British politics

Page 19 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re: Re:

roundabout said:
blutto said:
....this is absolutely hilarious and bang on....


https://off-guardian.org/2016/06/25/guardian-watch-insults-fly-in-post-brexit-hysteria/

....pretty nice summation of the story so far...." voting isn't that democratic" indeed....bravo Guardian....good job shilling there...and I can actually remember when that was a paper worth reading....has Murdoch secretly bought it or something...

Cheers
Yes, it's absolutely hilarious how the author is using an index made up of companies who benefit from the drop in the pound to show that voting to leave is not a big deal.

A 14% loss for FTSE 250 over just 2 days is less funny and doesn't fit the agenda.
....at the best of times the stock market is little more than a gambling hall...and since the introduction of quantitative easing it has lost most connections to reality....so given that, what exactly is your point...( and btw you may want to review python's most recent post here...)

Cheers
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Re: Re:

python said:
blutto:
and as for the rating companies playing this straight one just has to look at their performance prior to the 2008 collapse to see they as corrupt as anyone in the banking industry ( and that is saying a lot )...
agree 100%.

i used to be an active market participant. 'active' as in following everything and anything that affected the markets. of course to the extent i had the time for. the rating agencies news/updates were on the top of my list.

it took some years, but i came to a firm conclusion that the 3 biggies of rating agencies (the s&P, fitch, moody) are little more than another set of market manipulators (along with other american tools) tasked with advancing the us business interests.

think about it...they are all STILL the credit 'gold standard' in the world and (incidentally ?) ALL based in america. that all while the world financial capital had moved from nyc to london and while china had become the economic output parity to america.

what's more... the supposedly 'purely' financial organizations are often acting in strange coincidence with the us state department political declarations. etc etc. i recall, some years ago the eu, irritated by the naked american rating agencies political inclinations, had announced the creation of its own rating agency.

frankly, i don't recall what came out of the logical european intention.

it probably died out, just like many other fair initiatives designed to redress the american financial dominance. simply b/c the int. monetary fund, the world bank, the dollar a reserve currency etc etc are still the de facto instruments of the us financial domination that no one had succeeded to thwart much less to supplement or replace.

to suggest that the us - the self-appointed beacon of everything freedom and democracy - isn't acting to preserve the dominance....that would be in the face of known facts.

yep, the american rating agencies 'conclusions' are political. just as they were crap predicting the world economic troubles. the 2008 is just one bit.

Brilliant post. To think Standard & Poor, Moody's, et al aren't for sale is laughable.

I guarantee you the current admin put the screws to S&P to fire a shot over the bow.

Oh to be controlled. Isn't it great?
 
As usual Scott, you have entirely missed the point. You are a blockhead.

It isn't "no government control" that's needed, but a controlling institution that isn't politicized and acting in the interest of a sovereign state to preserve its global hegemony. Whatever the current administration may have done, was in response to its political constituancy over the financial debacle caused by their "ratings." It reflected the anti-Wall Street zeitgeist in the aftermath of the subprime scandal and the egregious ratings previously given.

Python's point was that the US rating agencies are pernicious institutions of its imperium, which have the ability to sink entire nations in the interest of American finance. They are undemocratic in a country that demands to be the harbinger of democracy exportation and, what's more, work in the interests of the plutocracy. No what's needed is a supranational agency that acts on behalf of the bonum, the verum and the nobile as per Plato, not deregulatory policy. I say this philosophically.

At any rate Brexit was also contingent upon a broader perception of finance working on behalf of an elité at the expense of the commonwealth.

PS. This was very topical in Italy several years back, in regards to the infamous "spread," which magically droped when Monti, the ex-Goldman Sachs financier, was installed. He did nothing but carry out the will of such ratings institutions, the US dominated IMF and their minions in the EU commission, but Italy's credit ratings suddenly improved. The economy was in shams and the national debt increased, but so long as the banks got their pound of flesh all was well.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
i am now listening live to nigel speaking at the european parliament. he's not selecting his words...accused the mps of never having a proper job, of imposing the union by deception and lying about it to the members etc etc

i know it is stupid to watch and listen to these clowns but i am entertained by their pomposity.

...20 minutes ago i listened to angela live speaking to bundestag. i respect her...but frankly, she's becoming a champion of speaking so much and saying almost nothing. :rolleyes:
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
....THE tweet of day from yesterday....


Oliver Phelps
✔ ‎@OliverPhelps

Didn't realise the England players wanted out of Europe too. #brexit #EURO2016

3:47 PM - 27 Jun 2016

696 696 Retweets

1,486 1,486 likes
...and a close second....


Gary Lineker
✔ ‎@GaryLineker

The worst defeat in our history. England beaten by a country with more volcanoes than professional footballers. Well played Iceland.

4:50 PM - 27 Jun 2016
Cheers
 
Mar 14, 2016
3,092
5
0
"The British people sent a very clear message with this vote: [INSERT YOUR OWN MESSAGE HERE]"

—every political pundit since 23 June.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Re:

rhubroma said:
As usual Scott, you have entirely missed the point. You are a blockhead.

It isn't "no government control" that's needed, but a controlling institution that isn't politicized and acting in the interest of a sovereign state to preserve its global hegemony. Whatever the current administration may have done, was in response to its political constituancy over the financial debacle caused by their "ratings." It reflected the anti-Wall Street zeitgeist in the aftermath of the subprime scandal and the egregious ratings previously given.

Python's point was that the US rating agencies are pernicious institutions of its imperium, which have the ability to sink entire nations in the interest of American finance. They are undemocratic in a country that demands to be the harbinger of democracy exportation and, what's more, work in the interests of the plutocracy. No what's needed is a supranational agency that acts on behalf of the bonum, the verum and the nobile as per Plato, not deregulatory policy. I say this philosophically.

At any rate Brexit was also contingent upon a broader perception of finance working on behalf of an elité at the expense of the commonwealth.

PS. This was very topical in Italy several years back, in regards to the infamous "spread," which magically droped when Monti, the ex-Goldman Sachs financier, was installed. He did nothing but carry out the will of such ratings institutions, the US dominated IMF and their minions in the EU commission, but Italy's credit ratings suddenly improved. The economy was in shams and the national debt increased, but so long as the banks got their pound of flesh all was well.
Blockhead?

Do you realize how few human beings pull the strings? You are controlled in every way I am. Manipulated too.

I'm not advocating 'no government control' and never have been. So it's not moi who has missed the point.

I accept your apology.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re: Re:

Scott SoCal said:
rhubroma said:
As usual Scott, you have entirely missed the point. You are a blockhead.

It isn't "no government control" that's needed, but a controlling institution that isn't politicized and acting in the interest of a sovereign state to preserve its global hegemony. Whatever the current administration may have done, was in response to its political constituancy over the financial debacle caused by their "ratings." It reflected the anti-Wall Street zeitgeist in the aftermath of the subprime scandal and the egregious ratings previously given.

Python's point was that the US rating agencies are pernicious institutions of its imperium, which have the ability to sink entire nations in the interest of American finance. They are undemocratic in a country that demands to be the harbinger of democracy exportation and, what's more, work in the interests of the plutocracy. No what's needed is a supranational agency that acts on behalf of the bonum, the verum and the nobile as per Plato, not deregulatory policy. I say this philosophically.

At any rate Brexit was also contingent upon a broader perception of finance working on behalf of an elité at the expense of the commonwealth.

PS. This was very topical in Italy several years back, in regards to the infamous "spread," which magically droped when Monti, the ex-Goldman Sachs financier, was installed. He did nothing but carry out the will of such ratings institutions, the US dominated IMF and their minions in the EU commission, but Italy's credit ratings suddenly improved. The economy was in shams and the national debt increased, but so long as the banks got their pound of flesh all was well.
Blockhead?

Do you realize how few human beings pull the strings? You are controlled in every way I am. Manipulated too.

I'm not advocating 'no government control' and never have been. So it's not moi who has missed the point.

I accept you apology.
....in addition to being an ardent Wrong Winger you are a conspiracy monger....gosh, who knew you had layers !...judging by your posts I always thought of you as more or less just a two-dimensional cartoon character regurgitating news releases from Wrong Wing World Headquarters....wonders never cease...

....so I'm curious, where do you think these few humans operate from, and who are they ?....

Cheers
 
Re: Re:

Scott SoCal said:
rhubroma said:
As usual Scott, you have entirely missed the point. You are a blockhead.

It isn't "no government control" that's needed, but a controlling institution that isn't politicized and acting in the interest of a sovereign state to preserve its global hegemony. Whatever the current administration may have done, was in response to its political constituancy over the financial debacle caused by their "ratings." It reflected the anti-Wall Street zeitgeist in the aftermath of the subprime scandal and the egregious ratings previously given.

Python's point was that the US rating agencies are pernicious institutions of its imperium, which have the ability to sink entire nations in the interest of American finance. They are undemocratic in a country that demands to be the harbinger of democracy exportation and, what's more, work in the interests of the plutocracy. No what's needed is a supranational agency that acts on behalf of the bonum, the verum and the nobile as per Plato, not deregulatory policy. I say this philosophically.

At any rate Brexit was also contingent upon a broader perception of finance working on behalf of an elité at the expense of the commonwealth.

PS. This was very topical in Italy several years back, in regards to the infamous "spread," which magically droped when Monti, the ex-Goldman Sachs financier, was installed. He did nothing but carry out the will of such ratings institutions, the US dominated IMF and their minions in the EU commission, but Italy's credit ratings suddenly improved. The economy was in shams and the national debt increased, but so long as the banks got their pound of flesh all was well.
Blockhead?

Do you realize how few human beings pull the strings? You are controlled in every way I am. Manipulated too.

I'm not advocating 'no government control' and never have been. So it's not moi who has missed the point.

I accept you apology.
Ha, ha. If I were as manipulated as you old boy we'd agree on a lot of things.
 
Re: Re:

blutto said:
roundabout said:
blutto said:
....this is absolutely hilarious and bang on....


https://off-guardian.org/2016/06/25/guardian-watch-insults-fly-in-post-brexit-hysteria/

....pretty nice summation of the story so far...." voting isn't that democratic" indeed....bravo Guardian....good job shilling there...and I can actually remember when that was a paper worth reading....has Murdoch secretly bought it or something...

Cheers
Yes, it's absolutely hilarious how the author is using an index made up of companies who benefit from the drop in the pound to show that voting to leave is not a big deal.

A 14% loss for FTSE 250 over just 2 days is less funny and doesn't fit the agenda.
....at the best of times the stock market is little more than a gambling hall...and since the introduction of quantitative easing it has lost most connections to reality....so given that, what exactly is your point...( and btw you may want to review python's most recent post here...)

Cheers
Given your stock fallback position, explaining what is my point would not be the best use of my time.

Although your post above does beg the question why you felt the need to emphasize the fact that FTSE 100 ended on a gain for last week if you actually feel this way about the financial market.

viewtopic.php?p=1953088#p1953088

So is it the stock market as a whole, or only people trading mid-cap stocks who have lost touch with reality? Or is it simply your bias at work?
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Re:

Amsterhammer said:
BREAKING - Corbyn loses vote of no confidence.....

Break out the popcorn.
...and now its up to the party membership isn't it to follow thru on this or not...the MP's cannot dump the leader can they ?....

...might be a long battle...so order lots of popcorn....

Cheers
 
Re:

wrinklyvet said:
This incisive article (from Salt Lake of all places!) best describes the main reasons for the vote to me and will be instructive to those who cannot see beyond the chaos that currently seems to reign. http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4055419-155/lowry-brexit-vote-a-victory-for#sthash.0HttxHnm
Well, self-government of course sounds really nice - but then you can forget access to the common European market, because access means living by the rules set by the EU. The EU you do no longer have a voice in. This includes free movement of labour. Your fishery grounds are subject to international regulation, again, no self-government there. The products you want to export into the EU will have to obey EU regulations. Et cetera, et cetera. Self-government is possible - if you accept huge economic changes. Did the 'leave' campaign make this clear? Seeing Johnsen's latest declarations, I don't think so.

By the way, as I think this move is good for the EU in the longer term, I am pro-Brexit.

 
Re: Re:

Jagartrott said:
wrinklyvet said:
This incisive article (from Salt Lake of all places!) best describes the main reasons for the vote to me and will be instructive to those who cannot see beyond the chaos that currently seems to reign. http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4055419-155/lowry-brexit-vote-a-victory-for#sthash.0HttxHnm
Well, self-government of course sounds really nice - but then you can forget access to the common European market, because access means living by the rules set by the EU. The EU you do no longer have a voice in. This includes free movement of labour. Your fishery grounds are subject to international regulation, again, no self-government there. The products you want to export into the EU will have to obey EU regulations. Et cetera, et cetera. Self-government is possible - if you accept huge economic changes. Did the 'leave' campaign make this clear? Seeing Johnsen's latest declarations, I don't think so.

By the way, as I think this move is good for the EU in the longer term, I am pro-Brexit.

Yes, it does sound really nice, especially to those who remember it. I have little doubt that the other issues will prove less intractable than at first appears. The Common Fisheries Policy of the EU is another story. I should like to see changes and believe it can be achieved, but sadly so much of the industry has already been lost that in many traditional fishing ports there are nearly no fishermen left. Incidentally, as you will know, we entered a Common Market and found ourselves in a centralising political project. Many people have rebelled against that and it is a trend in other countries too.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
....realize that opinions are sorta set but here are a few words from a pretty good commentator who has a fairly good track record....

British voters delivered a savage deathblow to the EU corporate superstate on Thursday sending global markets tumbling and forcing Prime Minister David Cameron to announce his resignation. The narrow victory, which caught the prognosticators by surprise, is the strongest sign yet that working people across the continent are awakening to economic and political disaster that has been created in the name of European integration. Not only has the EU failed to live up to its promise of lifting all boats and widening prosperity, it has also transformed the region into a low-growth, high unemployment charnel house where bankers and their corporate allies siphon off the wealth of the weaker states to enrich high-flying speculators and voracious bondholders. And while the referendum’s outcome will surely be challenged in the months to come, it represents a critical turning point in the public’s attitude towards a thoroughly reactionary and odious institution that is solely responsible for the abysmal state of the economy, the progressive erosion of living standards, and steady rise of right wing extremism. Here’s a short clip from Raul Ilargi Meijer explaining what Brexit really means:
The Brexit referendum represents a fundamental rejection of austerity for working people and subsidies (QE) for the markets. It is an indictment of the destructive policies that have thrust a broad swathe of southern Europe into a permanent depression while bankers in Paris and Berlin make out like bandits. Even now the loathsome European Central Bank continues to run up massive debts (ECB-QE is $80 billion per month) just to line the pockets of corporate CEOs who offload their toxic bonds with the clear intention of using the money to buyback their own shares further enriching themselves and their swinish shareholders at the expense of ordinary investors. This Ponzi-rip off is what passes as economic policy in the EU. Brexit threatens put an end to this huckster’s swindle. Here’s a little more background from the World Socialist Web Site:


The EU is an instrument of the ruling classes of Europe for the imposition of brutal austerity measures—most directly on the workers of Greece, of Spain, Portugal and Ireland, but also on workers in the UK, France and Germany….Prime minister, Cameron, has even proclaimed an “Age of Austerity” as his government imposes cuts of £210 billion, (€263 billion), equivalent to over 10 percent of Britain’s GDP, at the cost of the destruction of 20 percent of all public sector jobs, millions more in the private sector and the decimation of vital services.

The EU is second of all an instrument of military aggression. It is a vital ally of NATO in its escalating conflict with Russia and China as the US and European powers seek to control all of the world’s markets and resources—including vital oil and gas riches commanded by the Putin regime in Moscow and the giant production platform manned by billions of super-exploited workers led by President Xi Jinping in Beijing.” (“The Brexit referendum and the struggle for socialism“, World Socialist Web Site)
Brexit is also a rejection of incoherent immigration policies whose objective is to accommodate the millions of victims of US war-making in the Middle East. EU leaders should make every effort, including economic sanctions, to stop Washington from arming and training extremist proxies that are currently fighting in Syria and who have forced roughly 4 million refugees to flee to Europe for safety. Europe shouldn’t be blamed for the blowback from America’s bloodthirsty foreign policy.
http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/basta-ya-brussels-british-voters-reject-eu-corporate-slavestate/

Cheers
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Excellent once again by Vincent Browne, that I will share the entire article.

THE EUROPEAN UNION, its elites, its hyper fans had this coming to them.
They deliberately devised a supposedly idealistic project of a united Europe, founded on the subversion of democracy across the continent – the exclusion of the meddlesome masses, on an agenda that, inevitably, was going to deepen inequality.
All the bluster of a “social Europe” was just that. It was, essentially, never about anything other than the further enrichment of the rich, right from the inception of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951.
One of the “visionary” founders of the European project, Robert Schuman said that European Coal and Steel Community was “to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible” – and he may have believed that.
But what became of it was a huge cartel that enriched the shareholders and managers of the coal and steel industries. And so it has continued ever since.
The Euro project has progressed by similar deceptions.
Lisbon problems
Just recall the machinations that underpinned the infamous Lisbon Treaty. In its original form, it was a new Constitution for Europe to replace and extend the then existing European Treaties.
It was agreed among the Member States in October 2004 and went for ratification among them.
Some such states, including Ireland, had to ratify the Constitution via referenda (incidentally, Tony Blair promised a referendum in the UK on the Constitution).
The French and Dutch people decisively rejected the Constitution in July 2005, after which the Constitution project was abandoned.
A “period of reflection” was undertaken.
Then, deception
That reflection led to a decision effectively to deceive the people of Europe and have the essence of the Constitution ratified, without resorting to annoying referenda – except in Ireland.
This was what became the Lisbon Treaty, drafted in such a way as to make it indecipherable to the mass of people throughout Europe.
Then when Ireland voted against it again – thereby scuttling the project once more, for the Treaty required ratification by all member states – remember what happened?
Ireland was required to vote again, under the guise of significant changes to the Treaty (a lie) and under the threat of expulsion or marginalisation from the EU if the Irish people didn’t comply (another lie).
We wilted and approved.
Ironically, had we refused again to approve that Treaty, it might not have been possible for the UK to leave the EU for there was no mechanism to do so until the Lisbon Treaty came along.
Subverting democracy
Incidentally, our own Supreme Court had ordained in the case Crotty V Taoiseach in 1987 that all changes to EU Treaties required the consent of the Irish people in a referendum, for such changes amounted to changes in our own Constitution.
This case had been opposed vigorously by the then Irish government and by our domestic elites who argued that, essentially, the Irish people were too thick to comprehend the subtleties of EU Treaty changes, just as people now argue that the British people were too thick to comprehend the consequence of withdrawal from the EU – precisely the arguments that were proffered in opposition to universal suffrage.
Bit by bit, the European project has subverted democracy by overtly and covertly drawing power from Member States to the centre – most notably via the Maastricht Treaty which led to the creation of a single currency which seemed so sensible at the time.
The ECB
But at a cost, unsuspected by most of us, for it deprived us of control over monetary policy - ultimately over budgetary policy – and created a Leviathan in the form of the democracy-free-zone, the European Central Bank (ECB).
The promises that an “independent” European Commission would fairly reflect the interests of all Member States, including the minnows, and that a further empowered European Parliament would give a modicum of democratic oxygen to the EU were treated as nought when the crisis broke.
Did anyone even refer to the European Parliament during the years of the bail-outs and did anybody bother what the Europeans Commission thought?
Europe openly became the plaything of the Germans and their creation, the ECB.
Remember how Angela Merkel, with her then sidekick Nicholas Sarkozy, got rid of the Prime Ministers of two Member States, Greece and Italy?
Remember when we were brow-beaten into absorbing the €72 billion bank debt for which we had no responsibility or ownership?
Remember the bomb going off in Dublin and not in Frankfurt or was that another delusion of Michael Noonan?
And as we agitatedly ring our hands over Brexit, the Germans and their allies are engaged in devising yet another ruse – a “more flexible Europe” – an EU where they and a few other sidekicks would openly run the show and the rest of us would be spectators (actually not much different to how it is now).
No gumption
There is a chance of reversing much of this if Ireland and a few other States had the gumption to do so but be assured there will be no gumption coming from the Irish side, at least.
The Irish side did not even manage to come up with a contingency plan until Brexit happened – claims to the contrary by Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan that they had been working on this since the British election a year ago have been shattered by Brendan Howlin’s casual assurance that he knew nothing of this even though until 6 May he was Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
What we should want
There are a few things we could insist upon: an end to the Euro and the European Central Bank, the replacement of the Council of Ministers with a Senate comprised of two Senators, democratically elected from each Member State (this was a proposal of John Bruton of some years ago before he was colonised).
But there is no chance of that or of anything other than the further consolidation of the power of Germany and the ECB and the further enrichment of the already rich.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/vincent-browne-brexit-european-union-2851248-Jun2016/?utm_source=shortlink
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
gooner said:
Excellent once again by Vincent Browne, that I will share the entire article.

THE EUROPEAN UNION, its elites, its hyper fans had this coming to them.
They deliberately devised a supposedly idealistic project of a united Europe, founded on the subversion of democracy across the continent – the exclusion of the meddlesome masses, on an agenda that, inevitably, was going to deepen inequality.
All the bluster of a “social Europe” was just that. It was, essentially, never about anything other than the further enrichment of the rich, right from the inception of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951.
One of the “visionary” founders of the European project, Robert Schuman said that European Coal and Steel Community was “to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible” – and he may have believed that.
But what became of it was a huge cartel that enriched the shareholders and managers of the coal and steel industries. And so it has continued ever since.
The Euro project has progressed by similar deceptions.
Lisbon problems
Just recall the machinations that underpinned the infamous Lisbon Treaty. In its original form, it was a new Constitution for Europe to replace and extend the then existing European Treaties.
It was agreed among the Member States in October 2004 and went for ratification among them.
Some such states, including Ireland, had to ratify the Constitution via referenda (incidentally, Tony Blair promised a referendum in the UK on the Constitution).
The French and Dutch people decisively rejected the Constitution in July 2005, after which the Constitution project was abandoned.
A “period of reflection” was undertaken.
Then, deception
That reflection led to a decision effectively to deceive the people of Europe and have the essence of the Constitution ratified, without resorting to annoying referenda – except in Ireland.
This was what became the Lisbon Treaty, drafted in such a way as to make it indecipherable to the mass of people throughout Europe.
Then when Ireland voted against it again – thereby scuttling the project once more, for the Treaty required ratification by all member states – remember what happened?
Ireland was required to vote again, under the guise of significant changes to the Treaty (a lie) and under the threat of expulsion or marginalisation from the EU if the Irish people didn’t comply (another lie).
We wilted and approved.
Ironically, had we refused again to approve that Treaty, it might not have been possible for the UK to leave the EU for there was no mechanism to do so until the Lisbon Treaty came along.
Subverting democracy
Incidentally, our own Supreme Court had ordained in the case Crotty V Taoiseach in 1987 that all changes to EU Treaties required the consent of the Irish people in a referendum, for such changes amounted to changes in our own Constitution.
This case had been opposed vigorously by the then Irish government and by our domestic elites who argued that, essentially, the Irish people were too thick to comprehend the subtleties of EU Treaty changes, just as people now argue that the British people were too thick to comprehend the consequence of withdrawal from the EU – precisely the arguments that were proffered in opposition to universal suffrage.
Bit by bit, the European project has subverted democracy by overtly and covertly drawing power from Member States to the centre – most notably via the Maastricht Treaty which led to the creation of a single currency which seemed so sensible at the time.
The ECB
But at a cost, unsuspected by most of us, for it deprived us of control over monetary policy - ultimately over budgetary policy – and created a Leviathan in the form of the democracy-free-zone, the European Central Bank (ECB).
The promises that an “independent” European Commission would fairly reflect the interests of all Member States, including the minnows, and that a further empowered European Parliament would give a modicum of democratic oxygen to the EU were treated as nought when the crisis broke.
Did anyone even refer to the European Parliament during the years of the bail-outs and did anybody bother what the Europeans Commission thought?
Europe openly became the plaything of the Germans and their creation, the ECB.
Remember how Angela Merkel, with her then sidekick Nicholas Sarkozy, got rid of the Prime Ministers of two Member States, Greece and Italy?
Remember when we were brow-beaten into absorbing the €72 billion bank debt for which we had no responsibility or ownership?
Remember the bomb going off in Dublin and not in Frankfurt or was that another delusion of Michael Noonan?
And as we agitatedly ring our hands over Brexit, the Germans and their allies are engaged in devising yet another ruse – a “more flexible Europe” – an EU where they and a few other sidekicks would openly run the show and the rest of us would be spectators (actually not much different to how it is now).
No gumption
There is a chance of reversing much of this if Ireland and a few other States had the gumption to do so but be assured there will be no gumption coming from the Irish side, at least.
The Irish side did not even manage to come up with a contingency plan until Brexit happened – claims to the contrary by Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan that they had been working on this since the British election a year ago have been shattered by Brendan Howlin’s casual assurance that he knew nothing of this even though until 6 May he was Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
What we should want
There are a few things we could insist upon: an end to the Euro and the European Central Bank, the replacement of the Council of Ministers with a Senate comprised of two Senators, democratically elected from each Member State (this was a proposal of John Bruton of some years ago before he was colonised).
But there is no chance of that or of anything other than the further consolidation of the power of Germany and the ECB and the further enrichment of the already rich.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/vincent-browne-brexit-european-union-2851248-Jun2016/?utm_source=shortlink
....but but but its really about the racists and the youth and for heaven's sake think of the money, errrr, children....it is, isn't it....

Cheers
 
I do not really understand the view that this was a major victory of the little man over the elites.
The real fight of the British 'little man' should be against the British elites.

- Britain has the most class-divided society in Europe; an enormous percentage of power in Britain is reserved for those from the same few elite schools and universities; social mobility is very small, hence why the outlook for so many lower and lower middle class people is bleak
- Britain has the best and the worst education in Europe, and the best and the worst educated populace in Europe
- Britain has one of the least efficient national health services in Europe
- Britain has the most flexible labour laws in Europe, with little protection for the little man
- Britain has further dismantled its social system the past years and will continue to do so under Tory goverment
- etc. etc. etc.

Please tell me what Europe has to do with this?
The leave campaign was backed by several millionaires and one of the most influencial people in the world (Murdoch), yet it is a victory against the elite? It was a victory against one kind of elite, but now you find yourselves even more in the hands of another kind of elite. A bit tragic.
 
blutto said:
gooner said:
Excellent once again by Vincent Browne, that I will share the entire article.

THE EUROPEAN UNION, its elites, its hyper fans had this coming to them.
They deliberately devised a supposedly idealistic project of a united Europe, founded on the subversion of democracy across the continent – the exclusion of the meddlesome masses, on an agenda that, inevitably, was going to deepen inequality.
All the bluster of a “social Europe” was just that. It was, essentially, never about anything other than the further enrichment of the rich, right from the inception of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951.
One of the “visionary” founders of the European project, Robert Schuman said that European Coal and Steel Community was “to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible” – and he may have believed that.
But what became of it was a huge cartel that enriched the shareholders and managers of the coal and steel industries. And so it has continued ever since.
The Euro project has progressed by similar deceptions.
Lisbon problems
Just recall the machinations that underpinned the infamous Lisbon Treaty. In its original form, it was a new Constitution for Europe to replace and extend the then existing European Treaties.
It was agreed among the Member States in October 2004 and went for ratification among them.
Some such states, including Ireland, had to ratify the Constitution via referenda (incidentally, Tony Blair promised a referendum in the UK on the Constitution).
The French and Dutch people decisively rejected the Constitution in July 2005, after which the Constitution project was abandoned.
A “period of reflection” was undertaken.
Then, deception
That reflection led to a decision effectively to deceive the people of Europe and have the essence of the Constitution ratified, without resorting to annoying referenda – except in Ireland.
This was what became the Lisbon Treaty, drafted in such a way as to make it indecipherable to the mass of people throughout Europe.
Then when Ireland voted against it again – thereby scuttling the project once more, for the Treaty required ratification by all member states – remember what happened?
Ireland was required to vote again, under the guise of significant changes to the Treaty (a lie) and under the threat of expulsion or marginalisation from the EU if the Irish people didn’t comply (another lie).
We wilted and approved.
Ironically, had we refused again to approve that Treaty, it might not have been possible for the UK to leave the EU for there was no mechanism to do so until the Lisbon Treaty came along.
Subverting democracy
Incidentally, our own Supreme Court had ordained in the case Crotty V Taoiseach in 1987 that all changes to EU Treaties required the consent of the Irish people in a referendum, for such changes amounted to changes in our own Constitution.
This case had been opposed vigorously by the then Irish government and by our domestic elites who argued that, essentially, the Irish people were too thick to comprehend the subtleties of EU Treaty changes, just as people now argue that the British people were too thick to comprehend the consequence of withdrawal from the EU – precisely the arguments that were proffered in opposition to universal suffrage.
Bit by bit, the European project has subverted democracy by overtly and covertly drawing power from Member States to the centre – most notably via the Maastricht Treaty which led to the creation of a single currency which seemed so sensible at the time.
The ECB
But at a cost, unsuspected by most of us, for it deprived us of control over monetary policy - ultimately over budgetary policy – and created a Leviathan in the form of the democracy-free-zone, the European Central Bank (ECB).
The promises that an “independent” European Commission would fairly reflect the interests of all Member States, including the minnows, and that a further empowered European Parliament would give a modicum of democratic oxygen to the EU were treated as nought when the crisis broke.
Did anyone even refer to the European Parliament during the years of the bail-outs and did anybody bother what the Europeans Commission thought?
Europe openly became the plaything of the Germans and their creation, the ECB.
Remember how Angela Merkel, with her then sidekick Nicholas Sarkozy, got rid of the Prime Ministers of two Member States, Greece and Italy?
Remember when we were brow-beaten into absorbing the €72 billion bank debt for which we had no responsibility or ownership?
Remember the bomb going off in Dublin and not in Frankfurt or was that another delusion of Michael Noonan?
And as we agitatedly ring our hands over Brexit, the Germans and their allies are engaged in devising yet another ruse – a “more flexible Europe” – an EU where they and a few other sidekicks would openly run the show and the rest of us would be spectators (actually not much different to how it is now).
No gumption
There is a chance of reversing much of this if Ireland and a few other States had the gumption to do so but be assured there will be no gumption coming from the Irish side, at least.
The Irish side did not even manage to come up with a contingency plan until Brexit happened – claims to the contrary by Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan that they had been working on this since the British election a year ago have been shattered by Brendan Howlin’s casual assurance that he knew nothing of this even though until 6 May he was Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform.
What we should want
There are a few things we could insist upon: an end to the Euro and the European Central Bank, the replacement of the Council of Ministers with a Senate comprised of two Senators, democratically elected from each Member State (this was a proposal of John Bruton of some years ago before he was colonised).
But there is no chance of that or of anything other than the further consolidation of the power of Germany and the ECB and the further enrichment of the already rich.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/vincent-browne-brexit-european-union-2851248-Jun2016/?utm_source=shortlink
....but but but its really about the racists and the youth and for heaven's sake think of the money, errrr, children....it is, isn't it....

Cheers
But this can be said of neoliberal "trickle down" policy and the elité thus created in Washington since Reagan as well. This has pushed a traditional, white middle-class toward the limits of poverty, created a gulf between opportunities for the educated and those barely literate, sucked pentions into an instable financial market and created a nostalgia for the illusion of a time when "America was great," or when "Britain was first." Europe though has also been rocked by neo-migration (the insidious effects of globalization - and the horible wars fought in its name) and here is were the racial issues come to the fore. Let's not kid ourselves about that. They are fueling every nationalist-populist movement in Europe right now and their leaders, from Farange, to Le Pen, to Salvini, etc. The same can be said of Trump. Everyone of these folks has stoked the fire of anti-imigration. And yes, the old and the poorly educated have bought into the illusion that we can be "great again," or "first" if we vote for neo-isolationism.
 
Re:

Jagartrott said:
I do not really understand the view that this was a major victory of the little man over the elites.
The real fight of the British 'little man' should be against the British elites.

- Britain has the most class-divided society in Europe; an enormous percentage of power in Britain is reserved for those from the same few elite schools and universities; social mobility is very small, hence why the outlook for so many lower and lower middle class people is bleak
- Britain has the best and the worst education in Europe, and the best and the worst educated populace in Europe
- Britain has one of the least efficient national health services in Europe
- Britain has the most flexible labour laws in Europe, with little protection for the little man
- Britain has further dismantled its social system the past years and will continue to do so under Tory goverment
- etc. etc. etc.

Please tell me what Europe has to do with this?
The leave campaign was backed by several millionaires and one of the most influencial people in the world (Murdoch), yet it is a victory against the elite? It was a victory against one kind of elite, but now you find yourselves even more in the hands of another kind of elite. A bit tragic.
Hallelujah! Somebody finally talking sense.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
rhubroma said:
But this can be said of neoliberal "trickle down" policy and the elité thus created in Washington since Reagan as well. Europe though has also been rocked by neo-migration (the insidious effects of globalization) and here is were the racial issues come to the fore. Let's not kid ourselves about that. They are fueling every nationalist-populist movement in Europe right now and their leaders, from Farange, to Le Pen, to Salvini, etc.
But what Vincent Browne said in the article got lost in the debate among Farage's nonsense and the topic of discussion that should have been discussed more was marginalised to a degree during the campaign.

And the elites were hugely in numerical favour of Remain, to suggest otherwise is preposterous.

I can add to the above piece with the fiscal treaty which Cameron refused to sign up to and spoke about people in the room(namely Sarkozy) who wanted everyone to sign up to it with no questions asked. Then Yanis Varoufakis who was over here last week, spoke about Michael Noonan(Irish finance minster) who was told to sign off on something with Greece having not been told what he actually was signing for.

I'm for the freedom of movement among other things within the EU but would want nothing to do with the EU in its current clique and dictatorial format. You only have to see this clique of the founding members of foreign minsters who met the this week to discuss the result, while no place for little old Ireland who it will effect the most. That applies also to the other member countries.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY