Game of Morons: The UK General Election Thread

Alright. Please note that I'm still a little hung over from yesterday. Yes I'm old. Here's how I want Europe. This is what I'm referring to when I write 'my plan' or some such: it doesn't have national states (or maybe as some kind of midlevel organizational structure). The 'small stuff' resides within the regions while Brussels takes care of foreign policy, trade treaties, defense etc. Not unlike the US, but on a regional basis. Put together what belongs together regardless of random national borders.

Well yes. However, I do see lots and lots of potential to make it better. I also understand that every little step is a damn compromise of 27/28 self serving interests.

Indeed. That's its biggest problem. I mean it's understandable to some degree from a political point of view: elections are national. Solution? Be a Union. BUT. Every attempt to cut back politician's power at home will fail.

That is true. Granted, there was a reason to isolate the new eastern members for seven years. But even after the isolation was lifted, nothing of any importance happened.

The UK was always a very good member. One of the few that fulfilled the agreed upon contracts to the letter. Yes you guys had a knack for getting your way and yours alone. But once stuff was signed, no more bullshit.

Hell yeah.

After half a century or more throwing money at Africa with no real effect I'm all for stopping the flow of cash. Cut it. Time to let go of the white guilt. It's much more productive to send them torches and pitchforks to drive out all the warlords, cleptocrats and islamist nutjobs. And for heaven's sake stop sending food unless there's an immediate famine. No local farmer can compete with 'free'.

Also, secure the EU borders. I'm not one to kick out every migrant or refugee nor do I fear them. But we should pick who can stay. Canada is quite good at this and nobody calls them inhuman monsters. Copy them.

Centralize more - where it makes sense. Regionalize where it makes sense.

Yea, well. That's a problem. It's not easy to react fast when you have 28 squabbling members and politicians just looking at the next election at home. While we approached the cliff many times, I am impressed that we never fell down. Good sign if you ask me. At least they'll pull together and form a water line when the house burns. But to install a sprinkler system before the fire breaks out? Guess that costs too much power in the 28 fiefdoms.

Well this is being worked on right now. Things like the Visegrad group (despicable as they are) will probably be formalized soon. Also, my plan works better

You are wrong. The whole reason behind the very first treaties was to make another secret buildup impossible.

The problem with that is that a nation state requires a nation. People in Europe don't identify as the same nationality. They have very different languages and cultures. Someone in France cares about other Frenchmen but not as much about Greeks or Poles. When the shit hits the fan as it did with the debt crisis, they aren't willing to fork out their own money to support others as they do with their own countrymen.

Firstly, Africa is becoming much more prosperous. Secondly, harmful trade policies and other practices mean that the flow of wealth is actually in the opposite direction that whatever propaganda this is based on is telling you.

Yeah, yeah, there was lots of talk about the early steel treaty and the early coal treaty but those were mostly just protectionism. In group kids get protected from outside competition even if there was some competition allowed inside the in group. The protectionist origins of the ECC (which later morphed into the EU many decades later) has always been the EU's original sin and it still taints that shit show to this day.

As for the rest of that nonsense... Yeah, I am sure those Soviet tank divisions possed for invasion would totally have not pulled the trigger just because of local piddly steel sourcing agreements. Nor were any of the western states going to fight each other with those Soviet divisions sitting there waiting to invade them all.

The claim that the EU had anything to do with peace in Europe decades before it even existed is nothing more than expost facto propaganda lies made up to fool brain damaged simpletons because only a fool would believe it. NATO kept those Soviet divisions out and 50% of NATO forces were American units. That is who kept the damn peace in Europe and even you know it.

The EU kept the peace between its members, particularly France and Germany, who had had a war in every generation going back several centuries. This isn't about the Russians.

Indeed there was. By everyone involved. Claiming the opposite of what you are saying.

Is this your way of saying "I realise that all of the historical sources paint reality as you describe it, but I will dismiss all of them because my gut tells me differently"?

No they did not and the reason they would not have gone to war even if no EU (or really ECC as the EU did not exist yet) existed had everything to do with the Russians. I.E. an external threat to all.

The decision to leave the EU is mad because there are two options:

1) The hardcore leavers get what they want, and millions of EU and UK citizens find themselves facing immigration difficulties, causing massive headaches for both individuals and business.

2) Movement stays relatively free, and the hardcore leavers will be grinding their teeth every time they see someone from Europe working in the UK.

It's going to go down in history as a massive fuck up (and I hope I'm wrong about that), but the referendum was clear and people made their vote. Another vote after a deal is hammered out could well lead to a different outcome however it isn't necessary, the vote on whether the UK should leave the EU has been answered.

Worth mentioning as well that the Brexit vote could end up being even more damaging to Camerons legacy. An unprecedented amount of young people voted in the most recent UK election, and I suspect that is in no small part to a lot of people who went "Oh shit, my vote matters..." after they sat out the Brexit referendum. When votes have no takes-backsies people are more likely to participate, and by pushing the Brexit referendum Cameron probably did much to help Labour get into government in the next few years by providing a concrete example to younger voters of why participating is important.

My guess is immigration will remain relatively free but it will be made so under British law by British politicians elected by British voters not by the dictates of foreign powers. Also those non citizens who come will not have access to unlimited welfare and council housing until they have actually worked and contributed to society for five years and filled out the necissary residency forms. People who want to work will be welcomed while the deadbeat welfare migrants will be told they are not welcome.

This is a very good thing.

No. Hitler was very smart in how went about tooling up. In fact the Nazi's pretty much wrote the book on dual-use systems that could be militarized quickly, but look like civilian use on the surface.

Post-war it was recognised, in that context, that the quickest way to determine if someone was gearing up for war was looking at their coal and steel activities, so that was the initial mechanism to keep the peace.

Yeah, that's not going to work. I wish I still had the paper knocking around, and I'll have to go find it on t'web (or a chicken coop) some day, but there was a study that showed communities can only reach a certain size before they splinter. This, to me, suggests a more layerd approach which nation states have a part in.

People like flags, national sports teams, etc.

Take a look at Spain now. It's been unified for how many centuries now? Yet each state still cries for a bit of independence. Yugoslavia, another example, one that - post-Tito - fell to pieces. Freedom is messy, and such top-down structures require its removal. So, no. Unions have to handled gracefully.

Then the EU needs to rethink itself. A union is just that, a combination of its constituent parts with a bit of give and take. If it wishes to be a tight union, then it needs to take along its members and they must be okay with the destination. If they're not wishing that, then sit back and review what can be done.

Personally I don't think erosion of power is the problem, we've seen powers outsourced to EU institutions with little issue. I think the problem is erosion of identity. People identify with a number of things. I'm a Manc, I'm English, I'm British, I'm European. But there comess a sense that the EU would rather supplant than extend that sense of national identity. People do kick back with that.

Yet. Don't forget everything was fine in the UK for a long time.

Both the French and German peoples can have quite the antipathy to foreigners. Having lived with a couple of German families in my youth, I got to see how Turkish immigrants were viewed outside of the cities during the 80's and 90's, and one woman in particular who missed her calling by a few decades! I think she'd have cheerfully gassed anyone not German living in Germany.

There are African nations which do well.

Take Kenya. Kenya produces coffee beans, which the EU is happy to take. If the Kenyans decide to scale up and start processing and canning that coffee and wishing to import to the EU faces a 7.5% charge - why? To protect German coffee bean processors.

Or Nigeria. It produces cocoa. If they'd start to upscale and produce chocolate products, the EU will charge them a 8.3% rate. Then add on the agricultural tariff. Which is north of 18%. Next time you have a nice bit of chocolate, have a think about how it's production comes with a cost of retarding a whole continents growth.

What the EU does is place a glass ceiling over the whole continent, and does its best to ensure that African nations cannot take the advatange of scale that Europe did. It's a rather nasty form of economic imperialism that keeps the Big Men and the warlords in power, because they've no neighbours who can show a better way. Because the EU prefers to protect it's own commercial interests over human lives.

Canada only really has Americans to worry about there. Europe has the Middle East and Africa near it. Plus Merkel cordially inviting over everyone in attempt to fix German demographics.

Could start down that track by setting up safe havens in Libya and Syria and processing migrants and refugees there. But more humane than expecting them to cross a sea or mountains.

Then you'll break apart quicker. I've discussed before how power centralization leads to fracturing of structures. Strength lies in unity, not control, and centralization is power-projection from the centre. Unity is the whole in agreement.

Still have Greece and Italy to deal with. And it's not about the 28. The financial issues are down to German intransigence. Germany has made a mint by the euro effectively suppressing their currency. Were it still using the DM, exports would be hit by higher export costs because of currency differences, yet it doesn't feel the need to thank the weaker nations by truly helping them financially. Just like with Africa, toss some pity money, expect a thank-you and continue fucking them over.

Not really. Lack of leadership and recognition that the EU has multispeed nations leads to the Visegrads.

Mistakes are never learned from. They are repeated. If you want longevity of the EU it must learn from success and failure, and to use those lessons to inform the future. Running through a field of rakes and complaining of getting hit in te face is no way to run something.

Immigration, per se, was never the issue, it was the rate and quality of it.

The rate meant that property and rental prices spiralled upwards, and there was increased pressure and costs on public services.

The quality meant that lower-skilled roles could be filled rather than alternatives explored, which led to the sclerotic levels of productivity despite record numbers of people in employment.

A perfect storm that UK governments tried to ignore for too long.

So I expect, eventually, an immigration compromise will form where skilled roles will be welcome, whilst there'll be pressure to either employ UK youth or automate away the less skilled roles.

And given the EU tax regimes, we'll have takers once things are sorted out. Europeans love working in the UK, mainly as we don't tax the shit out of them and they appreciate it.

I understand the argument I am just saying it was irrelevant. With a very real common threat (namely the invasion forces the Soviets had possed and ready to go which they constantly threatened to use) along with a very large American military commitment in place there simply was zero threat of war between western powers. Your pre-EU local steel and coal policies were just lipstick on a pig which ignored the real politik realities which ACTUALLY prevented war.

To say otherwise is just dishonest fuckwittery by the EU trying to take credit for other people's accomplishments but I guess that has always been the EU's M.O..

The other people aren't other people, but the same people; the EU is their accomplishment, and that includes non-EU partners in NATO and elsewhere. It's not an external force that kept the peace, but one of the main tools with which Europe held peace.

You live in a fantasy world. Read a little history about how groups deal with overwelming external threats. Hint: They unite and don't fight among themselves because they know to do so would be suicide. Western Europe was under a very real threat of Soviet invasion for the entire cold war ergo they were not going to fight amongst themselves due to the existential threat to their collective existence. Also, no, without the US Army there to deter the Soviets you wimps would have been lunch meat for the Soviet Army to snack on before they announced new communist governments for you.

Fact. Just like the EU never brought or maintained peace with anyone.

By forming unions, like the EU did.

Except, no, you fight threats of force with military deterrence. If only there was a military alliance which could have ACTUALLY maintained peace... Oh, wait, there WAS and it sure as fuck wasn't the EU which didn't even fucking exist at the time!

I get it. The EU is a dismal failure and everything it touches turns to shit but stop being twats which try to claim the accomplishments of far better and far more successful organizations. It is as unbecoming as it is laughable.

Maybe the EU could actually come up with some real accomplishments of its own and then it would no longer feel the need to lie and attempt to take credit from far more noble and accomplished organizations.

Seriously, stop. Your brain is leaving a bloody trail...

There was zero, absolutely zero, chance of western Europeans fighting each other while they faced being wiped out by the Soviets. Even with no EU, which didn't even fucking exist then, so just stop lying. The reason there was no WW3 in Europe was NATO. Period. End of story.

The nonexistent EU had nothing to do with that. It is a made up story lying fucktards tell themselves to push the nondemocratic economic failure of a political empire program called the EU. That is just factual reality even if you dislike hearing the truth.