Looks like Jacob Rees Mogg, who has been telling struggling people they might not feel economic benefits of brexit for 50 years, has trousered £7 million from his firm over the past two years whilst calling anyone who votes remain "the elite".pic.twitter.com/qa9YncCRWN
— James Felton (@JimMFelton) March 11, 2019
This coffin design is a bit too elitarian.
— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) March 8, 2019
Birds of a feather … pic.twitter.com/fJ3lIhdjzc
— Prof Tanja Bueltmann (@cliodiaspora) March 8, 2019
Munich, Circus Krone, 1981. pic.twitter.com/NwoIfyjQ55
— Aventura Obscura (@AventuraObscura) January 28, 2019
So we voted to ‘take back control’ we wanted more sovereignty but looks like USA aren’t going to allow that.
America would seek to take appropriate action should officials disapprove of any terms of a trade agreement that 🇬🇧 strikes with an economy like China. pic.twitter.com/DpT6wmJjnn
— Jacq Dodman #FBPE #peoplesvote #revokeArticle50 (@jacqdodman) March 2, 2019
Actually, the Brexit is a battle about *which* elite takes (back) control over the British people.
Same story in the USA: Within the money elite, Trump was a kind of a joke. He now takes revenge.
The "idling" commoners are the weapons in these battles.https://t.co/eDhYFaHglZ
— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) March 1, 2019
This is why Raab is a Brexiter: He needs to take back control from Europe completely in order to rule these British, the worst idlers in the world. Worse, these idlers really believe that "the people" will take back control.
— Goetz Kluge (@Bonnetmaker) February 26, 2019
"We've reached the point where there is no good conclusion to Brexit and Britain faces a choice: take one for the team or be willing participants in the fall of Europe. And no, you are not going to like this." – @J_amesp #Brexit #NoDealBrexithttps://t.co/TtY4OZv6Bs
— Byline (@Byline_Media) February 25, 2019
Putin’s project works well for Putin.
[…] Brexit is a disease and Britain is a contagion risk which could unpick the fabric of the whole of Europe and leave millions more people facing much worse than even no deal. […]
@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
[…] 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.
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