|
Vitamin P posted:The old truism that a dictator negotiates better than a democrat has 100% held true this whole episode, when Johnson did his YOLO negotiation style and suggested he legit didn't give a poo poo about having no democratic mandate he has the power gently caress you, suddenly the deal that the EU said for almost a year was inviolate and couldn't be changed did get changed. Just like the original deal was pro-EU because T-May had to answer to a democracy and the EU didn't so the EU was stronger. That's quite the take. Whose interests has the EU violated in dictatorial rampage when negotiating either of these deals?
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
As for tomorrow, Portsmouth voted Leave but my Labour MP (the first Portsmouth South ever returned in an election) has said he's already going to vote it down so I know my representative is doing his part
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 21:55
|
|
|
 Just as a palate cleanser for the horrific mutated monstrosities of pages past. Cute little monster!
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Sulphagnist posted:Psst, the EU basically didn't give an inch of ground in the new deal. It's just the May deal except instead of the entire UK being in the backstop (to avoid DUP opposing the deal) Northern Ireland is in the backstop instead, which for the EU doesn't really matter because either way Ireland isn't hosed. Also the political declaration was fine-tuned so that the future relationship got downgraded to a free trade agreement. Yeah I was trying to point out how the EU did reopen what they explicitly called an unopenable deal but accidently implied that the Boris deal is at all better than Mays, it isn't better in any way beyond selling better at home. The point was the EU lies literally every single day and there is no accountability mechanism when they do. Vitamin P fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:That's quite the take. Whose interests has the EU violated in dictatorial rampage when negotiating either of these deals? It's obviously impossible to know, that's my point. The European Commission and so the leadership of the European Council are entirely unelected, they have no link, even momentarily which would produce polls, to actual people and their actual interests. If the EU, and be real we're talking about the EC, is stepping on people then what is the mechanism by which the people would be able to voice their displeasure? There isn't any but if we then go to secondary indicators then the EC more often than not does not come off well. If you want the most obvious specific example of peoples interests being stamped on despite their democratic stance being counter then Greece in the lead up to the Troika bailout and every single day the Greek people have suffered since.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:The European Commission and so the leadership of the European Council are entirely unelected The leader of the European Commission is proposed by the elected EC and is then voted in or not by the elected parliament. Where are you finding the democratic deficit here?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:Where are you finding the democratic deficit here?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:The European Commission is made up of people proposed by the democratically elected governments of Europe whose heads of state form the European Council. Even when trying to stan the EU as democratic you didn't even mention the EP lol. You are proscribing a legitimacy-by-proxy to justify the EC. The makeup of the EC was not decided by democracy as the conception of it's most important roles were created between relevant national elections. The roles have since outlasted the democratic governments that rubberstamped them. The best allegory and also true conception was imagine jobs were given to people because Thatcherite or Blairite governments didn't nope them and didn't give their populaces any say. Then those jobs were passed along based on the internal structures those existing internal leaders created. It's a recipe for poo poo leadership with no system of accountability and that is exactly what the EU is, and the shittiness multiplies because the only interference the working class ever has is violence or democracy and the EC literally, explicitly does not have democracy but capital class lobbying is allowed and extremely influential. Like oval office are you seriously trying to argue the citizen of France or Luxembourg has the same level of influence on the EU processes as they do on their own national processes?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:16
|
|
|
If you think that the representative democracies we live in aren't particularly democratic then it seems like you'd have to have even more objection to institutions elected by the results of those flawed democracies. Like at some point it's so abstracted away from people that it's not really democracy any more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
I'm glad someone explained that amendment thing because I was getting really confused about how Labour could possibly even consider not making this a "vote against or we launch you into the sun" issue
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If you think that the representative democracies we live in aren't particularly democratic then it seems like you'd have to have even more objection to institutions elected by the results of those flawed democracies. I think the representative democracies are much, much better than the EU systems justifying themselves as legitimate downflow of them. You're absolutely right that at a certain point the democratic legitimacy is abstracted and disenfranchised to the extent that it's not democracy anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:lmao at the ERG calling themselves spartans though, it's like they're exploring the outer limits of wank. yeesh Orrrrr. Have you seen excellent recent TV series 'Harlots'? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
I think part of the problem is how you define democracy. Like I think most people would say it's 'Give the people a say, innit?' But the issue with that is that too many people are easily led idiots, and I'm not just talking about the far right press and parties lying in order to bet on the destruction of the UK, I mean in terms of the simple mechanics of mob mentality. Ironically the roots of the political system we tend to call democracy were instituted to get around mob rule - each area appoints an expert, that expert goes and negotiates on their behalf / advocates for their interests at the big council of experts. Everyone feels represented and everyone feels as though they have a chance to vote out their expert if they turn out to be a douche. And then you have the modern system which has been going on for so long, it's mutated into a form where most people have forgotten the reasons behind these systems. People don't vote, and MPs in safe seats don't have to do poo poo to appease their constituents because the people who do vote just vote for the party and not the person. They've forgotten that they're advocating on behalf of their constituents which is how you end up with the absolute state of Michael Gove, a man supposedly appointed to act as an expert advocating for his community, saying that the public has had enough of experts; or Boris talking about traitor parliament subverting the will of the people when he is the least democratically appointed man in there. It just seems like so many people are throwing the word 'democratic' around while subverting the underlying ideals of it that it's kind of starting to acquire a sort of nebulous meaninglessness as a result, it's an abstract like patriotism or morality that people are invoking to strengthen whatever their point is. Ultimately it's a failure in education teaching people that democracy is important, but not why.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:40
|
|
|
Mob mentality and being easily led are features, not bugs. Because a lot of the criticsm I have with democracy as it exists is that it exists in a space where money buys support for an idea, where money can get an idea advertised to shitloads of people, where people are conditioned to listen to advertising. Where the supposed counterpoint to this is a variety of bourgeois publications staffed by, at best, middle class gobshites who will sell you a million different flavours of reactionary thought, and tell you the entire context and scope of politics is just arguments between those tendencies. Capitalist society is fundamentally at odds with democracy, there's no way the two can coexist, because capitalism is fundamentally antidemocratic, you have no democracy at work, or in most aspects of your life, it's most alive, I'd argue, between peer groups, but even those are taken away from us and replaced with media figures to consume, to form parasocial relationships around, robbing even that of its democratic basis. Consumption is not democracy, and our lives are built around superficial and limited choices in consumption, of stuff, of information, of politics, and we're told this is meaningful. Is it any wonder people are not good at democracy? As a specific caveat I would also point out that the roots of the current system of democracy were very much not rooted in everyone electing an expert and feeling represented, because the majority of democratic systems that serve as models did not begin with universal suffrage. They were rooted in the moneyed classes having a say, which also explains the notion of the press being a guardian of the public interest, because when the public constitutes people of the class that owns the press, that makes a lot more sense. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Oct 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
Actually capitalism is the most democratic system of economics possible, because you just vote with your dollars 
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
Social media also is bad at it because the whole way it's structured is to encourage people to be angry and screaming and to grade their social performance purely by the amount of engagement it generates, via the gamified system of likes. People exposed to that as their model of socialization are going to end up as loving nutcases. Roll on the genZ lot who've had to adapt their brains to it because that poo poo's like loving heroin for genX and older.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:Even when trying to stan the EU as democratic you didn't even mention the EP lol.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:You mean the elected EP that we had elections of about 5 months ago, which you could vote in, which I mentioned? That one? the ep can't produce legislation it can only yay or nay legislation, legislation is only produced by the 100% unelected ec you dumb bitch (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
How is the debate going to be? Is it gonna be good? With twists and all that, like last time? Is Bercow gonna yell at people? Are people gonna steal ancient weapons or appliances, or invoke some old secret rituals? How long is it going to last? We are considering eating /drinking with friends and watching the stream, but only if it is not boring.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:the ep can't produce legislation it can only yay or nay legislation, legislation is only produced by the 100% unelected ec you dumb bitch If you think Boris is going to help you realise your dreams of a more personally accountable world, you are just another person he told was special, hosed, and is going to walk away from after getting his ego trip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:21
|
|
|
Oh man wait until this guy finds out about the democratic way the UK can select a new Prime Minister
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Actually capitalism is the most democratic system of economics possible, because you just vote with your dollars 1 man, 0-100bn votes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
Doccykins posted:Could be the dam breaking for Labour MPs in Leave constituencies how come the inbetweeners guy is a journo now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
Friday Night Dinner > Inbetweeners fyi
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
Doctor_Fruitbat posted:https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1185205715704655872?s=19 Good news but it boils my piss that the bbc have two articles on this where they don't go into the issue beyond "lgbt people are upset about chick fil a donating to these charities" without actually outlinging whats objectionable about those charities but they sure did print the poo poo chicken peoples full statement on the matter (which does exactly the same dance around the issue).
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:Friday Night Dinner > Inbetweeners fyi That programme is awful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/timfarron/status/1185323306641174530?s=21 lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
 This is... wow
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
Hes a man with nothing to lose, dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:That programme is awful. More antisemitism from the thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
So I'm reading reform or revolution and, just... holy loving poo poo who is this lunatic who thinks that loving fluid credit and cartels are things that make capitalism more stable.
OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 02:24 on Oct 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:So I'm reading reform and revolution and, just... holy loving poo poo who is this lunatic who thinks that loving fluid credit and cartels are things that make capitalism more stable. Eh, they cause some crime but something like Sinaloa could just supplant a government at least locally if they really wanted to ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
She means as in, the things we have anti trust laws to prevent the formation of nowadays  Collusion between massive capitalist enterprises. She's arguing against some absolute nutter who apparently thinks that unrestricted access to credit between capitalists and collusion between them will create a perfect self regulating and crisis free form of production.And apparently he's some sort of center left guy??? 1900 must have been loving wild.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:30
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:I'm glad someone explained that amendment thing because I was getting really confused about how Labour could possibly even consider not making this a "vote against or we launch you into the sun" issue It also seems to have halted jabby's sprint towards the cliff edge, so that's nice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
loving lol. https://twitter.com/KeejayOV2/status/1184954058278424577?s=20
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
I seriously can't get enough of this brexiter/irish nationalist crossover act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:She means as in, the things we have anti trust laws to prevent the formation of nowadays I did suspect you meant the megacorp kind of cartel not the druglord kind but, you know Also wow that's a take for sure lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
We need the daily express to get their psychic to tell us that Bobby Sands came back from beyond the grave and he wants us to vote for Boris Johnson.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:It also seems to have halted jabby's sprint towards the cliff edge, so that's nice. All the amendment does is delay the actual meaningful vote by a few days. My concern is that former allies like Ronnie Campbell and Melanie Onn have said they'll vote for the deal out of some ridiculous lexiter plan/desire to keep their seats, and that might be why Corbyn is refusing to kick out any rebels. When the future of the whole country hangs on one vote I can't help wishing we had a slightly more ruthless leader. Hard to imagine Big John taking the same position.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
jabby posted:All the amendment does is delay the actual meaningful vote by a few days. Not necessarily, once johnson goes for the extension it's quite possible the opposition will go straight for a VONC. It also changes the nature of the vote even if it does go to one because it means the deal has to go through piece by piece and basically everyone's gonna say it's clearly just may's deal again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2019 03:14
|
|