Brexit - the next steps

[Harrowby Hall]

There is a very interesting item in this month's The Psychologist (the magazine of the British Psychological Society). It comprises the answers to a number of questions to Brian Hughes, an Irish academic, related to his new book The Psychology of Brexit: From Psychodrama to Behavioural Science.. Professor Hughes considers that Brexit is an example of "mass panic, social groupthink and tribal division" and thus can be seen as a case study concerned with the way societies function.

He considers the the general election:

'If you were a betting man, informed by psychology, what would you say happens next?'

I discuss in the book how the impasse in parliament is similar to the Prisoner's Dilemma as discussed by game theorists. Neither side will work with the other
in order to reduce risk. From the point of view of game theory, it is no surprise  that the system has now crashed. The forthcoming general election is an effort to reboot the government at the ballot box. However, I am not sure that switching the UK off and back on again will fix the problem.

Such logjams result from poor reasoning, irreconcileable tensions, and toxic relationships. An election is unlikely to change these conditions. Everything we know about group polarisation tells us that competitive politics will only sharpen the divide.

[/size]

[ippy]

It was not a fair vote at all, politicians like Boris and the nasty Farage lied to people about the so called benefits of voting to leave the EU. I have spoken to a number of people who  hadn't a clue what they were actually voting for. One person told me they voted for Brexit because their neighbour had done so. 

I think it was a fair vote, politicians like Boris and Our Lord Farage are about the best we have at the moment supporting leave, I have spoken to a number of EU leavers who knew exactly what they were actually voting for.

One person told me they voted for Brexit because their neighbour had done so, (there'll always be a few like this and then again look at how many voted for remain 48% app).

Regards, ippy.

P S It just goes on L R, do you really think we're ever likely to agree on this one? I don't, anyway I wish you well.

[ippy]

There is a very interesting item in this month's The Psychologist (the magazine of the British Psychological Society). It comprises the answers to a number of questions to Brian Hughes, an Irish academic, related to his new book The Psychology of Brexit: From Psychodrama to Behavioural Science.. Professor Hughes considers that Brexit is an example of "mass panic, social groupthink and tribal division" and thus can be seen as a case study concerned with the way societies function.

He considers the the general election:

Always good to hear the opinions of others I'd refer to the General Election on the 12th as more of a referendum rather than a reboot and I'll guess it'd take a brave or foolhardy man to put all he's got on predicting the result of this one.

Regards, ippy.

[Nearly Sane]

Always good to hear the opinions of others I'd refer to the General Election on the 12th as more of a referendum rather than a reboot and I'll guess it'd take a brave or foolhardy man to put all he's got on predicting the result of this one.

Regards, ippy.

You can refer to it as that. You would be wrong.

[Nearly Sane]

'The Story of Mr Brexit'

This isn't that bad an article about Farage. I dislike him intensely but I think the argument that he is  "the most influential politician of the modern era" is a strong one. In British terms I think in my lifetime it's him, Thatcher, Blair, and Salmond who are the stand-outs.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50565543

[Roses]

'The Story of Mr Brexit'

This isn't that bad an article about Farage. I dislike him intensely but I think the argument that he is  "the most influential politician of the modern era" is a strong one. In British terms I think in my lifetime it's him, Thatcher, Blair, and Salmond who are the stand-outs.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50565543

I saw that article earlier on today. That bloke makes my skin crawl, but he does have an impact on those who see it his way. 

[ippy]

You remainers certainly can't resist giving the BBC Guardian, Guardian BBC links.

ippy

[Nearly Sane]

You remainers certainly can't resist giving the BBC Guardian, Guardian BBC links.

ippy

Aw! An ad hominem fallacy, how cute.

[Nearly Sane]

As ever Fintan O'Toole on form

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/15/boris-johnson-lying-ireland-withdrawal-agreement-brexit-belfast-dublin?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

[jeremyp]

Apologies about the 'floo' L R, it slipped me for the moment however it does illustrate our opposing view about brexit, exactly, it's sad you can't see it and you're still a remainer.

We just need to leave as soon as pos and stop shouting down megaphones at each other after all whatever you may think I think it was a fair vote I never thought we'd ever have the luck to get a referendum and I don't/can't know about yourself but I knew as much as I needed to know many years before I put X in the appropriate box.

Regards, ippy.

Doesn't matter if it was a fair vote or not. The result is a disaster for the UK and many of the people who live here.

[jeremyp]

I think it was a fair vote, politicians like Boris and Our Lord Farage are about the best we have at the moment supporting leave

That's a bit of an indictment of the Leave campaign.

I have spoken to a number of EU leavers who knew exactly what they were actually voting for.

How would they know?

One person told me they voted for Brexit because their neighbour had done so

And you still think it was a rational decision?

It just goes on L R, do you really think we're ever likely to agree on this one?

We're never going to agree if you aren't prepared to tell us why we'll be materially better off outside the EU.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Ippy

Perhaps you would like to explain what "taking back control of our country/ borders" means to you in order for me to understand the rational logic of your position that we needed to Brexit in order to control our borders.

Bearing in mind that UK has border controls and had border controls before the 2016 referendum and further, that per the European Council meeting (18 and 19 February 2016), Cameron had negotiated  with the EU that we can prevent people from entering who are likely to [my emphasis] pose a serious threat even in the absence of previous criminal convictions:

"Host Member States may also take the necessary restrictive measures to protect themselves against individuals whose personal conduct is likely to represent a genuine and serious threat to public
policy or security. In determining whether the conduct of an individual poses a present threat to
public policy or security, Member States may take into account past conduct of the individual
concerned and the threat may not always need to be imminent. Even in the absence of a previous
criminal conviction, Member States may act on preventative grounds, so long as they are specific to
the individual concerned."

http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-1-2016-INIT/en/pdf#page=22

[ippy]

Ippy

Perhaps you would like to explain what "taking back control of our country/ borders" means to you in order for me to understand the rational logic of your position that we needed to Brexit in order to control our borders.

Bearing in mind that UK has border controls and had border controls before the 2016 referendum and further, that per the European Council meeting (18 and 19 February 2016), Cameron had negotiated  with the EU that we can prevent people from entering who are likely to [my emphasis] pose a serious threat even in the absence of previous criminal convictions:

"Host Member States may also take the necessary restrictive measures to protect themselves against individuals whose personal conduct is likely to represent a genuine and serious threat to public
policy or security. In determining whether the conduct of an individual poses a present threat to
public policy or security, Member States may take into account past conduct of the individual
concerned and the threat may not always need to be imminent. Even in the absence of a previous
criminal conviction, Member States may act on preventative grounds, so long as they are specific to
the individual concerned."

http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-1-2016-INIT/en/pdf#page=22

I have said all I want to say about the EU previously mainly on this thread, it can't be helped if you don't like it or its not enough; that's it for me. 

Regards to all, ippy.

[SteveH]

I have said all I want to say about the EU previously mainly on this thread, it can't be helped if you don't like it or its not enough; that's it for me. 

Regards to all, ippy.

This is the standard crap we get from you, whenever you can't answer a question about Brexit, but won't admit you're wrong.

[Robbie]

Ippy is probably one of the people who will not be adversely affected by Brexit, or not much.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Ippy certainly isn't a person who shows any evidence of thinking for himself about Brexit. My deepest commiserations to you Ippy for your indoctrination.

[jeremyp]

Ippy is probably one of the people who will not be adversely affected by Brexit, or not much.

I was talking to an expert in population demographics the other day. He was saying that we need immigration because the population is ageing and we need more economically active people to support the retired people.

This is why, despite government posturing (of all political stripes), immigration remains quite high. Governments simply don't want to reduce it because it could end catastrophically.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I have said all I want to say about the EU previously mainly on this thread, it can't be helped if you don't like it or its not enough; that's it for me. 

Regards to all, ippy.

It's not that I don't like what you say - I am indifferent. I am neither an ardent remainer nor an ardent leaver as I am financially cushioned whatever the outcome. I live in London so am happy with the cultural diversity I encounter - it would be boring for me to only encounter one nationality or culture. But I also enjoy my holidays in the less diverse green and pleasant lands of England. 

I am just seeking to understand "the rational logic of your position ".

I understand if you do not want to repeat yourself. In which case please just let me know the post numbers of where you have laid out the rational logic of your position - e.g for controlling our borders - and I will read it for myself.

Kindest of regards
G

[jakswan]

So looks like its happening and not a soft Brexit.

The remainers gambled the customs union for remain and some political point scoring. Worth it?

[Nearly Sane]

So looks like its happening and not a soft Brexit.

The remainers gambled the customs union for remain and some political point scoring. Worth it?

All of them?

[jakswan]

All of them?

I meant remainer MP's, although it could have wider context.

e.g. Stephen Kinnock was advocating Customs Union had this been Labour's position they would have won.

[Nearly Sane]

I meant remainer MP's, although it could have wider context.

e.g. Stephen Kinnock was advocating Customs Union had this been Labour's position they would have won.

So not all remainer MPs then. And given that 'something like a customs union' was Labour policy, since the Customs Union' isn't something that is within the voting powers of the UK parliament, it's not clear if it would have any meaning were it to have passed. I think it's a mistake to attribute generalised motives here.

[ippy]

It's not that I don't like what you say - I am indifferent. I am neither an ardent remainer nor an ardent leaver as I am financially cushioned whatever the outcome. I live in London so am happy with the cultural diversity I encounter - it would be boring for me to only encounter one nationality or culture. But I also enjoy my holidays in the less diverse green and pleasant lands of England. 

I am just seeking to understand "the rational logic of your position ".

I understand if you do not want to repeat yourself. In which case please just let me know the post numbers of where you have laid out the rational logic of your position - e.g for controlling our borders - and I will read it for myself.

Kindest of regards
G

I will be be, maybe, disappointing those of you that haven't read my previous posts or think I've not involved myself with your discourse enough but as I have said in my previous post:  'I have said all I want to say about the EU previously mainly on this thread, it can't be helped if you don't like it or its not enough; that's it for me'.

Please feel free to make whatever you want to make of my wish to leave the EU.

Regards to all and a merry Newton's day, regards, ippy.   

[jeremyp]

I meant remainer MP's, although it could have wider context.

e.g. Stephen Kinnock was advocating Customs Union had this been Labour's position they would have won.

If it had been Labour's position to support Remain in 2016, including their leader, probably the referendum would have gone the other way and the entire mess of the last three years - and next 40 probably - would not have happened.

[jakswan]

So not all remainer MPs then.

That was for example, I'll define terms; remainers - those that only wanted to remain and any debate/discussion was met with some of the following:-

a) This will be terrible so we should remain
b) It won't happen so we should remain
c) Ad hominem so we should remain
d) Political point score so we should remain.

And given that 'something like a customs union' was Labour policy, since the Customs Union' isn't something that is within the voting powers of the UK parliament, it's not clear if it would have any meaning were it to have passed.

Labour policy changed a lot!  I'm sure they voted against at some point, then they went for customs agreement and finally was the customs union. The timing of those changes seemed opportunistic.

I think it's a mistake to attribute generalised motives here.

I was more commenting on strategy.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/labour-corbyn-defeat-support-may-brexit-deal-a9246871.html
Quote from article:-
Labour MPs cannot say they didn’t know. It was pointed out at the time that May’s withdrawal agreement was what the Labour leadership said it wanted: it was in every respect what they said a Labour government would have negotiated. The only differences between Jeremy Corbyn and May were about the non-binding political declaration setting out the government’s aspirations for the long-term trade deal. 

By using those manufactured differences as an excuse to vote against May’s deal, Labour MPs more or less ensured that Boris Johnson would become prime minister and thus paved the way for him to take Britain out of the EU on his terms.