebabs, and if large parts of the restaurant appeared to be on fire but no-one was paying attention to it because they were all arguing about fish, I would quite like, just once, to be asked if I definitely still wanted the fish.
  2. Someone made a post on here linking research that concluded the S*n boycott helped to cut Euroscepticism in Liverpool. Over the weekend, the former Europe correspondent for The Daily Telegraph, David Rennie, gave some insights into how his paper goes about covering Brussels: "As one of Boris Johnson's successors as Telegraph Brussels correspondent from 2005-2007, I fear Sir Max is being too easy on the role his paper played in establishing the idea that Europe has only foolish and bad ideas, imposed on a hapless Britain. I inherited Boris's office, with its fine view over a Brussels park and lake, and his assistant who told adoring tales of her scallywag boss. I also inherited a beat predicated on the idea that stories about the EU did not have to be wholly true as long as they were funny. I wrote at the time that UK journalism felt like school bullying and the EU was the kid in the playground with glasses who had to be punched, because it never fought back and deserved it. I should say I had some fine Foreign desk editors, who let me knock down flase stories, but it felt like swimming against a tide. Two small stories, then I'll stop. I once asked for a briefing about a project to connect national databases of asylum applications. A patient EU Commission official explained how real-time maps could now be shared with governments. I rang London and was told to speak to the home news desk. I explained the scheme to the editor on duty. He was sincerely baffled. "But that's helpful to the UK", he said. "Yes," I said. "It sounds sensible," he went on, audibly at a loss at what to do with the story. It was buried. Last story. Shortly before my move to The Economist in 2007 I was rung to be told that the Telegraph was closing its Brussels staff bureau and wanted me to move to Paris as Europe editor. I argued for keeping an EU staff job, though I already knew I was off. I reminded my then boss that an op-ed colleague Simon Heffer had that week written a column comparing the EU threat to Nazi Germany. "Don't you think our readers should have a correspondent here to explain what such an institution is actually doing?" I asked. My then boss told me: "Telegraph readers hate the EU so much they don't want to read about it." This was the logical end of years of unserious, unprincipled, lazy polemic. Europe's wickedness was established as a feeling, a delicious channeling of contempt and rage. Facts didn't matter because the EU didn't sue and if Eurocrats complained that proved the UK press was doing something right. Boris Johnson didn't invent that journalism, but he and Sir Max put it on page 1, week after week, forcing others to compete, and changing UK debate." Eye-opening, though unsurprising.
  3. This is unbelievable. The first clip shows him lying for something he prepared for, the second one lying answering something unexpected. How could anyone vote for this person?
  4. This is informative by the neutral, government funded, think-tank "The UK in a changing Europe" : https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/UKIN-No-Deal-Brexit-Issues-impacts-and-implications.pdf
  5. Brexit means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. May's deal may not be what you think you were told, or what you specifically voted for, but you can't presume this extends to 17.4m people. May's deal would have taken you out of the EU and would have effectively ended freedom of movement (a lot of people would say immigration concerns were one of the major driving forces behind Brexit). One thing is for sure, you certainly weren't told you were voting for 'no-deal'. They tried to achieve remaining in the EU, by voting for the only available way to leave the EU? That is strange reasoning.
  6. Is it true that if the right wing of the conservative party had voted for May's deal, it would have passed? Were there enough Labour members to offset the DUP voting against? If so, how are they getting away with saying people like Gauke, Hammond, etc are frustrating Brexit? It is the right wing tories (currently in government) that have stopped Brexit from happening thus far by voting against it three times.
  7. That's a bit tough on Corbyn as a lot of people would call that an accurate description of Brexit. Today your PM tried to make a speech in front of 10 Downing Street but was drowned out by chants of "stop the coup", while yesterday one of his Cabinet said government wouldn't automatically respect laws passed by Parliament, which the PM himself suspended to push through his policies. I'd say Corbyn can't be much more disruptive to the economic and social cohesion in the UK. I'm all for being upbeat about Brexit (I hope it all works out for the UK and EU), but at some point its time to face reality. The UK is a services based economy (80%); there has never been an FTA between two countries (or blocs) that covered services in any meaningful way. Countries are not waiting in line to do a trade deal with the UK; to the contrary numerous countries are refusing to roll over their EU deal for the UK (until they see what the EU-UK relationship will be) or offering worse terms. Only Trump seems interested as it is his policy to support anything that weakens the EU (which Brexit definitely does). Even the most ambitions FTA with the US will only add 2% to GDP (as opposed to the massive drop from leaving your primary market). The UK is fifth in per capita contributions to the EU, but the anual beneftis from EU membership (increased tax take, membership numerous agencies, horizon programmes, etc) far outweigh the cost. etc. etc. etc. Brexit might be a good idea in the long run, who knows. But you can only get there if people aren't deluded but rather up front and honest about the consequences of a crash out Brexit and realistic about the (short to middle term) future.
  8. Brexit really is Syriza for slow learners 🤦‍♂️
  9. Yes they do. But as they don't care about Brexit they're not spending any political capital on it. I disagree with that comparison. A more apt one would be: Imagine a political campaign run by a leader on the basis of "we will create 100,000 new jobs and grow the economy". Then after he has won on that message, he actively pursues the opposite while still claiming a democratic mandate. Do you think Leave would have won if the prominent Leavers had said before the referendum what they did after?
  10. I see your point, but Norway and Switzerland are in a half way house and both were presented by prominent Leave campaigners as models for the future EU-UK relationship post Brexit.
  11. I very much disagree with this. Even Leave.EU, Farage's outfit, stated in their official plan (sadly now deleted from their website but still available elsewhere on the internet) the UK would leave the political institutions after 2 years, and the economic partnership only after 10. There is noone, literally noone, that talked about no-deal during the campaign. Raab tried to claim he did, but all factcheckers showed he didn't and even Gove called him out on it. No-deal is the legal default, but based on the referendum result it cannot be the political (or economic) default. Britain's economy is far more exposed to Brexit risks than the rest of Europe. Maybe the Irish are shitting themselves but even they will not experience as much disruption as the UK; when you go east of Germany, Brexit barely registers. The FT put it very clearly two days ago: "Brexiter's suggestions that the EU will capitulate because they dare not risk a no-deal rupture misunderstands the fundamental weakness of threats made with a gun pointed at your feet".
  12. When the EU adopts more democratic practices and becomes more State-like, eurosceptics balk and say they only want a Common Market. When the EU is run like an international organisation, and everything gets decided by the Member States, eurosceptics say it is not democratic enough. 🤷‍♂️ The debate has become silly as noone will convince anyone of anything anymore; choose your facts, twist them and make your case. However, to his credit, Johnson has finally ended the debate which is more democratic, the EU or the UK. It's not the one where a party-appointed leader can suspend Parliament to prevent it having a say on his interpretation of the "will of the people". Ironically, behaviour like that is grounds for getting your voting rights suspended in the EU council.
  13. Well. This blew up a bit in a way not intended; in essence I was only stating the official UK policy regarding goods (see also why Canada is refusing to roll-over its EU trade agreement for the UK (clue: because the UK will allow its market to be flooded with goods)). My post might have been a little over-aggressive, although the Marmite thing was meant as a joke (see the smiley). To be clear: - I like the UK - I like the EU - no-deal Brexit is a disaster for both. As Mike (who is correct about my past) indicated I used to back Leave because I was disgusted by the Cameron deal. I also believed there to be political gain in it for the EU as the UK was a very negative member, while logically the UK would stay in the economic partnership. As Brexit apparently now means no-deal, I am totally against it and I hope the UK stays.
  14. I think when, over your all-Marmite Christmas dinner, you finally understand the difference between the disruption of leaving a unified market and the marginal benefit of an FTA, you'll find that, in fact, irony is dead. 😉 What the hell are you talking about Palfy? I point out that it is in the economic intrest of the UK to keep its borders open to goods which it doesn't produce (as Johnson has said), in the same way the EU will keep its market accessible to UK services that the EU can't provide itself, and you set off on this rant about UK Blitzkrieg spirit stating 'facts' that don't make any sense whatsover. It's a true mark of British exceptionalism that being treated as any other third country by the EU is interpreted as an act of war.
  • Create New...