|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Brexit - Should they stay or should they go? | |||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Caffein writes:
quote: The main beef typical nationalists have is with immigration (not so much trade). Here is the thing I was mostly focused on. There was a recent immigration report, from the Scottish parliament, with a quote by Wishart.
quote: Here is a link discussing it. I don't know the pre-Brexit immigration view of the Scottish public (though it seemed to be pro free movement as per the EU Constitution), but there has been a raging debate as to whether a post-Brexit United Kingdom would give greater "devolutionary" (more Scottish control independent of U.K. immigration policy set in London) powers to the more pro-immigration minded Scottland, which would create complications similar to the Irish Border issues.
quote: Then.
quote: Now Pete Wishart and the SNP have been battling May for a good while now over immigration.
quote: Back to Caffeine. Caffeine writes:
quote: There is a massive distinction between a nation's people wanting to reap free trade rewards on the one hand, and wanting to allow unlimited immigration (from E.U. member states) on the other. The former is desirable (despite seductive protectionist arguments also holding a powerful counter sentiment), the latter is highly controversial. You need to specify what you mean by "open borders".
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
I found a pre Brexit poll showing that the Scotts were fairly anti-immigrant.
But, after this Guardian article showed economic data that painted immigrants as productive, we see that the SNP was fighting WITH the Scottish government to educate the public.
quote: Also see a more recent article showing the SNP fighting hard to make Scottland out to be pro-immigration (blurring the line between the people's less supportive view and the political class' very pro immigration view)
quote: Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
It looks like Brexit is bringing us the same educational benefits as the Trump election.
Look at this swing in Scotland! September 18, 2018
quote: Now the swing in the USA. September 25
quote: Here is the chart showing American attitudes toward immigration back to 2006. https://twitter.com/aedwardslevy/status/1044654707896197120 Look at how Feinstein has changed since 1994, when she won re-election against Michael Huffington (former husband of founder of the popular liberal site) Sen. All of this successful (at the ballot box) anti-immigration crap is causing a media-storm of coverage from one end of the western world to the other. And it is educational. Scotland had a paltry 27% seeing immigration as a good thing for the country in 2015 (with only 5% saying immigration should be increased). Those dark days better be over. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
The last Pre-Brexit general election saw a vote for a conservative outright majority, and the campaign message from Cameron was that a conservative majority would be the strongest force to keep the U.K.in the E.U.
Vote conservative for a united front against the UKIP. Back then, both major parties were anti-Brexit. Then the 52-48 vote for Brexit came in June of 2016. Then look at the ugly post-Brexit general election choice. 2 pro-Brexit choices. Yuck.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
The nationalists only won about a half dozen seats (out of 18) in Austria.
In the U.K., the hard anti-Brexit parties out polled the powerful Pro-Brexit parties. The anti-Brexit side did so good that (worthless) Jeremy Corbyn is finally being called out for his support for not only (what is essentially) anti-immigration policy but also his support for Brexit itself.
quote: The question is what kind of voters (regarding their Brexit views) backed the Conservatives and Labor. There needs to be a major effort to shoot down Corbyn if he promotes the type of crap that has the U.K. remain in the E.U. but stops the free movement constitutional right. It is pure anti-immigration stuff. Non U.K. results: Italy and Hungary saw big right wing wins. Poland saw right win parties get around 48% verses pro E.U. parties getting 45% (but the population is still pro E.U.). Otherwise, the pro E.U. side dominated results. (So it does not look too bad for now)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: The National Front would need to win by a wide margin to take enough seats to be a major player in forming a majority government in the parliament. Winning a 25% to 24% race against Macron's party won't do anything for the right when pretty much 70% of the vote was for a pro EU party. And France has a Presidential election where there are only two candidates. So 50% plus of the vote is needed. (Macron beat Le Pen 66% to 34% a few years ago, though Le Pen actually took 45% of the youth vote) Italy Italy actually saw two anti-immigration parties get a combined majority. One (Five Star Movement) is actually socialistic. When it came to the E.U. elections, the Five Star Movement had a dangerous infiltrator type of scheme where it kept trying to join the larger (pro immigration) left-wing and then left-leaning (pro-immigration) blocs to literally destroy the pro immigration side from within. (Kind of like Jeremy Corbyn's technique) Hungary Viktor Orban's anti-immigration party won 52% against the Liberal Democrat's 16%. He has attempted to destroy the the (pro immigration) center-right bloc's defense of "free movement" by joining the bloc. Poland The Polish situation is complicated by the strong social conservative strain in Poland. The Polish seem to be solidly pro E.U. but have problems with policies on social issues. Poland might not be in the same danger of nationalism like the U.K., Hungary, and Italy are (the last two seem fully lost, and they don't want a European Union to remain friendly to immigration and free movement). Back to the U.K. The major pro European Union parties still have a slight vote edge over the nationalists. Pro European Union (and immigration) parties vote percentage: Liberal Democrats 18.5% Green 11.1% Scottish Nationalist Party 3.3% Change U.K. 2.9% Anti Immigration & European Union parties: Brexit 31.7% UKIP 3.6% This means the anti-nationalists (yes the SNP is that, despite the name) are at 35.8% while the nationalists are at 35.3%. But the big questions: Who knows what the voters for the two main parties think? The conservatives have been pro E.U. and fairly pro immigration, but have been divided on both issues. The conservatives oppose "ever greater union" whatever that means. Labour has been all over the board on the E.U. for as long as the E.U. existed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: In France itself, the left had a government just before Macron won (who is something of a pro-environmental, low business regulation center-left type who also attempts to be something of a pro-immigration "populist"). Holland talked about a 70% tax rate on the wealthy (but "right-wing socialists" in his party demonstrated the economic ruin that would have brought to an already hurting country). Holland and the socialists were simply duds. I can't imagine any rational person would want them anywhere near government. Macron's big wins were a breath of hope for maintaining the fight against anti-immigration populism. (The French economy remains essentially in - what it feels like to people - stagnation, and Macron's numbers have plunged) In the E.U. Parliament, the situation has always had center-left parties (the "socialists" are part of the center, ironically) form a coalition with the center-right. Now those two (or a combined "One") fell to 43%. To get back to 65%, they need the pro-business ALDN (Liberal Democrats) and the pro-environmental Greens. A move toward the left is probable. The problem with the E.U. move to the left is that the more mandates it requires on member states, the more powerful the populists become. And "open borders" and "free movement" (immigrants!) get almost all of the blame and take the brunt of the anti-European Union forces when the forces outline their "fightback". David Cameron might have had it roughly right (if I understand his position) when he supported "free movement" while also opposing ever greater union. It seems far superior to the Jeremy Corbyn anti-immigration stance. It was a strategy designed to keep relatively "open borders" (between member states) possible. Outside of the U.K., the right-wingers are essentially pro E.U. but want to attack the big issue of "free movement" and E.U. wide immigration requirements from Brussels. (Unlike the United States, the populists, in Europe, are fairly pro-free trade, so immigration is the sole big issue)
quote: Corbyn always seemed to me like a nationalist in sheep's clothing. I was relieved that he did not win the last election. It would have been ruinous for the pro-immigration side. Considering the favorable circumstances since Brexit (after it happened, not WHEN it happened on June 23, 2016): I actually think Corbyn's strategy has been good for the pro immigration side IF HE SUDDENLY BECOMES PRO IMMIGRATION (or at least starts to slowly manage a move completely to the pro-immigration side), but it might have more to do with circumstances, and not where his heart has been. These last 3 years (starting June 24, 2016, NOT BREXIT ITSELF) have been about the best circumstances possible for the pro-immigration side. I totally hated how Corbyn took an anti "free movement" position, and frankly I feel it was what he always would have wanted (pre June 23, 2016 and back as far as you go), but perhaps he can be convinced that his position in incompatible with those he wants his support to come from. What he has done so far hasn't been so bad. There were no divorce deals, anyway. Hopefully the 52% to 48% decision can be overturned in a way that enables "free movement" to not get chopped up to save the E.U. membership status of the U.K. Germany, in the years (months, day, minutes, too) leading up to Brexit, said that it would be better for the U.K. to leave the E.U. than to see it remain with "free movement" axed. Otherwise, Brexit is far better. That is true. Scotland will remain, and perhaps North Ireland will try, somehow, to find a way to remain. The U.K. got all kinds of concessions (tough "welfare reform" for immigrants) that the E.U. rejected initially. But immigration was the ultimate issue. (The U.K. is similar to the United States in that younger people are pro-immigration with older people anti-immigration. The situation is actually reversed in many other western European countries, like France and Italy. That means the U.K. might be fundamentally pro-immigration in the future. Italy is just crazy anti-immigration.) Macron (who seems to identify with the ALDN in the E.U. Parliament) and Italy's Lega might be the two sides that ALL others will have to choose to orient around. Lega is right wing, but there are "left wing" nationalists that might attempt to form a possible future populist E.U. coalition. The AP recently said the Lega strategy is one of international nationalism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Look at this problem
The Unite to Remain alliance will have a mountain to climb to prevent a Conservative victory at the next general election – Slugger O'Toole
quote: The article goes on to look at the coming alliance between the Liberal Dems, Plaid Cymru, and Green parties. There does not see to be an efficient distribution. Even with the electoral pact. The math looks bad, unless the alliance exceeds expectations.
quote: The article offers a scenario that is more unlikely than not. Here is another long article from site. It references, and quotes, the recent long Gordon Brown article. Don’t underestimate him. Boris Johnson is making a powerful appeal by defying party traditions, but at the expense of the Union – Slugger O'Toole
|
|||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
The U.K. joined in bombing Serbia over the ethnic based-conflict 20 years ago.
Now that these two nation's have leaders that are trying to open borders, we see that the U.K. is going for a "deal" that includes closed borders and no freedom of movement for dozens of (E.U.) country's people that previously COULD move to the U.K. How many steps forward? How many backward? I can't add all the worldwide positives and negatives up (so I can't say if things are getting better or worse at the net level), but the recent (after the June 23, 2016 incident ) U.K. policy changes are just plain gross. If the world is opening borders overall, then Sub-Saharan Africa gets the lion's share of credit, or I SHOULD SAY the continent collectively should. A big boo for the United Kingdom.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024