4 ms·

Brexit divided and continues to cause paralysis. Soft, hard, or no-deal? Simplistic binary vote specified no mechanism, destination, or future relationship. Lea

Brexit divided and continues to cause paralysis. Soft, hard, or no-deal? Simplistic binary vote specified no mechanism, destination, or future relationship. Leave and remain have completely incompatible visions for post-Brexit Britain. Along with (IMHO) a polycrisis of far-right immigration agitation, post-COVID stagnation, high energy costs, NHS/social care strain, housing/planning hell, lack of infrastructure investment. We're not in a great place and, to your point, there is no clear way out.

mytailorisrich 2mo ago
> a polycrisis of far-right immigration agitation I think an important issue in the UK political landscape and public is the polarisation that makes people label immigration a "far-right agitation". Immigration is a serious and key issue, which impacts everything else, too. As long as the left of centre denies that it is an issue at all (because only "far right" people have a problem with it, apparently) Nigel Farage and the like will only keep increasing their share of the vote. The other aspect of Reform UK's rise is that the Conservatives only paid lip service to the issue so lost the support of many on the right and were destroyed at the last general election (still very visible in the polls). Perhaps this, like Brexit before, also highlights another issue in the UK/England, which is that London tends to live in its own bubble.
- TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago
  Xenophobia is a tool of demagogues, not a rational policy. So while it's an issue, it's not even in the top ten of of the UK's most important practical issues. And the racism it generates - including Brexit, and currently the collapse of income from foreign students, which was a huge earner for the university sector - does huge and lasting harm. It's a political shiny penny used for distraction, not a realistic solution to anything. And the people who make careers out of promoting it are provably cynical, corrupt, incompetent, and disinterested in solving real problems.
  - dash2 2mo ago
    The problem with this argument is that for essentially my entire lifetime, the UK population has wanted less migration. And what they have got instead is gross migration running at 1 million per year. If they are just fundamentally wrong on this and have been for 50 years, it seems like democracy is a bad idea. Alternatively, if you feel you have to accept democracy, then maybe it would be good to give people what they consistently say they want on this issue.
    - pamcake 2mo ago
      No we haven't.
    - gopher_space 2mo ago
      You're tied up in centuries of empire-building consequences and think "no brown people please" is a legitimate point of view?
      - cindyllm 2mo ago
        [dead]
      - dash2 2mo ago
        I think one of the most basic features of any "cooperative venture for mutual advantage" (as Rawls called the state) is who's going to be in the club. If that shouldn't be under democratic control, what should be? Also, I don't know why you think opposition to migration is driven by anti-brown-people racism. That opposition grew quite a lot when migration was coming mostly from Eastern Europe. I'd expect concerns over jobs, housing, public services etc. to be more important - I'm not claiming that those are correct, though I don't think they are illegitimate. Lastly, I am not sure why the empire is relevant. Is the story that because Britain had an empire, it's morally obligated to accept immigration? That could be true for e.g. Hong Kong or Ugandan Indians, but I'm not sure it need be true for all time and everywhere.
    - louthy 2mo ago
      > And what they have got instead is gross migration running at 1 million per year. LEGAL migration of 1 million per year. For one year only during Boris Johnson's term. Mostly it's in the 100,000s. Most migration is legal. People crossing the channel in boats is minuscule in comparison (tens of thousands). And, whilst people crossing the channel in small boats is certainly a problem (for their lives, if nothing else), it is not something that should be taking up so much political air. It's a side issue in the big scheme of things. Governments should certainly have more strategic plans for dealing with the legal migrants, like infrastructure building, and if they're unable to deliver the infrastructure, limit the legal migration. But the rest of it is often driven by political opportunists and bigots.
- JoshTriplett 2mo ago
  > Immigration is a serious and key issue, which impacts everything else, too. No, other things are serious and key issues, and immigration is the scapegoat that gives people someone to blame for their problems, distracting from actual solutions that don't fit in a one-sentence slogan the way the non-solution "kick out all the Xes" does. This has been an electoral tactic of right-wing populists for a long, long time.
  - karmakurtisaani 2mo ago
    It's just amazing how simple people can be when things like economic inequality, lack of affordable healthcare and housing, climate change, social security, public services etc. can all be labeled as leftist (and thus bad) issues, and focus turned just to immigration (which itself is also a complex topic). "I'd vote for the left, but they do nothing about the brown people." I wish these people just stayed at home on the voting day.
- sapphicsnail 2mo ago
  Labour pivoted way to the right on immigration and it didn't get them any more votes. There's nothing they can do to get that part of the electorate and it's a waste of time to try to cater to them.
  - mytailorisrich 2mo ago
    Hmm, their manifesto said "A fair and properly managed immigration system"... That's the absolute minimum lip service and a platitude, not any sort of pivot, which they cannot do considering the various power groups within the party. Since then it's really only foreign students who have had issues, so the group that probably makes the least sense to 'hit' (although there was abuse of the system that needed to be addressed)but the easiest politically, again because it's the least resistance path within party and party supports while allowing to say that they are acting.
philipallstar 2mo ago
[flagged]
- jasoncartwright 2mo ago
  Instant tribal labelling - a great example of my point. Nicely done. I'm off to do some property damage, incite racial hatred and predict civil war to live up to my new moniker :)
  - philipallstar 2mo ago
    You already made your own point, if your point was just "people call things left or right": > far-right immigration agitation
ben_w 2mo ago
> Leave and remain have completely incompatible visions for post-Brexit Britain. This would have been less of a problem if Leave had itself been a single position, rather than as it turned out to be several different positions that all started off in the same vague direction but pulled apart almost immediately, with those involved all insisting the rest of them "weren't proper Brexit" or were "secret Remainers", ignoring all the times Temainers said "What? Them? They aren't Remainers!" unless said Remainers pointed out this division at which point all these supposed "secret Remainers" who wanted something that wasn't "proper Brexit" suddenly were totes Leavers what are you talking about. But yeah, polycrisis, and it's not just the UK, but the UK seems to have it worse than most because Brexit added to it.
okeuro49 2mo ago
There is no "far right" in the UK -- it's a label that is used to smear people to excuse state failure.
- louthy 2mo ago
  * Right - Conservatives * Hard right - Reform * Far right - Restore Restore are a far right party. Luckily they get about the same number of votes as the old far right parties, like the BNP.
  - okeuro49 2mo ago
    Don't be silly, just because there are three right-wing parties, it doesn't mean they map onto that range. The label "far right" is just used to smear people, rather than something that represents a real group in Britain.
    - louthy 1mo ago
      I’m not being “silly”, each party is more extreme than the last. Rupert Lowe is an ethno-nationalist who clearly believes in ethnic cleansing (through forced deportation, at least) and is clearly a fascist with deep religious intolerance (against Islam and Judaism). Farage although he occasionally comes out with troubling rhetoric, and is clearly racist, I don’t think he’d go full Nazi; and the Conservatives, although they have moved further right in the past decade, are still fundamentally centre right. * Conservatives “centre right” to “right wing” [1]: * Reform: “far right” [2], but they have tempered their original far-right rhetoric and are clearly positioning themselves as hard-right these days. * Restore: “far right” [3] I don’t know why you think this is odd. Political parties tend to carve out their niche on the political spectrum. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_UK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_UK [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restore_Britain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restore_Britain

mytailorisrich 2mo ago

> a polycrisis of far-right immigration agitation I think an important issue in the UK political landscape and public is the polarisation that makes people label immigration a "far-right agitation". Immigration is a serious and key issue, which impacts everything else, too. As long as the left of centre denies that it is an issue at all (because only "far right" people have a problem with it, apparently) Nigel Farage and the like will only keep increasing their share of the vote. The other aspect of Reform UK's rise is that the Conservatives only paid lip service to the issue so lost the support of many on the right and were destroyed at the last general election (still very visible in the polls). Perhaps this, like Brexit before, also highlights another issue in the UK/England, which is that London tends to live in its own bubble.

TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago
Xenophobia is a tool of demagogues, not a rational policy. So while it's an issue, it's not even in the top ten of of the UK's most important practical issues. And the racism it generates - including Brexit, and currently the collapse of income from foreign students, which was a huge earner for the university sector - does huge and lasting harm. It's a political shiny penny used for distraction, not a realistic solution to anything. And the people who make careers out of promoting it are provably cynical, corrupt, incompetent, and disinterested in solving real problems.
- dash2 2mo ago
  The problem with this argument is that for essentially my entire lifetime, the UK population has wanted less migration. And what they have got instead is gross migration running at 1 million per year. If they are just fundamentally wrong on this and have been for 50 years, it seems like democracy is a bad idea. Alternatively, if you feel you have to accept democracy, then maybe it would be good to give people what they consistently say they want on this issue.
  - pamcake 2mo ago
    No we haven't.
  - gopher_space 2mo ago
    You're tied up in centuries of empire-building consequences and think "no brown people please" is a legitimate point of view?
    - cindyllm 2mo ago
      [dead]
    - dash2 2mo ago
      I think one of the most basic features of any "cooperative venture for mutual advantage" (as Rawls called the state) is who's going to be in the club. If that shouldn't be under democratic control, what should be? Also, I don't know why you think opposition to migration is driven by anti-brown-people racism. That opposition grew quite a lot when migration was coming mostly from Eastern Europe. I'd expect concerns over jobs, housing, public services etc. to be more important - I'm not claiming that those are correct, though I don't think they are illegitimate. Lastly, I am not sure why the empire is relevant. Is the story that because Britain had an empire, it's morally obligated to accept immigration? That could be true for e.g. Hong Kong or Ugandan Indians, but I'm not sure it need be true for all time and everywhere.
  - louthy 2mo ago
    > And what they have got instead is gross migration running at 1 million per year. LEGAL migration of 1 million per year. For one year only during Boris Johnson's term. Mostly it's in the 100,000s. Most migration is legal. People crossing the channel in boats is minuscule in comparison (tens of thousands). And, whilst people crossing the channel in small boats is certainly a problem (for their lives, if nothing else), it is not something that should be taking up so much political air. It's a side issue in the big scheme of things. Governments should certainly have more strategic plans for dealing with the legal migrants, like infrastructure building, and if they're unable to deliver the infrastructure, limit the legal migration. But the rest of it is often driven by political opportunists and bigots.
JoshTriplett 2mo ago
> Immigration is a serious and key issue, which impacts everything else, too. No, other things are serious and key issues, and immigration is the scapegoat that gives people someone to blame for their problems, distracting from actual solutions that don't fit in a one-sentence slogan the way the non-solution "kick out all the Xes" does. This has been an electoral tactic of right-wing populists for a long, long time.
- karmakurtisaani 2mo ago
  It's just amazing how simple people can be when things like economic inequality, lack of affordable healthcare and housing, climate change, social security, public services etc. can all be labeled as leftist (and thus bad) issues, and focus turned just to immigration (which itself is also a complex topic). "I'd vote for the left, but they do nothing about the brown people." I wish these people just stayed at home on the voting day.
sapphicsnail 2mo ago
Labour pivoted way to the right on immigration and it didn't get them any more votes. There's nothing they can do to get that part of the electorate and it's a waste of time to try to cater to them.
- mytailorisrich 2mo ago
  Hmm, their manifesto said "A fair and properly managed immigration system"... That's the absolute minimum lip service and a platitude, not any sort of pivot, which they cannot do considering the various power groups within the party. Since then it's really only foreign students who have had issues, so the group that probably makes the least sense to 'hit' (although there was abuse of the system that needed to be addressed)but the easiest politically, again because it's the least resistance path within party and party supports while allowing to say that they are acting.

philipallstar 2mo ago

[flagged]

jasoncartwright 2mo ago
Instant tribal labelling - a great example of my point. Nicely done. I'm off to do some property damage, incite racial hatred and predict civil war to live up to my new moniker :)
- philipallstar 2mo ago
  You already made your own point, if your point was just "people call things left or right": > far-right immigration agitation

ben_w 2mo ago

> Leave and remain have completely incompatible visions for post-Brexit Britain. This would have been less of a problem if Leave had itself been a single position, rather than as it turned out to be several different positions that all started off in the same vague direction but pulled apart almost immediately, with those involved all insisting the rest of them "weren't proper Brexit" or were "secret Remainers", ignoring all the times Temainers said "What? Them? They aren't Remainers!" unless said Remainers pointed out this division at which point all these supposed "secret Remainers" who wanted something that wasn't "proper Brexit" suddenly were totes Leavers what are you talking about. But yeah, polycrisis, and it's not just the UK, but the UK seems to have it worse than most because Brexit added to it.

okeuro49 2mo ago

There is no "far right" in the UK -- it's a label that is used to smear people to excuse state failure.

louthy 2mo ago
* Right - Conservatives * Hard right - Reform * Far right - Restore Restore are a far right party. Luckily they get about the same number of votes as the old far right parties, like the BNP.
- okeuro49 2mo ago
  Don't be silly, just because there are three right-wing parties, it doesn't mean they map onto that range. The label "far right" is just used to smear people, rather than something that represents a real group in Britain.
  - louthy 1mo ago
    I’m not being “silly”, each party is more extreme than the last. Rupert Lowe is an ethno-nationalist who clearly believes in ethnic cleansing (through forced deportation, at least) and is clearly a fascist with deep religious intolerance (against Islam and Judaism). Farage although he occasionally comes out with troubling rhetoric, and is clearly racist, I don’t think he’d go full Nazi; and the Conservatives, although they have moved further right in the past decade, are still fundamentally centre right. * Conservatives “centre right” to “right wing” [1]: * Reform: “far right” [2], but they have tempered their original far-right rhetoric and are clearly positioning themselves as hard-right these days. * Restore: “far right” [3] I don’t know why you think this is odd. Political parties tend to carve out their niche on the political spectrum. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_UK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_UK [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restore_Britain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restore_Britain