Brexit...

[rubecula]

15 hours ago, Palfy said:

Could be sooner than that. Told ya so

[Matt]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46056337

[MikeO]

october 30 2018, 5:00pm, the times

Our rudeness to European allies is shameful

max hastings

Brexiteer bluster and triumphalism about the war have led us to treat admirable nations with nothing but contempt

Half a century ago, when that military circus the Royal Tournament was a national institution, there was a contretemps after a visiting Italian officer discovered that his Bersaglieri must perform in a sand arena. He expostulated: “My men cannot run on sand!”. The chortling response of the tournament director delighted countless owners of regimental ties. “They ran pretty damn fast on sand in 1941!”

Amid the pervasive war legacy, many of a generation of British people spoke without embarrassment of jerries, wops and frogs. One of the best things that has happened to this country in the intervening decades is that most people with half a brain, and especially the young, have forsworn expressions of contempt for foreigners, seeing so much to admire in their economic, social and cultural achievements. If many EU nations now face serious political difficulties so too, heaven knows, do we.

Despite my authorship of books about the Second World War, neither I nor most of my readers suppose that the fact we finished up on the winning side in 1945 entitles Britain to the undying gratitude of old allies, any more than we expect the losers to go on paying moral or political reparations for defeat, provided that — like the Germans though unlike, alas, the Japanese — they renounce their forefathers’ dreadful deeds.

Yet one of the ugliest aspects of Brexit is that it has generated a resurgence of casual abuse of foreigners, and of Europeans in particular. In 1990 Nicholas Ridley was obliged to resign from the Thatcher government after giving an interview in which he denounced the EU as “a German racket”.

Today, Tory politicians and their supporters express with impunity incomparably ruder sentiments. Jacob Rees-Mogg cleverly dismissed Jean-Claude Juncker as “a pound-shop Bismarck”. The language of some other Tory backbenchers, according to their colleague Claire Perry, evokes that of jihadists, saying “Begone you evil Europeans”. The vulgar abuse directed at the red EU passport and triumphalism about restoration of the old blue British one would have embarrassed a 19th-century jingo.

Jeremy Hunt’s comparison of the EU with the old Soviet Union gained special notoriety because he had been considered sensible. He said what he did because aspirants to the Conservative leadership feel obliged to express such views to secure the support of the Colosseum mob conspicuous at the party conference.

In such circles xenophobia has once more become respectable and even admirable. Boris Johnson is by no means the only figure who seeks to rouse the spirit of 1940, of plucky little Britain and a bulldog prime minister broadcasting scorn and defiance from the white cliffs of Dover towards repugnant or cowed continentals. A barrage of mud pies is directed against European leaders who decline to concede what many Brexiteers seek: continuing access to the benefits of EU membership without its burdens and frustrations.

To sustain all human traffic, whether personal, commercial or international, there is a requirement for respect. Relationships are overwhelmingly influenced by who makes whom feel good. It is almost impossible to sustain a successful friendship, marriage, workplace association or negotiation without some show of appreciation of each other’s status and circumstances, whether sincere or not.

Unless we suppose, as perhaps some Brexiteers do, that we can shell other EU nations into yielding to our demands, we must hold out to them the prospect of a courteous and fruitful relationship with Britain, if compromises can be reached. To this end civility is indispensable, heedless of whether we reject their integrationist aspirations.

We might go a step farther, and occasionally display sympathy for what continental Europe suffered in both world wars, incomparably worse than our own tribulations, rather than indulge a feast of nationalistic triumphalism fed by movies about Churchill and 1940. Consider the grace and statesmanship displayed by Anthony Eden when he was interviewed back in 1968 for that great French documentary Le Chagrin et La Pitié. Marcel Ophüls’s film addressed with searing frankness his country’s experience of Nazi occupation and collaboration. Invited to comment, Britain’s wartime foreign secretary responded in impeccable French that it was not for him, a citizen of a nation lucky enough not to have been occupied, to offer any judgment upon others less fortunate.

We can imagine the sniggering spirit in which a modern Brexiteer and/or aspirant for the Conservative leadership would today reprise such a discussion. To sustain the confidence of Moggians, Johnsonites and Faragists in the wisdom of shaking the dust of the continent from our shoes, he or she deems it essential to assert that Britain fares better in war or peace without importunate partners; that the modern continentals are making such an unholy mess of their affairs that we should mop our brows in gratitude that we can leave them to it. We are back where King George VI left off in 1940, asserting Pooterish relief that Britain was no longer encumbered by allies.

Yet those of us who travel frequently in Europe never tire of paying homage to so much that we see and hear there. Watching the new French film Les Gardiennes, about the experiences of a farming family during the First World War, one feels a glow of pleasure that we are neighbours of the nation that produces such cinema. Italy is a political shambles but every visit there provides new reasons to love and admire its people. The Dutch give an ongoing masterclass in how to be civilised internationalists.

What kind of Englishman in 2018 can offer rational justification for condescending to foreigners in general, Europeans in particular? Yet that is what Tory politicians and newspapers do almost daily, before expressing outraged surprise that EU leaders at the negotiating table display no inclination towards generosity — or, more frankly, mercy. We should hang our heads in shame about the number of Europeans long resident in Britain who have either already gone home or are preparing to do so, because they no longer feel welcome here.

Ten years ago at a Anglo-German Königswinter conference, I heard the boss of Mercedes-Benz warn his British listeners, with exemplary politeness, that if we quit the EU we might find it cold outside. Whether or not he was right, it is certain that our future will prove permafrosted unless we can restore common courtesy to the language we use towards and about foreigners. In the future that we appear to have chosen, we shall stand in desperate need of goodwill from neighbouring nations which today a dismaying number of people deem it acceptable, or even brave and clever, to insult.

 

[MikeO]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46086336

[Palfy]

14 hours ago, MikeO said:

october 30 2018, 5:00pm, the times

Our rudeness to European allies is shameful

max hastings

Brexiteer bluster and triumphalism about the war have led us to treat admirable nations with nothing but contempt

Half a century ago, when that military circus the Royal Tournament was a national institution, there was a contretemps after a visiting Italian officer discovered that his Bersaglieri must perform in a sand arena. He expostulated: “My men cannot run on sand!”. The chortling response of the tournament director delighted countless owners of regimental ties. “They ran pretty damn fast on sand in 1941!”

Amid the pervasive war legacy, many of a generation of British people spoke without embarrassment of jerries, wops and frogs. One of the best things that has happened to this country in the intervening decades is that most people with half a brain, and especially the young, have forsworn expressions of contempt for foreigners, seeing so much to admire in their economic, social and cultural achievements. If many EU nations now face serious political difficulties so too, heaven knows, do we.

Despite my authorship of books about the Second World War, neither I nor most of my readers suppose that the fact we finished up on the winning side in 1945 entitles Britain to the undying gratitude of old allies, any more than we expect the losers to go on paying moral or political reparations for defeat, provided that — like the Germans though unlike, alas, the Japanese — they renounce their forefathers’ dreadful deeds.

Yet one of the ugliest aspects of Brexit is that it has generated a resurgence of casual abuse of foreigners, and of Europeans in particular. In 1990 Nicholas Ridley was obliged to resign from the Thatcher government after giving an interview in which he denounced the EU as “a German racket”.

Today, Tory politicians and their supporters express with impunity incomparably ruder sentiments. Jacob Rees-Mogg cleverly dismissed Jean-Claude Juncker as “a pound-shop Bismarck”. The language of some other Tory backbenchers, according to their colleague Claire Perry, evokes that of jihadists, saying “Begone you evil Europeans”. The vulgar abuse directed at the red EU passport and triumphalism about restoration of the old blue British one would have embarrassed a 19th-century jingo.

Jeremy Hunt’s comparison of the EU with the old Soviet Union gained special notoriety because he had been considered sensible. He said what he did because aspirants to the Conservative leadership feel obliged to express such views to secure the support of the Colosseum mob conspicuous at the party conference.

In such circles xenophobia has once more become respectable and even admirable. Boris Johnson is by no means the only figure who seeks to rouse the spirit of 1940, of plucky little Britain and a bulldog prime minister broadcasting scorn and defiance from the white cliffs of Dover towards repugnant or cowed continentals. A barrage of mud pies is directed against European leaders who decline to concede what many Brexiteers seek: continuing access to the benefits of EU membership without its burdens and frustrations.

To sustain all human traffic, whether personal, commercial or international, there is a requirement for respect. Relationships are overwhelmingly influenced by who makes whom feel good. It is almost impossible to sustain a successful friendship, marriage, workplace association or negotiation without some show of appreciation of each other’s status and circumstances, whether sincere or not.

Unless we suppose, as perhaps some Brexiteers do, that we can shell other EU nations into yielding to our demands, we must hold out to them the prospect of a courteous and fruitful relationship with Britain, if compromises can be reached. To this end civility is indispensable, heedless of whether we reject their integrationist aspirations.

We might go a step farther, and occasionally display sympathy for what continental Europe suffered in both world wars, incomparably worse than our own tribulations, rather than indulge a feast of nationalistic triumphalism fed by movies about Churchill and 1940. Consider the grace and statesmanship displayed by Anthony Eden when he was interviewed back in 1968 for that great French documentary Le Chagrin et La Pitié. Marcel Ophüls’s film addressed with searing frankness his country’s experience of Nazi occupation and collaboration. Invited to comment, Britain’s wartime foreign secretary responded in impeccable French that it was not for him, a citizen of a nation lucky enough not to have been occupied, to offer any judgment upon others less fortunate.

We can imagine the sniggering spirit in which a modern Brexiteer and/or aspirant for the Conservative leadership would today reprise such a discussion. To sustain the confidence of Moggians, Johnsonites and Faragists in the wisdom of shaking the dust of the continent from our shoes, he or she deems it essential to assert that Britain fares better in war or peace without importunate partners; that the modern continentals are making such an unholy mess of their affairs that we should mop our brows in gratitude that we can leave them to it. We are back where King George VI left off in 1940, asserting Pooterish relief that Britain was no longer encumbered by allies.

Yet those of us who travel frequently in Europe never tire of paying homage to so much that we see and hear there. Watching the new French film Les Gardiennes, about the experiences of a farming family during the First World War, one feels a glow of pleasure that we are neighbours of the nation that produces such cinema. Italy is a political shambles but every visit there provides new reasons to love and admire its people. The Dutch give an ongoing masterclass in how to be civilised internationalists.

What kind of Englishman in 2018 can offer rational justification for condescending to foreigners in general, Europeans in particular? Yet that is what Tory politicians and newspapers do almost daily, before expressing outraged surprise that EU leaders at the negotiating table display no inclination towards generosity — or, more frankly, mercy. We should hang our heads in shame about the number of Europeans long resident in Britain who have either already gone home or are preparing to do so, because they no longer feel welcome here.

Ten years ago at a Anglo-German Königswinter conference, I heard the boss of Mercedes-Benz warn his British listeners, with exemplary politeness, that if we quit the EU we might find it cold outside. Whether or not he was right, it is certain that our future will prove permafrosted unless we can restore common courtesy to the language we use towards and about foreigners. In the future that we appear to have chosen, we shall stand in desperate need of goodwill from neighbouring nations which today a dismaying number of people deem it acceptable, or even brave and clever, to insult.

 

I think most already new that the Tories and the press that spout their rhetoric are racist from a time we no longer live in, that’s why people of 55 and over shouldn’t have been allowed to vote and I’m in the category so it’s not an ageist thing, most not all harbour racist views towards people from other countries they do deny it only because they are blind to it. 

Its imprinted in their thought process from the times they grew up in and the papers and party they support help to carry on the beliefs. 

[Matt]

10 hours ago, MikeO said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46086336

Money talks. Let’s hope it talks sense. 

[rubecula]

On ‎04‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 04:36, Palfy said:

I think most already new that the Tories and the press that spout their rhetoric are racist from a time we no longer live in, that’s why people of 55 and over shouldn’t have been allowed to vote and I’m in the category so it’s not an ageist thing, most not all harbour racist views towards people from other countries they do deny it only because they are blind to it. 

Its imprinted in their thought process from the times they grew up in and the papers and party they support help to carry on the beliefs. 

I could not disagree more

[Palfy]

3 hours ago, rubecula said:

I could not disagree more

Ok no problem. 

[Matt]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46091134

[rubecula]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46091134

thanks Matt.  I do not understand what is going on here, we do not want a hard border, the Irish don't want one either, but the EU wants one?  It is nothing to do with them surely, if they want a border let them  build it

[Matt]

6 minutes ago, rubecula said:

thanks Matt.  I do not understand what is going on here, we do not want a hard border, the Irish don't want one either, but the EU wants one?  It is nothing to do with them surely, if they want a border let them  build it

How is it nothing to do with them? Ireland is in the EU, we’re trying to leave but still in the EU and we want to trade with the EU without playing by the rules that have helped establish one of the worlds biggest economies. There’s a jargon buster on the BBC site which can explain better. 

Edit: a border controlled by customs officials, police or military. After all the years it took to establish peace and demolish the border, its little wonder no one wants one

[rubecula]

1 minute ago, Matt said:

How is it nothing to do with them? Ireland is in the EU, we’re trying to leave but still in the EU and we want to trade with the EU without playing by the rules that have helped establish one of the worlds biggest economies. There’s a jargon buster on the BBC site which can explain better. 

yes I knew you would pick up on the wording there, I couldn't think of any other way to say it..  what I meant to say was really about the …. 

put it this way  the EU want the UK to put in a border down the middle of the Irish sea.  but northern Ireland is part of the UK  so we say no/  they then say to put one across Ireland, which we don't want to do and more importantly the Irish do not want to do either,  basically the EU want a border where nobody wants one  ( apart from they themselves )  which is imho very wrong.  The solution to my mind is simple  the EU want a border, let them build one.  and lets see where that takes us.

[Matt]

The EU wants their trading rules respected, the onus isn’t on them to sort out Britain’s mess or realise their delusions for them. If Britain can’t come up with something that appeases all parties, despite the brash / uniformed bragging about how everything will be better and easier, how is the EU to blame? They don’t want a border, they want a solution that’s not a border, and a border is the last choice for all parties. 

Plus, the EU isn’t a country, it can’t just go building a wall through a country. what it can and should do is protect the interests of all 27 states unless it wants to implode, and reinforcing the rules that the countries have created and agreed to over the decades is exactly the right thing to do. 

[MikeO]

4 minutes ago, rubecula said:

yes I knew you would pick up on the wording there, I couldn't think of any other way to say it..  what I meant to say was really about the …. 

put it this way  the EU want the UK to put in a border down the middle of the Irish sea.  but northern Ireland is part of the UK  so we say no/  they then say to put one across Ireland, which we don't want to do and more importantly the Irish do not want to do either,  basically the EU want a border where nobody wants one  ( apart from they themselves )  which is imho very wrong.  The solution to my mind is simple  the EU want a border, let them build one.  and lets see where that takes us.

First bit in bold no, the EU can't do that because when we leave NI will leave also.

Second bit in bold, we are the ones creating the border by pulling out.

[rubecula]

2 minutes ago, MikeO said:

First bit in bold no, the EU can't do that because when we leave NI will leave also.

Second bit in bold, we are the ones creating the border by pulling out.

ok if that is so  (I am not arguing) why have a border at all anywhere?  nobody likes them  (apart from racists )  so why bother ?  no  I understand what you are saung Mike but they are trying to impose their will on the Irish people.  why not have the border in France if they feel so strongly about it?

[holystove]

wow..

[Matt]

1 minute ago, rubecula said:

ok if that is so  (I am not arguing) why have a border at all anywhere?  nobody likes them  (apart from racists )  so why bother ?  no  I understand what you are saung Mike but they are trying to impose their will on the Irish people.  why not have the border in France if they feel so strongly about it?

Who are trying to impose who’s will?! Brexit is forcing this, not the EU!

Again, the EU isn’t a country and can’t just put a border up in France. Plus, even if they did, they isolate a member state, when they’re about unity. 

[MikeO]

16 minutes ago, rubecula said:

ok if that is so  (I am not arguing) why have a border at all anywhere?  nobody likes them  (apart from racists )  so why bother ?  no  I understand what you are saung Mike but they are trying to impose their will on the Irish people.  why not have the border in France if they feel so strongly about it?

I (probably controversially) completely agree with the first sentence. After that, they are not trying to impose their will on the Republic of Ireland, the UK and the people who voted for Brexit are solely responsible for imposing their will and creating the issue to start with. And there will be a border with France (albeit not a land one, along with every EU country if the "hard" exit goes ahead). 

This is all down to us (well 52% of us anyway), not them.

[rubecula]

4 hours ago, Matt said:

Who are trying to impose who’s will?! Brexit is forcing this, not the EU!

Again, the EU isn’t a country and can’t just put a border up in France. Plus, even if they did, they isolate a member state, when they’re about unity. 

I agree Matt  so why put a border in Ireland and not France.  it is contradictory/  my entire point albeit badly phrased, is why bother with a border at all, nobody wants one

[MikeO]

10 minutes ago, rubecula said:

I agree Matt  so why put a border in Ireland and not France.  it is contradictory/  my entire point albeit badly phrased, is why bother with a border at all, nobody wants one

I say again Rubes mate, there will be a border between England and France the way things are going; the fact that it's not a land border is irrelevant. No contradiction. Many people who voted with you do want one. I fail to understand how you can't grasp this, you're not daft (well you are a bit but not that daft).

[rubecula]

Mike I know mate  I am not worried about a border between England and france  (we have nearly always had one anyway) my worry is a land border when none of the folks on that land want a border there.

 

[MikeO]

14 minutes ago, rubecula said:

Mike I know mate  I am not worried about a border between England and france  (we have nearly always had one anyway) my worry is a land border when none of the folks on that land want a border there.

Probably why 56% of NI voters voted remain while the rest of the UK (Scotland apart) screwed them. Yourself included I'm sorry to say.

[rubecula]

1 minute ago, MikeO said:

Probably why 56% of NI voters voted remain while the rest of the UK (Scotland apart) screwed them. Yourself included I'm sorry to say.

I don't feel screwed just now mike we live in a democracy and I have faith in the system, despite the numpties that were voted in to help us in the first place.  

or do you feel I have screwed you by voting for what I believe in?  I would never have said that about you folks if the vote had gone the other way.  why would I  ??  I have already said I believe in democracy.

 

[MikeO]

3 minutes ago, rubecula said:

or do you feel I have screwed you by voting for what I believe in? 

Maybe not what you believe in but you need to remember that you are in bed with Farage, Gove, Rees-Mogg  and Johnson et al, all of whom have jumped ship since they won their completely unexpected ""victory"? Does that sit comfortably with you?

The country is screwed, you and your fellow voters haven't screwed me personally but they have my kids and grand-kids.

[rubecula]

5 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Maybe not what you believe in but you need to remember that you are in bed with Farage, Gove, Rees-Mogg  and Johnson et al, all of whom have jumped ship since they won their completely unexpected ""victory"? Does that sit comfortably with you?

The country is screwed, you and your fellow voters haven't screwed me personally but they have my kids and grand-kids.

sorry you feel that way Mike

[rubecula]

On ‎22‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 12:15, MikeO said:

 

The out camp are doing exactly the same thing.

 

Nobody really knows the consequences of leaving, even the campaigners are guessing.

 

I'll vote to stay in purely for the reason I gave here...

 

http://www.toffeetalk.com/index.php?/topic/27857-would-you-like-to-make-history/&do=findComment&comment=510346

  I fully agree with this bit Mike.

[Matt]

9 hours ago, rubecula said:

I don't feel screwed just now mike we live in a democracy and I have faith in the system, despite the numpties that were voted in to help us in the first place.  

or do you feel I have screwed you by voting for what I believe in?  I would never have said that about you folks if the vote had gone the other way.  why would I  ??  I have already said I believe in democracy

No doubt you believe in democracy, I'm just not sure you or  most of the population understand how it works (myself included, at least not into the legal details.)

[johnh]

14 hours ago, MikeO said:

Maybe not what you believe in but you need to remember that you are in bed with Farage, Gove, Rees-Mogg  and Johnson et al, all of whom have jumped ship since they won their completely unexpected ""victory"? Does that sit comfortably with you?

The country is screwed, you and your fellow voters haven't screwed me personally but they have my kids and grand-kids.

Mike, and you are in bed with Blair.  Don't really need to say any more, do I?

[MikeO]

21 minutes ago, johnh said:

Mike, and you are in bed with Blair.  Don't really need to say any more, do I?

He was a peripheral figure and not an elected politician representative, but even if he were then yes I'd have been much happier with him on my side than the four pond scum I mentioned. I was also "in bed" with your local MP during the campaign I believe.

[johnh]

5 hours ago, MikeO said:

He was a peripheral figure and not an elected politician representative, but even if he were then yes I'd have been much happier with him on my side than the four pond scum I mentioned. I was also "in bed" with your local MP during the campaign I believe.

Add the four together and they don't equal Blair.  There were wankers on both sides (I haven't mentioned Cameron).  None of them influenced my vote to leave.  I made up my own mind and it was made up a long time before the referendum was announced.