Tag: Brexit

The Real Brexit Cliff Edge Is Not on March 29th – It’s July 1st

This is a superb article from @IanDunt, but its inevitable conclusion is not going to be popular. Better to be informed, I say. Must-read.https://t.co/6aCWXyqKgi

— Lindsay Bruce (@RogueCoder250) February 22, 2019

 

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2019/02/21/the-real-brexit-cliff-edge-is-not-on-march-29th-it-s-july-1s:

[…] The real cliff edge is on July 1st, the day before the inaugural plenary session of the newly-elected European parliament. That’s the dead zone. If you haven’t taken part in the upcoming European elections, there’s no way to extend the deadline any further. So something is becoming increasingly clear. If Labour really is committed to ruling out no-deal, if moderate Tory Cabinet ministers really mean it when they say they refuse to allow it to happen, they must support British participation. This is, by far, the most important aspect of the whole Brexit debate. And there is almost no mention of it at all. […]

You Thought It’s Avocado? Eat up Your Wasabi!

@MPGeorgeEustice shows what is driving the Brexit: To the British (mostly English) political "elite" the Brexit provides the means to exert tighter control over UK citizens without interference from Europe. These citizens will have to learn again to follow their own elite only.

— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) February 23, 2019

Ian, Eustine wrote his letter in a way which invites misunderstanding. However, to read it in a different way doesn't improve his letter. He uses eristic rhetoric patterns against a 2nd referendum. https://t.co/vdjgQMpOzn

— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) February 23, 2019

 

http://georgeeustice.blogspot.com/2019/01/which-way-now.html:

[…] The second thing we need to do is vanquish those who want to ignore the referendum result and force people to vote again until they learn to do what the political elites demand. There is no point at all having a second referendum if parliament lacks the integrity to honour the result of the first. A decision to ignore the 2016 referendum result would be deeply damaging to our country and must not be allowed. […]

  • 2nd Referendum: The point to have a second referendum is that such a referendum honours the will of intelligent and mature people (I assume that British voters are intelligent and mature) to adapt their decision to changes of the paradigms on which that decision was based. Eustine is dishonest when asking to “vanquish” those who want to “ignore the referendum result” and “force” people to vote again until they make a decision demanded by the “political elites”. That’s utter nonsense and knowingly distorts the intentions of those who ask for a 2nd referendum. It is quite unintelligent to thoughtlessly honour a 2016 referendum which was based on much less information than what is available in 2019. We need to vanquish those who want to ignore changed paradigms and unrealistic promises.
  • PCDA: Implying that a 2nd referendum would be lack of integrity shows lack of integrity on Eustine’s side. Eustine knows that good governance requires to Plan–Do–Check–Adjust decisions and their implementations. To do that e.g. by means of a 2nd referendum is more democracy, not less. One of changed paradigms justifying the application of PCDS to the 2016 decision could be explained in bold yellow letters on big red busses driven through the Kingdom: “A Brexit will lead to higher taxes required to rescue the NHS.”
  • Patronizing the People: Eustine’s “… until they [the people] learn to do what the political elites demand …” should help his constituency to easily understand what kind of lesson they will have to teach to patronizers like Eustine. To be fair, Eustine wanted to say that he is against repeating voting until voters “learn” to agree to what the political elite demands. However, Eustine’s rhetoric patterns are dishonestly eristic nevertheless (and boring, because they are being used ad nauseam by many other politicians too who are against a 2nd referendum), for it is Eustine who patronizes the voters by not letting them apply PDCA to their decision. He forces them to stick to their decision like bad parents who force their child to eat up the full wasabi serving which the poor kid chose assuming that it was avocado. Eustine is the patronizer, not those who want to offer a 2nd referendum to the people.

Intentionally Compromising Users’ Privacy

If there was any doubt remaining that Facebook is intentionally compromising its users' privacy, it can now be put to rest, with a new report from a British parliamentary committee: https://t.co/cLFRnOXgho pic.twitter.com/qoA8qpp0xb

— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) February 23, 2019

If there remained any doubt that Facebook’s business practices intentionally compromise users’ privacy and recklessly undermine democratic norms, it was put to rest on Monday, when the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee of the British House of Commons issued a hundred-and-eight-page report, incongruously titled “Disinformation and ‘fake news.’ ” In a drama that played out over a few days in November, the committee’s chair, Damian Collins, a Tory M.P., had outwitted Facebook’s legal team when he summoned an American app developer named Ted Kramer to Parliament. […]

Brexit Will Help the British Elite to Exert Even Better Control over Their People

The Brexit won't give control back to "the people". In contrary, it will make them more rulable by the "elite" they despise so much.

— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) February 20, 2019

Why? Because your flawed economic ideology led to the worst income disparity in Europe. You've persuaded a large number of UK employers that their future is better secured by moving to a different country. pic.twitter.com/rbvrSn9GoZ

— QuantumChoices #FBPE #ABTV (@tfoale) January 22, 2019

 more

GDPR Cookie Consent with Real Cookie Banner