UK EU Referendum Thoughts

[vimothy]

Sure. The point (a reply to Mr Tea) stands, though. Hostility to sovereignty and self-determination *in principle* borders on the incoherent.

 

[vimothy]

Democracy is good, but by itself it's not enough, and is also frequently a fetish object. ("The word [democracy] has come to serve simply as a description of the therapeutic state. When we speak of democracy today, we refer, more often than not, to the democratization of `self-esteem'."). It requires a wealth of supporting institutions to function in a way that is healthy and furthers the common good.

 

[Mr. Tea]

So more democracy, in principle, also means a demand to abolish the house of lords and the monarchy while we are at it.

I think reforming the Lords so as to make all of its members elected would be better than abolishing it completely - I can't really back this up with a hard and fast argument but a bicameral system strikes me as better than just a single chamber. Change the name to something a bit less feudal if you like, though.

I used to be ambivalent about the monarchy, purely on the basis that an awful lot of people clearly like them very much, but these days I tend more to think that it's really pretty infantile to cling to the idea that one family is better than everyone else just because they had a distant ancestor who was the tribe's best fighter.

 

[john eden]

Democracy is good, but by itself it's not enough, and is also frequently a fetish object. ("The word [democracy] has come to serve simply as a description of the therapeutic state. When we speak of democracy today, we refer, more often than not, to the democratization of `self-esteem'."). It requires a wealth of supporting institutions to function in a way that is healthy and furthers the common good.

Well it will have to do until we get to communism.

Also while I'm here it does look like most of the terrible things that Woebot predicted in his weirdly defensive OP haven't actually happened.

 

[luka]

("The word [democracy] has come to serve simply as a description of the therapeutic state. When we speak of democracy today, we refer, more often than not, to the democratization of `self-esteem'."). .

im not sure i know what this means?

 

[sufi]

all the above is nice and well and good, but it's all high level theory, principles, ideology, which as everyone on here seems to agree has virtually no actual definite impact on our lives, whichever way things go.
That itself is a worry for me, since we're being asked to vote on this "big question" about which we have minimal understanding or clear vision of either of the alternative futures. Of course, there are masses of big mouth politicians and other figures keen to ride this wave of emotion and prejudice, and encouraging us all into disunity, which itself is a poor outcome of this "democracy" exercise.

However, I can see some concrete impact in an area i happen to know a bit about, which is employment law. The tories stripped out as many of the entitlements that protected employees as they could, early in their first term, and were prevented from demolishing them further by the underlying Euro-legislation. Getting out of Yurp is a necessary step for the next phase of this project.

I think this also applies to the HRA, and also obviously to lot of immigration legislation,
& I guess one could also extrapolate to other areas - housing, commerce and finance, protest & political activism, boring but useful stuff like health and safety...god knows what else.

That for me is enough to form an opinion, i don't fancy the idea of voting though, one shouldnt encourage these vampires.

I must congratulate you all, this thread feels like a bright spot of lucidity in a massive cloud of fart noises.

 

[vimothy]

Here is more of the quote, Luka:

The word [democracy] has come to serve simply as a description of the therapeutic state. When we speak of democracy today, we refer, more often than not, to the democratization of "self-esteem". The current catchwords--diversity, compassion, empowerment, entitlement--express the wistful hope that deep divisions in American society can be bridged by goodwill and sanitized speech. We are called on to recognise that all minorities are entitled to respect not by virtue of their achievements but by virtue of their sufferings in the past. Compassionate attention, we are told, will somehow raise their opinion of themselves; banning racial epithets and other forms of hateful speech will do wonders for their morale. In our preoccupation with words, we have lost sight of the tough realities that cannot be softened imply by flattering people's self-image. What does it profit the residents of the South Bronx to enforce speech codes at elite universities?

Christopher Lasch, Revolt of the Elites, New York, 1996

 

[Mr. Tea]

Here is more of the quote, Luka:

Riiight. I'm sure there's something in that but how is it relevant to the concrete question of laws in the UK being made by a sort-of elected domestic elite vs. by an unelected pan-European elite?

 

[vimothy]

It isn't relevant.

 

[vimothy]

I quoted part of it originally as an illustration of the "fetishization" of democracy (vis-a-vis the fetishization of sovereignty).

 

[droid]

Varoufakis is right. Better to reform than destroy. Political union could, at least, delay some of the worst effects of the coming crises.

Also, Britain outside the EU would, I think be a worse place to live in. On a pragmatic level, neo-liberalism will probably accelerate without Europe, and there is some slim chance EU reform could slow it down. If stability is your thing, then the risk of political crisis cannot be ignored. Its conceivable that this will not only lead to the breakup of the UK, but also the EU.

 

[vimothy]

I'm not sure about the rest of it, but this seems compelling:

If stability is your thing, then the risk of political crisis cannot be ignored. Its conceivable that this will not only lead to the breakup of the UK, but also the EU.

 

[Woebot]

However, I can see some concrete impact in an area i happen to know a bit about, which is employment law.

heard a bunch of scientists talking on radio 4 last night. strong consensus seems to be that UK leaving the EU would badly damage their community and the ability to secure funding for research. they see themselves as people of no nation which was refreshingly nerdy.

and then this morning the editor of the economist going through the comparison with denmark in detail and that's clearly not an attractive position to be in. uk probably needs to be more pro-european - we ought to be seeding brussels with bright young kids.

 

[Woebot]

4. The EU is huge bureaucracy. As a bureaucrat myself I know that this means a lot of making things more complicated than they have to be, working to perpetuate yourself instead of the greater good and general wasteman behaviour.

 

[Mr. Tea]

heard a bunch of scientists talking on radio 4 last night. strong consensus seems to be that UK leaving the EU would badly damage their community and the ability to secure funding for research. they see themselves as people of no nation which was refreshingly nerdy.

I think it's a given that the fewer barriers to communication, travel and collaborative funding exist, the better, for any kind of scientific enterprise but especially the colossal research projects that characterize much of modern experimental physics and biology/medicine. I was young kid at the time of course but I understand there was an unprecedented cross-fertilization of scientific ideas when the USSR disintegrated. For all its political and cultural oppression, China is being smart in allowing (as I understand it) a relative degree of freedom for its scientists and technologists to interact with labs and universities in the outside world.

 

[john eden]

I think that the EU's commitment to freedom of movement (i.e. low wages) will trump any EU legislation protecting workers rights personally. Perhaps there is an argument that it was progressive at one point but I think when the chips are down it is quite clear what the priority is.

They were only to happy to talk to Cameron about jettisoning some of the good stuff as part of his negotiations iirc.

And we are back to democracy on this one. Even if the EU is able to introduce Things That We Like in some instances - is that OK?

Is it OK that this country has voted for a Tory government whose wishes have been overridden by the EU? Maybe it is, though that is clearly a problem waiting to happen in the long run.

What if we elect someone amazing and their wishes are overridden? What if the EU starts eroding workers rights as part of its commitment to neo-liberalism?

I know it's shit having to fight these battles about housing and the minimum wage and the bedroom tax etc and we might not win them in the current climate. But at least they are winnable if enough outrage is generated and enough people sign up - because we can actually remove David Cameron.

In the freaky technocratic world of the EU, there is even less chance of influencing these things. Just ask Greece.

And the question for the "oh but we should stay and reform it" crew has to be: "why hasn't this happened already?"

 

[droid]

Not disagreeing particularly, but in answer to your last point, its is only in the last 10 years that the EU has really mutated/been revealed to be a monstrous undemocratic technocratic nightmare.

 

[john eden]

Not disagreeing particularly, but in answer to your last point, its is only in the last 10 years that the EU has really mutated/been revealed to be a monstrous undemocratic technocratic nightmare.

Now call me pessimistic but what would you say the chances were of reforming a monstrous undemocratic technocratic nightmare?

Because this is beginning to sound a lot like the "carrot" side of "project fear" during the run up to the Scottish referendum. "Oh yes we've been terrible, but we've changed. Yes if you stay with us this terrible stuff will never happen again, promise".

Except nobody is even saying that - they're just saying better the devil you know and perhaps a magic pony will appear with a wand that can be waved at the EU that might somehow reform it, a bit, maybe if we're lucky?

 

[droid]

lol. All Im saying is that there had been little opportunity for reform as up until recently we didn't know how bad it was, that's not to say it cant be reformed. How is another question.

 

[john eden]

lol. All Im saying is that there had been little opportunity for reform as up until recently we didn't know how bad it was, that's not to say it cant be reformed. How is another question.

I accept that, but I hope you can see that this is hardly a compelling argument to stay?