# A turning point. Trump and Brexit



## cremeegg (21 Jun 2016)

The old saying that voting changes nothing usually has some truth in it. The 2011 election was seen as the most critical in Ireland for many years, but it would have made little difference to the policies pursued, if FF rather than FG had been the major party.

However this year the UK referendum on EU membership and the US presidential election are different. I really fear that if Britain votes to leave the EU and Trump is elected US president that the world will take a turn for the worse.

That the worlds problems will be addressed in an increasing spirit of confrontation and within a win-lose mindset.  

The post war world has shown the benefits of cooperation and a win-win mentality. From the Marshall plan onwards the idea that progress is made with others, not against others, has brought peace and prosperity on an unprecedented scale.

There is a strain in US politics and recently in UK politics that sees progress as besting the other, this holds great danger for the world.

I haven't really cared about politics in many years but I really hope that Britain votes to remain and that the US rejects trump.


----------



## Betsy Og (21 Jun 2016)

Looks like remain will get there. 

Re the US, Trump winning is unthinkable, I trust it wont happen in the end, might be more comfortable if Hilary let Bernie Sanders at is but why would a politician put the good of their country before personal ambition....


----------



## Gerry Canning (21 Jun 2016)

I expect Britain to remain.
If not , Britain will be quietly isolated , not good for anyone , but quickly people will see your (benefits of co-operation)
The rest of EU will not collapse but I reckon will tweek things to ensure cohesion.

If Britain remains ; are we going to see more fudge/bloodletting in Tories and an ongoing narky out of Europe rump that will continue with the out of Europe peddling .again not good for anyone.

Mr Trump;
As he gets more (Presidential) , hard questions will be asked of him. He will not survive the heat up to  November, he will be outed on his many populist rants .
The American people are not that stupid.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (21 Jun 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> The American people are not that stupid.


I don't know, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Bush

Slightly off topic but do you not feel a tad sorry for the poor Russians.  Nobody loves them at all (except possibly The Donald).  Dumped themselves out of the Euros before the organisers did it to them, dumped out of the Olympics, sanctions by most countries etc.


----------



## Gerry Canning (21 Jun 2016)

Duke , you pessimist!!

Didn,t we vote Bertie , Bertie , Enda , Enda, !!

Yup do feel a tad sorry for Russians , given their harsh history, but druggies don,t won friends.Football hooligans irk people , and surely invasions by proxy are so last century.!


----------



## Purple (21 Jun 2016)

Reagan was good, Clinton was good, Bush the first was OK, Bush the second was a muttonhead, Obama is a disappointment.
With the Possible exception of Bush the second they were all far better than Bertie or Enda. 

I don't feel sorry for the Russians at all. They deserve everything they get and more; Their leader is a loathsome creature, their country is run as a corrupt corporation and the people support it all.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (21 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> Reagan was good, Clinton was good.


Reagan made public jokes about bombing Russia (at a time when that would not have been smart),  Clinton turned the "v" of the Oval Office into an "r".  YMMV


----------



## Purple (22 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Reagan made public jokes about bombing Russia (at a time when that would not have been smart),  Clinton turned the "v" of the Oval Office into an "r".  YMMV


But they did good things while in office; ending the cold war in one case and balancing the books in the other.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

Brendan, can we lift the swearing ban for 1 day? #brexit 

Thought I'd missed the boat on buying sterling last week, relieved now (though Sterling and Euro in somewhat of a tandem tumble Vs US$ so Euro to Sterling not as pronounced)


----------



## blueband (24 Jun 2016)

Fair play to the UK, at least now the get to leave the "lunatic asylum" lets hope more will wake up and follow suit...


----------



## Conan (24 Jun 2016)

So that vile and odious little man Farrage has got his wish. The United Kingdom is now an oxymoron. Pretty soon the UK will consist of England and Wales. Perhaps if the French close the Channel Tunnel then the "little Englanders"  (with a Welsh rump) will truly become the island they want. Good luck with that.


----------



## Purple (24 Jun 2016)

Conan said:


> So that vile and odious little man Farrage has got his wish. The United Kingdom is now an oxymoron. Pretty soon the UK will consist of England and Wales. Perhaps if the French close the Channel Tunnel then the "little Englanders"  (with a Welsh rump) will truly become the island they want. Good luck with that.


The chance of Scotland leaving the UK is now less likely than ever as if they did leave there would be a hard boarder between them and England. That just ‘aint gonna happen.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> The chance of Scotland leaving the UK is now less likely than ever as if they did leave there would be a hard boarder between them and England. That just ‘aint gonna happen.



Dunno, didnt seem to worry them re NI & ROI (and yes I know its not really called ROI but.....), unless they intend quarantining NI and protecting the integrity of...cough.....the Mainland. Watch em fall like dominos, Scotland into EU and out of UK, NI rejoins ROI, an explosive (no pun intended) little pot has been set a-bubbling......


----------



## cremeegg (24 Jun 2016)

"The EU is a elitist, undemocratic, bureaucratic, meddling, organisation with a neo-liberal ideology, which has imposed austerity, and created inequality, in its member states."

Obviously if you believe that you would want to leave.

I think that the older, undereducated, poorer, people in the UK who voted leave are about to discover that the opposite is the truth.

A Johnson, Farage regime, without any restraining influence from the EU, will lower taxes, cut services, and drive greater inequality. 

Never before have so many turkeys voted for Christmas. It makes the con-trick US Republicans have pulled getting the socially conservative poor to vote for them over the years pale by comparison.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

I guffawed as I see Indo with headline of Bertie to return to politics if Ireland to vote on exiting. Fair play to him for offering himself as a poison pill like that, I'd say he's nailed any such rumblings ab initio


----------



## Ceist Beag (24 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> The chance of Scotland leaving the UK is now less likely than ever as if they did leave there would be a hard boarder between them and England. That just ‘aint gonna happen.


Scotland narrowly failed to leave the union last time around but one of the big issues they had at the time was that they don't like being dictated to by England. Now England votes to leave, Scotland votes to remain but have to leave because they are part of the union - I definitely can see them leaving the union now as a result.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> The chance of Scotland leaving the UK is now less likely than ever as if they did leave there would be a hard boarder between them and England. That just ‘aint gonna happen.


_Purple_, you got in before me.  Because Scotland wanted the *UK* to remain does not at all mean that Scotland wants to be in the EU with or without the rest of the UK.  Scotland in the EU on its own makes about as much sense as Yorkshire being in the EU on it own.  As for NI this result has no implications for its constitutional status whatever.  If the UK voted to join ISIS the majority in the NI would back them and the deal is that NI stays in the UK as long as the majority so desire.

So, ironically, the union is more secure now than before the vote.

Let this all be a lesson on the deep weakness in naïve forms of democracy of which referenda are the naivest.  The Brexit vote was driven by ignorant working class fodder of the Murdoch hate machine.


----------



## blueband (24 Jun 2016)

So Scotland would rather be dictated to by Europe than England.....!!!


----------



## Ceist Beag (24 Jun 2016)

Fair points Duke, blueband and Purple, I guess Nicola Sturgeon may want to take stock before she commits herself to the same gamble that Cameron took as her comments to this point have very much suggested that is exactly what she plans to do. Ultimately as with all these things it will come down to what makes most economic sense for Scotland.

BTW Duke, don't for a second think that the good people of Yorkshire would not love the idea of creating their own republic separate from England!


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

Duke - Brexit was marginally on the agenda last time (not front & centre I'll grant you), but even then Scotland said it wanted to be in the EU, so had they won and the rest of the UK left EU the Scots had said they wanted to stay. So I dont think them being in the EU on their own necessarily scares them. 

However on the downside;

Oil price is down and uncertain - so have they got the bobs to pay for it all? (EU help or hinder on this point?)
I would assume sterling would have to go if Scotland is EU and UK is not.
In general, why is Scotland in the EU any more ridiculous than Ireland being in the EU?, should Ireland leave so??, Ireland needs to be outward looking as the internal market is so small, same holds for Scotland, I dont think either state would be blocked from trading with England.

If Scotland goes then NI looks like an outlier.


----------



## orka (24 Jun 2016)

Betsy Og said:


> If Scotland goes then NI looks like an outlier.


NI is a two part process though - (1) does NI want to leave the UK and (2) does ROI want to accept NI (they surely don't want to be totally independent).  I'm not at all sure ROI would want to or should take in NI - it would be very expensive (they receive something like 7B from the UK annually just to keep themselves going) and troublesome.  If we did take NI, it would want to come with a massive dowry from the UK!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

Betsy Og said:


> Duke - Brexit was marginally on the agenda last time (not front & centre I'll grant you), but even then Scotland said it wanted to be in the EU, so had they won and the rest of the UK left EU the Scots had said they wanted to stay. So I dont think them being in the EU on their own necessarily scares them.


Fair point but I still maintain that it is a non sequitur to say that Scotland wanting the UK as a whole to remain implies that Scotland wants to remain irrespective of the rest of the UK.  In the case of NI this is even more starkly the case.  It is really disingenuous for Martin McGuinness to argue that the majority in NI want to remain in the EU.  Those unionists who voted to remain were absolutely voting in the context of the UK as a whole, no way do they want to remain irrespective of what the rest of the UK does.  





> In general, why is Scotland in the EU any more ridiculous than Ireland being in the EU?, should Ireland leave so??,


Another good point.  Personally I thought Ireland going for the Euro when our biggest trading partner was opting out was a mistake motivated by anti British sentiments.  What would we give now not to have joined the Euro?  I don't think we should dismiss leaving the EU along with Britain but of course given our traditional anti Britishness there is absolutely no way that any party will go there.    





> If Scotland goes then NI looks like an outlier.


Not half as much an outlier as Gibraltar or The Falklands.  If Scotland goes it is because the people of Scotland wish for it.  There is no way the people of NI, Gibraltar or The Falklands are going to wish to break away from Britain anytime soon.


----------



## Ceist Beag (24 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Not half as much an outlier as Gibraltar or The Falklands. If Scotland goes it is because the people of Scotland wish for it. There is no way the people of NI, Gibraltar or The Falklands are going to wish to break away from Britain anytime soon.


True Duke, but should Scotland leave then will England really want to keep NI? The union would really be devalued if Scotland opt out so anything is possible if that were to happen. One thing is for sure, this vote has really shaken things up and it will be an interesting couple of years ahead to see what way the dust settles on Europe. There are a number of different ways this could go ... Britain & Ireland union anyone?!


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

Ceist Beag said:


> True Duke, but should Scotland leave then will England really want to keep NI?


It is a long time since England "really wanted to keep NI", possibly strategically during WWII.  It was one of the first moves in the peace process for the Secretary of State, Peter Prior, to announce what had become de facto anyway "_Britain has no strategic or selfish interest in retaining NI_".  Leaving aside the fact that it wouldn't like a civil war on its doorstep Britain's interest in NI is the totally honourable one of its commitment to let the majority in the Provence decide whether or not to remain in the UK.  What a relief for them it would be if there was a peaceful transition to a United Ireland, they would be shot of that subsidy for a start.

So despite the contrived fantasies of SF this Brexit vote does not in one iota advance the prospects of a United Ireland.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

It gives SF a reason to bring it up, which they are gagging to do. The GFA provides for it, so it's not outlandish in that sense.

No major appetite down South I'd say. Not sure how demographics shape up in NI, but prob a fair few who will vote with head/wallet anyway. Wait and see on Scotland and take it from there.


----------



## michaelm (24 Jun 2016)

Ceist Beag said:


> should Scotland leave then will England really want to keep NI?


If Scotland skedaddle then England would offload the North in a heartbeat, they'd have to pay though.

I'm delighted that the UK voted Leave (no doubt a minority view on AAM).  The European political classes may want ever closer union but the peoples of Europe don't really seem to want it, methinks the majority would prefer a simpler EEC which is about ease of trade and travel, and no more.

When French people rejected the EU Constitution the EU didn't listen, they just dressed the EU Constitution up as the Lisbon Treaty and denied the French a vote.  When the Irish people rejected the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty the EU didn't listen . . I'd say they are listening now, just too late.  It will  be interesting to see if the calamity predicted by the doom merchants comes to pass.


----------



## Ceist Beag (24 Jun 2016)

For what it's worth I agree completely MichaelM. I'm not happy the UK voted to Leave (as I think reform from inside would have been better and it now puts barriers between us and the UK which were not there before now) but I do think that the majority of the citizens of the EU agree with the British in that the EU is no longer what any of us want and would prefer to see it go back to the principals of the EEC. I don't particularly like Ireland being referred to as a state within the EU and hopefully now this vote will inject some long overdue discussions at rewinding some of the decisions made to bring the EU to where it currently stands, it's just really sad that Britain had to leave in the meantime.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

_Michaelm_, you seem to ascribe some profound political analysis to those who voted Brexit.  I fear the explanation is much more prosaic.  The working class bought into the immigration card big time.  This was mainly not racist.  The threat was from white immigrants from Eastern Europe. And arguments that migration from that source undercut wages and put pressure on housing etc. is not all bogus.


----------



## Betsy Og (24 Jun 2016)

Likewise I do not weep for 'the European project', should have left it at the trade level, I accept I voted in all the rest but the a la carte menu wasn't available...

Here's hoping they pull in their horns and give the people what they want, not the masterplan they are working to.


----------



## Sophrosyne (24 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _Michaelm_, you seem to ascribe some profound political analysis to those who voted Brexit. I fear the explanation is much more prosaic. The working class bought into the immigration card big time.



That ties up exactly with what I have seen on UTV and BBC today.

But also, the leave campaigners seem surprised that they won.

In interviews, they don’t seem to have thought beyond the Britain has regained its sovereignty mantra to what this effectively means for British businesses and trade.

They are also deflecting questions about border issues, including the situation at Calais.

Teresa Villiars doesn’t appear to have any appreciation of future border issues between what will be the EU and the UK while others are relying on the French honouring the Le Touquet agreement, which allows the British to carry out passport checks in Calais, rather than shifting the problem to Dover.

What if Marine Le Pen were to be elected?


----------



## joe sod (24 Jun 2016)

The saying "never overestimate the intelligence of the electorate" rings very true in this instance.
I actually think the internet is making people more silly and dumber than they were 30 years ago. Would the previous generation have taken such a risk especially when they knew what real austerity meant. If UK was a poor struggling country you could see the logic of taking a big leap. But today the British are some of the richest people on the planet even the poorest of the British have never had it so good.


----------



## elacsaplau (24 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _...._The working class bought into the immigration card big time.  This was mainly not racist.  The threat was from white immigrants from Eastern Europe.



So when would it be mainly racist?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

elacsaplau said:


> So when would it be mainly racist?


When they are black.


----------



## elacsaplau (24 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> When they are black.



Thanks. Because there were these folk (Arabs and Asians and the like) and I didn't like them at all at all (wasn't really sure why) and someone challenged me that I was just being an oul racist - and I told them I've nothing much _agin_ the pure black man so I couldn't be racist - so I'm obliged to ya that you've cleared that one up for me. If only the bloody frogs would have a proper frog's lunch on Sunday, like.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (24 Jun 2016)

Apologies, I meant any sort of off white hue.


----------



## elacsaplau (24 Jun 2016)

Racism is not confined to Hugh - some _wurkers_ would even knows this!


----------



## S.L.F (26 Jun 2016)

I am personally pleased that the UK decided to leave the EU because of the far left ideology of the EU.

I do find it fascinating how Sinn Fein have been saying since their beginnings they they don't like being dictated to by a foreign power and now they are in favour of being ruled by the EU powers that be.


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Jun 2016)

I guess it depends on how much you value (what price you put on) absolute soverignty and  De Valera like notions of self-sufficiency. Most people choose "sharing" (grinds teeth) soverignty in order for economic benefit - a pragmatic view that even the Shinners cannot ignore. Not since the Egypt/Israel 7 days war has a nation so dramatically shot itself in the foot as the UK on Brexit. To extent to which its dawning on the leave side is almost funny if it wasnt so serious. Nevertheless after a couple of years of hand wringing I'd say we'll be back more or less where we started.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (27 Jun 2016)

Betsy Og said:


> Not since the Egypt/Israel 7 days war has a nation so dramatically shot itself in the foot as the UK on Brexit.


I don't know, Ireland joining the euro when sterling was its natural currency match

What was missing from the debate was the sheer hassle of Brexit.  A suggestion that it was a simple "IN/OUT" referendum was highly irresponsible.  Someone on the Remain side sould have pointed out that a "simple" IN/OUT was not on the cards.  I am sure if Ireland was given a simple IN/OUT of the euro we would vote Out. The reason we stay In the euro is not because we love it but because it would be horrendously risky to exit it.  The Union Jack wavers of the Leave campaign must feel terribly frustrated and cheated today to find out that it will take forever to actually exit and meanwhile sterling and the economy goes south. south


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> I don't know, Ireland joining the euro when sterling was its natural currency match



I'll admit I know very little about this (never stopped you before sez you ..) but was joining the Euro of itself the issue or was it bad lending? I know we couldnt mess with interest rates to regulate the economy, but didnt it unlock long term low interest rates which benefited us greatly until we bet the lot on property. So if not in the Euro we could have jacked up interest rates, but in the Euro we could have extricated our heads from where there shouldn't have been and stopped the mania.  

The funny thing re Bexit was everyone assumed it would fail so no-one thought about what next. There was an onus on the Leave campaign to paint the picture of what next, but the reality is that it'll probably be much the same - if they go the Norway route there doesnt seem to be a huge amount of difference (adopting Directives, paying into the kitty etc). While Farange is a 'get what you see' idiot, I thought Boris for all his zaniness had a bit going on upstairs, interesting to see how he reflects on the fallout in time.


----------



## cremeegg (27 Jun 2016)

Betsy Og said:


> I'll admit I know very little about this (never stopped you before sez you ..) but was joining the Euro of itself the issue or was it bad lending? I know we couldnt mess with interest rates to regulate the economy, but didnt it unlock long term low interest rates which benefited us greatly until we bet the lot on property. So if not in the Euro we could have jacked up interest rates, but in the Euro we could have extricated our heads from where there shouldn't have been and stopped the mania.



I think you know a lot more about it than most commentators.

The idea has taken hold that the Euro was a mistake. This is nonsense.

It has been a huge success for the stronger eurozone countries and it offered opportunity to escape from the inflation/devaluation cycle for the weaker countries. That Greece failed so spectacularly to grasp that opportunity is not the fault of the euro. 

If Ireland had not joined the Euro, we might have escaped the worldwide credit crisis. Yes the independent Irish central bank would have uniquely avoided the mistakes made by everyone else. It would have been prudent and strong enough to avoid the madness. If we hadn't joined the euro the FF government would have pursued a sensible mildly expansionary policy and avoided over reliance on construction.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (27 Jun 2016)

_cremeegg   _We are straying off topic here, but the correct approach would have been to revert to the position before 1979 a parity link with Sterling. Not quite a monetary union - that as we now know requires a fiscal and political union and even I would be against that

This parity link worked well.  Ordinary people had confidence in the currency whilst the money changers knew that ultimately it was subject to the risk of the Irish sovereign.  Hence  the scope for importing credit was reasonably contained. The Euro illusion was that there was no sovereign risk and thus Ireland had in practice access to almost unlimited imported credit.  There can be no doubt that Ireland's financial crisis, which in proportionate terms is possibly the worst ever, would have been much less pronounced under sterling.

And then there is the main purpose of a currency link - the rate of exchange for external trade.  No matter how much we might try to convince ourselves otherwise the UK is still our dominant trading partner. Sterling is the correct currency for us.  The mandarins knew that but they thought the Brits decision was only temporary and so they decided to join up day one without doing the responsible thing and following our neighbour.


----------



## Conan (28 Jun 2016)

England opts out of the EU and within 4 days is kicked out of the Euro's. Boris J and Nigel F must be delighted. Will England be eligible for the Ryder Cup team and Eurovision after exercising Article 50?


----------



## michaelm (28 Jun 2016)

cremeegg said:


> The idea has taken hold that the Euro was a mistake. This is nonsense.


A mistake for Ireland.  We would have better weathered the credit crisis otherwise and would be in a much better position to manage Brexit.





Conan said:


> Boris J and Nigel F must be delighted.


I've always viewed Nigel as a straight talker, he was on fire this morning in the EU Parliament https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlN9o3g-yuA


----------



## mf1 (28 Jun 2016)

"I've always viewed Nigel as a straight talker, he was on fire this morning in the EU Parliament https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlN9o3g-yuA"

He was rude and offensive and oblivious to the trouble he is making for the Leave organisers ( are there even any organisers?) 

mf


----------



## Purple (28 Jun 2016)

michaelm said:


> A mistake for Ireland.  We would have better weathered the credit crisis otherwise and would be in a much better position to manage Brexit.I've always viewed Nigel as a straight talker, he was on fire this morning in the EU Parliament https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlN9o3g-yuA


He's an ignorant racist buffoon with enough PR training to just about disguise himself as an ignorant intolerant buffoon.


----------



## michaelm (28 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> He's an ignorant racist buffoon with enough PR training to just about disguise himself as an ignorant intolerant buffoon.


He's a bit Marmite for sure . . his detractors often play the man and not the ball, good line though.  Methinks the reaction to Brexit is entirely OTT . . but time will tell.


----------



## cremeegg (28 Jun 2016)

michaelm said:


> We would have better weathered the credit crisis (if we had not joined the Euro) otherwise and would be in a much better position to manage Brexit.



Thats your opinion and you are entitled to it. I hold a different opinion, and I hope I am entitled to that.

However I have given 2 solid reasons for my opinion, see post 41 above. You have given none for yours.


----------



## michaelm (28 Jun 2016)

_cremeegg _I'm always happy to agree to disagree . . indeed, as many of my opinions/beliefs are minority ones (on AAM anyway), it's essential.  Cheap eurozone credit fuelled huge private debt and when inept Irish politicians nationalised that debt under pressure from our EU friends we were sunk. I would agree with the opinion below . .





Duke of Marmalade said:


> There can be no doubt that Ireland's financial crisis, which in proportionate terms is possibly the worst ever, would have been much less pronounced under sterling.


----------



## elacsaplau (28 Jun 2016)

Unfortunately, the ugly racism of some elements of the Brexit mindset has manifested itself as per the just some, of the many available examples, linked to below:

http://www.thejournal.ie/hate-crime-england-brexit-2849073-Jun2016/

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/...st-attacks-eu-referendum-160628045317215.html

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/483228ec-3d23-11e6-8716-a4a71e8140b0.html#axzz4CtIzUHZg


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2016)

Not everyone who votes for Brexit is a racist xenophobe but every racist xenophobe voted for Brexit.


----------



## michaelm (29 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> Not everyone who votes for Brexit is a racist xenophobe but every racist xenophobe voted for Brexit.


Certainly whatever percentage of racist xenophobes actually voted will have voted Leave.  I suspect that numbers of such people are smaller than the Remainers care to believe.  

The difference between the UK and say France, the Netherlands, Hungary and a few others is that the UK had the audacity to put it to a vote.  Perhaps the EU should clearly state that we are in a process of European unification and integration (Merkel said Brexit was a watershed for the process of European unification and integration) and put it to a vote in the other 27 EU states so that those peoples who want to be part of a United States of Europe can drive on.


----------



## thedaddyman (29 Jun 2016)

I'm not sure that is the case, an awful lot of people in the UK seem to have an issue with Eastern Europeans, especially outside of London. A simple example, I was speaking to a senior (as in Vice president level) person in a multinational 2 weeks ago who lived in the Midlands. This is a well paid and well educated man. He said he was voting leave because he was fed up of seeing shelves of Polish food in Sainsbury's and that most of the people he knew were voting leave for similar reasons. Watching a BBC report on Friday night from Peterborough, in a vox pop in the street, people were blaming the opening of a Polish shop for the closure of a bakery that had been 2 doors down and in existence for 3 generations. A similar report from Canvey Island in Essex had someone wishing they could go back to how things were 20 years ago. Eastern European immigrants are not as well integrated in the UK as they often are in Ireland.

I'm not saying it is the only reason why people voted leave but it is a very big factor[/QUOTE]


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2016)

michaelm said:


> Certainly whatever percentage of racist xenophobes actually voted will have voted Leave.  I suspect that numbers of such people are smaller than the Remainers care to believe.
> 
> The difference between the UK and say France, the Netherlands, Hungary and a few others is that the UK had the audacity to put it to a vote.  Perhaps the EU should clearly state that we are in a process of European unification and integration (Merkel said Brexit was a watershed for the process of European unification and integration) and put it to a vote in the other 27 EU states so that those peoples who want to be part of a United States of Europe can drive on.


They did kind of put it to the vote; France and Holland rejected the European Constitution and Ireland rejected two treaties. The reality is that, for better or worse, the majority of voters in the EU do not support the path towards further integration which we are on.


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

thedaddyman said:


> I'm not sure......



Hi thedaddyman,

Just wondering how you (and others) consider the attitude you described? Specifically, is it racism or something else?


----------



## Sophrosyne (29 Jun 2016)

Obviously, there are some who will use any excuse to be racist.

But for most I think is a feeling of being overwhelmed and powerless.

I think it is interesting that Daddyman’s friend is vice president of a multi-national.

Besides immigration, a growing anti-globalization sentiment contributed in part to Brexit.


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

Hi Sophrosyne,

I accept the points you make.

What I'm really trying to understand is what constitutes racism in this whole context so what I'm looking for is whether people believe the views expressed by Daddyman's contact were racist or not (and ideally with a why/why not!)


----------



## Leo (29 Jun 2016)

Sophrosyne said:


> Besides immigration, a growing anti-globalization sentiment contributed in part to Brexit.



Kind of ironic given how proud they still are of their past empire.


----------



## Delboy (29 Jun 2016)

elacsaplau said:


> Hi Sophrosyne,
> 
> I accept the points you make.
> 
> What I'm really trying to understand is what constitutes racism in this whole context so what I'm looking for is whether people believe the views expressed by Daddyman's contact were racist or not (and ideally with a why/why not!)


How could that be construed as racism? Someone voting out because they are fed up about the level of immigration into their country and the obvious (if very petty) visualisation of it
(though I'm sure there's plenty who will make it their business to deem it racist).

I think people are entitled to hold their views and articulate them (without getting into insults or vulgarity) especially when the decision to allow mass immigration was made without consultation to the people.
Tony Blair and his cronies opened the borders to mass immigration from day 1 of the EU Accession back in 2004, forcing us to follow suit. It was a decision made by a few at his Cabinet table and from what I can see they did it for purely ideological reasons i.e. to increase the potential voting base for Labour in the future so as to be able to defeat the Tories.
Thats how base their logic was and they gave no though as to the consequences for Society as a whole...housing, schools, hospitals/GP's etc.


----------



## michaelm (29 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> They did kind of put it to the vote; France and Holland rejected the European Constitution and Ireland rejected two treaties.  The reality is that, for better or worse, the majority of voters in the EU do not support the path towards further integration which we are on.


That the EU Constitution was enacted regardless by way of Lisbon Treaty, and that those driving the EU unification project don't care what the peoples of Europe want, should make even the most ardent Europhile uneasy.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2016)

I think the suppression of English nationalism within the UK is also part of the problem. It’s OK to be proudly Scottish or Welsh but if you are proudly English it means you are some sort of racist yob. It’s probably because they are far and away the dominant nation within the UK but as more people arrive who are proudly Polish or Latvian or Irish the English see their identity diluted and diminished even more and English patriotism being stolen by the extremists. It’s not the UK’s independence day but it’s a clear majority of 50 million  English people crying stop to their loss of identity. I have strong sympathies for that position, not withstanding that I think they were wrong to leave the EU as their concerns could have been better addressed in other less self destructive ways.


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2016)

michaelm said:


> That the EU Constitution was enacted regardless by way of Lisbon Treaty, and that those driving the EU unification project don't care what the peoples of Europe want, should make even the most ardent Europhile uneasy.


I am and it did.


----------



## Sophrosyne (29 Jun 2016)

Leo said:


> Kind of ironic given how proud they still are of their past empire.



Agreed!



elacsaplau said:


> What I'm really trying to understand is what constitutes racism in this whole context so what I'm looking for is whether people believe the views expressed by Daddyman's contact were racist or not (and ideally with a why/why not!)



I think racism is an irrational hatred of people based race, religion, etc.

Daddyman's friend's views are more common than people would expect.

It is a notion about being swamped by immigrants to the detriment of the indigenous population.

That sentiment is certainly not new.

I am old enough to remember the "Rivers of Blood" speech given by Enoch Powell in 1968.


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

In reply to Dellboy....

For the avoidance of doubt, I am just seeking clarity on whether the motivation ascribed to Daddyman's, now infamous, friend is racist or not. I'm struggling with this question myself. But to answer your specific question:

Under Article 1 of the UN's International Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination, racial discrimination is defined as:

_"any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life."_

If we accept this definition, I fail to see how the views expressed do not constitute racial discrimination!


----------



## Delboy (29 Jun 2016)

> He said he was voting leave because he was fed up of seeing shelves of Polish food in Sainsbury's and that most of the people he knew were voting leave for similar reasons


So the above is now considered racism 
And if it is, then that is why we are where we are today...the rise of Trump, Brexit, widescale negativity towards the EU, etc


----------



## Purple (29 Jun 2016)

thedaddyman said:


> He said he was voting leave because he was fed up of seeing shelves of Polish food in Sainsbury's and that most of the people he knew were voting leave for similar reasons.


When I go to the supermarket the place is full of French, Italian, Chinese and Indian food. The place is owned by the Germans...Bloody foreigners!!


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

Delboy said:


> So the above is now considered racism



Delboy,

I am just trying to understand what constitutes racism in this context.

Do you accept the UN definition? If yes - does it not follow, that the opinion under review is racist? If you do not accept the definition, please explain why not?

Do you believe Enoch Powell's speech was racist or not?


----------



## Delboy (29 Jun 2016)

It appears to raise your head above the parapet and even think about immigration is considered racism in some quarters. 
If you keep telling the people to shut about immigration, then don't be surprised when it eventually blows up

I think you already 'understand' what racism is from your own viewpoint (your mind is made up on the subject) and I'm not sure what your trying to tease out here.

I haven't given much thought to Enoch Powell's statement. It would have to be viewed in the context of the time when it was made, the debate then etc.
It has obviously proven to be incorrect so far, at least from the UK side of things


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

Delboy said:


> I'm not sure what your trying to tease out here.



All I am trying to do is to understand what racism means in this context. I am reflecting on this myself and welcome other people's thoughts. I think it's an extremely complex subject and as a result capable of going in all sorts of directions. That's why I thought it would be interesting to "tease out" one specific definition of racial discrimination from an authoritative source. All I have said for now is that if we accept the UN's definition, I cannot see how the opinion under discussion does not fall under the scope of that definition.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (29 Jun 2016)

_elac_ The EU itself blatantly fails that UN test as non EU citizens are discriminated against in terms of their access to the EU.  And the same is true of every other political/economic bloc on earth.

So let's get real.  Enoch Powell predicted amongst other things that the _"black man would get the whip hand over the white man"._  That *was* racist.  Complaining about too many Polish goods in the supermarket shelves is unjustifiably xenophobic but not racist; I don't think British people regard Poles as being from a different race any more than they think the French are from a different race.

Seeing your wages cut or even losing your job because of unfettered immigration from Eastern Europe is justifiable cause to be resentful but again not racist IMHO.


----------



## Gerry Canning (29 Jun 2016)

Liked the original comments by Creemeeg.

Few points.
1. Back in I think 74 , IMF was called into UK.
2. Back in 73 , we were much poorer.
....................
Today
1. Both Islands are much better off .
2. You couldn,t have immigrant issues if EU was a failure.
3. By most  measures  EU is a success.
4. If the long term success of EU was ( hard Left policies!) , as per one post, then lets have more lefties!
.................
A lot of the (leave) vote seems to have been disaffected people , eg North England, Wales, that have not felt the (success) of London and are trapped into long term welfare dependency.The fault is more likely to be UK government NOT EU ..
The drip ,drip of (blaming ) Europe for the leadership failings in local countries maddens me.

I fear that we also get locked into short term whinging and forget the huge improvements wrought by EU , whilst I acknowledge ,it could do better.


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> the _"black man would get the whip hand over the white man"._  That *was* racist.



Oh, I don't know - it would have to viewed in the context of the time it was made?


----------



## Sophrosyne (29 Jun 2016)

elacsaplau said:


> What I'm really trying to understand is what constitutes racism in this whole context so what I'm looking for is whether people believe the views expressed by Daddyman's contact were racist or not (and ideally with a why/why not!)



You pose an interesting question.

The answer has to be nuanced.

People have a right to express their opinions and vent their dissatisfaction. But it depends on proportion.

The worst racism can occur when powerful people take advantage of national frustration.

In _England Your England,_ George Orwell wrote:

“As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

They do not feel any enmity against me as an individual, nor I against them. They are ‘only doing their duty’, as the saying goes. Most of them, I have no doubt, are kind-hearted law-abiding men who would never dream of committing murder in private life. On the other hand, if one of them succeeds in blowing me to pieces with a well-placed bomb, he will never sleep any the worse for it. He is serving his country, which has the power to absolve him from evil.

One cannot see the modern world as it is unless one recognizes the overwhelming strength of patriotism, national loyalty. In certain circumstances it can break down, at certain levels of civilization it does not exist, but as a _positive _force there is nothing to set beside it. 

Christianity and international Socialism are as weak as straw in comparison with it.

Hitler and Mussolini rose to power in their own countries very largely because they could grasp this fact and their opponents could not.”

Trump, Johnson, Farage, et alia have also grasped that fact.


----------



## elacsaplau (29 Jun 2016)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _elac_ The EU itself blatantly fails that UN test as non EU citizens are discriminated against in terms of their access to the EU.  And the same is true of every other political/economic bloc on earth.



Let's get real, this is immigration policy/controls.



Duke of Marmalade said:


> I don't think British people regard Poles as being from a different race any more than they think the French are from a different race.



You seem to believe that racism is exclusively to do with race. I do not agree and believe that it encompasses discrimination on many grounds, including nationality.



Sophrosyne said:


> The answer has to be nuanced.



Indeed, it does. Interesting observations.


----------



## thedaddyman (30 Jun 2016)

Purple said:


> When I go to the supermarket the place is full of French, Italian, Chinese and Indian food. The place is owned by the Germans...Bloody foreigners!!





elacsaplau said:


> Hi thedaddyman,
> 
> Just wondering how you (and others) consider the attitude you described? Specifically, is it racism or something else?



The definition of racism in the Oxford English Dictionary is interesting. It defines racism as
_The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races:
_
To be honest, I don't believe the majority of English people are racist. I lived there for many many years and in all that time only twice did I get a "bloody Paddies" or comments like that and on both occasions it was English people who were more offended and embarrassed them me and who stood up for me (I was more inclined to think a comment like that said more about the person saying it then anything else and would walk away). I was a regular at lower league football grounds, including Milwall on occasions and was never made anything but welcome.

But, I do think English people are seeing their own culture, race and identity being eroded and that most just want a stronger English culture to prevail. I don't believe they think they are superior, I just think that they believe England is becoming less English


----------



## elacsaplau (30 Jun 2016)

Hey thedaddyman,

What have you started here?

In my copy of the 1998 edition, the first part of the definition is as you have said, verbatim. However, and importantly, it continues:
"prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief."

Worth noting also that race is defined as:
"a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, boats, etc. to see which is the fastest."

I, too, can be selective! 

Teasing out Purple's contribution a little, what would we think if your interlocutor had said?


thedaddyman said:


> He said he was voting leave because he was fed up of seeing shelves of French, German, Spanish and Portuguese wine in Sainsbury's and that most of the people he knew were voting leave for similar reasons.



It is good that your experience in England has been so positive. Not everyone's experience was so. My father has often told me about his encounters with the NINA mentality, as in, _No Irish need apply._


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (30 Jun 2016)

_elac_  it seems then we are simply engaging in a semantic debate regarding the meaning of the word "racism".  We probably actually agree on the attitudes of the British people except that what I describe as xenophobia ranging from the irrational (too many Polish goods on the shelves) to the rational (Eastern European cheap labour undermining living standards) you describe as racism.

I prefer to restrict the term "racism" to the Oxford Dictionary definition.  Racism gave us the Holocaust.  Xenophobia gave us two World Wars.  The former is the more vile ideology albeit the latter can be more destructive.  I think we do an injustice to true victims of racism when we get to the stage where, for example, we describe South Dublin jokes about Northsiders as racism.


----------



## Betsy Og (30 Jun 2016)

My experience of English people has been 100% positive, didn't work there for too long but often holiday there. Buddies of mine living there for about the last 20 years have said that, in particular post the Norn Iron thing settling down and fading back, that the Irish are seen as pretty much part of "us", inside the tent not outside. The Irish are not seen as "foreign", and no more a curiosity than, say, the Scots. We are one of the "home countries" in most peoples mind. The "No Dogs No Irish" thing is long long ago at this stage and should be bracketed with the Punch articles, to go raking over that is trying to resurrect something that has long died.

I'm surprised the likes of the Polish are getting a hard time, they were the most popular immigrants here, more popular than the Baltics. 

If Leave voters thought it was going to make Britain white again they were sorely mistaken, I've walked around parts of London where I was literally the only white guy. Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but these would be, for the most part, 2nd generation, full British citizens, they are not going anywhere regardless of Leave votes.

Finally, people who are not ethnically English generally refer to themselves as British. "English" as such has connotations of being white, rugby & cricket*, tea with the Vicar, Blighty, Albion, empire, England & St. George, WWII and all that - 99% of which your average immigrant has no connection nor wants any connection. So the break up of the UK would be seen as the rise of "Englishness", and not too many of them are into that. How assimilated are all the minorities in England?, not hugely I would think, but I don't necessarily blame the English for that. Irish people like to clan together when abroad (various London neighbourhoods over time, Woodlawn in the Bronx, another spot in Queens), but if you added colour and more pronounced religious divergence into the mix its not hard to see why you get 'parallel universe' stuff on English soil. 

*And yes I do know the Pakistani's and others do like their cricket.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (30 Jun 2016)

Reflection.  Teresa May is slight favourite to beat Boris for British PM.  Hillary is a stronger favourite to beat The Donald.  By Christmas we could have the two leaders of the English Speaking World being females, throw in Angela and I don't want to hear anything more about glass ceilings

On the other hand the ESW could be led by two clowns.  Throw in Hollande and I don't want to hear anything more about the merits of democracy.


----------



## elacsaplau (30 Jun 2016)

I understand this is complex stuff. All I'm trying to do is to see can we come to a broad understanding of what constitutes racism? *Very possibly, we can not.*

The Duke, for example, wants to restrict its meaning to the Oxford English definition. That's his prerogative and seems reasonable. Of course, the curiosity is his interpretation of racism is simply inconsistent with what is set out in the said dictionary. We have already shown that racism includes


elacsaplau said:


> "prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief."



and if we agree that "race" is defined, amongst other definitions, as: "a group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.", the contradictions become clear, as in....



Duke of Marmalade said:


> The working class bought into the immigration card big time.  This was mainly not racist.  The threat was from white immigrants from Eastern Europe.





elacsaplau said:


> So when would it be mainly racist?





Duke of Marmalade said:


> When they are black.





Duke of Marmalade said:


> Apologies, I meant any sort of off white hue.


----------



## Betsy Og (30 Jun 2016)

Elac, while I not hugely interested in the semantics, I think most people would say:

Racism - based on colour, implies active hate. What motivates people to physical or verbal attack, graffitti etc. The domain of the scumbag. Largely targeted at Black, Mexican (incl. Central American & Andean peoples), A-rabs (intentional spelling) or Asian persons (both India/Pakistan region and to the east of it).
Xenophobia - literally fear of foreigners, but a catch all for less extreme forms of bias, uneasiness, fear. Would not normally sufficiently motivate to active hate. 

So I think the anti-Polish graffiti is an unusually extreme case of Xenophobia, if the Poles were black it would be racism. White on white "racism" does not compute in my simple world.....


----------



## elacsaplau (30 Jun 2016)

Hi Betsy Og,

Wow - word for the day.....SEMANTICS 

So you don't accept the Oxford English definition? Again, that's your prerogative. By the way, I did not introduce this definition into the debate - I have just set out what it says.

My sense, for example, is that Disraeli (former British PM) was being racist when he said:

_The Irish hate our order, our civilization, our enterprising industry, our pure religion. This wild, reckless, indolent, uncertain and superstitious race have no sympathy with the English character. Their ideal of human felicity is an alternation of clannish broils and coarse idolatry. Their history describes an unbroken circle of bigotry and blood.
_
Also, and very seriously, given what you said - do you not consider anti-Semitism a form of racism?


----------



## 44brendan (30 Jun 2016)

Boris has just pulled out of leadership challenge!!!


----------



## Sophrosyne (30 Jun 2016)

Boris Johnson has ruled himself out of the running for next leader of the Conservative Party.

This came after his former supporter, Michael Gove nominated himself. He said Boris "cannot provide the leadership to guide Britain out of the European Union.".

What next?


----------



## Betsy Og (30 Jun 2016)

Elacsaplau - you forgot the 18XX reference to go on that quote...... 

OK the jews, forgot about them. Anti-semitism seems so irrational to me that I dont know where to place it, if you hate Man U with a passion should that be racism too?? Would anti-semitism also apply to people who convert to become jews, or are we keeping it to circular hats and long sidelocks? Overall I'm sick of racism/anti-semitism being thrown at every grumble, you dont like Israel obliterating a civilian neighbourhood, oh you're one of them anti-semites. You'd like it if travellers kept the halting site some way tidy - another "racist".

And what about Roddy Doyle "Northside Dubliners are the blacks of Dublin"... where do you start and end, and what's the point of splitting hairs?, do I really care what the Oxford dictionary says?? (no would be the answer...).


----------



## Purple (30 Jun 2016)

elacsaplau said:


> My sense, for example, is that Disraeli (former British PM) was being racist when he said:
> 
> _The Irish hate our order, our civilization, our enterprising industry, our pure religion. This wild, reckless, indolent, uncertain and superstitious race have no sympathy with the English character. Their ideal of human felicity is an alternation of clannish broils and coarse idolatry. Their history describes an unbroken circle of bigotry and blood._



A strange thing for him to say considering he was of Jewish birth.
... Hard to disagree with him though


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (30 Jun 2016)

Sophrosyne said:


> Boris Johnson has ruled himself out of the running for next leader of the Conservative Party.
> 
> This came after his former supporter, Michael Gove nominated himself. He said Boris "cannot provide the leadership to guide Britain out of the European Union.".
> 
> What next?


Wow!  Michael Gove, what a weasel, he most definitely ruled himself out during the debate.  He was 70/1 this morning on Betfair, now 4/1, I wish he had given me a tip off.


----------



## elacsaplau (30 Jun 2016)

I'm delighted Boris backed down - he's got Turkish blood in him - you can never trust the Turks. I'd be ok with a little bit of Greek but Turk, no way, like.


----------



## Gerry Canning (12 Jul 2016)

Seen in letters page a play on PLEBICITE , ie referendum .
A new word.

PLEBICIDE , noun,
Meaning , The self inflicted ruin of a nations prospects or interests via a reckless act of direct democracy.


----------



## Betsy Og (13 Jul 2016)

Theresa May, she being a nominal stay advocate, should re-run the referendum since the leave side were clearly sold a pup. If she doesn't then I lose all sympathy for Britain - they have their chance but if they insist on repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot then I guess that's their problem. They will survive, we will survive, but the world will have lost a lot of respect for the modern incarnation of the UK (post Empire, excluding handling of NI etc. etc.).


----------



## Leo (13 Jul 2016)

Betsy Og said:


> Theresa May, she being a nominal stay advocate, should re-run the referendum since the leave side were clearly sold a pup.



She has already ruled that out.


----------



## Gerry Canning (13 Jul 2016)

Betsy Og,

It looks like UK has shot Uk in the foot , but its early days.
The EU being unwieldly ,maybe just doesn,t suit Uk.
The question UK has raised , is this,
Do  Eu or UK thrive post Brexit? or with luck both will thrive.
With luck (fudges) will be found that suits us all .?.


----------



## blueband (14 Jul 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> Betsy Og,
> 
> It looks like UK has shot Uk in the foot , but its early days.
> The EU being unwieldly ,maybe just doesn,t suit Uk.
> ...


Of course the UK will thrive, its a strong wealthy trading country that has control of its own currency ..


----------



## Leo (14 Jul 2016)

blueband said:


> Of course the UK will thrive, its a strong wealthy trading country that has control of its own currency ..



Is that really all it takes?


----------



## blueband (14 Jul 2016)

Leo said:


> Is that really all it takes?


That and the fact that as a country they can now set the rules to suit themselves...better than having some unelected dictatorial
bureaucrats in Brussels telling you how to run your country!....personally I think they will be just fine into the future.


----------



## cremeegg (14 Jul 2016)

blueband said:


> Of course the UK will thrive, its a strong wealthy trading country that has control of its own currency ..



Who is it going to trade with.

Have they actually started trade negotiations with the US or China, or anyone ?


----------



## Gerry Canning (14 Jul 2016)

blueband said:


> That and the fact that as a country they can now set the rules to suit themselves...better than having some unelected dictatorial
> bureaucrats in Brussels telling you how to run your country!....personally I think they will be just fine into the future.



...........................
Surely this thing about unelected is a tad naiive ?
Any decision of consequence lands right back with each government .
Surely this thing about setting rules to suit yourself is also a tad naiive ?
UK had a strong input into rules , indeed of the 2,500 applied , I believe there was only serious anxst by UK of about 60.

So surely most things were agreed .

...........
cremeegg.
Am with you on this . Methinks Brexit was conceived in haste with nil planning.
£stg is dropping , Ex-chancellor mooted tight times and recession?
Maybe UK are smarter than they are showing us ?


----------



## Leo (14 Jul 2016)

blueband said:


> That and the fact that as a country they can now set the rules to suit themselves...better than having some unelected dictatorial
> bureaucrats in Brussels telling you how to run your country!....personally I think they will be just fine into the future.



Only if they manage to negotiate a trade deal with the EU, the likes of which no other country has been able to achieve. Are they really going to do much better than a Norway-style deal that still sees them paying into the EU budget and abiding by a lot of rules they no longer have any say over?

It really will be interesting to see what they can achieve, but I don't think there's much appetite within the EU to give them a deal that might encourage others to follow their lead.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (2 Aug 2016)

It's fairly clear now that The Donald is a set up by his golfing pal Bill.  He's not even trying to win this thing.  Calling Hillary the devil.  Claiming the election will be rigged. Supporting Putin on Crimea and Ukraine. etc.


----------



## Delboy (3 Aug 2016)

Its starting to look something like that alright!


----------



## Firefly (4 Aug 2016)

OK....here's my outside punt....

Paul Ryan for president!


----------

