UK Politics Thread

[STEED]

Tory leadership latest: Philip Hammond leads group of 30 Tory MPs planning to stop no-deal Brexit

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...hunt-hustings/

Of course he will as a remainder and knowing his job could be on the line Hammond has nothing to loose by muddy the waters.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by STEED

You don't trust SKY.

I had a visit from some one acting on behalf of the BBC asking me do I own a TV? No I have a monitor for watching my DVD's and he said I was breaking the law! He demanded to come in, he was acting like a verbal thug in my book and I told him to go away and get a warrant. I get nasty letters whom can not get in their thick skulls I'm not breaking the law but the BBC thinks I am.

About bloody time the BBC got its money from adverts.

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ15

PS. Just to add its gone quite for a few months but I know they will try it on again sooner or latter.

As soon as I've finished reporting on the matter I should be in a position to give you a pretty close prediction of the time

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by STEED

Of course he will as a remainder and knowing his job could be on the line Hammond has nothing to loose by muddy the waters.

Hammond is toast, regardless of the eventual winner.

[STEED]

Please new PM can we have some more money..

The DUP is set to present the next prime minister with a demand for cash for NHS waiting lists in Northern Ireland within days of coming to office.

The party's MPs have told Sky News they expect to review the confidence and supply arrangement later this month after Theresa May stands down.

https://news.sky.com/story/dup-to-de...xt-pm-11757553

Interesting move wonder how Boris will take it.

Probably be swinging from the chandeliers beating his chest shouting out how dare they.

[MGR1]

Originally Posted by STEED

Please new PM can we have some more money..

Interesting move wonder how Boris will take it.

Probably be swinging from the chandeliers beating his chest shouting out how dare they.

An unfortunate consequence of having to rely on the DUP, the party that normally says NO to everything.

At least the SNP aren't that mercenary. At least until the possibility of a Labour Government and even then it would be a case of support in return for another IndyRef.

Another wall-o-text from Dante over on the TotalWar Center forum:

I've had the privilege to partake in a series of brexit seminars and conferences over the past few weeks analyzing it and this point was raised extremely well as something that has rather gone under the radar, so kudos for reaching the same conclusion faster i'd say mate. If we take the (quite right i'd say) thesis that Britain only became a 'nation' (prior to being the first 'sphere' of an empire- being Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland with London, Glasgow and Liverpool as an imperial metropoles) post-1940s, when the 'techo-nationalist' state forged an identity that for the first time attempted to incorporate the constituent nationalities into 'Britain', but then this work was undone (or abandoned- depends on view) by Thatcher, who 'internationalized' again Britain...this time without the Empire (So going from a free-trading foremost power, who directly reaped all the benefits of free trade to a free trading, but rather typical economy that no longer was in the position to reap the real rewards of pushing a free trading policy, the term 'reverse colonization' could be somewhat awkwardly applied in terms of the business world indeed). In doing this though, the half-formed 'British identity' gave way, to well... nothing. What unified Britain's constituent nations together was the imperial project, without it, the fact that administration and identity had never really been addressed (Indeed i wrote a paper on the Boer War highlighting admittedly a very niche group- soldiers- how their 'national' identities within Britain, relied on the 'Empire' to define and shape them- Scottish and English without that imperial aspect where broad, debatable and fluid...and just rather awkward).

So from Thatcher to brexit, a background narrative has been these nations of Britain attempting to resolve this mess (Another interesting aside, its why Labour is arguably the only truly 'British' party in terms of historically having an identity and policy platform that actually attempts to bridge the four nations identities...how successful this has been you decide ) and forge their identities, often in opposition to one another. Brexit is part of this indeed- It will likely either result directly in, or be the catalyst for Scotland leaving the UK, But for England, its a battle within their identity (as well as vs 'British') over what it means to be English, and frustration at a perceived (and actual) lack of recognition for 'English' identity (though going back to my Boer war paper, its partly the English political elites fault for essentially using 'English' and 'British' interchangeably- thus unlike Scotland and co, they've rather 'stunted' the typical work that goes into adapting and 'keeping relevant' a national identity, and instead relied on 'British'...which is in itself tied to a dead imperial project, seeking new meaning and rather empty post-1960 essentially- if anyone is interested in all this stuff, i can give them a full bibliography- most work is open access).

Political representation is a big part of this, no longer is it fair to assume 'Westminster= England and Britain'. However, the other fear, made apparent above is that for some perceptions of 'English', taking 'England' out of Westminster would essentially just signal that Britain and the UK is truly 'finished'. So its an interesting perspective, and historians who are interested in identity and nationalism are loving it a lot so far .

A personal comment to that poll though- Genuinely scary (for my perspective), as while it is evidence that Conservatives are still very much tied to a solid 'English' (and not British as Labour) identity, the fact that

A)politics is so polarized that Conservative members largely would rather see the UK cease to exist and a decade long depression happen than see Corbyn as PM- The damage he could do even for a far-right worst case perspective is far less, and indeed in 5 or less years could be undone... It seems tribal politics is back in a way that it hasn't been for quite a while, and that logic is out the window.

B) That the Conservative members are now solely thinking of the short term. If brexit does 'significant damage to the UK economy' or breaks up the UK, you can guarantee the sustainability of brexit (already questionable) will collapse, it means we'll be back in the EU a mere few years down the line, and without in all likelihood our special status within it. Actual analysis of how to make their cause 'work', has gone out the window in favour of short-term emotional fulfillment, that would see the thing their willing to sacrifice so much for (Brexit), collapse and be undone in front of their very eyes a relatively short time later.

This is though a failure of brexiteer leadership to get that across of course, its also a failure of remain who indeed did totally misjudge their campaign- if anyone wanted to hear a chancellor squirm on this point, the QC interview on youtube between Osborune and Campbell highlights an awareness of this- Osbourne essentially admits that fresh from the GE and successful Scottish referendum, they were partly overly confident and partly misjudged brexit and ran the same campaign they had in these cases without really doing the groundwork research. Cameron further hamstrung himself by his constant emphasis that 'blue on blue' violence should be avoided, thus Boris and co were given a very free hand. Maybe from this poll they should have all allowed Corbyn to campaign for brexit (as i suspect he wanted to do), it would have seen the Tory membership change their minds rather sharpish by the look of it

I think it highlights something I find quite interesting as a concept - that what we're seeing is England asserting it's own, separate, national identity in the face of it's own political elite's attempts to throttle that awareness off because that elite view's this England only identity as a threat to both their own position and to the continuation of the British State.

So, the question should be asked: what does Brexit actually mean if the concept of Britain as a state no longer has any real meaning?

Mike.

[Jimbuna]

Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson has described another Brexit referendum as "the least worst option" and urged his party to throw its weight behind one.

Speaking to the BBC, he said Labour should then fight for Remain, even though "we might lose some votes".

Jeremy Corbyn has resisted calls to fully endorse another public vote, only calling for it in some circumstances.

But Mr Watson said Labour would pay "a very high electoral price" if it did not have "a clear position" on Brexit.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48658683

Looks to me like you're putting yourself in harms way again Tom.

[JU_88]

Too little too late - RIP Labour, they'll still get votes from naive students indoctrinated in to the church of social justice and greivence culture, but everyone else has moved on.

[Jimbuna]

^ True that but not just Labour

[Jimbuna]

Everyone should worry about no deal, the civil servant who was, until March, head of the Brexit department has said.

Philip Rycroft, who resigned after 18 months, told the BBC's Panorama no deal was "fraught with risk".

And NI police said no deal could help recruitment for paramilitary groups.

Both the candidates in the race to replace Theresa May as prime minister - Jeremy Hunt and Boris Johnson - have said they would be prepared to leave the EU without a deal.

Former Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon said there was "no reason at all" why new negotiations with the EU could not be completed "the next three months".

But the EU has repeatedly refused to re-open negotiations.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48901055

I really don't see the EU backing down unless the forthcoming changes in their leadership feel differently to the old regime.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by JU_88

[...] votes from naive students indoctrinated in to the church of social justice and greivence culture, but everyone else has moved on...

... from once-granted statutory rights, to new age exploitation, national unilateralism and far-right interests with their solo attempts. Multipolarism rules again. Divide and screw the people

[Jimbuna]

Corbyn to speak at 135th Durham Miners' Gala
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been confirmed as the main speaker at the 135th Durham Miners' Gala on Saturday.

Mr Corbyn has attended the event - dubbed the Big Meeting - every year since becoming leader.

This precisely why I broke a personal twenty year tradition of visiting the Gala as soon as he came onto the scene.

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Catfish

... from once-granted statutory rights, to new age exploitation, national unilateralism and far-right interests with their solo attempts. Multipolarism rules again. Divide and screw the people

Er.... Pardon?
You want to talk about sewing the seed of division?
have you still not realized or accepted that the success of the 'far right' is largely reactionary - and is a response to the far lefts past decade of work? Carving people up to special interest groups to demand not equality but equity.
BLM, the current generation of Feminism, LGBTQ etc. Where did all these 'groups' sprouted from? Answer - The Universities, and who runs the academia? Tommy Robinson and The far right? No, I don't think so.
Not to mention good old ATIFA masked in black, beating people and calling themselves 'anti fascists'. Amazing.

If you legitimize such group Identity, and then cast certain people out, don't be surprised when they join / form their own bitter resentful groups. You have after all just legitimized the practice.
In a nut shell If the far left hadn't spent the past decade promoting 'group identity', we would not have such a far right problem as we do now.
Look at the Lefty term 'people of colour' a term to lump all non-white people together, created by 'well to do' white people. but there can be no good outcome from creating such a divisive term.

Frustratingly much of Left are still pegging the rise of the far right on failed economics & capitalism.
The level of denial is amazing.
We had a major crash in 2008- and what rose from the aftermath of that?, Libertarians and socialists, yes - but nazis? not so much!

The left has its crazies just like the right, what we have now seen is what happens when the sensible leftists fail to control the fringes. Their own fringe grows and so does the 'rights' in backlash.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by JU_88

Er.... Pardon?
You want to talk about sewing the seed of division?

No i'd say it is a fact, whoever does it. I would not even know whether the left or the right is bader, though i think it is the side with big money trying to seed division. And while the left may have some, the big money is on the corporate 10 percent side, which is b.t.w. seldomly 'left', politically.

[...] have you still not realized or accepted that the success of the 'far right' is largely reactionary - and is a response to the far lefts past decade of work? Carving people up to special interest groups to demand not equality but equity.

"Reactionary". Who was first, the hen or the egg? I would say that 'the right' in history almost always had the say in the past centuries and back to the cavemen (by sheer brutal force, or by religion explaining why males are more worth in god's eyes), maybe until the 1980ies. No, i would not call Stalin 'left' indeed.

But I am all for equity. Since people differ so much "equality" cannot match here. But equity, yes, everyone should have the same right to live, and pursue his/her/x (ahem lol, pc off from here i promise) path to happiness.

BLM, the current generation of Feminism, LGBTQ etc. Where did all these 'groups' sprouted from? Answer - The Universities, and who runs the academia? Tommy Robinson and The far right? No, I don't think so.
Not to mention good old ATIFA masked in black, beating people and calling themselves 'anti fascists'. Amazing.

It is not so much about "feminism" but about equal treatment regarding the law. Why should a woman earn less if she perfoms same or even better than her male colleague? Shouldn't she be allowed to vote?

The Antifa are idiots. So the universities are the bad ones now since all those eggheads want to spoil my fun cruising around with a 8 litre Diesel truck by scientific methods and arguments fake news. I agree, damn them! Vote for Trump! Vote for brexit! To hell with their fancy theories, i want my fun and i want it now.


This genderism or whatever one calls it is ridiculous, but again imho it is a reaction of centuries of suppression, of women not being able to withstand brute power, and of minorities. And now since all can voice their opinion also minorities like transgender people see their chance to say it aloud. Why not? Imho it is an overreaction, and after all most people are not transgender. So why is the latter so scared?

Also majorities have been suppressed or enslaved, if you think of Africans (but not only). They have a good reason to protest today against racism don't you think so? And don't tell me racism is dead, not in the US, not in Europe, not in Russia, Asia or anywhere else in this oh so civilised world.

Back to genderism, LGBTQ and so on i guess it will even itself out when those undercurrents get out of fashion. Soon.

And back to those poor suppressed right wing people who say were not allowed to speak their mind openly and publicly until Trump under those bad left governments, in the last decades. (i guess this includes the KuKluxers?)
I'd say they the latter were not even holding back much, but then you are right insofar that "the left" (or should i say common sense) has obviously not paid enough attention to them. Whether this attention consists of allowing them to publicly lynch certain people or spread their racism in blogs and all over the internet, or this attention involves a certain kind of force towards arsonists and haters trying to bring society to its knees, is not really debatable?

Those bitter resentful groups indeed. So who really had to suffer in the last decades, by democratically elected presidents or governments? Was there racial unrest? Did people really suffer, physically, like in Iraq, Syriah? Most are moaning from their high horse, and it is ridiculous to see.
Social unrest, well. Enough to kill and hate others? Like with Mr. Luebcke in Germany? Or Mrs Cox in England?

In a nut shell If the far left hadn't spent the past decade promoting 'group identity', we would not have such a far right problem as we do now.
Look at the Lefty term 'people of colour' a term to lump all non-white people together, created by 'well to do' white people. but there can be no good outcome from creating such a divisive term.

It is a bit easy to blame it all on the left. They have their problems, wrong ideologies, and some are just donkeyholes. So the alternative is to use right wing terms for "coloured people". What would you propose?

The left has its crazies just like the right, what we have now seen is what happens when the sensible leftists fail to control the fringes. Their own fringe grows and so does the 'rights' in backlash.

I can agree, but still think that even the craziest left have a lot more humour than those "bitter and resentful" on the right.

[Jimbuna]

Jeremy Corbyn has challenged the next PM to put their Brexit deal or a no deal exit to a second referendum, saying Labour would campaign for Remain in those scenarios.

The Labour leader announced the shift following a meeting of his top team, having come under pressure from critics to rectify what they characterised as a lack of clarity from Mr Corbyn on the issue.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexi...id=mailsignout

It looks like Steptoe is finally being forced to climb down off the fence but sti;; falls short of his parties expectations.

[Jimbuna]

The head of the World Trade Organisation has blown a hole in Boris Johnson’s Brexit plans as Conservative members vote on whether he should become party leader and prime minister.

Mr Johnson has argued that if the UK crashes out of the EU without a deal on 31 October, businesses will still be able to continue tariff-free trade with Europe under an obscure trading law known as Gatt 24. Without this protection, thousands of goods traded between the UK and the EU would be subject to standard WTO tariffs, adding considerably to costs to consumers.

But WTO director general Roberto Azevedo has now baldly stated that the mechanism – which his organisation oversees – cannot be invoked unless the parties involved have reached agreement on a future trade deal.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8996001.html

This is the man who is the current favourite to become PM?

God help us