… BREXASPERATION …

Nationalism is the pathology of modern developmental history as inevitable as neurosis in the individual.  – Tom Nairn – ‘The Break-Up of Britain.’  Brexit and Trump have not suddenly happened. My …

Source: … BREXASPERATION …

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “… BREXASPERATION …

  1. There is a lot of sense in this article. However, as someone who voted to leave the EU, I personally resent all the focus on Racism and Nationalism. I am neither racist, nor nationalist. I would like to see many countries return to smaller units, Britain included, and I never supported entry into the EU, voting against it originally, in the 1970s. But my motives and reasons are political, not driven by xenophobia, greed, or bitterness.
    Strange that all those who thought that the break up of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and other places was not only acceptable, but desirable, have been so vocal about the same thing happening in the EU. But what do I know? According to those who voted to Remain, I am a fat, lazy, unemployed, uneducated racist, living on benefits, and with a blinkered and uninformed view of the outside world.

    Best wishes, Pete.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I think this is quite a difficult subject. We have opposite views on the EU Pete, but I understand your point of view. I personally don’t think that everyone who voted for ‘out’ of the EU are all racists etc. the same as I don’t think all the people who voted ‘remain’ are refugee hugging, anti nationalists.
    There are pros and cons for being in or out of the EU and it’s a personal thing as to what each person thinks is a benefit and what is not. However I do think that the monetary benefits of coming out of the EU that were given by Farage and Johnson were based on incorrect information and they gave the impression that once the vote was done, it would be almost instantaneous and the NHS would get the millions given to the EU and immigration would be drastically reduced straight away. I think the ‘remain’ group used scaremonger tactics about the UK collapsing if we pulled out of the EU. So I don’t think either side could say they held the moral ground here.
    I think there should have been more information about Article 50 in the media and more information about how long it would take. In any referendum, I think that it should be just the facts that are given out and that the ‘floor show’ from both sides of the argument should not be allowed. It stops a lot of people from reading up on it to get a fuller view which ever camp they are in. All this flotillas on the Thames type mullarkey on both sides was distracting I thought. If I remember rightly, when entering the EU was first put forward every household was sent a proposal by the government giving the pros and cons of being in the EU.(Is that right Pate?)
    Debate is the right way to talk these things out as long as it doesn’t reduce down to ‘Jerry Springer’ level and they stick to the facts.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s