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

[B.I.G]

So, how did it come about that people not educated beyond the statutory age voted for Brexit?

Not all of them did. I would suggest that those that did are mainly racist. Then you have those that are stupid and instead of racism believed lies about boosting the nhs. And then there are those that sre deluded about it returning power to the people.

 

[J Ed]

Ah the 21st Century

Do you want to vote for a liberal politician who will ensure that a hellfire missile drone is painted pink to raise LGBT awareness during the latest murderous bombing campaign? Or do you vote for the far-right politician who wants to develop a database to force children without citizenship out of the schools both they and the liberal have chronically underfunded?

Remember not to vote against your own interests!

 

[JimW]

People who voted for trump and brexit are thick, uneducated, or deluded it doesnt matter if they agree with me or not.

As they are voting against their own best interests.

So the plan is to sit in the sunny uplands watching the world burn because too many don't come up to your standards? If your politics abandons a wide swathe of the country is it any surprise they abandon you?

 

[butchersapron]

Or worse.

 

[J Ed]

So the plan is to sit in the sunny uplands watching the world burn because too many don't come up to your standards? If your politics abandons a wide swathe of the country is it any surprise they abandon you?

I wonder how much of these attitudes are the result of liberals believing their own bullshit about power. We are all individuals, there is no ruling class, no social class or any worthwhile collective identity and all individual opinions are of equal worth anyway so why wouldn't you express these attitudes?

 

[andysays]

...If people lack education, Uneducated is not an insult, anymore than lack of common sense or unattractive is, merely a description...

"Uneducated" may not necessarily be an insult, but it doesn't take a Masters degree in linguistics to recognise that you are using uneducated in this thread as an insult, to dismiss and express contempt for people who vote differently or have different views to you.

Whether you realise it or not, you are the perfect example of what this thread is about

 

[redsquirrel]

Fuck you B.I.G

You are the enemy right now.

This times a million

 

[B.I.G]

"Uneducated" may not necessarily be an insult, but it doesn't take a Masters degree in linguistics to recognise that you are using uneducated in this thread as an insult, to dismiss and express contempt for people who vote differently or have different views to you.

Whether you realise it or not, you are the perfect example of what this thread is about

There are plenty of uneducated people that vote in the same way that I do on many matters, what you are saying is that I am using uneducated as an insult because it suits your purposes, but I don't care if people are uneducated or not, and they certainly am not inferior to me if they are.

 

[brogdale]

I regard racists as thick. Apologies for that.

I regard people without education as uneducated. Apologies for that.

You haven't really tried to engage with my points.

TBH it's part of the long tradition of 'punching down' that's been cultivated by those at the top for decades; middle-class blaming the working class, working class blaming the non-working ('scroungers') or migrant labour etc. Classic divide and rule. Maybe the leave vote is seen to have broken these rules by 'punching up' (even if the result was as much driven by well-fed Tory golf club bigots etc - just make sure the blame points down)

That's an interesting point that raises some questions.
If, as you suggest, the Leave campaign/vote gave permission for/encouraged 'punching up' it's important to analyse what forces were instrumental in that process, over what time period will that 'permission' hold and to what ends was it allowed.

I'd suggest that the answer might lie within the notion of oligarchic rule, in particular the recent trend for (formerly) non-ruling oligarchs, who had been content to 'sub-contract' their wealth-defence to a professional public bureaucracy, to more explicitly fuse their economic and political power. Obviously the 2016 US Presidential election offers the most striking example of the emergence of Russian-style, oligarchic elite rule, but it might also be useful to analyse the Brexit vote in those terms?

Having lost confidence in the supra-national bureaucracy's ability to effectively defend their wealth, the oligarchic elite/media determined to separate, insulate and protect their island wealth-haven from bureaucratic meddling from the professional experts & technocrats of the super-state. In this project they exceptionally (& temporarily) permitted the proletariat the 'luxury' of punching-up to the elements of the political elite who were, as "enemies of the people", complicit with the foreign, technocratic/expert elite responsible for stealing 'our' sovereignty. Crucially, this permitted punching-up was tightly focussed so as to excuse the oligarchic elite from any scrutiny or criticism.

In such an analysis those voting Leave in the hope of 'getting my country back' or 'taking back control' were merely useful idiots in the cause of effecting a move towards oligarchic rule in one of the elites' favoured tax/wealth havens.

 

[brogdale]

And by using the established political term of useful idiot, I am not implying that people voting Leave were stupid.

 

[danny la rouge]

Not all of them did. I would suggest that those that did are mainly racist. Then you have those that are stupid and instead of racism believed lies about boosting the nhs. And then there are those that sre deluded about it returning power to the people.

So, voting Leave or Trump was against their interests but voting Remain or Clinton was in their interests? People who voted Remain or Clinton were alone not deluded. And were educated beyond statutory leaving age.

So. I'm engaging. Talk me through that.

 

[butchersapron]

That's an interesting point that raises some questions.
If, as you suggest, the Leave campaign/vote gave permission for/encouraged 'punching up' it's important to analyse what forces were instrumental in that process, over what time period will that 'permission' hold and to what ends was it allowed.

I'd suggest that the answer might lie within the notion of oligarchic rule, in particular the recent trend for (formerly) non-ruling oligarchs, who had been content to 'sub-contract' their wealth-defence to a professional public bureaucracy, to more explicitly fuse their economic and political power. Obviously the 2016 US Presidential election offers the most striking example of the emergence of Russian-style, oligarchic elite rule, but it might also be useful to analyse the Brexit vote in those terms?

Having lost confidence in the supra-national bureaucracy's ability to effectively defend their wealth, the oligarchic elite/media determined to separate, insulate and protect their island wealth-haven from bureaucratic meddling from the professional experts & technocrats of the super-state. In this project they exceptionally (& temporarily) permitted the proletariat the 'luxury' of punching-up to the elements of the political elite who were, as "enemies of the people", complicit with the foreign, technocratic/expert elite responsible for stealing 'our' sovereignty. Crucially, this permitted punching-up was tightly focussed so as to excuse the oligarchic elite from any scrutiny or criticism.

In such an analysis those voting Leave in the hope of 'getting my country back' or 'taking back control' were merely useful idiots in the cause of effecting a move towards oligarchic rule in one of the elites' favoured tax/wealth havens.

So we now have direct rule by capital without politicians and the state inbetween as a result of the vote to leave?

 

[brogdale]

So we now have direct rule by capital without politicians and the state inbetween as a result of the vote to leave?

A move towards/ making possible, more likely.

 

[B.I.G]

So the plan is to sit in the sunny uplands watching the world burn because too many don't come up to your standards? If your politics abandons a wide swathe of the country is it any surprise they abandon you?

Abandon me, they have abandoned themselves. I'm not a politician, they aren't even aware of my politics. As for the sunny uplands, they have gained and lost as much as I have from their votes. They have as much benefit from EU migration as I do.

 

[butchersapron]

Abandon me, they have abandoned themselves.

Thread over

 

[J Ed]

Abandon me, they have abandoned themselves. I'm not a politician, they aren't even aware of my politics. As for the sunny uplands, they have gained and lost as much as I have from their votes. They have as much benefit from EU migration as I do.

Are you aware of your politics?

 

[redsquirrel]

I wonder how much of these attitudes are the result of liberals believing their own bullshit about power. We are all individuals, there is no ruling class, no social class or any worthwhile collective identity and all individual opinions are of equal worth anyway so why wouldn't you express these attitudes?

I certainly think this anti-humanism that B.I.G. is an example of goes hand-in-hand with the individualism so beloved of Thatcher. After all who cares about society when most of it just consists of idiots anyway, just look after number one.

 

[B.I.G]

So, voting Leave or Trump was against their interests but voting Remain or Clinton was in their interests? People who voted Remain or Clinton were alone not deluded. And were educated beyond statutory leaving age.

So. I'm engaging. Talk me through that.

Trump is a racist, so if they are racist they are obviously voting in their own interests. Voting leave is not in their interests as their are no benefits other than closing than borders and increased UK government sovereignty. People who voted for Clinton may have been deluded that she would have benefited them, but she is likely to have protected Civil rights more than Trump. Remain voters are unlikely to have been deluded being as its maintaining the status quo.

As to educated beyond statutory age, I don't know if they were, but I do know that the explanation for their vote lies with them being either uneducated, thick, or deluded, which covers most votes against people's own interests even if I agree or disagree.

 

[B.I.G]

I certainly think this anti-humanism that B.I.G. is an example of goes hand-in-hand with the individualism so beloved of Thatcher. After all who cares about society when most of it just consists of idiots anyway, just look after number one.

Anti-humanism. Classic putting words in the mouths of people that don't share your world view.

 

[B.I.G]

Are you aware of your politics?

I'm aware of my views.

 

[J Ed]

Anti-humanism. Classic putting words in the mouths of people that don't share your world view.

Trump is a racist, so if they are racist they are obviously voting in their own interests. Voting leave is not in their interests as their are no benefits other than closing than borders and increased UK government sovereignty. People who voted for Clinton may have been deluded that she would have benefited them, but she is likely to have protected Civil rights more than Trump. Remain voters are unlikely to have been deluded being as its maintaining the status quo.

As to educated beyond statutory age, I don't know if they were, but I do know that the explanation for their vote lies with them being either uneducated, thick, or deluded, which covers most votes against people's own interests even if I agree or disagree.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm aware of my views.

B.I.G for human president.

 

[redsquirrel]

Yeah cos calling the majority of the population UK and at least 25% of the US and France (and good knows how many more worldwide) thick and/or racist isn't anti-humanist at all.

 

[brogdale]

So we now have direct rule by capital without politicians and the state inbetween as a result of the vote to leave?

Yeah, I would argue that as a sovereign nation-state un-bound by the EU project, it is considerably easier and more worthwhile for Oligarchic forces to effect political power. I believe that's why the campaign was supported & backed as it was and that punching-up was permitted.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah, I would argue that as a sovereign nation-state un-bound by the EU project, it is considerably easier and more worthwhile for Oligarchic forces to effect political power. I believe that's why the campaign was supported & backed as it was and that punching-up was permitted.

Any idea why the great mass of those oligarchic forces were opposed to leaving the EU then?

 

[brogdale]

Any idea why the great mass of those oligarchic forces were opposed to leaving the EU then?

Were they? Or were we seeing the professional, bureaucratic institutions that believed they were representing capital?

 

[butchersapron]

Were they? Or were we seeing the professional, bureaucratic institutions that believed they were representing capital?

The great mass of capital - financial and industrial, parasitic and productive - overwhelmingly opposed leaving the EU. As did the political institutions designed to legitimate them.

 

[danny la rouge]

Trump is a racist, so if they are racist they are obviously voting in their own interests.

This is just "they are racists therefore they're racists". It's not an explanation of anything. No evidence, no argument, no reasoning.

Voting leave is not in their interests as their are no benefits other than closing than borders and increased UK government sovereignty.

You're sure about that? No other benefits? Well, I guess we can take your word for it. What with you being educated and non-deluded.

I asked if voting Remain was in the interests of those voting Remain. You seem to have avoided answering that.

People who voted for Clinton may have been deluded that she would have benefited them, but she is likely to have protected Civil rights more than Trump.

With you being educated and non deluded, we'll have to accept that. Was there no other issue being decided then? Only civil rights?

Remain voters are unlikely to have been deluded being as its maintaining the status quo.

And voting in favour of the status quo is voting in my interests? Your interests? The interests of everyone?

As to educated beyond statutory age, I don't know if they were

You attested they were. You brought up the term "uneducated". You meant it in a patronising, superior way. Then when challenged on it, you said you didn't. You said you meant it in a non-judgemental, specific way, as purely a descriptor. You meant people not educated beyond statutory age. So either you knew something about that demographic or you didn't. Which?

 

[redsquirrel]

And voting in favour of the status quo is voting in my interests? Your interests? The interests of everyone?

Definitely in the interests of those that have seen their standard of living decrease over the last 30 years. Why would they not want more of the same.

 

[brogdale]

The great mass of capital - financial and industrial, parasitic and productive - overwhelmingly opposed leaving the EU. As did the political institutions designed to legitimate them.

Yes, but what those bodies had in common was some sort of concern for the economic 'health' of the nation-state/society concerned; but neoliberal oligarchic inequality is so great that genuine oligarchic wealth is largely decoupled from the fate of the national economy. The desire for secure wealth havens exceeds concern for economic impact of the withdrawal from the super-state.