Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[phillm]

Just close sign ups and ban everyone who joined after 2009, it's the only way to be sure

Or alternatively ban everyone over 50,000 posts - like Logan's Run kill off the dinosaurs - obviously, editor as 'God' of this Universe gets exempt.

 

[Pickman's model]

The GFA is a phenomena.
Brexit is a phenomena.

one phenomenon
many phenomena

 

[binka]

Or alternatively ban everyone over 50,000 posts - like Logan's Run kill off the dinosaurs - obviously, editor as 'God' of this Universe gets exempt.

I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense

 

[Pickman's model]

I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense

the entire rationale of urban is what you contemptuously call 'the time wasting nonsense'

 

[phillm]

I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense

Even better idea - post rationing.

 

[Pickman's model]

Even better idea - post rationing.

perhaps we could have a market in posts, where 'spivs' who never use their ration sell them to people who desire more than the allocation

 

[Pickman's model]

Even better idea - post rationing.

or better yet people could be allowed to post 20% of their postcount on 31/12/2018 throughout 2019

 

[brogdale]

the entire rationale of urban is what you contemptuously call 'the time wasting nonsense'

One of the more important posts of 2018.

 

[phillm]

or better yet people could be allowed to post 20% of their postcount on 31/12/2018 throughout 2019

factoring likes there as well in some context. Why not have a referendum on it? They seem like a good way to find consensus in making important decisions.

 

[realitybites]

Successfully we have made the UK one of the most undesirable countries in the West.. Toursim in the UK is going to be drop like a lead balloon . . Ironic really as London will always be safe, but the regional towns will first feel the sting - In 5/8 years we will really start to see the overall picture of this. Brexit started out as as a way to control borders, now no one in their right mind would want to come to this country 'Project Undesirable'..

 

[8ball]

I think if the vitriol dies down, tourism will do very well from a weakened pound in the longer term.

The production sector will be in deep shit, though.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.

 

[brogdale]

7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.

Bargain!
Is that a return?

 

[Pickman's model]

Bargain!
Is that a return?

only if you're unlucky

 

[brogdale]

only if you're unlucky

the old "...and second prize is...' one

 

[andysays]

7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.

This story isn't really about Brexit, but about changes to EU rules affecting everyone entering the EU from the 61 nations on the special (most favourable) list
Great news for supporters of freedom of movement

Citizens of EU countries - which currently includes British people - are able to travel anywhere in the EU. But anyone from a non-EU country has to apply for a visa - unless they are from a special list of 61 countries, which also includes the US, Japan and Australia. Nationals from these 61 countries can travel within the EU's Schengen zone - the area where people can travel without border checks - for up to 90 days without a visa.

However, because of the migrant crisis and security concerns over terrorism, the EU has decided to bring in more controls over the countries on this special list.

The EU says the ETIAS system will "to strengthen security checks on those persons who travel visa-free to the EU"...
...The details needed for the application form will include passport information as well as background questions about criminal records or medical conditions.

Applications can also be denied or take up to four weeks to process... ...The document will be checked by border guards when crossing the EU border.

This last bit reads to me as if the EU will have to install guards on the border between NI and Eire, to check the documents of anyone entering the EU that way...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

We can just add it to the list of thousands of small things that will be shit about brexit. Some might be much bigger shocks than this - any kind of hard brexit will end the EHIC arrangement for instance.

This in addition to all the shit big things. Yay!

 

[Wookey]

Saw this BTL comment on the Guardian, liked it thought I'd share.

Pinkie123
6d ago
Guardian Pick
4041
I think the critical nature of our times beyond extends political upheavals such as Brexit. These political convulsions are manifestations of anxieties generated by a whole nexus of traumatic cultural, economic, political and ecological shifts. Perhaps the most significant is the advent of the anthropocene. With anthropgenc climate change, the idea of nature being a stable background to human affairs in no longer tenable. Furthermore, digital infrastructures are breaking down the boundary between man and machine. Biogenetics and AI augur the death of the liberal subject.

Then there is a crisis of political economy. Given that a market economic system predicated on goods cannot adapt to a world run by fibre optics and algorithms, capitalism is having to assume ever more authoritarian and violent forms in order to reproduce itself. This it does in a paradoxical symbiosis with new 'deterritorialized' ways of living and working with no roots in place or encitizened community.

In principle this article is right. Politics has been utterly debased into infotainment and nefarious data manipulation. But the solution cannot be as straightforward as to return 'gravitas' to political dscourse. Liberals are wrong to believe that technocratic governance can be restored by returning to a 'centre ground' representing moderate common-sense, or simply by reputable media organisations giving people 'facts'. Firstly, there is no longer a secure, demarcated space within which an elite technocracy can successfully operate. Once politicians took to Twitter, that was game up for politics as an elite profession separate from the spheres of commerce and media. Second, as a result of the sudden proliferation of publicly accessible data given rise to by the data economy, we are finding it ever-harder to organise facts into political narratives. Instead, we create personal narratives rooted in our own subjective experience. In a final conclusion to consumerism, knowledge itself has become a commodity to be shopped for in a digital marketplace.

I think you are right when you say that we no longer know what it means to be informed. We no longer know what truth is in the ethical sense. One does not have to be a relativist to conclude that there is much more to truth than facts. Truth is a question of what facts are slected or ommitted in support an ideological narrative. Third Way liberalism, for all its claims to rationality, was never common-sensical or empiricist. Think of all the reckless wars and crazy economic experiments of the past twenty years! What is called moderate is pure ideology. Since events such as Iraq and the financial crash, it has become harder to trust politicians as bearers of truth. WikiLeaks and other leaking of deep state secrets into the public domain, along with the permanent threat to public institutionsby cyber-terrorists, show that politicians and elite officials cannot maintain control of information, and therefore their authority, as they once did.

But neither is populism the answer, as many anti-neoliberals of the right believe. Populism is a retreat from the trauma and terrifying complexity of sociopolitical upheaval into toxic fantasy. Absurdly, the populist assumes that 'ordinary people' have an innate wisdom and are immune fom ideology. Conspiracy theories constructed around the hate figure of the immigrant, Muslim or the Jew serves to restore a false coherency to his or her worldview. They suggest, comfortingly, that someone (the elite) is in charge and all it takes is for an enemy interloper to be removed from the democratic community for the power of its rightful members (an ethno-culturally homogenous 'people') to be restored. Apart from anything else, the populist cannot engage with questions of structural economics - only cultural idenity. Similarly, left-wing identitarianism is a form of populism insofar as its organising principle is culture rather than class in the Marxian sense.

What the answer is I do not know, but both the populist reactionaries and the centrist liberals long to return to versions of the past which, even if they did ever truly exist, are now irrevocable."

Pretty high standard of global socio-economic insight I thought.

Our age lacks gravitas. That’s why we cannot deal with crisis | Ian Jack

 

[binka]

tl;dr

 

[Pickman's model]

Saw this BTL comment on the Guardian, liked it thought I'd share.

Pinkie123
6d ago
Guardian Pick
4041
I think the critical nature of our times beyond extends political upheavals such as Brexit. These political convulsions are manifestations of anxieties generated by a whole nexus of traumatic cultural, economic, political and ecological shifts. Perhaps the most significant is the advent of the anthropocene. With anthropgenc climate change, the idea of nature being a stable background to human affairs in no longer tenable. Furthermore, digital infrastructures are breaking down the boundary between man and machine. Biogenetics and AI augur the death of the liberal subject.

Then there is a crisis of political economy. Given that a market economic system predicated on goods cannot adapt to a world run by fibre optics and algorithms, capitalism is having to assume ever more authoritarian and violent forms in order to reproduce itself. This it does in a paradoxical symbiosis with new 'deterritorialized' ways of living and working with no roots in place or encitizened community.

In principle this article is right. Politics has been utterly debased into infotainment and nefarious data manipulation. But the solution cannot be as straightforward as to return 'gravitas' to political dscourse. Liberals are wrong to believe that technocratic governance can be restored by returning to a 'centre ground' representing moderate common-sense, or simply by reputable media organisations giving people 'facts'. Firstly, there is no longer a secure, demarcated space within which an elite technocracy can successfully operate. Once politicians took to Twitter, that was game up for politics as an elite profession separate from the spheres of commerce and media. Second, as a result of the sudden proliferation of publicly accessible data given rise to by the data economy, we are finding it ever-harder to organise facts into political narratives. Instead, we create personal narratives rooted in our own subjective experience. In a final conclusion to consumerism, knowledge itself has become a commodity to be shopped for in a digital marketplace.

I think you are right when you say that we no longer know what it means to be informed. We no longer know what truth is in the ethical sense. One does not have to be a relativist to conclude that there is much more to truth than facts. Truth is a question of what facts are slected or ommitted in support an ideological narrative. Third Way liberalism, for all its claims to rationality, was never common-sensical or empiricist. Think of all the reckless wars and crazy economic experiments of the past twenty years! What is called moderate is pure ideology. Since events such as Iraq and the financial crash, it has become harder to trust politicians as bearers of truth. WikiLeaks and other leaking of deep state secrets into the public domain, along with the permanent threat to public institutionsby cyber-terrorists, show that politicians and elite officials cannot maintain control of information, and therefore their authority, as they once did.

But neither is populism the answer, as many anti-neoliberals of the right believe. Populism is a retreat from the trauma and terrifying complexity of sociopolitical upheaval into toxic fantasy. Absurdly, the populist assumes that 'ordinary people' have an innate wisdom and are immune fom ideology. Conspiracy theories constructed around the hate figure of the immigrant, Muslim or the Jew serves to restore a false coherency to his or her worldview. They suggest, comfortingly, that someone (the elite) is in charge and all it takes is for an enemy interloper to be removed from the democratic community for the power of its rightful members (an ethno-culturally homogenous 'people') to be restored. Apart from anything else, the populist cannot engage with questions of structural economics - only cultural idenity. Similarly, left-wing identitarianism is a form of populism insofar as its organising principle is culture rather than class in the Marxian sense.

What the answer is I do not know, but both the populist reactionaries and the centrist liberals long to return to versions of the past which, even if they did ever truly exist, are now irrevocable."

Pretty high standard of global socio-economic insight I thought.

Our age lacks gravitas. That’s why we cannot deal with crisis | Ian Jack

Can you summarise?

 

[cupid_stunt]

Meanwhile pantomimes across the country are being cancelled, because despite how much they spend on stars & production, they don't feel they can compete with what's coming out of parliament, free of charge.

 

[Sea Star]

tl;dr

"what the answer is I do not know." - there, saved you some reading.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Can you summarise?

Word salad.

 

[Helen Back]

From the BBC news website:
"However, the prime minister has ruled out the prospect of another public vote. Mrs May has repeatedly told MPs that the 2016 referendum result "should be respected"."

But that is now outdated data. Surely the current "will of the people" should be respected? Especially since the original Leave campaign has been shown to be flawed and not entirely honest. We all now have a better understanding of the effects of Brexit, both good and bad. Surely another referendum will either confirm the 2016 vote or show that the majority now want to remain?

As a great philosopher once said, "Is that your final answer?"

 

[cupid_stunt]

Especially since the original Leave campaign has been shown to be flawed and not entirely honest.

As if the Remain campaign wasn't flawed and not entirely honest.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The flaw in the reasoning is elsewhere, I think. The result of the 2016 referendum is not the only thing deserving of respect. And it is not necessarily the ultimate trump card beneath which all other eventualities (and institutions of UK democracy) must be subservient. It is self-serving of May to insist that it is. It is one of the many things she should be called on.

 

[Pickman's model]

As if the Remain campaign wasn't flawed and not entirely honest.

So radical right people on your side breaking the law fine then

 

[tommers]

The one vote to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them.

 

[ska invita]

From the BBC news website:
"However, the prime minister has ruled out the prospect of another public vote. Mrs May has repeatedly told MPs that the 2016 referendum result "should be respected"."
"

She'll keep saying that until the the vote, in the vain hope a naive MP might vote for her deal because "its the only option". Once she loses that the line will change...most likely to referendum.

 

[kabbes]

The flaw in the reasoning is elsewhere, I think. The result of the 2016 referendum is not the only thing deserving of respect. And it is not necessarily the ultimate trump card beneath which all other eventualities (and institutions of UK democracy) must be subservient. It is self-serving of May to insist that it is. It is one of the many things she should be called on.

That’s true but it ignores the fact that the 2017 election was then fought on the basis of political manifestos that were quit explicit about the intention to perform a full Brexit (eg the Labour manifesto promised to retain the “benefits of the single market and the customs union” but without being a member of either whilst the Tories also made it clear that they intended to exit the customs union.). So it’s not just about the 2016 referendum — it’s also about fulfilling explicit election promises.