5 ms·

> because immigration is "bad". The malicious simplification of argument. Immigration will continue after Brexit, just like it does today for Canadians or Tha

> because immigration is "bad". The malicious simplification of argument. Immigration will continue after Brexit, just like it does today for Canadians or Thais or Ukrainians or whomever non-EU moving is to the UK. No-one pretends otherwise except sneering anti-Brexiters. Look, we're going into this together. It's time to stop being dickish and work out what we're going to do in the new reality whether we like it or not. Ridiculing half the population as uneducated xenophobes isn't going to achieve anything.

SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
> It's time to stop being dickish > sneering anti-Brexiters. ...uh-huh
Ntrails 8y ago
Half the reason we are in this mess is because politicians are too stupid to properly discuss this without resorting to straw men and personal attacks. Free movement is not without consequence, address it honestly, attempt to solve real issues and maybe people come around.
- chosenbreed37 8y ago
  Well reasoned argument.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  I don't think politicians are too stupid to discuss without straw men, it's just that straw men work with the general public, and get them support.
- NotAnEconomist 8y ago
  > Free movement is not without consequence, address it honestly, attempt to solve real issues and maybe people come around. The problem is that unrestricted movement disrupts culture and lowers a lot of social statistics all at once - in a way that can be really disruptive to the host culture. Similarly, no matter how you explain it, the deal in practice is "We'll take a lot of money from the middle class and give it to the globally impoverished." Understandably, the people who are just being taken from don't seem to like that deal very much; and cultures which are rapidly disrupted by low-class migrants don't seem to do well. Never mind that "free movement" is usually just political cover for people looking to import more workers after their leadership and the society they built is so toxic, it's killing the indigenous population. Naturally, the people being fed into the meat grinder and replaced aren't particularly fond of paying for their replacements to be imported. Talking about "free movement" in that context has about the same tone as "right sizing" your business, while off-shoring.
  - arethuza 8y ago
    But Brexit probably won't reduce immigration - it might well increase total numbers. All that will change is where people are coming from.
    - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
      I didn't mean to imply Brexit was a solution to anything - just that people can understand what the deal with free movement is, but be against it for perfectly rational reasons.
  - kartan 8y ago
    > The problem is that unrestricted movement disrupts culture and lowers a lot of social statistics all at once - in a way that can be really disruptive to the host culture. So, free movement inside the UK should be restricted? The UK should be divided by countries and block free movement? And what happens if two cities have different cultures? I'm different from my neighbors and I feel I have more in common with people from other countries, how to done that? My country is Christian, but I'm an atheist. I am disruptiny the country culture. I'd that bad? Global communications and exchange of people and ideas has brought riches to the world that were impossible to think of one century ago. Tribalism has a romantic appealing, but it's based in the falacy of the Noble Savage. You are right that there is people that will abuse the system. But, that is true for any system. So, is better to try to improve it instead of throwing it away without an alternative. People should be concerned about losing their jobs, losing wealth, etc. And look for the causes instead of using a straw man.
simias 8y ago
Fear mongering around immigration was definitely one of the top "arguments" of the brexit proponents during the referendum campaign. So clearly it's not something made up by "sneering anti-Brexiters".
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
otikik 8y ago
> It's time to stop being dickish and work out what we're going to do in the new reality whether we like it or not. Ridiculing half the population as uneducated xenophobes isn't going to achieve anything. In the interest of stopping being dickish, you could start by admitting that brexiters are not, in fact, "half of the population". Around 1/4 of the population voted for brexit on the Referendum [1]. Since then, it's likely that some amongst those have changed their opinion, now that more information about how (and how not) the process would (or will not) take place. > Look, we're going into this together. I, as a non-UK European, agree on that. UK should have a second referendum, for its shake as well as Europe's. [1] https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-charts-7399226 https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-pe...
- mdw 8y ago
  Otikik, as a Brit who voted remain, I’ll be proud to vote exit EU if we ever get faced with a ghastly anti-democratic second referendum.
  - otikik 8y ago
    The fact that new information is available now that when the Referendum took place is incontestable. In the light of this, not voting again is the anti-democratic option, from where I stand.
altairiumblue 8y ago
> work out what we're going to do in the new reality whether we like it or not. The reality in question is being denied, ignored or lied about. > Ridiculing half the population as uneducated xenophobes isn't going to achieve anything. Agreed - ridiculing won't do anything. But if half of the population are uneducated xenophobes, these problems will persist with/without/before/after leaving the EU. And this shouldn't be ignored.

SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago

> It's time to stop being dickish > sneering anti-Brexiters. ...uh-huh

Ntrails 8y ago

Half the reason we are in this mess is because politicians are too stupid to properly discuss this without resorting to straw men and personal attacks. Free movement is not without consequence, address it honestly, attempt to solve real issues and maybe people come around.

chosenbreed37 8y ago
Well reasoned argument.
StavrosK 8y ago
I don't think politicians are too stupid to discuss without straw men, it's just that straw men work with the general public, and get them support.
NotAnEconomist 8y ago
> Free movement is not without consequence, address it honestly, attempt to solve real issues and maybe people come around. The problem is that unrestricted movement disrupts culture and lowers a lot of social statistics all at once - in a way that can be really disruptive to the host culture. Similarly, no matter how you explain it, the deal in practice is "We'll take a lot of money from the middle class and give it to the globally impoverished." Understandably, the people who are just being taken from don't seem to like that deal very much; and cultures which are rapidly disrupted by low-class migrants don't seem to do well. Never mind that "free movement" is usually just political cover for people looking to import more workers after their leadership and the society they built is so toxic, it's killing the indigenous population. Naturally, the people being fed into the meat grinder and replaced aren't particularly fond of paying for their replacements to be imported. Talking about "free movement" in that context has about the same tone as "right sizing" your business, while off-shoring.
- arethuza 8y ago
  But Brexit probably won't reduce immigration - it might well increase total numbers. All that will change is where people are coming from.
  - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
    I didn't mean to imply Brexit was a solution to anything - just that people can understand what the deal with free movement is, but be against it for perfectly rational reasons.
- kartan 8y ago
  > The problem is that unrestricted movement disrupts culture and lowers a lot of social statistics all at once - in a way that can be really disruptive to the host culture. So, free movement inside the UK should be restricted? The UK should be divided by countries and block free movement? And what happens if two cities have different cultures? I'm different from my neighbors and I feel I have more in common with people from other countries, how to done that? My country is Christian, but I'm an atheist. I am disruptiny the country culture. I'd that bad? Global communications and exchange of people and ideas has brought riches to the world that were impossible to think of one century ago. Tribalism has a romantic appealing, but it's based in the falacy of the Noble Savage. You are right that there is people that will abuse the system. But, that is true for any system. So, is better to try to improve it instead of throwing it away without an alternative. People should be concerned about losing their jobs, losing wealth, etc. And look for the causes instead of using a straw man.

simias 8y ago

Fear mongering around immigration was definitely one of the top "arguments" of the brexit proponents during the referendum campaign. So clearly it's not something made up by "sneering anti-Brexiters".

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

otikik 8y ago

> It's time to stop being dickish and work out what we're going to do in the new reality whether we like it or not. Ridiculing half the population as uneducated xenophobes isn't going to achieve anything. In the interest of stopping being dickish, you could start by admitting that brexiters are not, in fact, "half of the population". Around 1/4 of the population voted for brexit on the Referendum [1]. Since then, it's likely that some amongst those have changed their opinion, now that more information about how (and how not) the process would (or will not) take place. > Look, we're going into this together. I, as a non-UK European, agree on that. UK should have a second referendum, for its shake as well as Europe's. [1] https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-per-cent-voter-turnout-electoral-register-charts-7399226 https://www.indy100.com/article/brexit-leave-remain-52-48-pe...

mdw 8y ago
Otikik, as a Brit who voted remain, I’ll be proud to vote exit EU if we ever get faced with a ghastly anti-democratic second referendum.
- otikik 8y ago
  The fact that new information is available now that when the Referendum took place is incontestable. In the light of this, not voting again is the anti-democratic option, from where I stand.

altairiumblue 8y ago

> work out what we're going to do in the new reality whether we like it or not. The reality in question is being denied, ignored or lied about. > Ridiculing half the population as uneducated xenophobes isn't going to achieve anything. Agreed - ridiculing won't do anything. But if half of the population are uneducated xenophobes, these problems will persist with/without/before/after leaving the EU. And this shouldn't be ignored.