English Nationalism and Independence

[Mock Turtle]

No. I live in Brexit country and we're all normal people. We've all worked with foreigners. We make regular friends of them. We just don't like the influence Buxelles has on us. We don't want our whole villages and towns to become Russian or Polish. I'll give you an example or two.

When my dad went to a job agency everything was in Polish and they would only hire Polish people.

When my mom worked in the Tesco warehouse all the instructions were in Polish.

This is what folks don't want.

But this is what folks living in middle class bubbles don't see.

Well perhaps there was an element of this that many didn't recognise then, since much of the influx of foreigners didn't actually originate from the EU, or only in passing through, but came from elsewhere. So why lose all the benefits we were getting from being a member in the hope that one aspect of any issue was solved? And this issue was hardly the sole reason why so many voted to leave apparently.

 

[Rival]

Well perhaps there was an element of this that many didn't recognise then, since much of the influx of foreigners didn't actually originate from the EU, or only in passing through, but came from elsewhere. So why lose all the benefits we were getting from being a member in the hope that one aspect of any issue was solved? And this issue was hardly the sole reason why so many voted to leave apparently.

The main reason was seen as the lack of decentralisation.

The problem is that most ordinary folks lack the necessarily political wordstock to make themselves clear, since most folks simply do not know about complex political ideas and how to phase them. Most folks where I live would not know what 'centralisation' means, let alone be able to parse that this is one of their main reasons for voting Leave. Not would they know what 'protectionism' is, but it's another reason they voted Leave. Nor do they know what 'federalisation' is, but it's a huge, huge reason why most folks voted Leave.

In short, we do not want anything to do with a centralised, federalised protection racket. We no not want a US of E. And that is, openly, what many MEPs want. This is what Guy Verhofstadt wants. It's behind their EU army, anthem, currency, court and trade laws.

Unfortunately, most ordinary folks lack this kind of political wordstock so they simply cannot make their points effectively.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The main reason was seen as the lack of decentralisation.

The problem is that most ordinary folks lack the necessarily political wordstock to make themselves clear, since most folks simply do not know about complex political ideas and how to phase them. Most folks where I live would not know what 'centralisation' means, let alone be able to parse that this is one of their main reasons for voting Leave. Not would they know what 'protectionism' is, but it's another reason they voted Leave. Nor do they know what 'federalisation' is, but it's a huge, huge reason why most folks voted Leave.

In short, we do not want anything to do with a centralised, federalised protection racket. We no not want a US of E. And that is, openly, what many MEPs want. This is what Guy Verhofstadt wants. It's behind their EU army, anthem, currency, court and trade laws.

Unfortunately, most ordinary folks lack this kind of political wordstock so they simply cannot make their points effectively.

Not sure they (all that voted leave) are happy that you elect yourself to speak for all of them.

 

[Rival]

Not sure they (all that voted leave) are happy that you elect yourself to speak for all of them.

From whom I've spoken to these are the underpinning factors. I don't think I speak for all Leave voters, no, but these are some of the biggest arguments you will hear. They're certainly the arguments one hears if one hangs around in Brexiteer circles as I do. The unwillingness of many Remainers to 'go there' reflects in their poor understanding of our reasons, and it seems many would prefer to project onto us why they think we wanted to leave, rather than actually ask us. I support Scotland leaving the Union too, if that's what they want. I'm just totally in favour of national independence. Same for Catalonia.

 

[Mock Turtle]

From whom I've spoken to these are the underpinning factors. I don't think I speak for all Leave voters, no, but these are some of the biggest arguments you will hear. They're certainly the arguments one hears if one hangs around in Brexiteer circles as I do. The unwillingness of many Remainers to 'go there' reflects in their poor understanding of our reasons, and it seems many would prefer to project onto us why they think we wanted to leave, rather than actually ask us. I support Scotland leaving the Union too, if that's what they want. I'm just totally in favour of national independence. Same for Catalonia.

Two things seem to come out that might explain this better - that Remain voters tend to be better educated (so probably not just a London thing) and Leave voters tend to read the popular right-wing press, and where the latter did a good job of smearing the truth (as always).

 

[Rival]

Two things seem to come out that might explain this better - that Remain voters tend to be better educated (so probably not just a London thing) and Leave voters tend to read the popular right-wing press, and where the latter did a good job of smearing the truth (as always).

More education doesn't mean it's 'better' by any stretch. Leave voters merely looked at the world around us and saw it wasn't working. I don't know why everyone seems to think that everyone's opinions in this have been shaped by the press. Mine weren't. My family's weren't. We had seen what had happened to our villages and towns and we'd had enough.

But I guess the uneducated peasantry just needs to shut up and accept that their government knows best.

....which is exactly what we protested.

 

[oldbadger]

I do hope Scotland gets independence and Ireland becomes unified again, Wales, I'm not sure of.

Ireland unified............... Again?

When was that?
You should wander around Belfast, have a look at the Murals, go and see the huge walls and steel gates.
The English didn't put them there. Irish did.

 

[oldbadger]

I'm English but am ashamed of my 'country'; I will always say I am Mancunian, British or European ahead of saying English.

........ just because you lot can't play decent football.

 

[oldbadger]

I too find displays of the flag of St George rather suspect, unless flown by a Church of England church or at a rugby match. In other contexts it is a flag I associate with pot-bellied, tattooed thugs.

What?
That was at Twickenham!

 

[Mock Turtle]

More education doesn't mean it's 'better' by any stretch. Leave voters merely looked at the world around us and saw it wasn't working. I don't know why everyone seems to think that everyone's opinions in this have been shaped by the press. Mine weren't. My family's weren't. We had seen what had happened to our villages and towns and we'd had enough.

But I guess the uneducated peasantry just needs to shut up and accept that their government knows best.

....which is exactly what we protested.

I think one has to place issues in their proper place since we can't always have the complete set of anything that we might want.

It probably isn't the case that all decisions are better if one is better educated and/or more knowledgeable but as a general rule it seems to work, and getting such knowledge from the popular media hardly helps. Most informed people, and experts, were more inclined to remain in the EU from what I observed at the time - including all my friends, for example, (all university educated and some with higher qualifications).

All should have a voice, but if, as with this pandemic, we don't believe the experts and choose to do our own thing then we are in trouble. I said at the time, and still believe such, that the bar for leaving should have been made higher, and not just a majority vote, given that it was a decision affecting more of those with a future, the young.

 

[Rival]

I think one has to place issues in their proper place since we can't always have the complete set of anything that we might want.

It probably isn't the case that all decisions are better if one is better educated and/or more knowledgeable but as a general rule it seems to work, and getting such knowledge from the popular media hardly helps. Most informed people, and experts, were more inclined to remain in the EU from what I observed at the time - including all my friends, for example, (all university educated and some with higher qualifications).

All should have a voice, but if, as with this pandemic, we don't believe the experts and choose to do our own thing then we are in trouble. I said at the time, and still believe such, that the bar for leaving should have been made higher, and not just a majority vote, given that it was a decision affecting more of those with a future, the young.

The reason for this is simple, though: Those who work in business and education benefit massively from the EU. Their unions benefit from the EU. Universities are in bed with the EU through various programmes. Of course they're going to be for it when they have their snouts in the trough, just like Westminster.

But for those of us whose lives revolve around small villages of under 1000 people (I grew up in a village of about 300-400 folks) we do not see any of these benefits. We see decisions being made by higher ups who have no idea how it effects us here on the ground. Who is best to make decisions about farms? Farmers, or the Minister of Farming? It's farmers. We have no say in these things. And now you're claiming that 'the bar should be higher' - basically you would take the fair democratic vote away from the working class because they don't have the same educational level as everyone else. How would that solve the problem of their not being listened to?

All we see are us being left behind while the upper classes sip their EU champagne.

Someone in a small village needs his voice heard and for once we finally did it.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The reason for this is simple, though: Those who work in business and education benefit massively from the EU. Their unions benefit from the EU. Universities are in bed with the EU through various programmes. Of course they're going to be for it when they have their snouts in the trough, just like Westminster.

But for those of us whose lives revolve around small villages of under 1000 people (I grew up in a village of about 300-400 folks) we do not see any of these benefits. We see decisions being made by higher ups who have no idea how it effects us here on the ground. Who is best to make decisions about farms? Farmers, or the Minister of Farming? It's farmers. We have no say in these things. And now you're claiming that 'the bar should be higher' - basically you would take the fair democratic vote away from the working class because they don't have the same educational level as everyone else. How would that solve the problem of their not being listened to?

All we see are us being left behind while the upper classes sip their EU champagne.

Someone in a small village needs his voice heard and for once we finally did it.

But this, as for not voting Tory, is about what we (I'm sure my friends would agree) feel is right for the country as a whole not because it suits us. I have never voted on anything because I might be better off, although I know many will do so, but that just leaves it down to factionalism and bribery rather than reasonable arguments as to what might be best for us all - as a country.

The bar being higher is often used for some things, if important enough, and the vote didn't necessarily mean the government had to follow on from the vote - they chose to do so.

 

[Rival]

But this, as for not voting Tory, is about what we (I'm sure my friends would agree) feel is right for the country as a whole not because it suits us.

This is the problem though.

There's no such thing as 'what's right for the country as a whole'. It doesn't work. As we know, our country is divided into non-metropolitan and metropolitan areas. These are two completely distinct classes of civilisation. What works for one will be a disaster for the other. What works in Lincolnshire villages will not work for Portsmouth or Glasgow. We need to break it down to the local level to make it work for the folks who live there. This is why, as I was saying earlier, centralisation doesn't work. We need more local government and less national government.

 

[Mock Turtle]

This is the problem though.

There's no such thing as 'what's right for the country as a whole'. It doesn't work. As we know, our country is divided into non-metropolitan and metropolitan areas. These are two completely distinct classes of civilisation. What works for one will be a disaster for the other. What works in Lincolnshire villages will not work for Portsmouth or Glasgow. We need to break it down to the local level to make it work for the folks who live there. This is why, as I was saying earlier, centralisation doesn't work. We need more local government and less national government.

So factions pulling against others works better?

 

[Rival]

So factions pulling against others works better?

I don't see how they would be 'against others'. It's just a fact that rural communities and urban communities, among many others, need completely different kinds of governance in order to work right. The USSR used a central government for everything and that was a complete disaster. We need to put the country folk in charge of the countryside and the urban folk in charge of the cities. This makes the most sense. You don't have a maths teacher in the English classroom or the other way. It's the system that thinks it works for everyone in all areas that causes the chaos.

 

[Augustus]

So factions pulling against others works better?

That's the result of centralisation. With decentralisation you don't really care about other political units as they don't impact you. You don't worry yourself much over what is happening in Albanian politics, do you?

The 'one big happy family' approach creates the need for different factions to fight over the central authority or be dominated by 'the other'.

America is the obvious example where half the country fights the other half in what they see as a fight for the soul of the nation.

You don't think America would work better if people in rural Alabama ran their own affairs and people in Berkley, California ran theirs rather than both fighting tooth and nail to control both rural Alabama and Berkley?

Religious conservatives could live in religious conservative towns, and Progressives could live in progressive towns without resenting each other for meddling in their affairs.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I don't see how they would be 'against others'. It's just a fact that rural communities and urban communities, among many others, need completely different kinds of governance in order to work right. The USSR used a central government for everything and that was a complete disaster. We need to put the country folk in charge of the countryside and the urban folk in charge of the cities. This makes the most sense. You don't have a maths teacher in the English classroom or the other way. It's the system that thinks it works for everyone in all areas that causes the chaos.

But a government is what we have to govern in the interests of the people as a whole, and if there are sectors who have legitimate complaints then take them up with the government or change the government when they don't give satisfaction, but taking bad decisions to placate one sector is hardly sensible.

 

[Mock Turtle]

That's the result of centralisation. With decentralisation you don't really care about other political units as they don't impact you. You don't worry yourself much over what is happening in Albanian politics, do you?

The 'one big happy family' approach creates the need for different factions to fight over the central authority or be dominated by 'the other'.

America is the obvious example where half the country fights the other half in what they see as a fight for the soul of the nation.

You don't think America would work better if people in rural Alabama ran their own affairs and people in Berkley, California ran theirs rather than both fighting tooth and nail to control both rural Alabama and Berkley?

Religious conservatives could live in religious conservative towns, and Progressives could live in progressive towns without resenting each other for meddling in their affairs.

But that wasn't apparently why people voted as they did. They seemed to have some rather intangible things, or things they couldn't actually have, as the reasons why they voted out. I'm not opposed to decentralisation, and can't really see that being the main reason why most did vote out - given that I lost interest in the matter the day after the result.

 

[Rival]

But a government is what we have to govern in the interests of the people as a whole, and if there are sectors who have legitimate complaints then take them up with the government or change the government when they don't, but taking bad decisions to placate one sector is hardly sensible.

This is what local government is for. The national government should really be dealing with issues of foreign policy, national threats, etc. - it has no business sticking its nose in local affairs that are much better managed by local communities. When local communities are governed by local authorities they fare much, much better. Human psychology is tribe oriented and we don't - or perhaps rather can't - think much bigger than that. Nor is it practical to do so. We need folks who represent us governing us, as they know our needs better than anyone else. No governments throughout history have ever really had the kind of power that modern governments have over such large populations. Most places in history were left to local authorities, religious leaders, etc. It worked better that way.

 

[Mock Turtle]

This is what local government is for. The national government should really be dealing with issues of foreign policy, national threats, etc. - it has no business sticking its nose in local affairs that are much better managed by local communities. When local communities are governed by local authorities they fare much, much better. Human psychology is tribe oriented and we don't - or perhaps rather can't - think much bigger than that. Nor is it practical to do so. We need folks who represent us governing us, as they know our needs better than anyone else. No governments throughout history have ever really had the kind of power that modern governments have over such large populations. Most places in history were left to local authorities, religious leaders, etc. It worked better that way.

Well we will find out whether we made the right decision or not some time in the future.