more 66 to 512. And I disagree. Of course nation states are already too unweildy, but then making them even more unweildy and justifying by saying they are already unweildy doesn't work for me. I think the corporations and the neocons have wanted the eu for a number of not very palatable reasons, while arguing on their teams liberals - in the US sense - and leftists have for other reasons. Corporations like central powers to work on. It simplifies and streamlines lobbying. I think they also want a larger foe to work against Putin and China and while Britain has generally kissed US ass on dumb enterprises, I'd still feel better if more separate nations had to be convinced of things before acting in concert. Have a strong federal governmentin the US of course has done good things or tried to. Say around civil rights. On the other hand we now have presidents or really their cabinets who can just start wars and every state must go along. In fact we have armed forces and interventions all over the place with nary a discussion. And the lobbyists can focus on one city to affect everywhere in that nation. And the cost of getting attention to get power as a politician throws one into the hands of corporations and the financial sector. Brexit might have been a good thing for the wrong reasons.
Should the UK leave the European Union?
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
So it's not difficult to see why he was in favour of Brexit. Divide and conquer. That, to me, is one of the main reasons why negotiations by the EU as one large economic bloc are better for individual member states than individual negotiations. That's what unions are for. And it's one of the reasons why we, the UK, are mad to be currently in the process of throwing all that away and starting again from scratch as a small country with an economy which is a small fraction of the size of the US or China.
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
I don't really see the EU as maintaining independence from the corporations. IOW your argument makes sense if the EU will be a separate entity, but I don't think it will be. I'm not sure it is. I'm not sure it really is a separate economic unit in any real sense from the US and each step in the direction it is taking make it easier to merge. I don't see Trump actually managing to do much of what he intends to do. And that's in part at least because he is not, at least in his presentation, in line with the neo-con agenda. Or not neatly in line with it, in any case, on the surface.Steve3007 wrote: ↑January 16th, 2019, 6:33 am In the age of Trump, I think a counterbalance to the Trump-US is also important. For all his day-to-day dishonesty, Trump is very clear as to the simple, straightforward way in which he sees the world. Winners and losers. The powerful dominate the weak by force. Clearly he prefers bilateral negotiations with players who are smaller, economically and militarily, than his own side, because life is a poker game and the player with more chips wins and dictates terms. Hence, for example, his recent threat to destroy the economy of Turkey unless it does what he wants.
So it's not difficult to see why he was in favour of Brexit. Divide and conquer. That, to me, is one of the main reasons why negotiations by the EU as one large economic bloc are better for individual member states than individual negotiations. That's what unions are for. And it's one of the reasons why we, the UK, are mad to be currently in the process of throwing all that away and starting again from scratch as a small country with an economy which is a small fraction of the size of the US or China.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
For example I believe May is a member of the conservative party. I'm pretty sure about that, almost 100%. There's a lot of evidence of this in the news and on various reputable websites. The manifesto of the conservative party is irrelevant. This is historically accurate. Again there is a lot of evidence for this. I can look at previous years manifestos and judge accuracy. Also historically all the parties just morph with the times. They have no recognisable specific unchanging logic based agenda. They switch party members freely. They passionately defend one view one week and the opposite the next week. Again tons of evidence for this. Much of the country is massively unorganised. Again tons and tons of evidence. It is like the conservative party is full of members who each have their own agendas, of course sometimes these agendas align but also some of these agendas are impossible to achieve, or at least have proven impossible. Again tons of evidence, you can take any pledge for as long as I've been alive and see how accurate each one has been (not very). So if the 'ruling elite' do have one political ideology and a shared consistent agenda then this agenda has never been published plus to all an outsider looking in there is no evidence for this single agenda. Indeed there is a ton of evidence for contrasting shifting agendas. So where do you get your information from? How are you so sure? What is is the agenda?
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
I guess I could add more questions, like who are these neo-cons. And what does their agenda have to do with Trump's ability to execute his intentions.
I'm just trying to work out your process.
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Um, you seemed to be saying that what i was saying did not make sense since Teresa May was a Conservative. You opening with a bunch of statements. It came off as sarcastic, since you mentioned that this informaiton - that she is a Conservative - can be found all over the place. As if I was saying something different. I pointed out that I was talking about neo-cons which not all conservatives are, though they may share some positions in common with them.
Right, exactly. And this is irrelevent. In fact you still seem not to have understood the simple answer that you labeled one of the top five. etc. posts a few posts ago. It wasn't off, my simple answer, it was a very clear response to your post and the statements in it that you seemed to think were relevent. They weren't and the fact that the Conservative party has an unclear agenda is also not relevent.I was hoping for some information. May is just an example of someone who's agenda is far from clear (to me). In a broader sense I was explaining that the conservative party as a whole has an unclear agenda.
That's not just what you are doing. That's disingenous. You made irrelevent statements, did it in a mocking way. When it is pointed out that it is not relevent, you mock that pointing out. I suppose you might not be aware of what you are doing. But then, I still need to respond to what you are doing. If you didn't understand what neo-cons are, why the hell is this coming up after three posts. If I read a term I do not understand in another person's post, I generally try to find out myself what it means. If I respond anyway without knowing nad they point out where the miscommunication is coming from, as I did in the short post on neo-cons, then I sure as hell am going to look it up. But here on post three you are still talking about Conservatives as if it is relevent, and after being, yes just mildly but nevertheless, snarky.I guess I could add more questions, like who are these neo-cons. And what does their agenda have to do with Trump's ability to execute his intentions.
I'm just trying to work out your process.
I find your way of posting as asking others to do work you are not willing to do yourself. Like in the other thread with the relatively bad issue. I ask for clarification, and ask for you to put in in the context of someone talking to an atheist, and you just ignore this and basically repeat yourself.
And that's your right. You get to demand people do things you won't do in reponse to them. You get to mock things when you don't understand something, even when it is pointed out what you do not understand. You get to be lazy.
And then I need to really take responsibility for myself and never respond to you again. See if I can manage this time around rather than drifting back to communicating with you.
take care.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Which part is communication? You seem unable to answer simple questions without some assumption of hidden ulterior motives. You seem to be constantly answering questions I didn't ask. Has it ever occurred to you that I might actually be interested in your sources? Of course I can google neo-con. It tells me nothing and certainly doesn't back up your point regarding Trump. The point in my example was to show that agendas are tough to ascertain in general. That they shift with the times. I find printed manifestos to not necessarily reflect actual agendas. So I was wondering how you come to your conclusions. I apologise if that came off as patronising. Can you think of a way for me to ask the question I am asking without being patronising?And then I need to really take responsibility for myself and never respond to you again. See if I can manage this time around rather than drifting back to communicating with you.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
If anything is maddening, I think it's just human tribalism, not specific to one political party or one country.Eduk wrote:Politics is maddening. I was just listening to radio 5, some Labour bloke is talking in an overly fake voice about 'May's rotten deal' and how Labour are 'credible negotiators'. All while giving zero detail. Is anyone really fooled?
Labour and Tory are tribes. That was on full display when Michael Gove gave the final speech in Parliament before they divided to vote on the No-Confidence motion against the Tory government as a whole (as opposed to again their leader). At that moment, Gove knew that Brexit had to be temporarily set aside and he had to do a good old fashioned tub-thumping rip-roaring appeal to Tory tribal loyalty by painting a picture of the supposed horrors or a Labour government. And, of course, his Labour opposite number would do a similar thing in a similar situation. It works. The two parties making noises at each other across the Chamber are startlingly similar to two rival tribes of chimpanzees screeching at each other.
I presume that Labour bloke you were listening to was just being loyal to his tribe.
The question is could we or should we attempt to abandon the tribal political system?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Tough question to answer. The world would obviously be better with less tribalism but then tribalism exists mostly in those least equipped to live without it (hence why it exists).The question is could we or should we attempt to abandon the tribal political system?
- Mark1955
- Posts: 739
- Joined: July 21st, 2015, 4:02 am
- Favorite Philosopher: David Hume
- Location: Nottingham, England.
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Deciding to abandon something is easy, now what will you replace it with, how will it work and why will it be better than the tribal system of democratic politics.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Well you can't decide to abandon irrationality and if you could you wouldn't need to replace it with anything.Deciding to abandon something is easy, now what will you replace it with, how will it work and why will it be better than the tribal system of democratic politics.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Should the UK leave the European Union?
Good questions. One of the apparent advantages of tribalism in politics is the same as the advantage of unions: strength in numbers. By agreeing to throw in their lot with a major political party like Labour or the Tories, despite probably not agreeing with every one of the official policies of their chosen tribe, an MP gains all the advantages that a well known brand offers. And the electorate gets a simple choice between 2 or 3 broad categories of political position.Mark1955 wrote:Deciding to abandon something is easy, now what will you replace it with, how will it work and why will it be better than the tribal system of democratic politics.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023