The UK’s culture war is dying – but the next PM will face populists overseas

[pellinore]

Populism limps on, but the general election looks set to deliver the death blow that will put it out of its misery. ........

But just as Britain seems willing to rejoin the grown ups and ready to regain its reputation as a sensible country which respects the rule of law and its international obligations, many of its allies overseas are ramping up their flirtations with populism.

Were he to win the keys to Downing Street, this would be a major strategic challenge for Starmer’s new government. And it is a challenge made all the more acute by the increasing volatility in the world, whether that be in the shape of Russia, China or the Middle East and the threats they pose to security and the economy.

With Brexit estimated to be costing the British economy £100 billion a year in lost output, now would be a good time to reestablish constructive cooperation with the EU, working closer together for mutual economic and social benefit.

But so much for the hope London could normalise its relations with Brussels for the first time in a decade when one looks at the buildup to the European parliamentary elections. Far right, anti-European and populist parties across a host of member states are widely expected to win significant support, shifting the balance in the parliament and potentially the make-up of the European Commission.

The UK’s culture war is dying – but the next prime minister will have to stand up to plenty of populists overseas (theconversation.com)

Edited June 17 by pellinore

[Destination Unknown]

26 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Populism limps on, but the general election looks set to deliver the death blow that will put it out of its misery. ........

But just as Britain seems willing to rejoin the grown ups and ready to regain its reputation as a sensible country which respects the rule of law and its international obligations, many of its allies overseas are ramping up their flirtations with populism.

Were he to win the keys to Downing Street, this would be a major strategic challenge for Starmer’s new government. And it is a challenge made all the more acute by the increasing volatility in the world, whether that be in the shape of Russia, China or the Middle East and the threats they pose to security and the economy.

With Brexit estimated to be costing the British economy £100 billion a year in lost output, now would be a good time to reestablish constructive cooperation with the EU, working closer together for mutual economic and social benefit.

But so much for the hope London could normalise its relations with Brussels for the first time in a decade when one looks at the buildup to the European parliamentary elections. Far right, anti-European and populist parties across a host of member states are widely expected to win significant support, shifting the balance in the parliament and potentially the make-up of the European Commission.

The UK’s culture war is dying – but the next prime minister will have to stand up to plenty of populists overseas (theconversation.com)

Not a fan of democracy really are you pellinore, unless of course the vote goes "your" (pro-EU) way.

Edited June 17 by Destination Unknown

[pellinore]

3 hours ago, Destination Unknown said:

Not a fan of democracy really are you pellinore, unless of course the vote goes "your" (pro-EU) way.

I think you may be confusing populism with democracy, and nationalism with patriotism. I am a great fan of democracy and have always been conservative (small c) in my politics.

[Destination Unknown]

25 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I think you may be confusing populism with democracy, and nationalism with patriotism. I am a great fan of democracy and have always been conservative (small c) in my politics.

The thing about "populism" pellinore, is that it's becoming rather popular, which is why people across the EU are voting democratically in favour of it, which by definition makes it democratic. So if anyone is "confused" pellinore, it's you, because you're the one that's confusing populism with democracy, not me.

And the EU itself is nationalistic, awarding itself the symbols of a Country (its own President (or five), its own (fake) Parliament, it's own Supreme Court, with jurisdiction over all member "States" Courts, its own Flag, its own Anthem, its own Currency, Outer Borders/Open Borders, and now, seemingly, its own Armed Forces) - All totally contrived, but designed to pull a false sense of allegiance in our minds.

It has even told those of us who were gullible enough to even listen to them that we were now its so-called "Citizens", despite not even being a Country, and, as we saw during Nigel's barnstorming farewell speech in the EU's fake Parliament, demands that member "States" transfer all Patriotism towards the EU instead of their own lands.

 

Edited June 17 by Destination Unknown

[pellinore]

17 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

The thing about "populism" pellinore, is that it's becoming rather popular, which is why people across the EU are voting democratically in favour of it, which by definition makes it democratic.

 

Nope, you are wrong. I can see why you are thinking wrongly- it is easy to think that because something is popular, it is democratic to carry it out.

But to give a simple example- suppose a popular mob leader incited a crowd to burn down the Houses of Parliament and execute all MPs. Would that be democracy in action? It wouldn't, because democracy is underpinned by two important principles: the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers. Without these, democracy cannot exist, which is why it is so important that we preserve them.

[Destination Unknown]

32 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Nope, you are wrong. I can see why you are thinking wrongly- it is easy to think that because something is popular, it is democratic to carry it out.

But to give a simple example- suppose a popular mob leader incited a crowd to burn down the Houses of Parliament and execute all MPs. Would that be democracy in action? It wouldn't, because democracy is underpinned by two important principles: the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers. Without these, democracy cannot exist, which is why it is so important that we preserve them.

How the hell am I wrong pellinore for crying out loud.

Nobody is talking about burning down the Houses of Parliament and executing all MPs and putting that to a national vote you loony, all that's happening is that people are finally waking up and rejecting the decades of wishy-washy left-wing ideology of the EU, and they're choosing something else instead, that's not "populism" pellinore, that's democracy, so if people are voting for it democratically, how is it not democratic to carry it out?

Edited June 17 by Destination Unknown

[+ouija ouija]

1 hour ago, pellinore said:

 

But to give a simple example- suppose a popular mob leader incited a crowd to burn down the Houses of Parliament and execute all MPs. Would that be democracy in action? It wouldn't, because democracy is underpinned by two important principles: the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers. Without these, democracy cannot exist, which is why it is so important that we preserve them.

I say this with all respect, pellinore, but you are losing the plot! 🙁

[pellinore]

1 hour ago, Destination Unknown said:

How the hell am I wrong pellinore for crying out loud.

Nobody is talking about burning down the Houses of Parliament and executing all MPs and putting that to a national vote you loony, all that's happening is that people are finally waking up and rejecting the decades of wishy-washy left-wing ideology of the EU, and they're choosing something else instead, that's not "populism" pellinore, that's democracy, so if people are voting for it democratically, how is it not democratic to carry it out?

24 minutes ago, ouija ouija said:

I say this with all respect, pellinore, but you are losing the plot! 🙁

Lol! I was giving a very simple example so that DU could understand the importance of the criteria underpinning democracy, as he doesn't understand what it means. He thinks it is the same as populism!

Edit: and presumably you are the same @ouija ouija

Edited June 17 by pellinore

[Destination Unknown]

5 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Lol! I was giving a very simple example so that DU could understand the importance of the criteria underpinning democracy, as he doesn't understand what it means. He thinks it is the same as populism!

Edit: and presumably you are the same @ouija ouija

So who is talking about burning down the Houses of Parliament and executing all MPs and putting that to a national vote then pellinore?

[pellinore]

2 minutes ago, Destination Unknown said:

So who is talking about burning down the Houses of Parliament and executing all MPs and putting that to a national vote then pellinore?

Lol! Please tell me you are being deliberately stupid! No one was, it was an extreme example to make the point easy to understand (not simple enough, it seems).

[Destination Unknown]

48 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Lol! Please tell me you are being deliberately stupid! No one was, it was an extreme example to make the point easy to understand (not simple enough, it seems).

Because it's a deliberately stupid example to begin with pellinore, that's why.

Here's my interpretation of what "you" are interpreting as "populism":

. If Micron wins the French elections because enough people like his policies, that's automatically democracy, but if Le Pen wins by the same voting figures because enough people like her policies instead, that's somehow not democracy at all, in your eyes it's automatically "populism".

Is that simple enough for you pellinore?

Edited June 17 by Destination Unknown

[+ouija ouija]

@pellinore Your example is so ludicrous that it skews the entire discussion up to that point and takes it down a mad 'rabbit hole'.

Edited June 17 by ouija ouija

[itsnotoutthere]

3 hours ago, pellinore said:

I think you may be confusing populism with democracy, and nationalism with patriotism. I am a great fan of democracy and have always been conservative (small c) in my politics.

Ok Pellinore, as you're a great fan of democracy here's one for you. As you are well aware, the British people were given democratic referendum in 2016 on whether or not we stayed in or left the EU. The people voted to leave, democracy in action if you will.

Now if Starmer wins the general election & becomes prime minister & he takes us back into the EU without another referendum & without the mandate of the people, is that democracy & democratic? & would you be happy with that, or would you insist on another referendum first?

Edited June 17 by itsnotoutthere

[Buzz_Light_Year]

1 hour ago, pellinore said:

Lol! I was giving a very simple example so that DU could understand the importance of the criteria underpinning democracy, as he doesn't understand what it means. He thinks it is the same as populism!

Edit: and presumably you are the same @ouija ouija

Democracy in its true form is the Tyranny of the Majority. 

In the U.S. you will not find the word Democracy in the Declaration of Independence nor does it appear in the Constitution. You will however find several writings by the founding fathers that warn of the dangers of Democracy. 

[Setton]

1 hour ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Ok Pellinore, as you're a great fan of democracy here's one for you. As you are well aware, the British people were given democratic referendum in 2016 on whether or not we stayed in or left the EU. The people voted to leave, democracy in action if you will.

Now if Starmer wins the general election & becomes prime minister & he takes us back into the EU without another referendum & without the mandate of the people, is that democracy & democratic? & would you be happy with that, or would you insist on another referendum first?

If he says he's going to do that, then gets elected and does so, you'd say that's democratic right?

After all, you like to cast the 2019 election as proof that everyone wants Brexit because most people voted for a party that didn't campaign to rejoin (regardless of any other policies).

[itsnotoutthere]

1 hour ago, Setton said:

If he says he's going to do that, then gets elected and does so, you'd say that's democratic right?

After all, you like to cast the 2019 election as proof that everyone wants Brexit because most people voted for a party that didn't campaign to rejoin (regardless of any other policies).

He hasn't said he would do that, but that is my point, what if he doesn't say it, but once in power goes ahead & does it?

Last election the lib dems campaigned on rejoining & got decimated, that should give you some pause for thought. If Starmer fought the election campaign on rejoining & then won by a landslide majority then that would be democratic, but that's exactly why he hasn't mentioned it, he knows how unpopular that would be.

Edited June 17 by itsnotoutthere

[L.A.T.1961]

10 hours ago, pellinore said:

.

With Brexit estimated to be costing the British economy £100 billion a year in lost output, now would be a good time to reestablish constructive cooperation with the EU, working closer together for mutual economic and social benefit.

 

The UK’s culture war is dying – but the next prime minister will have to stand up to plenty of populists overseas (theconversation.com)

I keep seeing this figure used but can anybody say where the £100 billion axe has fallen in the economy.

Lets look at the other side of the equation.😉

£100 billion would have a big impact, especially as its not supposed to be a one off but every year since brexit.

It would reduce the economy and show up in GDP, it hasn't.

It would show up in employment figures, it hasn't.

House prices would fall noticeably, they haven't. 

I do see folks quoting this figure as fact without giving any cost breakdown. 

There must be a reason for this and I suspect its because its based on a collection of worst case scenario assumptions and the economy demonstrates this did not happen.

 

 

[pellinore]

4 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Democracy in its true form is the Tyranny of the Majority. 

In the U.S. you will not find the word Democracy in the Declaration of Independence nor does it appear in the Constitution. You will however find several writings by the founding fathers that warn of the dangers of Democracy. 

Can you suggest a better form of political governance?

[Buzz_Light_Year]

2 hours ago, pellinore said:

Can you suggest a better form of political governance?

A just government is dependent upon just and moral people to govern. 

One of our founding father said this:

John Adams: 'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.' 

Churchill said this:

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

To answer your question I'd have to say a Constitutional Republic where those that govern do so by the consent of the people. However the U.S. has more of a representative democracy.

If it weren't for the The Bill of Rights laid out in our Constitution then we would have barely any rights at all. This is evident in the constant attack on the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th Amendments by one political party or the other. Now with the focus on hate crimes and hate speech the 1st Amendment is being eroded away.

Ayn Rand has some good insights.

  

Edited June 17 by Buzz_Light_Year

[L.A.T.1961]

For democracy to survive a nation's citizens need to have a fundamental understanding of right and wrong and what's fair and reasonable.

I hate to admit it but I think religion does have some roll to play here.

And then some sensible system of law. 

The UK is lucky and almost alone in that regard. Without needing to turn to the ECHR.

 

 

[+and-then]

I find it a bit odd that the UK is moving Left while much of the rest of the European voters seem to have had all they want of that corrosive ideology.  I don't follow UK politics very much but it seems that the "conservatives" have behaved like our DC Republicans and made many promises they did not even try to follow up on or failed miserably in executing.  Unless we have another bizarre election where millions of unsigned, unrequested, UNVERIFIED votes - still being tallied days after election day - manage to bring Biden or some replacement across the line as "winner", then the most likely outcome is another Trump presidency.

The DC crowd have managed to create the perception of so much economic misery, and have sowed so much division between so many groups that people are simply worn out and want it to go away.  They have inflicted so much pain on so many that it's even possible that in a "clean" election, we might have unified government for two years.  A Republican majority House, Senate, and Oval Office.  We, and apparently most Western nations, have become so divided that we're at an inflection point between anarchy - meaning absolute chaos and lawlessness - or a return to a more conservative, traditional way of life.  That would include limits on governments getting in the way of people's lives.  It's going to be interesting to watch the choice unfold.  The Left have done everything they can to stop Trump - short of eliminating him physically and I pray they refrain from that madness - and they have now put him in a position, through their obvious hatred and double standards, of being seen as a kind of political martyr.  A lot of people are waking up to the threat that these people in DC pose to all Americans.

Sadly, I expect the forces that created the "Summer of Floyd" to be at work prior to the election and if it goes to Trump, they will just continue and ramp up the discord and violence.

[pellinore]

12 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

A just government is dependent upon just and moral people to govern. 

One of our founding father said this:

John Adams: 'Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.' 

Churchill said this:

‘Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

To answer your question I'd have to say a Constitutional Republic where those that govern do so by the consent of the people. However the U.S. has more of a representative democracy.

If it weren't for the The Bill of Rights laid out in our Constitution then we would have barely any rights at all. This is evident in the constant attack on the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th and 10th Amendments by one political party or the other. Now with the focus on hate crimes and hate speech the 1st Amendment is being eroded away.

Ayn Rand has some good insights.

  

So you agree with me about democracy then? Of course you do. I presume you also see that the rule of law and separation of powers are essential?

[Buzz_Light_Year]

4 minutes ago, pellinore said:

So you agree with me about democracy then?

No!

[pellinore]

1 hour ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

No!

Well, name a better system.

[Buzz_Light_Year]

3 minutes ago, pellinore said:

Well, name a better system.

I did.