Language would seem to be a much bigger barrier to integration than skin colour.
There are successful multi language countries like Switzerland but even that is heavily federalised, more like a federal union of three different countries which is visible even at a petty level. For Example in German speaking areas of Switzerland traffic lights go red, red+amber, green, like Germany; whereas in French speaking areas they go direct from red to green as in France.
Similarly Canada and Belgium have come close to breaking up.
Wales, conquered a thousand years ago has its own language and has kept its identity as a nation state as has to a tiny extent Cornwall, Wessex and Kent with a common language have not
The only bigger barrier to integration than language would seem to be an absolutist religion.
"If tomorrow’s Labour party belongs to a figure who has remained in the trenches with Corbyn – which, in my view, is why Emily Thornberry remains worth a bet too – then Clive Lewis has done his chances after 2020 no small amount of good."
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against globalisation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
That post -it note has now been found .It reads-To Comrade Lewis. Our new defence policy is that we don't need Trident. Or you. Fraternal greetings, Comrade Milne.
''A loose Federation of the old Commonwealth English speaking states does make a lot of sense. I believe it will happen tacitly anyway, because of changing technology. ''
To make it work, it has to be more than 'loose' in my opinion. We have to be able to protect each other from intimidation by large blocks.
Basically, our Navy needs to treble in size. At least.
The loose federation already exists - called the commonwealth realms. A sort of personal empire of the monarch. Thanks mainly to the efforts of HM Queen the institution has survived and can grow as needed. But to move towards anything other than loose federation will bring back all the stresses and strains that brought about the balfour declaration and statute of westminster. After 1931 the British empire was a corpse with a living shell. The EU also shows us the dangers of federation.
As to Navies, no need while nato exists. It sort of surprises me that Australia have never joined, and that France did.
Too simples. Immigration just the icing on the cake.
I blame a long term failure to engage in Europe + collapsing trust in political elites + collapsing trust in media + stagnating incomes.
Immigration just the trigger point.
I wouldn't agree that high and sustained levels of net immigration are merely the straw that broke the camel's back. They're an important motivating factor in the desire of people to get out of the EU, for reasons that have previously been discussed very extensively and which I'll try not to bore on about.
However, the migration issue is just one dimension of the wider problem with the EU, which is that it is suffering from a lethal combination of imperial over-reach, institutional rigidity and hopeless divides over policy. Cameron could probably have won that referendum if there had been meaningful concessions on open borders, but the EU was both unwilling and unable to bend. Europe couldn't shield its external borders from a flood of economic migrants and refugees all jumbled together, because the member states were hopelessly split on whether or not to let them all in and could not organise any kind of common response, and then Germany went rogue and threw the doors wide open, leading to the de facto collapse of the passport free border system.
The Eurozone crisis drags on and on and on, firstly because a single currency should never have been implemented without a single government in the first place, and then secondly because the EU has been built without a brake, let alone a reverse gear. Its engine was only built for going forward and it has 28 pairs of hands on the steering wheel, so it is no wonder it keeps crashing into every obstacle in its way. The Eurozone's strong states won't give meaningful help to the weak ones, and yet nobody will contemplate doing what is necessary, in the absence of common borrowing and fiscal transfers, and just wind the whole thing up in an orderly fashion.
Opposition to the EEC in Britain was largely a fringe obsession - first of a weak Labour Party, then of a handful of Tory rebels - during the latter part of the last century. If the European project had been carefully managed, driven at a pace that people could live with, and if the principles of subsidiarity and variable geometry had been followed, then there is no reason to suppose either that Britain would be within a million miles of leaving, or that the organisation would be in the mess it is right now. Instead we have been treated to the spectacle of twenty years of the runaway steamroller of integration crushing popular referendums, national governments and entire societies under its great fat drum. It's no wonder that so many Britons ran away screaming.
Ennui with the establishment and economic distress were factors in the Brexit vote, but the most important motivator was the simple fact that the EU is failing, and has been seen to fail for years.
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against globalisation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against globalisation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
Australia is the most British place I know, outside Britain. It feels even more British than Dublin. Or Gibraltar.
It is basically a part of Britain, with better weather. I hear NZ is very similar.
Canada is not quite so British, America much less so (but still culturally closer than most European nations, bar maybe the Dutch or Nordics, maybe)
A loose Federation of the old Commonwealth English speaking states does make a lot of sense. I believe it will happen tacitly anyway, because of changing technology.
I think that could happen - not because of historical or cultural ties particularly - but because the three countries - Australia, Canada and the UK - are in similar circumstances: Middle ranking* "Western" liberal democracies democracies that find themselves somewhat isolated in Asia Pacific, at the top of America and in a newly disconnected Europe.
* I got in trouble with that phrase here last week but I am sticking with it.
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against globalisation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
That's just name calling.
I am simply replying in kind. Alistair's posts are genuinely ugly, driven by ignorance and bigotry. I am only insulting one person. He is content to insult millions. He is a disgraceful and unremittingly disgusting individual.
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against globalisation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
That's just name calling.
Alastair name-called 17.4 million people.
Never quite sure whether Mr Meeks' position on Leavers is closer to Caligula (he wishes they all had one neck, which he could cut) or Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (he would like to insult every single one of them individually, in alphabetical order).
Brussels is no more a foreign body to the UK than Westminster is to Scotland.
Brussels is not a British city. Its inhabitants aren't my fellow citizens. The proportion of people who think of themselves as European citizens in this country is vanishingly small.
Also, Brussels is not an English-speaking city. Language is really important. Really, really important. I know it’s possible to learn to speak another language, but most British people just don’t; certainly not to the extent where they are equally at home in a foreign-speaking city. I know the UK isn’t completely monoglot, but the number of non-English speakers is pretty small, and the largest body of them (Welsh-as-a-first-language speakers – probably?) tend to vote for a separatist party – showing that they’re perhaps not entirely at home in a country which speaks a different language. Language is how we know what our rulers, and our fellow citizens, are saying and doing – rather than what an interpreter says they’re saying and doing. We may not, in England, have our fingers fully on the pulse of Scottish politics, and of what the Scots as a nation think, but we understand Scottish politics - and the Scots - far more than we understand, say, French politics and the French, or German politics and the Germans, or even EU politics and the mainland Europeans. It’s really hard to forge a functioning democracy without a common language.
Switzerland. And to a lesser extent, Canada.
Don't most Swiss speak both though?
If you are in Basle, you will find German speakers and English speakers. And if you're in Geneva, it will be French and English.
I was in Ticino for a week, recently, and everyone spoke Italian, German, English and French. It was seriously impressive. Even dauntingly so.
Ticino just voted to make it harder for foreigners to work in the canton. Apparently foreigners (largely from Nth Italy) comprise 25% of the workforce.
There's also loads of Third World migrants camped out at the Italian side of the Ticino border - a bit like Calais.
The Ticinese were very twitchy about it.
Why would migrants be camped out at the border? Given that both Switzerland and Italy are part of the Schengen area, what's stopping them from waltzing right on in?
As to Navies, no need while nato exists. It sort of surprises me that Australia have never joined, and that France did.
Does that surprise make you consider that your world view is perhaps incomplete?
Not really. France have already walked out of Nato in a Huff once.
Canada are arguably just as egregious as Australia in terms of membership and are in. The gathering power of China may yet see Australia join but would need a rule change.
Fortunately We Aus Nz Can and US had the sense to set up AUSCANNZUKUS and five eyes enabling us to function effectively as a single Navy.
Too simples. Immigration just the icing on the cake.
I blame a long term failure to engage in Europe + collapsing trust in political elites + collapsing trust in media + stagnating incomes.
Immigration just the trigger point.
Ennui with the establishment and economic distress were factors in the Brexit vote, but the most important motivator was the simple fact that the EU is failing, and has been seen to fail for years.
I can't disagree on the EU failings, but I do think a more prosperous Britain would not have voted to Brexit.
What I think you miss is a failure by British politicians for a generation to really lead the pro-European argument, along the lines suggested by Casino Royale up thread.
Indeed, they have usually felt it impossible to resist flirting with a little Euroscepticism.
An opportunity existed for the UK to envision and argue for a different kind of EU. It did not, and thus the case against the EU became deafening.
A couple of interesting articles this past weekend:
Anne McElvoy claims if we all calm down and don't push too hard on Brexit we're likely to get a better settlement.
Ian Jack thinks utilitarian nationalism is dead in Scotland. Utilitarian nationalism sees independence as a means to an end: more prosperity, better governance etc. Independence as a goal in its own right is existential nationalism. It will be either that kind of independence, or not at all.
Which makes me think there's existential and utilitarian Brexit too. I suspect utilitarian Brexit (ie leaving the EU to achieve a particular desirable result) is just as dead as Scotland's utilitarian nationalism. I admit I expected Remain to win (just) on the assumption that enough people would realise the Leave campaign not only didn't have a plan, but didn't have a clue either. Those are incontrovertible facts, but I wasn't getting it: existential leavers simply didn't see it in terms of what is in our country's interest. For them, I think, it's about an idea of Britain that doesn't include the EU. In effect we have existential Leave versus utilitarian Remain. They don't share a philosophy or language that allows any communication.
Just catching up. Seems like it has been a popcorn-tastic day in Liverpool. Surely Clive Lewis could read out what he wanted to say or ad-lib and forget the autocue?
A guy who hasn't got the gumption to say "oops, the autocue has broken - so excuse me if my comments on Trident are a bit less subtle than I would have otherwise wanted" isn't a guy you would want as the Secretary of State for Defence....
@SeanT And conversely I have come to the conclusion that the manner of Leave's victory will ensure that the country becomes poorer, meaner, less important and more fractured. The likely consequences outside Britain are equally unpleasant, as the idea of nations working together falls out of fashion and every man looks for himself.
Brexit is part of an inflexion point, part of the revolt by the developed world's lower middle classes against global?isation. It will no more stop globalisation than it will stop the world spinning on its axis. But it will probably hasten the relative decline of Britain as the benefits of that globalisation that would otherwise have reached Britain will now be felt elsewhere and as trade barriers start to be re-erected.
Ugly stupid Britain won. Britain is set to get uglier and stupider.
No Alistair. Ugly and stupid Britain is represented almost every day on here - by you.
That's just name calling.
I am simply replying in kind. Alistair's posts are genuinely ugly, driven by ignorance and bigotry. I am only insulting one person. He is content to insult millions. He is a disgraceful and unremittingly disgusting individual.
What's worse - calling Leavers ugly or consistently spelling someone's name wrong
Comments
There are successful multi language countries like Switzerland but even that is heavily federalised, more like a federal union of three different countries which is visible even at a petty level. For Example in German speaking areas of Switzerland traffic lights go red, red+amber, green, like Germany; whereas in French speaking areas they go direct from red to green as in France.
Similarly Canada and Belgium have come close to breaking up.
Wales, conquered a thousand years ago has its own language and has kept its identity as a nation state as has to a tiny extent Cornwall, Wessex and Kent with a common language have not
The only bigger barrier to integration than language would seem to be an absolutist religion.
"If tomorrow’s Labour party belongs to a figure who has remained in the trenches with Corbyn – which, in my view, is why Emily Thornberry remains worth a bet too – then Clive Lewis has done his chances after 2020 no small amount of good."
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/09/why-clive-lewis-was-furious-when-trident-pledge-went-missing-his-speech
I have no interest in left wing politics but this I read recently regarding Seumas Milne may help in understanding him and may be what he is up too.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/04/thin-controller
As to Navies, no need while nato exists. It sort of surprises me that Australia have never joined, and that France did.
However, the migration issue is just one dimension of the wider problem with the EU, which is that it is suffering from a lethal combination of imperial over-reach, institutional rigidity and hopeless divides over policy. Cameron could probably have won that referendum if there had been meaningful concessions on open borders, but the EU was both unwilling and unable to bend. Europe couldn't shield its external borders from a flood of economic migrants and refugees all jumbled together, because the member states were hopelessly split on whether or not to let them all in and could not organise any kind of common response, and then Germany went rogue and threw the doors wide open, leading to the de facto collapse of the passport free border system.
The Eurozone crisis drags on and on and on, firstly because a single currency should never have been implemented without a single government in the first place, and then secondly because the EU has been built without a brake, let alone a reverse gear. Its engine was only built for going forward and it has 28 pairs of hands on the steering wheel, so it is no wonder it keeps crashing into every obstacle in its way. The Eurozone's strong states won't give meaningful help to the weak ones, and yet nobody will contemplate doing what is necessary, in the absence of common borrowing and fiscal transfers, and just wind the whole thing up in an orderly fashion.
Opposition to the EEC in Britain was largely a fringe obsession - first of a weak Labour Party, then of a handful of Tory rebels - during the latter part of the last century. If the European project had been carefully managed, driven at a pace that people could live with, and if the principles of subsidiarity and variable geometry had been followed, then there is no reason to suppose either that Britain would be within a million miles of leaving, or that the organisation would be in the mess it is right now. Instead we have been treated to the spectacle of twenty years of the runaway steamroller of integration crushing popular referendums, national governments and entire societies under its great fat drum. It's no wonder that so many Britons ran away screaming.
Ennui with the establishment and economic distress were factors in the Brexit vote, but the most important motivator was the simple fact that the EU is failing, and has been seen to fail for years.
Averaging the averages with the averagifier.
* I got in trouble with that phrase here last week but I am sticking with it.
NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the clue as to why Australia didn't join it is in the name I should have thought.
On a tangent, I had not realized that the UK was the only country in all three of NATO, CENTO and SEATO.
new thread
Canada are arguably just as egregious as Australia in terms of membership and are in. The gathering power of China may yet see Australia join but would need a rule change.
Fortunately We Aus Nz Can and US had the sense to set up
AUSCANNZUKUS and five eyes enabling us to function effectively as a single Navy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUSCANNZUKUS?wprov=sfla1
What I think you miss is a failure by British politicians for a generation to really lead the pro-European argument, along the lines suggested by Casino Royale up thread.
Indeed, they have usually felt it impossible to resist flirting with a little Euroscepticism.
An opportunity existed for the UK to envision and argue for a different kind of EU. It did not, and thus the case against the EU became deafening.
Anne McElvoy claims if we all calm down and don't push too hard on Brexit we're likely to get a better settlement.
Ian Jack thinks utilitarian nationalism is dead in Scotland. Utilitarian nationalism sees independence as a means to an end: more prosperity, better governance etc. Independence as a goal in its own right is existential nationalism. It will be either that kind of independence, or not at all.
Which makes me think there's existential and utilitarian Brexit too. I suspect utilitarian Brexit (ie leaving the EU to achieve a particular desirable result) is just as dead as Scotland's utilitarian nationalism. I admit I expected Remain to win (just) on the assumption that enough people would realise the Leave campaign not only didn't have a plan, but didn't have a clue either. Those are incontrovertible facts, but I wasn't getting it: existential leavers simply didn't see it in terms of what is in our country's interest. For them, I think, it's about an idea of Britain that doesn't include the EU. In effect we have existential Leave versus utilitarian Remain. They don't share a philosophy or language that allows any communication.