The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on May 19, 2024 10:40:58 GMT
Regional and continental blocks are a very old dated way of dividing up the world when geography becomes ever more irrelevant Hmmm, apart from anything else this doesn't really take account of the growing backlash against globalisation does it. If anything regional and continental based thinking could be about to come back more into fashion - maybe all the more so in Europe if Trump wins in the US this year. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on May 19, 2024 11:25:17 GMT
I'm firmly opposed to the death penalty and a supporter of the Good Friday Agreement... ...but at what point will the elastic snap and the GFA cease to be a sufficient argument for staying in the ECHR? One of the general frustrations in politics in recent decades has been the tendency for one generation of ministers to sign the UK up for things that could not be easily undone by their successors - most obviously with the EU this was everything from directives that governments implementing them hated and told critics to blame ministers no longer in office for headnodding instead of vetoing them at the time through to EU integration treaties that couldn't be unratified by new governments or renegotiated to reverse them. To rephrase the position a bit, at what stage does "Tony Blair signed the country into an international agreement that locks this into place domestically and there's nothing the electorate can do, no matter how much it objects to it, short of pulling the whole edifice down" cease to be a winning argument for keeping something in place and instead becomes a "this is the price to pay and it's worth paying"? Why is the ECHR so often defended with either this or random lists of countries on one little continent who aren't members (there's a heck of a lot more countries who aren't) rather than defence on the merits of the institution as it operates in practice? Where are the great rulings held up to be admired across the spectrum or even just on the right? Why is there such a reluctance to sell actual benefits? I support the ECHR and the UK's membership thereof, because it's a good thing. I don't feel the need to point to the Good Friday Agreement as an excuse to keep the ECHR. If it were the democratic will of Parliament to legislate to leave the ECHR, that should be allowed to happen without people jumping up and down saying "What about Northern Ireland" or "What about Belarus". |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on May 19, 2024 11:55:28 GMT
Sorry to bring this thread up, but a cruel twist of irony that Jo Cox’s constituency was that of Elizabeth Peacock, MP from 83-97, who campaigned for the restoration of the death penalty relentlessly in the Commons It's not a cruel twist of irony, it's a mildly unimportant and uninteresting minor coincidence. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on May 19, 2024 13:04:39 GMT
Sorry to bring this thread up, but a cruel twist of irony that Jo Cox’s constituency was that of Elizabeth Peacock, MP from 83-97, who campaigned for the restoration of the death penalty relentlessly in the Commons How so? Because she was murdered? There's no irony there at all. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on May 19, 2024 13:12:43 GMT
We often question the motives of those countries that seem like they've shielded themselves from the rest of the globe - North Korea, Belarus etc. Why we would prefer to become part of the ridiculed I don't know.
Geography and geology proves that we're European. What a shame that we chose to be American in our politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on May 19, 2024 13:33:45 GMT
We often question the motives of those countries that seem like they've shielded themselves from the rest of the globe - North Korea, Belarus etc. Why we would prefer to become part of the ridiculed I don't know. Geography and geology proves that we're European. What a shame that we chose to be American in our politics.
We are non-Continental Europeans, that is why our politics has a different tangent than most countries of Continental Europe. Our history feeds into this politics and being an Island has molded us. We are not American in our politics, but neither are we Continental European in our politics, we are our own being, which overall a good thing, though it may mean we currently struggle to find a place in the world where it seems one has to choose a political camp. Europe, The US, China, Africa, Russia.
Personaly I think camp choosing is a bad thing, though it is very fashionable. I'd prefer us to do what is our own best interest, not Europe's, The US's or anyone else's. That does not mean I want us to be North Korea or Belarus, they are run for the benfit of a minority elite, but running your country for it's own best interest, yes I totally support that, even though it seems to be politically out of fashion at the moment.
|
|
spqr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,905 
|
Post by spqr on May 19, 2024 17:28:29 GMT
We often question the motives of those countries that seem like they've shielded themselves from the rest of the globe - North Korea, Belarus etc. Why we would prefer to become part of the ridiculed I don't know. Geography and geology proves that we're European. What a shame that we chose to be American in our politics. "We" don't "often question" the motives of Belarus and North Korea; they are frequently considered too distant and mysterious to be understood if paid attention to at all. We are not part of the "ridiculed", because (aside from some doo-lally Rejoiners) most people understand that resiling from the EU does not equate to the kind of isolation experienced by North Korea and Belarus. Geography and geology on their own do not "prove" anything like that. We aren't American in our politics, and even if we were we wouldn't "choose" to be such, because that's not how politics in this country works. Apart from that, I agree with everything that your fertile Lancastrian "mind" has spouted here. |
|
|
|
Post by swingometer on May 19, 2024 18:11:43 GMT
I'm firmly opposed to the death penalty and a supporter of the Good Friday Agreement... ...but at what point will the elastic snap and the GFA cease to be a sufficient argument for staying in the ECHR? One of the general frustrations in politics in recent decades has been the tendency for one generation of ministers to sign the UK up for things that could not be easily undone by their successors - most obviously with the EU this was everything from directives that governments implementing them hated and told critics to blame ministers no longer in office for headnodding instead of vetoing them at the time through to EU integration treaties that couldn't be unratified by new governments or renegotiated to reverse them. To rephrase the position a bit, at what stage does "Tony Blair signed the country into an international agreement that locks this into place domestically and there's nothing the electorate can do, no matter how much it objects to it, short of pulling the whole edifice down" cease to be a winning argument for keeping something in place and instead becomes a "this is the price to pay and it's worth paying"? Why is the ECHR so often defended with either this or random lists of countries on one little continent who aren't members (there's a heck of a lot more countries who aren't) rather than defence on the merits of the institution as it operates in practice? Where are the great rulings held up to be admired across the spectrum or even just on the right? Why is there such a reluctance to sell actual benefits? I support the ECHR and the UK's membership thereof, because it's a good thing. I don't feel the need to point to the Good Friday Agreement as an excuse to keep the ECHR. If it were the democratic will of Parliament to legislate to leave the ECHR, that should be allowed to happen without people jumping up and down saying "What about Northern Ireland" or "What about Belarus". Why should we put up with this blackmail, funny how it’s all related to Northern Ireland, remember the backstop and all that, I’d love for us to quit the ECHR but unfortunately it ain’t happening 😤😡🤬 |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on May 19, 2024 18:19:16 GMT
We often question the motives of those countries that seem like they've shielded themselves from the rest of the globe - North Korea, Belarus etc. Why we would prefer to become part of the ridiculed I don't know. Geography and geology proves that we're European. What a shame that we chose to be American in our politics. We are non-Continental Europeans, that is why our politics has a different tangent than most countries of Continental Europe. Our history feeds into this politics and being an Island has molded us. We are not American in our politics, but neither are we Continental European in our politics, we are our own being, which overall a good thing, though it may mean we currently struggle to find a place in the world where it seems one has to choose a political camp. Europe, The US, China, Africa, Russia. Personaly I think camp choosing is a bad thing, though it is very fashionable. I'd prefer us to do what is our own best interest, not Europe's, The US's or anyone else's. That does not mean I want us to be North Korea or Belarus, they are run for the benfit of a minority elite, but running your country for it's own best interest, yes I totally support that, even though it seems to be politically out of fashion at the moment.
Economics is not a zero-sum game. Some ardent Brexiteers gave the impression that, if Brexit cost say 100,000 jobs in the UK but cost 200,000 jobs in the rest of the EU, that would be a "win". |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on May 19, 2024 18:25:18 GMT
We are non-Continental Europeans, that is why our politics has a different tangent than most countries of Continental Europe. Our history feeds into this politics and being an Island has molded us. We are not American in our politics, but neither are we Continental European in our politics, we are our own being, which overall a good thing, though it may mean we currently struggle to find a place in the world where it seems one has to choose a political camp. Europe, The US, China, Africa, Russia. Personaly I think camp choosing is a bad thing, though it is very fashionable. I'd prefer us to do what is our own best interest, not Europe's, The US's or anyone else's. That does not mean I want us to be North Korea or Belarus, they are run for the benfit of a minority elite, but running your country for it's own best interest, yes I totally support that, even though it seems to be politically out of fashion at the moment.
Economics is not a zero-sum game. Some ardent Brexiteers gave the impression that, if Brexit cost say 100,000 jobs in the UK but cost 200,000 jobs in the rest of the EU, that would be a "win". Not sure why you posted that in reply to my comment, but such people were idiots just like the extreme just let the EU do whatever want idiots at the other extreme. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on May 19, 2024 19:53:04 GMT
I support the ECHR and the UK's membership thereof, because it's a good thing. I don't feel the need to point to the Good Friday Agreement as an excuse to keep the ECHR. If it were the democratic will of Parliament to legislate to leave the ECHR, that should be allowed to happen without people jumping up and down saying "What about Northern Ireland" or "What about Belarus". Why should we put up with this blackmail, funny how it’s all related to Northern Ireland, remember the backstop and all that, I’d love for us to quit the ECHR but unfortunately it ain’t happening 😤😡🤬 We should not put up with such blackmail. If the people vote for, and Parliament wants to legislate for, the UK to leave the ECHR, then it should. I don't want it to, but that's not the point. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on May 20, 2024 10:34:18 GMT
Really, politicians and indeed the wider public make arguments based on practicality (in this case, withdrawal from the ECHR would mess up things in NI) and empricism (do we *really* want to be like Russia and Belarus but absolutely nobody else in Europe) all the time. Such arguments are not in themselves inferior to "principled" ones, and a major reason they are made is that a large swathe of voters are more persuaded by them. This is also the case with capital punishment, abortion, immigration and Brexit - amongst many other issues. In practice "principle" is rarely the be all and end all.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on May 20, 2024 19:41:19 GMT
I'm afraid this at least is a totally disingenuous argument - the E stands for EUROPEAN, so the USA or New Zealand or Thailand or Senegal not being members is a totally irrelevant red herring. Whereas, on the other hand, the only EUROPEAN countries who are not members being Belarus and Russia could not be more relevant to many of us. Regional and continental blocks are a very old dated way of dividing up the world when geography becomes ever more irrelevant. I don't see any reason to think that geography is becoming irrelevant at all, let alone "ever more irrelevant". Recent disruptions to trade through the Panama canal (that ship that got stuck, blocking it for weeks, and the Houthi attacks on shipping) have proven that geography remains crucial to the trade of any and all physical goods. Surges in mass migration have proven that geography remains crucial to any and all issues relating to the movement of people. The effects of both Covid and the policies trying to control it have proven that geography remains crucial to any and all issues relating to infectious diseases. Pretty much the only thing that is making geography less relevant to anything is the movement of some areas of human activity online. And even that has some reliance on geography when it comes to the infrastructure that is needed in order for somebody to access the internet. |
|
|
|
Post by ArmchairCritic on May 21, 2024 11:48:40 GMT
We won't be having a referendum on capital punishment and if we did, at the current time, it would be defeated relatively comfortably.
If you started to categorise who and what for, then you would end up with the absurdity that existed post-1957, where you could rape a woman and murder her without risk of being executed. But if you stole the money from her purse whilst you were doing it....."Murder in the Furtherence of Theft" capital offence - Penalty - DEATH
|
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on May 21, 2024 12:08:05 GMT
Considering that under the ECHR capital punishment is banned this is nothing but mindless fantasy. Of all the reasons to oppose capital punishment, this is the least important and of the Forum members who might regard it as relevant, you were the most likely |
|
|
|
Post by londonseal80 on Jun 19, 2024 17:15:40 GMT
How does everyone think the poll would go, I think people in normal circumstances would very narrowly vote against it, but if a particularly evil murder came up on the news expect the result to flip very easily. Thoughts on constituency results as well? Islington and Haringey would probably receive the highest votes against it. Havering would most likely London borough to vote for capital punishment. But somewhere like Tower Hamlets could be interesting. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,774
|
Post by john07 on Jun 19, 2024 23:50:44 GMT
Why should we put up with this blackmail, funny how it’s all related to Northern Ireland, remember the backstop and all that, I’d love for us to quit the ECHR but unfortunately it ain’t happening 😤😡🤬 I have finally worked out the source of your username. Most probably thought it was to do with Robert McKenzie the academic and TV psephologist and proponent of the swingometer. Clearly your name may be to do with another type of ‘swinging’! |
|
