Thats how parliamentary democracy works, otherwise the population voted to take a running jump at the cliff so what can you really say?we are being led off a cliff by a fringe bunch of loonies
the reason a right-wing cabinet are now sitting is because of the internal machinations of the conservative party.
brexit never had an overwhelming majority, not in the electorate/referendum, nor in parliamentary representation. are you fucking stupid? 'the people' did not vote to 'take a running leap off the cliff'. the original brexit vision and campaign was FAR more moderate and FAR more optimistic than the current no-deal reality we face. people voted for a pleasant exit and are now being presented with self-mutilation. the original referendum was characterised by lies and dishonesty, promises that would never be kept. stop acting like 'the people' gave the government a mandate to pursue no-deal brexit.
a minority and fragile government tried to pursue its own brexit vision without any cross-party consultation or collaboration, acting as if they had an overwhelming majority. it failed, time and time again. a prime minister has not had to face such repeated, routine humiliation in our entire modern history.
you keep talking blithely. 'sorry you lost'. 'the majority want it, shut up'. 'that's just how it works'. have you even been watching the last three years of UK politics? i'm very sorry that you emotionally identify with brexit, and support all of its crypto-racist fringes, with your little mere-pathetique vision of blair's britain 'ruining everything' (by that i take you mean allowing immigration and multiculturalism). but you can stop saying that there's a mandate. it is meretricious and it failed spectacularly for may.
it will fail for boris soon too. he knows it -- he wanted to prorogue parliament ffs.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-25 03:49:07)
Britain did have a majority for Brexit, and for the Brexit party in the Euro elections years later. If the average moron is dumb enough to repeatedly vote for this without understanding what they're voting for what does that mean?
If they didn't care or didn't know what it meant you'd think they either wouldn't vote or would vote against.
The conservative party, a reasonably long-standing organisation, voted for Johnson. Again the country deserves what it gets.
Apart from that I guess its doubtful Johnson will be able to hold parliament together, let alone get anything through it, so there'll likely be an election to deliver what? Corbyn? Israel isn't going to let that happen.
I suppose a wildcard is the Scots, who might see Brexit as another opportunity for their moronic Freedom! campaign and help push it through on that basis.
Anyway, good luck, in the meantime I'll be working on my tan and taunting New Zealanders.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-07-25 03:57:14)
corbyn won't get in because 'israel won't let that happen'.
the conservative party, which is overwhelmingly white, male, and over 65, is 'reasonably long-standing' and so a legitimate stand-in for 66 million britons.
you're just quite an unpleasant person, aren't you? fitting that you left your country, being so full of spite. it's worked out so well for you.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-25 04:05:15)
Enjoy living in Boris's Britain, you can thank your fellow citizens for the situation.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-25 07:05:11)
That reminds me, I need another case of beer, and maybe an asian girl to rub butter into my back - the govt has really come down hard on immigration, these girls are desperate enough to do anything these days.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-07-25 04:32:19)
anyway. we can continue this when you’ve done a little reading.
https://twitter.com/davidhall111/status … 81377?s=21
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-25 04:38:18)
The bigger problem was that Labour has sat on its hands for years now, tied up with the anti-semitism nonsense, if they'd got involved and actually taken a position the conservative right wing faction would have been irrelevant.
i don’t follow that guy. you seem to have some basic issues understanding how content is shared on twitter.
Britain has a moron as a PM and a clutch of corrupt cretins for the cabinet.
Well done Britain, maybe I'll visit in a few years and see how it worked out.
There could be an election in a month or two, then you'll see the anti-semitism complaints go up another few notches.
The morons voted for Brexit not knowing what it meant, hard Brexit, soft Brexit, common market but not political union etc.
Uzique complains "there's no mandate for no-deal Brexit" we don't know what there's a mandate for, but there's definitely a mandate for Brexit.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2019-07-26 03:01:29)
apart from that, yes, 'we don't know what there is a mandate for' is precisely what i've been saying for the last two pages.
again, i'm sorry that you take a cynical pleasure in brexit and in 'showing the idiot socialists' what they have sowed by allowing brown people and romanians into the country. but it just isn't so. you'll have to keep topping up your bile using other sources.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-26 03:10:28)
The country voted for Brexit in some form without caring what it was, Brexit got more votes than any political party has for decades, every election 'splits the country down the middle' - this isn't unusual.
Something drove das britischer volk to vote for Brexit, you seem to be more out of touch than me. Blair has admitted flooding the country with immigrants and third world europeans was a terrible miscalculation and a disaster, maybe you should take it on board.
Three years of impasse has been pure political ineptitude and opportunism, nothing else, the will of the people has been ignored - no doubt this drove the landslide to the Brexit Party at the Euro elections, the people are pissed.
your reading of brexit as some anti-blair, anti-immigrant, anti-muslim 'volkisch' uprising only belies your own weird preoccupations. i'm sorry that you are a lonely racist anti-semite, i really am, but don't project that onto 13 million voters. the aggravations of the disenfranchised, (largely working class, northern) voters who opted for brexit were more to do with losing labour and being undercut to european workers, which wasn't anything to do with blair or 'multiculturalism' and didn't involve strange brown people with exotic religions. in fact, a large proportion of brexit voters came from a monied, middle-class, surrey golfcourse type background, the banker belt residents who are free-marketeers and hardly bothered about stanislaus the plumber or ahmed the corner shop owner in the way that evidently puts you into conniptions.
'the will of the people', it's funny how quickly this nonsense phrase has gained a talismanic power. referenda are only advisory, they are not legally binding, no advanced society in the world conducts its national politics based on the 'will of the people' (that is literally populism and history shows us it is almost always a terrible idea). the people have no collective will, whoever 'the people' are, anyway, it's certainly not a homogeneous and united group -- you just said above that there is no clear mandate. the whole rhetoric of 'the people will it' is populist proto-fascism 101, and normally the people who tout it are elites with agendas all of their own, with nary a thought for the actual average working person. you are parroting an idiot ideology.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-26 05:17:37)
Switzerland conducts itself according to referenda, other countries do from time to time.
There is a clear mandate - Brexit in some form, it was voted on in a referendum, the result of which the government promised beforehand to implement.
This really isn't complicated, you don't like the outcome so you're trying to argue black is white and people voted for Brexit but didn't want it really.
yes, i do think people were misled and voted without full knowledge and proper information. that’s how democracy in large countries works — the media and the medium of the message are very important and highly relevant, whether it’s a referendum or an election. being truthful is helpful, i think. people should be as well-informed as possible.
the campaign made promises it had no hope of keeping. it was a con job. promise the world now and worry about the actual details and delivery later (i.e. never). that big data companies like cambridge analytica were hired to that end, effectively to trigger and manipulate people on hot button issues, such as hordes of turks crowding into the country in the imminent future (which is an outright fabrication but tickles just the right ganglion of fear in a certain voter's mind), just adds an extra shade of indecency to things. techniques honed in frankly suspect election campaigns in places like kenya were applied at home.
the leave campaign was investigated for its funding and its practices. it rode roughshod over electoral regulation.
the ‘mastermind’ of the campaign was officially held as being in contempt of parliament and undermining just process.
people certainly didn’t vote for a no deal brexit, in which the post-industrial north, the agriculture and manufacturing industries, and much else besides will be economically wiped out. nobody was mentioning the huge costs and damage to the economy involved in a leave vote during the referendum campaign. people who voted for brexit 3 years ago weren't informed that the decision would likely cause the break-up of the UK, or inflame the irish question again.
new facts and new realities have come to light, any responsible and wise person would surely say that when such facts emerge, reassessing things is sensible.
that you insist on it being a done deal with a ‘let them suffer and see what they have wrought’ approach is bitter, cynical and frankly sort of pathetic. if you were a believer in brexit i could agree to disagree with you and respect your opinion, but instead it seems you take some pleasure in watching your home country destroy itself, no doubt because it confirms some angst and psychodrama in your own personal history. very sad.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-26 11:49:32)
If, after the Iraq invasion, the population didn't know they should do their own research and make up their own minds about things instead of believing politicians then frankly they deserve what they get.
Voting for Brexit and winding up with Johnson running the show is comparable with America voting for Trump.
Maybe its some kind of mass stupidity effect, I don't know, but people should not be rescued from the effects of their own stupidity - they should be allowed to die off, otherwise its bad for the species as a whole, plus if you stand in the way of someone running over a cliff you might well get knocked over too.
Also in future please address me as 'Dilbert_X Esquire'
https://twitter.com/sebdance/status/115 … 44352?s=21
‘people should be allowed to die and not rescued from the effects of their stupidity’. spoken like a true fascist (or are you still playing that insipid victorian-eugenicist tune?) the whole idea of liberal representative democracy is that people are entrusted to do work on behalf of and for the greater good of the majority. that’s the entire idea behind patrician and benign leadership. do you believe in upholding the social fabric of your society, where it is judged on how it treats its poor and disadvantaged, and those in need, or do you surrender the entire idea of public spirit, service and social contract over to some idiotic market-based ideology of ‘competition’? we’ve come a long way from hobbes, and we should all be thankful for it. it’s no longer fashionable to apply a cod-darwinism to the political sphere. it’s been embarrassing since the 1930s or so.
people have been complaining about the supposed stupidity of the mass, the cupidity of youth, how things are much worse now than before, how 'back in my day', etc. since seemingly the ancient greeks. at first glance it doesn't seem like the most robust analysis. as a symptom of developing senility, i admit it has some diagnostic use.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-27 04:50:29)
Anyway, best of luck!
the same guy also said democracy is the best system we have devised thus far. and, great job! he was also an upper-class patrician very much from the ‘born to rule benevolently’ demographic. i mean, this was his family home.
and his family had literally ruled the country as military and political leaders for several centuries.
not the strongest rebuttal you’ve ever made, dilbert.
you say ‘you live inside a democracy’ but evidently don’t know what a democracy is, or how it was conceived in the abstract. a democracy in the west has never meant direct rule by populist votes. not in france, not in america, certainly never in the united kingdom. the ‘liberal’ part of the formulation always implies an enlightened elite or leadership.
Last edited by uziq (2019-07-27 07:26:12)
How do democratic representatives get elected except by convincing the electorate they're populists?
I'm sure Johnson, Rees-Mogg and the rest of the condescending Eton toffs firmly believe they're part of the 'enlightened elite', the problem is you think you are too and there can't be two enlightened elites can there? Or are there multiple forms of enlightenment?