Another new Brexit thread

[Ban-jani]

@mcfc1632 no they are not. They operate in the same way every union in the world does.

You’re dodging 90% of my post on purpose.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Funnily enough I don’t remember filling in a questionnaire when I casted my vote?

Does anyone here ever get asked to take part in these opinion polls. I don’t know anyone who has, ever.

Does Family Fortunes count?

 

[Ban-jani]

So you support FoM for everyone irrespective of nationality.

I mean, it’s a fucking ridiculous argument he’s making.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Does Family Fortunes count?

Yeah and who wants to be a millionaire.

 

[FlemishDuck]

the EU policies are inherently and intentionally discriminatory.

This is an inconsequential statement in regards to practicle worldy considerations on the status and interrests of nation states and normative policy's on immigration. The only thing it obviously serves is youre personal agenda of trying to defame the EU.

Not to mention afcourse that by that definition practicly every nation is discriminatory for having an immigration policy.

 

[west didsblue]

I mean, it’s a fucking ridiculous argument he’s making.

Best ignored.
It's too ludicrous even to bother about.

 

[George Hannah]

I happen to think in relation to the EU referendum we use the word racist too often and we need to make a distinction between those who are actually racist and those who are concerned about the effects another race can have on society. They are two different things. A racist will always ideologically be a racist and will hate anyone from another race that is distinct to how they categorise themselves. A person who is concerned about the effects that another race may have on the indigenous population may not necessarily be a racist and just be concerned about the effects immigration has on the country.

I am pretty sure that ideologically based racists all voted leave as that is the common sense position for them to hold, where as those who are concerned about immigration and are not necessarily racist can quite easily belong to both remain and leave camps.

That sort of association underlies the democratic tensions which face our political system. For the UK electorate the social impact of mass immigration is a clear issue but it is not addressed by the main political parties. Instead it is converted into contests about which have the best policies for tackling racism through better education, promoting equality of opportunity, further legal protections against discrimination and cultural apologetics. Whenever this disconnect between society and politics is raised the spectre of imminent populist/fascist danger is immediately invoked and the reality of problems facing the population are deliberately ignored.

 

[mcfc1632]

You can either judge it as discrimination or not but it's inconsequential as it's actually normative behaviour in a world where the order of the day is nation states. Basicly within international norms it's considered justified whereas that applies less so for discriminating among youre own nationals. If you don't get that then i think youre throwing pragmatic realism overboard.

I have my own oppinions aswell regarding "nation states" in the 21th century, but then that debate mainly revolves around "internationalism or not". Hence that as a conqesuence of the remarks you make people are wondering if you shouldn't then support internationalism.
It surrises many to see leavers make that argument because the whole point about Brexit is that it's about Brittain moving away from further internationalism into a position where it enjoy's more it's independant powers of a nation state.

It is simple to get...………...

The UK is a state - therefore FOM across the UK is entirely appropriate, as it is within Australia etc.

When considering immigration into the UK, the EU's policies ensure that there is discrimination against the citizens of nation states that are outside the EU membership.

The above statement is an entirely undeniable fact

If all citizens of the UK considered the EU to be a 'super nation state' and wanted to be part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' then the FOM case you and other Remainers make would have credibility.

That those that support leaving the EU do not consider the EU to be a 'super nation state' and want to avoid becoming part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' is really what Brexit is about.

That the majority voted for the UK to Leave the EU emphasises that and an implication is that we do not wish to continue to be forced to discriminate against the citizens of the ROW.

 

[Rascal]

Funnily enough I don’t remember filling in a questionnaire when I casted my vote?

Does anyone here ever get asked to take part in these opinion polls. I don’t know anyone who has, ever.

I actually do, I am a member of YouGov, so I regularly do the polls, you get points for each one you do and when you accrue so many points you get £50

You can join it through their app.

 

[mcfc1632]

Funnily enough I don’t remember filling in a questionnaire when I casted my vote?

Does anyone here ever get asked to take part in these opinion polls. I don’t know anyone who has, ever.

I have never been asked - and, being a sensitive fella, I am feeling a bit miffed

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

I actually do, I am a member of YouGov, so I regularly do the polls, you get points for each one you do and when you accrue so many points you get £50

You can join it through their app.

Oh for fuck's sake - is that how they do them? Please tell me this is a clarkie?

 

[mcfc1632]

So you support FoM for everyone irrespective of nationality.

Apologies, I must have not been clear.

What I meant when I posted:

"I support ending inherent and intentional discrimination - simples"

Was that:

I support ending inherent and intentional discrimination - simples

 

[M18CTID]

Oh for fuck's sake - is that how they do them? Please tell me this is a clarkie?

I hope not. I've just signed up on the strength of his post as I need some beer tokens for the weekend

 

[George Hannah]

What an interesting poll. Old aged Poorly educated Tories voted leave, young well educated Labour voted remain. On two out of three markers I should fall into the remain camp but don't, and 5% of UKIP voters are complete morons :))

'eye of the beholder' and all that Rascal - polling data is an inkblot test for adherents of political parties

 

[mcfc1632]

@mcfc1632 no they are not. They operate in the same way every union in the world does.

You’re dodging 90% of my post on purpose.

What I say is a simple and undeniable fact - for fuller context read my reply to FD

Yes - I did ignore the other half of your reply. Not because of any 'dodging' - I just saw it as another obvious example of your tactic of deflection whilst I was trying to be clear on a simple fact

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Oh for fuck's sake - is that how they do them? Please tell me this is a clarkie?

Why anyone places any weight in those things is beyond me

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

It is simple to get...………...

The UK is a state - therefore it FOM across the UK is entirely appropriate, as it is within Australia etc.

When considering immigration into the UK, the EU's policies ensure that there is discrimination against the citizens of nation state that are outside the EU membership.

The above statement is an entirely undeniable fact

If all citizens of the UK considered the EU to be a 'super nation state' and wanted to be part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' then the FOM case you and other Remainers make would have credibility.

That those that support leaving the EU do not consider the EU to be a 'super nation state' and want to avoid becoming part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' is really what Brexit is about.

That the majority voted for the UK to Leave the EU emphasises that and an implication is that we do not wish to continue to be forced to discriminate against the citizens of the ROW.

The EU doesn't to my knowledge stop you allowing FOM from other countries. So any discrimination imposed is a political choice made by each member state.

 

[BobKowalski]

Apologies, I must have not been clear.

What I meant when I posted:

"I support ending inherent and intentional discrimination - simples"

Was that:

I support ending inherent and intentional discrimination - simples

So you support FoM for everyone irrespective of nationality. Can’t have a citizen of one commonwealth country, say Scotland, having an advantage over a citizen of another commonwealth country, say Australia or Cameroon, when it comes to living or working in England can we? That would be inherent and intentional discrimination.

 

[mcfc1632]

This is an inconsequential statement in regards to practicle worldy considerations on the status and interrests of nation states and normative policy's on immigration. The only thing it obviously serves is youre personal agenda of trying to defame the EU.

Not to mention afcourse that by that definition practicly every nation is discriminatory for having an immigration policy.

I have answered your previous post to establish that - IMO - you have this (understandably) entirely wrong

I say (understandably) because I accept from the entrenched viewpoint of a devout EU member that aspires to see the EU evolve into a Federated/United States of Europe - the inherent and intentional discrimination works well.

Thankfully, the EU is not yet that Federated/United States of Europe and a lot of its citizens hope that ambition is never realised.

 

[FlemishDuck]

The UK is a state - therefore it FOM across the UK is entirely appropriate, as it is within Australia etc.

And the US is a federation, whereas the Eu is something of a confederation. Both consist of a number of states. So how does for example moving between states in the USA relate to immigrating from outside the states? Would it be discrimiation if individual states i the US accepted more immigrants from other US states that from outside the US?

The UK is a state - therefore it FOM across the UK is entirely appropriate, as it is within Australia etc.

Well technicly Birtain is afaik a "royal union"? It is atleast a union of somewhat distinct cultural groups rather than centered around being the nation state of a certain nationalistic identity. (it shows during Brexit i must say) It's not like say Norway which is pretty much exclusivly inhabited by Norwegians.

The above statement is an entirely undeniable fact

Euh i feel you are heading into a field of semantics where you even have somewhat ill defined what the UK is within the perspective of nation states as to make an in conceived argument how states relate to con/federated unions thereof for what regards internal and external migration. I disagree both with the idea of the UK being the typical nation state and that distinction between internal and external immigration to be something usefully described as discrimination rather than simply "egoistic nationalistic interrests".

If all citizens of the UK considered the EU to be a 'super nation state' and wanted to be part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' then the FOM case you and other Remainers make would have credibility.

The problem as it is is that "the practicle reality NOW is that FoM applies". Meaning that in practice the EU serves as a confederation of states in that regard.

I accept the confederalist nature of the EU and as such that having a different policy for outside immigration does not result in "discrimination" by ay normative perception on the interrests of nation states or (con-)federations thereof.

That those that support leaving the EU do not consider the EU to be a 'super nation state' and want to avoid becoming part of a 'Federated/United States of Europe' is really what Brexit is about.

Perhaps, but that is not the defacto state YET.