posted June 27, 2016 11:57 PM            

However, I'd like to point out to those who are unity-inclined, believe in cooperation, and saw the EU favorably, that this matter is more complicated than simply which side the xenophobes are on. Yes, some people may lose their jobs in other countries, but if all we do is see xenophobes lining up on one side and go to the other, we are simply engaging in reactionism. Economics - and this was an economic decision because the EU is an economic union - is very complicated when you get many nations with many particular conditions and interests involved.

There are well-considered opinions by serious economists like Steve Keen who see the result of this referendum positively as a rejection of neo-classical economics. He said before the referendum:

quote:

---

“I see the EU club as a force for European division and breakdown, despite its motto to the contrary. The EU, as I commented in my brief note for Kingston University, is a politically undemocratic and economically dysfunctional club whose rules and procedures have caused serious economic decline in Europe, and are feeding the racist and separatist forces that are driving Europe apart.”

---

Keen argues there is no empirical support for neo-classical economics (upon which the EU is based) in over 200 years of our experience of it. He is the author of Debunking Economics. "Keen presents a wide variety of critiques on neoclassical economic theory, and argues that they show neoclassical assumptions are fundamentally flawed." (wikipedia)

Sometimes, you have to go away from an ill-formed alliance to make way for a better one, labels aside.

http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/the-left-should-ce lebrate-brexit-the-uk-just-kicked-neoliberalism-in-the-nuts/

Part of the reality is that when you centralize you create fewer points of decision making to make it easier for corporate and banking interests to lobby and corrupt them. You essentially facilitate corruption unless you've also built in mechanisms to counter it. This is very difficult to achieve when there are language barriers to transparency.

The unity we need must be built at a local level, not at the far-reaching level of national or multi-national centralization. People must first be empowered locally for anything further reaching to be functional. We can't achieve this if we are sitting around waiting for the person's we voted for to do it all for us, then indulging in the luxury of complaining when they don't.

We need functioning democracy in our communities, and cooperative ownership of our workplaces and homes. The old model of ownership created only so much stability and prosperity and was never intended to empower people broadly.

In the UK Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have supported policies like this: Labour backs employees' right to own shares in their workplace

Some hope:

quote:

---

"We live in the beginning phase of a global revolution which will turn societal conditions upside down. We cannot stop this transformation, but we can influence where it will go. Will the disintegration of the globalized systems lead to fascist violence and molecular civil wars as some fear or will it lead to a process of planetary renewal and liberation?"
Post-Brexit: It's Time to Imagine a New European Community

---

Remember, before the UN there was the failed League of Nations.

posted June 30, 2016 04:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by florence:
i voted for remain and am left leaning. This is where the referendum was interesting ...

basically, as the conservatives came into govt there was anger about immigration, fuelled very much by the recession - ukip and the Conservative party linking the two to stir up anger.

Once the conservatives were in government they used the recession, imo, to impose heavy cuts to the state which served their agenda. This was a terrible decision leading to a double-dip recession. It basically recovered at the same pace as a recession with no intervention.

Ukips animosity towards immigration was in the conservative party's favour as it created this link between austerity and immigration when in fact austerity only hit the poor and the conservatives wanted to dismantle the nhs so they could privatise, many having affiliations with private healthcare providers.

At the last election, Cameron, having ridden this animosity, for his own benefit offered up a referendum to secure a further govt and then back pedalled. This govt has butchered the economy from the working class and state outwards and 'solid' industries like construction are on their knees as a result. It's not a good business decision to opt out when there's this shell of an economy. I don't even think the extent will be apparent for some time (the debt apparently invoking austerity has increased too.)

This is why the Scottish (labour, left-wing, anti-capitalism etc) voted to remain

The opt out is not based on anti-cronyism although it will possibly superficialyl affect it - or if there's an element of that its a mistake because the people will suffer before they do. The opt out is based on poverty .. (And not just on the micro level but of industry) .. Which has been aligned, falsely with immigration.

UKIP who have pushed for the opt out portray being for the people but are in fact bank-rolled by the rich. Not only would they not feed money into the nhs, they want to privatise it, for their benefit. They are also racist, IMO.

As for Cameron, he will be fine - probably get a city job with a million pound check

Tl;dr a lot of scapegoating

---

posted October 04, 2019 04:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pire:
baked beans is a representation of the culinary excellency of Britain...

And/or of their self-mockery

---

I you, and I miss you around here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elysia:
Well then why do you want me to put it back up?

Coz "not complimentary to the Brits" is absolutely not how I meant it. I'm very attached to Britain myself, have studied in British schools too. It hurts that someone should have that interpretation. I know it's open to interpretation, but I'd rather not have people comment on it thinking that's all there is to my opinion on the country itself.
That's reductio ad abdsurdum.

It wasn't made by me. I couldn't even begin to represent all that Britain is in one symbol. Do those baked beans show the glory of the vast untouched moors? The damp freshness of a London morning? The beauty of the buildings against an overcast skyline? The richness of their literature? All their many many wonderful football teams and hundreds of other contributions to the world?
No. And they're not even meant to.

Nothing can hope to capture the essence of something or someone in its entirety. Would not want to encourage such literal takes on what I put up.

That pic is not in the literal sense how I feel, and I wouldn't want people to think that it is. So I'd rather not put it back up.

---

Elysia would never have offended anyone.
Apparently, the offending picture was a can of baked beans, representing the citizens without money. I can confirm that beans on toast or potatoes, was something that we ate, and still do. I bought some baked beans recently, just for that. Ooh, eggs, beans and chips, too.

posted October 08, 2019 08:47 PM            

Everyone else was against it, and are as upset as a lot of us are over here, when it comes to Trump. When some (unknown to me, in the news) mentioned that they didn't really know what Brexit was/what would happen, I was visiting mum in the hospital, and joked that we could no longer get away with being thought to be intelligent, based on our accent alone.