Let's Get Political!

[4D]

Undemocratic? Isn't that like trying to change the outcome of a democratic vote? 

[RedRag]

No I can't.  Two reasons.
  
1.  I do accept that there are some potential advantages to Brexit of which the most easily measureable is probably the elimination of our (net) EU contribution, a much quoted one is the increased autonomy it gives us, a more speculative one is avoiding the gradual move to a Federal Europe and my own favourite which is to ensure we stay out of the euro which I believe (but have no evidence to prove) is an accident waiting to happen.  However I don't believe that it is likely that Brexit will "bring a [net] positive benefit to the population of this country".   The biggest myth, I believe, is the EU contribution which I think will be dwarfed by the underlying cost of going it alone, in particular wrt our ability to negotiate equally advantageous trade deals when we have a fraction of the financial muscle of the EU.
 
2.  All of the above is riddled with "I believe" this and "I think" that which is all it can be because opinions are all we have right now.  Anyone who claims they can "provide evidenced examples whereby it can be shown that Brexit will [anything] " before it actually happens doesn't understand the difference between fact and projection.    Furthermore Brexit has no real historical equivalence (that I can think of) so it is not like, say, projecting that it will rain in Wales in 2020 based on historical rainfall data.

I think that you & I probably have reasonably similar views on the (un)desirability of Brexit.  I think that we have very different views on how much the strength with which we hold those views entitle us to deride those who disagree.

The world seems to be increasingly dominated by people who believe that it is not just their right but their patriotic duty to decry anyone who appears to disagree with them (however marginally) as a fascist/commie, homophobe/faggot, misogynist/feminazi, sjw/alt-right who deserves to be insulted, intimidated, milk-shaked, fired, assaulted, threatened with rape, shot dead all in the name of ….. whatever.    By Any Means Necessary as one US group proudly titles itself.

I think (rather pompously) that this is uncivilised and more importantly that it is counter-productive.  How many people, having been called a moron, have ever clapped their hand to their forehead and exclaimed “By god you’re right, I’ll come around to your way of thinking immediately”?

You describe SRK as “like those girls who get groomed, desperately believing the nonsense they are told as it makes them feel special.”

PaulD believes that this demonstrates that you have “considerably more consideration”.  I struggle with that.

So no calling people "traitors" on the one hand or "thick" on the other?

That would be a wonderful world but it is not the rapidly changing world we live in.

It presumes rationalism.  The Enlightenment of the 18th Century.  I wish.

We now have early 21st C democracy which, in my (biased and unreliable) view is sadly informed by a willingness by the political or other influencing elites to dishonestly manipulate public thinking - in sufficient numbers to achieve their ends.

Groomed or manipulated then leads the "victims" to triumphalism based on genuine (but misguided) belief.  It is tough to consider oneself (as opposed to others) a "victim"

We can argue or insult as we please here but this is the research on:false memory of fake news as fact:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49435387

an increased preponderance to gullibility when claims/stories corroborate our gut feelings: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170918142157.htm

I don't expect anyone will read the links   but the point is that a little more humility in the judgement that underlines one's own political or other beliefs would be desirable.

That won't come about by magic.  However, passing legislation to severely disincentivise the perpetrators of "fake news" (ie not a token fines) should perhaps be supported by posters who are uncomfortable with the explosion in fake news and its associated triumphalism.

[pauld]

PaulD believes that this demonstrates that you have “considerably more consideration”.  I struggle with that.

To be clear, this doesn't just apply to horlock - I'd say pretty much anyone on here demonstrates considerably more ability to consider and grasp an argument than SRK's faulty bot algorithm

[Flashheart]

Regardless of whether he is 'right' or 'wrong', SRK's immature manner does him no favours. There are some on that side of the fence that can hold a reasoned discussion. SRK is not one of them. He'd actually likely be booted form platforms that hold members to higher standards.

[horlock07]

You describe SRK as “like those girls who get groomed, desperately believing the nonsense they are told as it makes them feel special.”

PaulD believes that this demonstrates that you have “considerably more consideration”.  I struggle with that.

It may not be 'consideration', although I stand by the general conclusion that many have been groomed by politicians and the media to draw a desired conclusion using the same methods as people engage with vulnerable people, as noted by my learned friend RedRag.

I may also be blunt but this is borne of basic frustration. We have now had four years of brexiteers coming on here saying things, on the whole without any factual evidence to back them up, they are then countered with a factual response it goes quiet and then 2-3 weeks later the same people come on here and say the exact same things over and over again, its clear that facts and evidence matter little, fine, but it getting tedious after a while.

As an example, I could start spouting off complete conjectural things about something I know next to nowt about, then you or another could say, 'no Horlock07, that appears incorrect as 'x' who has had years of experience in that sector/trade/profession provides their professional judgement here, read it and you will understand why I am making this point and taking this position'. Instead we have the same people making the same countered points over and over and over again, very rarely providing any form of evidence to support their position bar a long standing prejudice and or the scribblings of the right wing media.

Would that not start to grate after a while?

Cards on table I knew very little about the EU pre 2015, frankly I have more important things to worry about in life (things that have been greatly exacerbated since 2016!), however coming to he referendum I did a heck of a lot of reading on the topic, on both sides of the debate and reached a balanced judgement noting what appeared to be based upon evidence and what appeared to be based upon conjecture and paranoia and I reached a conclusion, I continue to read around the topic and my conclusion is little altered, in fact its strengthened by the fact that no Brexiteer either on here or in fact anywhere has been able to articulate a real evidence supported benefit to our leaving, decisions in the best interest of the country tend not be require the suspension of parliament, contingency measures and spending billions of pounds of taxpayers money to protect business and maintain medical and basic food supplies.

I apologise if this appears a little snarky, that is not my intention, however as someone who works with legislation where facts are king (lecture on day 1 - anything you choose to believe or cite should be based upon a consideration of the evidence available, taking note of the source and not conjecture) and works in a profession where facts are doubly important, it gets right on my tit ends frankly that these debates are still going round and round. I suspect its not helped by the fact that politicians are now spouting lies unchallenged, and its become fine to do so.

[Red Frog]

No I can't.  Two reasons.
 
1.  I do accept that there are some potential advantages to Brexit of which the most easily measureable is probably the elimination of our (net) EU contribution, a much quoted one is the increased autonomy it gives us, a more speculative one is avoiding the gradual move to a Federal Europe and my own favourite which is to ensure we stay out of the euro which I believe (but have no evidence to prove) is an accident waiting to happen.  However I don't believe that it is likely that Brexit will "bring a [net] positive benefit to the population of this country".   The biggest myth, I believe, is the EU contribution which I think will be dwarfed by the underlying cost of going it alone, in particular wrt our ability to negotiate equally advantageous trade deals when we have a fraction of the financial muscle of the EU.
 
2.  All of the above is riddled with "I believe" this and "I think" that which is all it can be because opinions are all we have right now.  Anyone who claims they can "provide evidenced examples whereby it can be shown that Brexit will [anything] " before it actually happens doesn't understand the difference between fact and projection.    Furthermore Brexit has no real historical equivalence (that I can think of) so it is not like, say, projecting that it will rain in Wales in 2020 based on historical rainfall data.

I think that you & I probably have reasonably similar views on the (un)desirability of Brexit.  I think that we have very different views on how much the strength with which we hold those views entitle us to deride those who disagree.

The world seems to be increasingly dominated by people who believe that it is not just their right but their patriotic duty to decry anyone who appears to disagree with them (however marginally) as a fascist/commie, homophobe/faggot, misogynist/feminazi, sjw/alt-right who deserves to be insulted, intimidated, milk-shaked, fired, assaulted, threatened with rape, shot dead all in the name of ….. whatever.    By Any Means Necessary as one US group proudly titles itself.

I think (rather pompously) that this is uncivilised and more importantly that it is counter-productive.  How many people, having been called a moron, have ever clapped their hand to their forehead and exclaimed “By god you’re right, I’ll come around to your way of thinking immediately”?

You describe SRK as “like those girls who get groomed, desperately believing the nonsense they are told as it makes them feel special.”

PaulD believes that this demonstrates that you have “considerably more consideration”.  I struggle with that.

I get your objection to all the ad hominem stuff, but I'm not sure whether you think there's any point in continuing to defend a remain stance at this stage, or whether for you that debate is dead, and remainers should now just shut up and accept the will of the majority.

[pauld]

Ooops ... defence secretary caught on camera admitting that proroguing is all about govt numbers and nothing to do with the Queen's Speech:

https://twitter.com/MonarchyUK/status/1167048291273584641

Obviously we all know Johnson is a liar, but nice to catch one of his ministers admitting it

EDIT: to be clear, this is potentially quite signifcant beyond the standard "Boris Johnson caught lying", that's two-a-penny. The issue here is that this also means the govt lied to the Queen about the reason for proroguing, potentially invalidating the order to prorogue itself

[Pax Romana]

I get your objection to all the ad hominem stuff, but I'm not sure whether you think there's any point in continuing to defend a remain stance at this stage, or whether for you that debate is dead, and remainers should now just shut up and accept the will of the majority.

No I don't.  I started off in that position.  You can't pick and choose democracy when it suits you etc etc.

I changed my mind when a number of people (in particular one of my daughters) convinced me that an old man like me, whose future is fortunately pretty secure, isn't justified in adopting a holier than thou approach when millions of other mainly younger people's futures were being screwed.

Still not a position I feel totally comfortable in defending however.   Not sure there is a 'right' answer.

[Pax Romana]

Would that not start to grate after a while?

I take your point.  Yes it does. 

And to be honest, I am rather a hypocrite in piously commenting on you when I have had at least one unfortunate (i.e. embarrassing) incident myself, a drunken argument in a pub with a Leaver who worked for me.  Not my finest hour.

[Batch]

But PaulD, we know there will be a statement of 'that's his opinion and not that of liar Boris', and that will be that

[Arriba]

@ByDonkeys on twitter is well worth a look folks.

[pauld]

I take your point.  Yes it does. 

And to be honest, I am rather a hypocrite in piously commenting on you when I have had at least one unfortunate (i.e. embarrassing) incident myself, a drunken argument in a pub with a Leaver who worked for me.  Not my finest hour.

That's one of the worst things about this whole sorry mess. There is, as you said in your other post, no "right" answer, but it seems the more grey areas there are the more entrenched people have become. It's been horribly divisive of the whole nation, within communities, even families. And the current government seem set on just sharpening those divides rather than trying to re-unite.

[BambooToTheFuture]

That's one of the worst things about this whole sorry mess. There is, as you said in your other post, no "right" answer, but it seems the more grey areas there are the more entrenched people have become. It's been horribly divisive of the whole nation, within communities, even families. And the current government seem set on just sharpening those divides rather than trying to re-unite.

It's almost as if it is some kind of sadistic shakeout by government. I mean, they don't really care for the outcome (whatever that may be), they will still have their tidy pensions and offshore investments, while we all go to shit 

[Flashheart]

Steve Barclay, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, tweeted earlier TODAY that we need to start talks on how to ensure car parts are allowed to pass freely over the border in the case of no deal.

[mystical_goat]

Think they've mostly solved that one anyway - build the cars elsewhere.