EU Vote

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

Strange that you should mention that, because in the 1960s British Prime Minister Harold Wilson did have talks with American officials over whether Britain could become the 51st state. The talks were only exploratory and didn't lead anywhere. It is not known what the British people would have thought of this idea, or even whether they'd have had any say in the matter.

I think it's obviously true that the British 'get on better' with the US than with most Europeans. And I think the French in particular have always doubted our European credentials, pointing to our friendship with the USA (something the French are decidedly sniffy about) and our traditional worldwide seafaring history. When we leave the EU - and hopefully it will be very soon now - we will have been guilty of wasting the Europeans' time. For this our politicians are more to blame than the ordinary people are, as our politicians have consistently lied about the true aims of the Common Market/EEC /EU.

The European project was never an idealistic one. It had nothing to do with peace or fraternity. It was a scheme hatched by six countries, all of whom had been defeated in one way or another and realised that their place in the sun had gone for ever. It was their way of trying to make sure that they were still big players on the world stage. It is a vanity project.

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff

Strange that you should mention that, because in the 1960s British Prime Minister Harold Wilson did have talks with American officials over whether Britain could become the 51st state. The talks were only exploratory and didn't lead anywhere. It is not known what the British people would have thought of this idea, or even whether they'd have had any say in the matter.

I think it's obviously true that the British 'get on better' with the US than with most Europeans. And I think the French in particular have always doubted our European credentials, pointing to our friendship with the USA (something the French are decidedly sniffy about) and our traditional worldwide seafaring history. When we leave the EU - and hopefully it will be very soon now - we will have been guilty of wasting the Europeans' time. For this our politicians are more to blame than the ordinary people are, as our politicians have consistently lied about the true aims of the Common Market/EEC /EU.

The European project was never an idealistic one. It had nothing to do with peace or fraternity. It was a scheme hatched by six countries, all of whom had been defeated in one way or another and realised that their place in the sun had gone for ever. It was their way of trying to make sure that they were still big players on the world stage. It is a vanity project.

Hi Robert,

Actually it is funny about Wilson considering the idea of a 51st state relationship. Apparently several countries have considered similar ideas. When I was in college in the 1970s I knew a fellow student from Guatamala, who informed me that there was a political party there that pushed for becoming part of the United States. It is possible that this country's party was created in the aftermath of the 1954 CIA coup there, but it was the only time I ever heard of it.

Britain and the U.S. have a close relationship (since they last nearly clashed in 1895 over the Venezuela/British Guiana border dispute), but it has had slumps at times. In 1956 the U.S. refused to support Britain, France, and Israel on the Suez Canal seizure. Also it has sometimes been carried too far. I refer to the Iraqi invasion in 2002, where it was loyal and friendly by Britain's government, but it did not translate too well in Britain after awhile. Interesting to compare that with the reaction of Pierre Trudeau's government in Canada over our Vietnam policy. One's respect for the senior Trudeau is still high. One's respect for the British Prime Minister in 2002 is more questionable.

Jeff

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

In Britain, Tony Blair has never lived down the weapons of mass destruction business. He is a semi-pariah over here. A report soon to be published (the Chilcot report) is expected to be fairly damning.

Speaking personally, although I wouldn't want to live in America (I only want to live in England) I was exposed to Americana from the time I was born, via TV and music. Some of it may have been unrepresentative, but the overall effect was to make (some) American things seem quite natural to me. There are still things I'm not too keen on - Country & Western music for instance - and some of your habits are weird, but there you go. One thing I always found strange was how Americans would hang up the phone without saying goodbye or even knowing that the person at the other end had finished speaking. I wonder if this scenario ever occurred :

PHONE RINGS

COLONEL : Colonel Smith.

CAPTAIN : Captain Jones here, colonel. Intelligence reports there'll be an attack on our left flank...

COLONEL : Right. (HANGS UP)

CAPTAIN : ...but it will be a feint. The real attack will be on our right flank....hallo?...hallo?...

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff

In Britain, Tony Blair has never lived down the weapons of mass destruction business. He is a semi-pariah over here. A report soon to be published (the Chilcot report) is expected to be fairly damning.

Speaking personally, although I wouldn't want to live in America (I only want to live in England) I was exposed to Americana from the time I was born, via TV and music. Some of it may have been unrepresentative, but the overall effect was to make (some) American things seem quite natural to me. There are still things I'm not too keen on - Country & Western music for instance - and some of your habits are weird, but there you go. One thing I always found strange was how Americans would hang up the phone without saying goodbye or even knowing that the person at the other end had finished speaking. I wonder if this scenario ever occurred :

PHONE RINGS

COLONEL : Colonel Smith.

CAPTAIN : Captain Jones here, colonel. Intelligence reports there'll be an attack on our left flank...

COLONEL : Right. (HANGS UP)

CAPTAIN : ...but it will be a feint. The real attack will be on our right flank....hallo?...hallo?...

Hi Robert,

It does happen in this country with the phones. And Colonel Smith will soon regret his hasty hang-up action.

Actually I like some country and western music, but I can't understand the popularity of "Rap", which I tend to see as a type of music meant as a way of attacking the establishment (predominantly caucasian and European) and some of it's institutions (i.e., the police). I don't like painting myself as a reactionary or too conservative in nature, but there just is too much "Gansta" in the lyrics, not to mention a sexually obsessed anti-feminism in the tunes. Yet it is still the biggest popular music movement of today. Go figure that.

As for Blair, I can only think of one other politician who ever blew himself up like that. He's a Canadian who was twice Prime Minister in the 20th Century, but few remember him at all, probably even in Canada - Arthur Meighan. Meighan had been the right hand man to the World War I Prime Minister Robert Borden as Attorney-General, and had pushed very reactionary legislation against foreign born citizens, suffragettes, and French-Canadians (there was an assumption that the Quebeckers had not been as supportive of the war effort as the Canadians of English background). So he was not well liked when he was the chosen successor to Borden in 1920, after he had smashed a major city-wide strike in Winnipeg. He was Prime Minister about a year and a half when replaced by the man who'd put a coda to his career, William Lyon Mackenzie King. Although Meighan was intelligent and a highly gifted speaker and debater, he never realized that what he thought was good for Canada everyone else who counted might not like. In 1922 there was a show-down in the Anatolian peninsula at Chanak between Great Britain and Turkey (now under Kemal Ataturk) that came close to war. As it turned out the British general (Tim Harrington) in charge at Chanak and Ataturk cooperated to difuse the situation. But in the meantime, while Prime Minister King saw no reason to get involved in this mess, Meighan made a speech to the effect of "when Britain called for our support, we should have answered, "Ready, Aye Ready!!" We stand beside you!!" The speech went down like a lead balloon with the war weary Canadians (I don't know if you are aware, but although more American troops died in the twelve months that the U.S. troops were in Europe from late 1917 -1918, Canada lost (from 1914 - 1918) more troops in that period, and (percentagewise regarding their population as a whole and that of the U.S. as a whole) more of their population!). Meighan was too self-satisfied with his pompous greater empire vision to see this. He would be Prime Minister again in 1926 for a big three months (in a situation that King fully was able to play around with) and then lost real power for the rest of his career. So it is not only Blair who can bungle like that.

Jeff

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Jeff

Strange that you should mention that, because in the 1960s British Prime Minister Harold Wilson did have talks with American officials over whether Britain could become the 51st state. The talks were only exploratory and didn't lead anywhere. It is not known what the British people would have thought of this idea, or even whether they'd have had any say in the matter.

I think it's obviously true that the British 'get on better' with the US than with most Europeans. And I think the French in particular have always doubted our European credentials, pointing to our friendship with the USA (something the French are decidedly sniffy about) and our traditional worldwide seafaring history. When we leave the EU - and hopefully it will be very soon now - we will have been guilty of wasting the Europeans' time. For this our politicians are more to blame than the ordinary people are, as our politicians have consistently lied about the true aims of the Common Market/EEC /EU.

The European project was never an idealistic one. It had nothing to do with peace or fraternity. It was a scheme hatched by six countries, all of whom had been defeated in one way or another and realised that their place in the sun had gone for ever. It was their way of trying to make sure that they were still big players on the world stage. It is a vanity project.

It was a scheme hatched by one country: the French.

I should say I'm not anti-French. I'm pretty much neutral to the country. It's not a place I want to visit as I prefer Central and Eastern Europe when I cross the channel. The French have an interesting history, some things positive and other things not so positive from my perspective.

But, the whole European Union thing was borne out of fear on the part of the French believing they needed to lock in the Germans to prevent the fear and invasion that had persisted between the two nations over some time. They always intended it to be a political union, not solely an economic one. We're an entirely different people because of geography. We're an island people who have always looked outwards for the answers unlike say the Germans who have a history of looking inwards.

As for the United States, they are undoubtedly our natural allies and the Europeans simply aren't. We are superficially different to the Americans clearly, we carry ourselves differently, but in terms of how we think the Americans are the closest thing we have to natural allies - along with the Commonwealth.

The ideas that underpin English political history are similar to the ideas that underpin the United States version, and ideas are pretty much everything.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Well if Britain votes no. I hypothesise we will be economically less powerful. Of course if Britain votes to leave the EU I will be either proven correct or incorrect.

Why exactly would we be 'economically less powerful'?

And, in the event it turned out to be the case then it could be a good thing to tighten our belts and cut down on waste.

[Robert]

Hi Jeff

Churchill made a mistake in 1945, but it didn't affect his place in history, which is unassailable.

In the general election of that year Churchill, despite his wartime service and despite our still being at war with Japan, was voted out of office. One of the main reasons was his absolute refusal to countenance the Labour Party's plans for a welfare state. The public disagreed with him - they felt they had earned that much.

[Robert]

Hi FM

Yes, the French wanted long-term security and the Germans wanted international respectability. I think also that the French resented perceived slights by the Americans during the war, and set about creating a political bloc which they hoped would one day challenge America.

When I say the French, I don't mean the French people. Probably all the peoples of Europe feel patriotically towards their own countries. But the so-called elites - well, they're different. They have no countries or loyalties or principles. They are basically parasites.

[Ginger]

Probably all the peoples of Europe feel patriotically towards their own countries. But the so-called elites - well, they're different. They have no countries or loyalties or principles. They are basically parasites.

Exactly. This is why the regulars from both American parties are so horrified by Trump.

[John Wheat]

Why exactly would we be 'economically less powerful'?

And, in the event it turned out to be the case then it could be a good thing to tighten our belts and cut down on waste.

How is it a good thing to have less money. That logic is flawed.

[Fleetwood Mac]

How is it a good thing to have less money. That logic is flawed.

If you can't see that sometimes it's a good thing to have less money then I've no idea what world you're living in.

But then, perhaps it's because I'm more of a sit down conservative who thinks that principles and morals and one or two other things hold far more importance than money.

It remains a true saying that the best things in life are free, and a world that places stock in having as much money as possible might not be the best thing for us.

[John Wheat]

If you can't see that sometimes it's a good thing to have less money then I've no idea what world you're living in.

But then, perhaps it's because I'm more of a sit down conservative who thinks that principles and morals and one or two other things hold far more importance than money.

It remains a true saying that the best things in life are free, and a world that places stock in having as much money as possible might not be the best thing for us.

Well there are people in Britain that are poor as it is. How is Britain having less money going to benefit them? They will be the hardest hit as usual.

[Svensson]

Hi,

I am actually shocked about the way this discussion chosen to go with the Anti-German, "let's mention the war" mentality in from Page 1 onwards. 3 Weeks ago, Boris Johnson compared the EU to Hitler. Pretty much one of the most offensive statements in recent years. This is the kind of populist right-wing demagoguery that we are now all too used to from people like Donald Trump, Jean Marie Le Pen, Geert Wilders and a number of others.

Also the accusation that Germany's war-aim was to create a custom zone is simply ridiculous. I dig my history where I can but this is certainly something that I have never heard of. Maybe I should just point out here that it was in fact the British Empire that was built on trade and war (and a few trade-wars thrown in for good measure), but this obviously does not fit the narrative, does it?

But following Boris Johnson's Hitler comment, the fact that Jacob Reece-Mogg actually came out and defended this comment was probably even more disturbing. This entire debate is legitimising racism and populism that would have simply been unthinkable here in the UK only 5 years ago and this is something that nobody is really talking about.

I am of German descent and I have been living in London for 24 years. I follow the news in the UK as well as in Germany and it was always apparent that parts of the UK press is systematically hostile towards the EU and Germany for the simple reason that they appeal to a particular audience who are willing to buy the latest edition of the Daily Mail, Daily Express and Daily Telegraph. The narrative has always been a cash-cow that was lucrative enough to be maintained. The EU actually has a Website ("Euromyths") that has a real job on its hands to correct one horror story after another from the UK papers. The problem is that the UK press was allowed to run riot with this systematic misinformation for years and years, so as soon as Cameron called for the Referendum, it was too late to have a serious and balanced debate on the subject. I think the UK will vote to leave the EU and it will be based on false information that the electorate have received for years (not that Cameron was ever capable of setting the record straight. Like someone mentioned, "cometh the hour, cometh the mouse").

I will vote to remain, simply because there is not one argument of the leave campaign that has convinced me to vote leave. Not a single one.

This vote is not about geo-political decisions, if the EU has a "sufficient share of World-wide GDP" or similar. Besides, this is impossible to trend as the size of the EU keeps changing and the sizes of its individual economies do too. This vote is about an ever more interconnected world and how to deal with it. Is the UKL going to withdraw from it and take a step , literally, backwards, or is it going to engage and attempt to take the bull by the horns?

Finally, the problem with the Leave compagin is that much of their arguments are basically lies that they are hell-bent on perpetuating even though they have been corrected and called out many times over. They hage even been asked to stop claiming that the UK pays 350 million every week to the EU because this figure is simply not correct. There are countless examples of lies and misrepresentations that would go beyond this post/thread/forum but a couple of more points if I may:

- the Leave Campaign is headed by a Opportunist career politician Boris Johnson who is the UK's own version of Donald Trump. He has flip-flopped on EU issues in order to advance his own career. His side-kick is Michael Gove, a failed Minister for Schools whose ONLY policy was to attack teachers and school in a pretty despicable manner. Still in the Leave-camp but hated by all other protagonists in the EU referendum is Nigel Farrage and his pack of open racists, closet racists, mysogonists and common garden weirdos. So that's already a gang and a half, but nothing compared to:

- Trump and Putin and supporting the Leave campaign.

- the rest of Europe is pretty much at the point where they had enough of the UK's Primadonna behaviour for the last 20 years. They want the UK to stay as it would be a stronger union but if you have been called a "cesspit of stinking such and such" and have been compared to Hitler, I don't think that the UK will get any sort of favours from the EU whatsoever. Any sort of trade agreement will be on the EU's terms or there will be no agreement, so the entire "we don't want to get pushed around by the EU any longer" exercise will be self-defeating.

- I 100% agree with John Major when he let it rip last sunday: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36454782

- Someone mentioned Norway as an example. The thing is that Norway is a very specialised economy around shipping and oil. the UK on he other hand is a very diverse trade, services and goods-based econonmy. Besides, Norway are paying almost as much as the UK per capita to have access to the EU market and still need to realistically consider and many of the EU regulations in order to continue trading with the other 500 million customers in that market. Again, such a model would mean that a Leave vote would be self defeating.

- the UK and the US have nothing in common apart from a language.

So, rant over. Thanks for listening.

Oh, and I love the site.

[Robert]

Sorry to mention the war, Svensson - it obviously pains you - but it's a good job you weren't around when it was happening. You'd have burst a blood vessel. All those Little Englanders, Little Scotlanders, Little Welsh and Little Irish going off to die so that Little Britain could govern herself - they must all have been racists, right? I'm surprised we're allowed to remember them once a year. I dare say the EU will put a stop to that in due course.

Populism? You mean, saying things that people like? Or giving people what they want? Smells too much like democracy. Can't have that.

The EU has been rumbled. I saw through it 40 years ago. Some poor devils never will. But I believe that there is a real chance that we can finally escape from this impudent fraud.

[GUT]

Sorry to mention the war, Svensson - it obviously pains you - but it's a good job you weren't around when it was happening. You'd have burst a blood vessel. All those Little Englanders, Little Scotlanders, Little Welsh and Little Irish going off to die so that Little Britain could govern herself - they must all have been racists, right? I'm surprised we're allowed to remember them once a year. I dare say the EU will put a stop to that in due course.

Populism? You mean, saying things that people like? Or giving people what they want? Smells too much like democracy. Can't have that.

The EU has been rumbled. I saw through it 40 years ago. Some poor devils never will. But I believe that there is a real chance that we can finally escape from this impudent fraud.

And little Aussies and Kiwis, and eventually Yanks.