6 ms·

Actually, seems like one of the reasons for Brexit was ability to do even more surveillance and other totalitarian practices without EU interfering. Not surpris

by 988747 4y ago

Actually, seems like one of the reasons for Brexit was ability to do even more surveillance and other totalitarian practices without EU interfering. Not surprising given the fact that UK is one of the Five Eyes.

jiriknesl 4y ago
Do you have proof for such a claim?
- ben_w 4y ago
  "Seems like" doesn't need proof, it is clearly opinion. "the fact that UK is one of the Five Eyes" is attested to on the NSA's own domain: https://www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-Transparency-Initiatives/Historical-Releases/UKUSA/ https://www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-... …although the "and that's bad" part of Five Eyes is tied to what Snowden released.
  - jiriknesl 4y ago
    The thing is. Brexit vote was a referendum, not a decision of "deep state" or whatever one might call it. And if you remember, there were two main topics surrounding Leave campaigns: 1. We pay to the EU more than we get - which was absolutely correct btw. 2. Anti-immigration sentiments - which is sad if that's a synonym for racism. At the same time, the UK has changed extremely in the past 7 decades. From a white Christian country with very distinctive culture became an extremely multicultural country with places where "natives" are a minority. I am pro-immigration and pro-multiculturalism, but I can understand why some people have an issue with such a quick change. I know OP is stating that as an opinion, but I don't think it is based on a knowledge of the UK reality and there would be very little evidence supporting it.
    - ben_w 4y ago
      Don't mistake the purpose of the voters themselves for the purpose of the campaign for their votes, especially not in the eyes of others. The voters got targeted messaging for what they were most likely to believe, but taken as an aggregate the campaigns were contradictory. (This also means that most people who say they aren't getting the Brexit they voted for are probably sincere and justified in that, even though people like me did tell them this at the time). > We pay to the EU more than we get - which was absolutely correct btw. As with recent claims of progress in nuclear fusion, it depends on where you draw the boundary of the system. The EU, being a free trade agreement with the unusual extra layer of some democratic self-updating that most FTAs don't bother with, also made it easier to do business and thus create wealth. I know this isn't important to your point, but I do find it rather bizarre that the EU, which is mostly white and Christian, got the flack from people who say they want a white Christian country. That said, I saw such nonsense at the time, racists blaming the EU for too many Africans and Middle Easterners. I would add a third pillar of the Brexit campaign to your two: "take back control", from all the people who didn't like the EU limiting what the UK could do. This included the Human Rights Act and ECHR even though that's technically not the EU. That last bit connects to the right to privacy.
      - jiriknesl 4y ago
        Do you assume politicians pushing Leave were doing so to be able to limit human rights? People like Daniel Hannan or Nigel Farage would probably oppose that. One of founders of Vote Leave Matthew Elliott founded Big Brother Watch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_Watch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_Watch I think in this one, you aren't right. Prominent Vote Leave politicians are against state surveillance. > The EU, being a free trade agreement with the unusual extra layer of some democratic I think this shift has happened during M.Thatcher. Initially she was for the common market, but later she has learned about the political agenda that wasn't often in the interest of the UK. Honestly, it has started even before, I believe Enoch Powell will have older critical speeches on the same topic. It's nothing new in the British politics. Which confirms: > I would add a third pillar of the Brexit campaign to your two: "take back control" Yes, absolutely. But not for the reason you say. Taking back control might really be based on the fact that many EU countries are way more left-leaning, financially irresponsible, poorer, etc. Taking back control equals decreasing influence of such countries on the reality of ordinary British citizen. But this is something that really goes back for many decades. It isn't something that would be suddenly used by surveillance-favouring people. > EU, which is mostly white and Christian, got the flack from people who say they want a white Christian country. People opposing such a quick change (out of racism, ignorance of benefits of immigration or pure conservatism) might see the EU as pro-immigration and pro-multiculturalism (which it openly is for a while now already). And again, leaving the EU might give people more powers to stop this from happening. The fact that it is hurting the UK a lot now is a different topic.

by 988747 4y ago

jiriknesl 4y ago

Do you have proof for such a claim?

ben_w 4y ago
"Seems like" doesn't need proof, it is clearly opinion. "the fact that UK is one of the Five Eyes" is attested to on the NSA's own domain: https://www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-Transparency-Initiatives/Historical-Releases/UKUSA/ https://www.nsa.gov/Helpful-Links/NSA-FOIA/Declassification-... …although the "and that's bad" part of Five Eyes is tied to what Snowden released.
- jiriknesl 4y ago
  The thing is. Brexit vote was a referendum, not a decision of "deep state" or whatever one might call it. And if you remember, there were two main topics surrounding Leave campaigns: 1. We pay to the EU more than we get - which was absolutely correct btw. 2. Anti-immigration sentiments - which is sad if that's a synonym for racism. At the same time, the UK has changed extremely in the past 7 decades. From a white Christian country with very distinctive culture became an extremely multicultural country with places where "natives" are a minority. I am pro-immigration and pro-multiculturalism, but I can understand why some people have an issue with such a quick change. I know OP is stating that as an opinion, but I don't think it is based on a knowledge of the UK reality and there would be very little evidence supporting it.
  - ben_w 4y ago
    Don't mistake the purpose of the voters themselves for the purpose of the campaign for their votes, especially not in the eyes of others. The voters got targeted messaging for what they were most likely to believe, but taken as an aggregate the campaigns were contradictory. (This also means that most people who say they aren't getting the Brexit they voted for are probably sincere and justified in that, even though people like me did tell them this at the time). > We pay to the EU more than we get - which was absolutely correct btw. As with recent claims of progress in nuclear fusion, it depends on where you draw the boundary of the system. The EU, being a free trade agreement with the unusual extra layer of some democratic self-updating that most FTAs don't bother with, also made it easier to do business and thus create wealth. I know this isn't important to your point, but I do find it rather bizarre that the EU, which is mostly white and Christian, got the flack from people who say they want a white Christian country. That said, I saw such nonsense at the time, racists blaming the EU for too many Africans and Middle Easterners. I would add a third pillar of the Brexit campaign to your two: "take back control", from all the people who didn't like the EU limiting what the UK could do. This included the Human Rights Act and ECHR even though that's technically not the EU. That last bit connects to the right to privacy.
    - jiriknesl 4y ago
      Do you assume politicians pushing Leave were doing so to be able to limit human rights? People like Daniel Hannan or Nigel Farage would probably oppose that. One of founders of Vote Leave Matthew Elliott founded Big Brother Watch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_Watch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Brother_Watch I think in this one, you aren't right. Prominent Vote Leave politicians are against state surveillance. > The EU, being a free trade agreement with the unusual extra layer of some democratic I think this shift has happened during M.Thatcher. Initially she was for the common market, but later she has learned about the political agenda that wasn't often in the interest of the UK. Honestly, it has started even before, I believe Enoch Powell will have older critical speeches on the same topic. It's nothing new in the British politics. Which confirms: > I would add a third pillar of the Brexit campaign to your two: "take back control" Yes, absolutely. But not for the reason you say. Taking back control might really be based on the fact that many EU countries are way more left-leaning, financially irresponsible, poorer, etc. Taking back control equals decreasing influence of such countries on the reality of ordinary British citizen. But this is something that really goes back for many decades. It isn't something that would be suddenly used by surveillance-favouring people. > EU, which is mostly white and Christian, got the flack from people who say they want a white Christian country. People opposing such a quick change (out of racism, ignorance of benefits of immigration or pure conservatism) might see the EU as pro-immigration and pro-multiculturalism (which it openly is for a while now already). And again, leaving the EU might give people more powers to stop this from happening. The fact that it is hurting the UK a lot now is a different topic.