Privileged people calling less privileged people "stupid" doesn't seem to be working...

[DotCommunist]

lets list all the EU restraints again shall we? You know, all those things the EU is for and stopped our governments doing.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's naive in the extreme to think that removing the UK from the EU removes an opponent in a future battle. At the same stroke, it removes potential allies - note that it was Walloons asserting their interests that blocked and had the Canadian trade deal amended. TTIP was also scotched not by the UK but by EU-wide opposition. And any battle is not just against the government but against the powers that control governments - international capital and its interests. That doesn't change. In fact, I would argue that individual govts are likely to be more beholden to capital interests than supranational groups, not less.

 

[billy_bob]

It's naive in the extreme to think that removing the UK from the EU removes an opponent in a future battle. At the same stroke, it removes potential allies - note that it was Walloons asserting their interests that blocked and had the Canadian trade deal amended. TTIP was also scotched not by the UK but by EU-wide opposition. And any battle is not just against the government but against the powers that control governments - international capital and its interests. That doesn't change. In fact, I would argue that individual govts are likely to be more beholden to capital interests than supranational groups, not less.

Although I respect the left perspective on the reasons to leave and I'm still far from certain that leaving will be all bad, it's basically this that convinced me to vote remain. On the economy I'm not convinced the fight has become any more winnable now, and on social rights and the environment, for example, I'm sure it's become harder.

 

[Rob Ray]

individual govts are likely to be more beholden to capital interests than supranational groups, not less.

People forget that a good chunk of the reasoning behind the creation of the EU was to allow what had been a collection of medium-powered States to avoid being bullied by bigger players, national and corporate. Britain on its own is going to get pushed around by everyone from the US and China to BP and Microsoft — we're already seeing it happen.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

People forget that a good chunk of the reasoning behind the creation of the EU was to allow what had been a collection of medium-powered States to avoid being bullied by bigger players, national and corporate. Britain on its own is going to get pushed around by everyone from the US and China to BP and Microsoft — we're already seeing it happen.

Yep, and to repeat what I've said elsewhere, you only have to read David Davis's pamphlet on Brexit, which he released just after the vote and which is basically the thing that got him his job, to see what is intended. A race to the bottom, an undercutting of the EU in trade deals to gain competitive advantage for British businesses at the expense of British workers. He's very clear about this - 'different standards for different markets' is his idea.

 

[Raheem]

Yep, and to repeat what I've said elsewhere, you only have to read David Davis's pamphlet on Brexit, which he released just after the vote and which is basically the thing that got him his job, to see what is intended. A race to the bottom, an undercutting of the EU in trade deals to gain competitive advantage for British businesses at the expense of British workers. He's very clear about this - 'different standards for different markets' is his idea.

It's worse than that. We're not really going to have a choice about compensating business for Brexit. If you have a workable alternative to DD's proposals, get it in writing quickly.

 

[eoin_k]

People forget that a good chunk of the reasoning behind the creation of the EU was to allow what had been a collection of medium-powered States to avoid being bullied by bigger players, national and corporate. Britain on its own is going to get pushed around by everyone from the US and China to BP and Microsoft — we're already seeing it happen.

I think this idealises post-war European history. The origins of the EU are bound up with US foreign policy at the end of the 1940s, which determined that France should not be allowed to reindustrialise by expropriating West German steel and coal reserves. The alternative was greater political and economic integration, concentrating power in the hands of French bureaucrats and German industrialists. Varoufakis goes as far as to suggest that US concerns about the policies of Britain's post-war Labour government helped determine this policy, with Germany under the Christian Democrats (and with a politically decimated working class) seeming like a more reliable regional industrial power. While not repeating the mistakes of the Treaty of Versaille, European integration has suited the agenda of the world's greatest super power until now. It is no coincidence that Robert Schumann, one of the EU's founding father, was also a founder of NATO. Even if it is hard to see how leaving can lead to a positive outcome, we should view the European institutions as critically as the government's plans for Brexit.

 

[Rob Ray]

I wouldn't want to understate the extent of US influence, and said "a good chunk" as a nod to other influences, but seems to me it would be underestimating the local bourgies to pitch it as all Washington — confluence of interests n all that.

 

[Pickman's model]

The threads title begs the question had all the horrible progressives been nicer would that have worked?

the title begs the question, are privileged people as intelligent as less privileged people?

 

[Pickman's model]

People forget that a good chunk of the reasoning behind the creation of the EU was to allow what had been a collection of medium-powered States to avoid being bullied by bigger players, national and corporate. Britain on its own is going to get pushed around by everyone from the US and China to BP and Microsoft — we're already seeing it happen.

this would be the medium powered france and the medium powered west germany i suppose.

 

[Rob Ray]

The question begs the title: Privileged people are stupid

 

[Rob Ray]

this would be the medium powered france and the medium powered germany i suppose.

They certainly didn't have the heft of the US or USSR. And they'd struggle as much as Britain outside the EU.

 

[Pickman's model]

They certainly didn't have the heft of the US or USSR.

no indeed. but economically west germany was doing very nicely in the 50s and 60s, while france one of the few countries which can and could project its power overseas, albeit with er mixed results.

And they'd struggle as much as Britain outside the EU.

maybe they would. but one of the founder countries leaving the eu would likely have a greater shock on the institution than one of the later arrivals.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

we should view the European institutions as critically as the government's plans for Brexit.

Absolutely. Varoufakis described his position on brexit as 'radical remain' - stay in and work to change the EU from within, form alliances to do so, don't underestimate how much is wrong with it. That was my position, more or less. My fear now is the same as Varoufakis's fear - as Europe fractures, r/w populist nationalism will find its way into power, by the ballot in places like France, and quite possibly by the boot in places like Greece.

 

[Rob Ray]

no indeed. but economically west germany was doing very nicely in the 50s and 60s, while france one of the few countries which can and could project its power overseas, albeit with er mixed results

Tier 2 powers then?

 

[eoin_k]

I wouldn't want to understate the extent of US influence, and said "a good chunk" as a nod to other influences, but seems to me it would be underestimating the local bourgies to pitch it as all Washington — confluence of interests n all that.

Sure, the EU isn't simply a puppet of US interests, but in the late 1940s Jean Monnet - Europe's other founding father - was planning French economic development based on precisely that model (i.e. expropriating German resources). The European Coal and Steel Community was set up right in the middle of the Marshall Aid programme, when the US holds the purse strings and calls the shots.

 

[ViolentPanda]

'lets say that trump voters were one third sexists one third racists and one third genuinely economically disturbed' he says, and then that 'the only thing that's malleable to public policy is the economic part'.
Maybe that's true if public policy simply means the actions of the State. But what about everyone else, who is not the government: Surely this is not a good time for feminists and anti-racists to be told to pipe down, or even told that they are a big part of the problem, with their alienating identity politics etc.
There has to be a way for these concerns to not be mutually exclusive and locked in a zero sum game type fight.

Selective citation is generally the tool of a tool, you spanner.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Nick Cohen seems to be starting to get it, well, bits of it.

Through the gin-fog.

 

[eoin_k]

Absolutely. Varoufakis described his position on brexit as 'radical remain' - stay in and work to change the EU from within, form alliances to do so, don't underestimate how much is wrong with it. That was my position, more or less. My fear now is the same as Varoufakis's fear - as Europe fractures, r/w populist nationalism will find its way into power, by the ballot in places like France, and quite possibly by the boot in places like Greece.

The issue I had with that book was that his depiction of how messed up the whole project was seemed much more convincing than his proposals for reform. I remember thinking that a vote to remain committed me to engaging in an ongoing project to reform EU politics in a way that didn't even feel really possible, never mind desirable. I'm not sure that I would do so again, but his book helped persuade me to vote to leave the EU - that and stuff posted on here by both sides of the debate.

 

[no-no]

I dunno what you've been reading but I wasn't aware there was any "admission" going on, implying some sort of prior taboo?

My surprise was based on previous threads here and on conversations I've had irl regarding immigration affecting wages.

I agree we should be uniting with immigrants however I just don't see it happening. What form does solidarity take? Are migrants signing up to unions when they arrive?

With regards to systematic racism, it undoubtedly exists but isn't it important to draw a distinction between the aim of the policy and it's results? Just because a policy broadly affects a particular race doesn't make it racist, the intent behind the policy is what makes it racist. Controlling borders might be about race for some but for most it's about protecting wages, the fact the people being kept out are largely of a different race is irrelevant.

"There's never guarantees. But the only way the working class can realistically act in a united fashion against our real oppressors is by being united. That means organising with migrants, not denying them a stake in society and shunning them until they stop giving a shit."

Again, I agree with you on this but I don't see it happening and it's been a long long time since I last had this conversation on these boards, things have only got worse. The far right has more power now than they did then, of course had we controlled immigration years ago who's to say if working conditions and pay would have improved over here or if the target would have shifted.

Why am I not in Germany? My life here is not hard enough to warrant the move, the conditions between here and Germany are not as pronounced as between Poland and the UK, or Somalia and the UK. My German is also non existant, most migrants have a smattering of english or french.

I think there is also something to say for a persons expectations of being able to find employment in the area they grew up, where their family lives. It's no good thing that people may start to consider it the norm to live abroad to earn a living. This applies to everyone.

tbh the whole thing confuses me and my understanding of economics is terrible which doesn't help, I try to reason my way through it but I know that there are things I don't really understand which may well undercut my points. So this is the other thing, it's really really complicated. Most people spend very little time reading about this shit, any message you use to unite people has to be easy attractive and easy to understand. Trump was very shrewd to campaign on both immigration and kicking big money out of politcs.
-

 

[no-no]

Although I respect the left perspective on the reasons to leave and I'm still far from certain that leaving will be all bad, it's basically this that convinced me to vote remain. On the economy I'm not convinced the fight has become any more winnable now, and on social rights and the environment, for example, I'm sure it's become harder.

But we do have a government that are more directly accountable than the EU now, although the UKs voting record is dire. I'm not confident we won't carry on voting for centre right parties or worse.

 

[Pickman's model]

Why am I not in Germany? My life here is not hard enough to warrant the move, the conditions between here and Germany are not as pronounced as between Poland and the UK, or Somalia and the UK. My German is also non existant, most migrants have a smattering of english or french.
-

it's been my experience that german people are almost universally happy to speak english, and a repetition of the phrase 'sprechen sie englisch bitte' will practically invariably be met with a positive response.

 

[bimble]

Selective citation is generally the tool of a tool, you spanner.

cheers. thats got to be about 5 people who've called me names for that post, all assuming i wrote it to somehow have a go at people. Spanner is better than the rest though so thanks. . Pages after that , Athos wrote 'it will be important to explain to people how this is not a zero sum game' , so for all my stupidness i take comfort in the idea that apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't get it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

But we do have a government that are more directly accountable than the EU now, although the UKs voting record is dire. I'm not confident we won't carry on voting for centre right parties or worse.

I would dispute that. The process trade agreements have to go through in the EU contains accountability - that's why they take so long. I fear there will be precious little accountability on the UK's trade deals.

 

[DotCommunist]

remember that time the EU whipped the cloak of secrecy away from TTIP?

I've been googling for it since I'm sure they would have, but my search results come up dry

 

[no-no]

I would dispute that. The process trade agreements have to go through in the EU contains accountability - that's why they take so long. I fear there will be precious little accountability on the UK's trade deals.

That might be so but we can vote the Tories out relatively easily, the question is how likely do they think that is, how much do they think they can get away with?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

remember that time the EU whipped the cloak of secrecy away from TTIP?

I've been googling for it since I'm sure they would have, but my search results come up dry

The TTIP that they failed to get through? That one?

 

[Athos]

cheers. thats got to be about 5 people who've called me names for that post, all assuming i wrote it to somehow have a go at people. Spanner is better than the rest though so thanks. . Pages after that , Athos wrote 'it will be important to explain to people how this is not a zero sum game' , so for all my stupidness i take comfort in the idea that apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't get it.

Please don't use quotation marks if you're not actually quoting verbatim (regardless of whether or not you use the quote function).

 

[emanymton]

remember that time the EU whipped the cloak of secrecy away from TTIP?

I've been googling for it since I'm sure they would have, but my search results come up dry

MPs can view TTIP files – but take only pencil and paper with them

 

[ViolentPanda]

How and why are some voices more persuasive than others though?

I don't think it can be dismissed as simply "superior knowledge ". A frequent complaint from people unable to support their opinions in the face of argument is that, coupled with some sort of of insinuation about heavy political tomes.

But how often do we actually see obscure political theory chucked in to swing an argument? Very rarely IME.

Certainly some posters are more considered in their use of sources (articles, news reports etc) that they use than others. But...

...but the key thing here for me is the years and years and years of collective accumulated experience.

Experience doesn't necessarily validate or invalidate any given opinion but when, taking the current arguments about Trump/Le Pen/Brexit etc. as an example when posters have actually already been through the arguments before ("lesser evilism"/"just thick racists" vs. the BNP for example) and seen how spectacularly it failed in real life, then that's your "superior knowledge" for you.

Sometimes people do just "know better".

It's an amazing resource we have here, though fading somewhat, and we'd be fools to pay no heed to it.

But even then, these arguments need challenging. What was right 20 years ago isn't automatically going to be right now.

But the challenge needs to be rigorous, substantiated, based on something. Otherwise it's merely an opinion.

Nothing wrong with opinions of course, but they're not going to carry as much weight as experience.

There are some posters who have a problem with that. That feel that that their (passionately held) opinions should carry as much weight as somebody else's direct experience. Understandably when those opinions are based on genuine belief and genuine commitment.

There are also a few posters who simply see this place as a an extension of the debating society. Their arguments are devoid of either experience or commitment and they poison many discussions on here. But they are are few and easily spotted.

It's always disheartening when people who describe themselves as "left" or "socialist", have no idea what either term means, and mistake Blairite neoliberal centrist ameliorationism for both the preceding terms.