But what the comments on this site show is that many people closely interested in politics haven't moved on.
Literally every single day, the vast majority of comments on every thread consist of both Brexit and Remain supporters going on and on and on and on regurgitating the same old points over and over and over and over again.
When Rocket Man carries out an atmospheric nuclear test (which non-crazy people seem to think is on the cards) there will be people on here talking about what it means for Brexit.
Is this a because of brexit or despite brexit incidents?
I'm sure Williamglenn will be along any moment now to tell us how fantastic this is, because now the dispirited British people will surely vote in favour of the Euro and the Great Project once we've been broken on the wheel...
The British people know mediocrity when they see it, and when they heard David Cameron utter those feeble words, "Britain will never join the Euro," they knew they had to deliver a stern rebuke to shake up a political class that had lost its sense of purpose.
Hah!
Have you won your bet with SeanT yet? I can't remember the exact terms and am interested to know how the transition period mooted affects it.
I'm sure Williamglenn will be along any moment now to tell us how fantastic this is, because now the dispirited British people will surely vote in favour of the Euro and the Great Project once we've been broken on the wheel...
The British people know mediocrity when they see it, and when they heard David Cameron utter those feeble words, "Britain will never join the Euro," they knew they had to deliver a stern rebuke to shake up a political class that had lost its sense of purpose.
Hah!
Have you won your bet with SeanT yet? I can't remember the exact terms and am interested to know how the transition period mooted affects it.
It hinges on whether we'll have legally left the EU by the last day of 2019, so in terms of transition it depends what the mechanism is. If Article 50 is extended then I would win, otherwise probably not.
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed Leavers to understand this but I like the idea of nations cooperating rather than fighting (which was the history of Europe pre-EU); I like the fact that I can travel freely, that all EU countries are expected to meet the same standards (as a wheelchair user for the past 35 years I've seen the practical side of that). I like it that the richer EU regions support the poorer regions. I think the EU has been an instrument for promoting and protecting democracy in Greece, Spain, Portugal (none of which were democracies when we joined the EEC) and the ex-Iron Curtain countries.
I could go on...
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
I'm sure Williamglenn will be along any moment now to tell us how fantastic this is, because now the dispirited British people will surely vote in favour of the Euro and the Great Project once we've been broken on the wheel...
The British people know mediocrity when they see it, and when they heard David Cameron utter those feeble words, "Britain will never join the Euro," they knew they had to deliver a stern rebuke to shake up a political class that had lost its sense of purpose.
Hah!
Have you won your bet with SeanT yet? I can't remember the exact terms and am interested to know how the transition period mooted affects it.
It hinges on whether we'll have legally left the EU by the last day of 2019, so in terms of transition it depends what the mechanism is. If Article 50 is extended then I would win, otherwise probably not.
A timely reminder to the rest of us everyday punters to always read the fine print closely!
But what the comments on this site show is that many people closely interested in politics haven't moved on.
Literally every single day, the vast majority of comments on every thread consist of both Brexit and Remain supporters going on and on and on and on regurgitating the same old points over and over and over and over again.
Because people have moved on doesn't stop Brexit being the most important issue of this and perhaps the next generation.
A perfectly sensible topic for PB to discuss on a daily basis.
It's been very tetchy here today. I reacted, and then overreacted. I include myself in that. So, there: I'm sorry. My bad.
But, it would be nice if we could just "talk" on here without telling each other to go f*ck ourselves, or cheering on a clusterf*ck, or resigning ourselves to a clusterf*ck, or embracing a clusterf*ck, or somehow wanting a clusterf*ck to f*ck over those we really want to just get f*cked.
What I got wrong is that I grossly underestimated how bitter it would get on both sides. I thought ld shrug their shoulders and accept it without much fuss if we did vote to Leave.
I was wrong. Perhaps that was always going to be the case in a close vote that chose to take the nuclear option, but I was still wrong. I admit, and accept that.
No you weren't.
The vast majority of people have accepted it. The issue now is that the small vocal minority now exists on both sides of the divide. Whereas previously only the sceptics were the angry vocal majority, there is now an angry vocal majority on the Remain side too.
Both angry vocal minorities are just that though. ~5% on either side (if that) are angry and loud, ~90% of the country has moved on.
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
But while I voted leave, I've never seen msyelf as a headbanger. Had the vote gone the other way, I would have shrugged my shoulders, gone 'ah, that's democracy, at least I had my say' and gone on to think of other things.
Had we continued to remain in the EU, I would have simply regarded it in the same way as a distant villager in Dykanka might have viewed the court of the Russian Tsar - distant, dictatorial and bureaucratic, but an inevitible part of life, a burden to bear. But the idea that one might feel love and loyalty to these distant and alien overlords is still utterly alien to me.
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed Leavers to understand this but I like the idea of nations cooperating rather than fighting (which was the history of Europe pre-EU); I like the fact that I can travel freely, that all EU countries are expected to meet the same standards (as a wheelchair user for the past 35 years I've seen the practical side of that). I like it that the richer EU regions support the poorer regions. I think the EU has been an instrument for promoting and protecting democracy in Greece, Spain, Portugal (none of which were democracies when we joined the EEC) and the ex-Iron Curtain countries.
What I got wrong is that I grossly underestimated how bitter it would get on both sides. I thought the vast majority of people really didn't give much of a toss about the EU, and would shrug their shoulders and accept it without much fuss if we did vote to Leave.
I was wrong. Perhaps that was always going to be the case in a close vote that chose to take the nuclear option, but I was still wrong. I admit, and accept that.
snip Both angry vocal minorities are just that though. ~5% on either side (if that) are angry and loud, ~90% of the country has moved on.
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
But while I voted leave, I've never seen msyelf as a headbanger. Had the vote gone the other way, I would have shrugged my shoulders, gone 'ah, that's democracy, at least I had my say' and gone on to think of other things.
Had we continued to remain in the EU, I would have simply regarded it in the same way as a distant villager in Dykanka might have viewed the court of the Russian Tsar - distant, dictatorial and bureaucratic, but an inevitible part of life, a burden to bear. But the idea that one might feel love and loyalty to these distant and alien overlords is still utterly alien to me.
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
Many of its supporters see the EU as symbolic of a peaceful, rule based world order based on co-operation between nations prompted by two inconcievably destructive wars. By contrast, Brexit represents a rejection of this system, an expression of crude nationalism based on xenophobia, ignorance and populism.
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed Leavers to understand this but I like the idea of nations cooperating rather than fighting (which was the history of Europe pre-EU); I like the fact that I can travel freely, that all EU countries are expected to meet the same standards (as a wheelchair user for the past 35 years I've seen the practical side of that). I like it that the richer EU regions support the poorer regions. I think the EU has been an instrument for promoting and protecting democracy in Greece, Spain, Portugal (none of which were democracies when we joined the EEC) and the ex-Iron Curtain countries.
I could go on...
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
I'm only telling you why I like the EU. I don't expect any Leavers to agree.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie. Or Star Wars.
I know, I know: I haven’t lived. What can I be thinking? What have I been doing? Well, I can assure you I have been doing lots of lovely things.
For instance:
I did see ET in an open air cinema in Venice. That was lovely. And my rather gorgeous Italian date had tears in his eyes at the end, which made him even more irresistible.
There is plenty of bad SciFi, but the best films are not just special effects and dodgy costumes. They are a genre to explore themes and ideas without the constraints of earthly mundanity.
I particularly like the orginal "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers", for example as an exploration of cold war paranoia.
That is what impresses me so much about both Bladerunner films. Whilst of course using Sci-Fi as the medium, in fact both films are actually about what it means to be human, how we define humanity and what part memory, empathy and the desire to exist play in being human. They are so much more than just 'Sci-Fi' films.
I never quite got to see the original Bladerunner, probably because as a very busy junior doctor I didnt see any movies or buy any new music for about 5 years...
I think it probably impossible now to get a full feeling for just how visually stunning and strange the original film was back in 1982, however much you might (or might not) appreciate the visual aesthetics. Likewise, the ideas of Philip K Dick's novels weren't the cultural commonplaces they are today.
It remains a powerful film, and I still find Rutger Hauer's performance mesmerising.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
I am still waiting for them to discover that 'they need us more than we need them', as has been promised many times by various PB Leavers.
What I got wrong is that I grossly underestimated how bitter it would get on both sides. I thought the vast majority of people really didn't give much of a toss about the EU, and would shrug their shoulders and accept it without much fuss if we did vote to Leave.
I was wrong. Perhaps that was always going to be the case in a close vote that chose to take the nuclear option, but I was still wrong. I admit, and accept that.
snip Both angry vocal minorities are just that though. ~5% on either side (if that) are angry and loud, ~90% of the country has moved on.
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
But while I voted leave, I've never seen msyelf as a headbanger. Had the vote gone the other way, I would have shrugged my shoulders, gone 'ah, that's democracy, at least I had my say' and gone on to think of other things.
Had we continued to remain in the EU, I would have simply regarded it in the same way as a distant villager in Dykanka might have viewed the court of the Russian Tsar - distant, dictatorial and bureaucratic, but an inevitible part of life, a burden to bear. But the idea that one might feel love and loyalty to these distant and alien overlords is still utterly alien to me.
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
Many of its supporters see the EU as symbolic of a peaceful, rule based world order based on co-operation between nations prompted by two inconcievably destructive wars. By contrast, Brexit represents a rejection of this system, an expression of crude nationalism based on xenophobia, ignorance and populism.
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
A very good post. Your first two paragraphs are an accurate portrayal of this EU supporter's feelings.
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed Leavers to understand this but I like the idea of nations cooperating rather than fighting (which was the history of Europe pre-EU); I like the fact that I can travel freely, that all EU countries are expected to meet the same standards (as a wheelchair user for the past 35 years I've seen the practical side of that). I like it that the richer EU regions support the poorer regions. I think the EU has been an instrument for promoting and protecting democracy in Greece, Spain, Portugal (none of which were democracies when we joined the EEC) and the ex-Iron Curtain countries.
I could go on...
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
The EU was at least partly born out of a desire to avoid further conflict between nations. It is quite interesting that it experiencing these existential challenges at the exact point when the last major war is fading from living memory.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
I think they'll say "Whatever. Do you have a new proposal or have you just decided to leave?"
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed Leavers to understand this but I like the idea of nations cooperating rather than fighting (which was the history of Europe pre-EU); I like the fact that I can travel freely, that all EU countries are expected to meet the same standards (as a wheelchair user for the past 35 years I've seen the practical side of that). I like it that the richer EU regions support the poorer regions. I think the EU has been an instrument for promoting and protecting democracy in Greece, Spain, Portugal (none of which were democracies when we joined the EEC) and the ex-Iron Curtain countries.
I could go on...
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
I'm only telling you why I like the EU. I don't expect any Leavers to agree.
But you are an intelligent man who has proved himself open to debate and discussion so I do at least feel it is worthwhile engaging you in what I feel are misconceptions.
Do you really not see that the EU has laid claim to the preservation of peace ( as was the wish of its founders) but that this claim is false and the peace we have benefitted from lies with the geopolitical balance between East and West, Warsaw Pact and NATO rather than having anything to do with the EU. As I say, it was only after the collapse of that balance that we began to see wars again in Europe in spite of the existence of the EU.
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
But while I voted leave, I've never seen msyelf as a headbanger. Had the vote gone the other way, I would have shrugged my shoulders, gone 'ah, that's democracy, at least I had my say' and gone on to think of other things.
Had we continued to remain in the EU, I would have simply regarded it in the same way as a distant villager in Dykanka might have viewed the court of the Russian Tsar - distant, dictatorial and bureaucratic, but an inevitible part of life, a burden to bear. But the idea that one might feel love and loyalty to these distant and alien overlords is still utterly alien to me.
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
Many of its supporters see the EU as symbolic of a peaceful, rule based world order based on co-operation between nations prompted by two inconcievably destructive wars. By contrast, Brexit represents a rejection of this system, an expression of crude nationalism based on xenophobia, ignorance and populism.
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
A very good post. Your first two paragraphs are an accurate portrayal of this EU supporter's feelings.
A benevolent dictatorship, then. You only needed two words. Not two paragraphs.
I believe I've already made my feelings on the subject clear, but thank you for enlightening me on what you see as the positives. For me, they are vastly outweighed by the democratic deficit.
Ironically I would probably be an enormous cheerleader for a completely democratic EU that took subsidiarity seriously. But it's not, and it doesn't, and here we are.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie. Or Star Wars.
I know, I know: I haven’t lived. What can I be thinking? What have I been doing? Well, I can assure you I have been doing lots of lovely things.
For instance:
I did see ET in an open air cinema in Venice. That was lovely. And my rather gorgeous Italian date had tears in his eyes at the end, which made him even more irresistible.
There is plenty of bad SciFi, but the best films are not just special effects and dodgy costumes. They are a genre to explore themes and ideas without the constraints of earthly mundanity.
I particularly like the orginal "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers", for example as an exploration of cold war paranoia.
I have a long list of favourite films which explore themes like this and what it means to be human etc without the need for sci-fi. It just leaves me cold. Human beings are so infinitely interesting there is no need, to my mind, to escape into other worlds.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie. Or Star Wars.
I know, I know: I haven’t lived. What can I be thinking? What have I been doing? Well, I can assure you I have been doing lots of lovely things.
For instance:
I did see ET in an open air cinema in Venice. That was lovely. And my rather gorgeous Italian date had tears in his eyes at the end, which made him even more irresistible.
Apparently one of the best cinematic experiences to be had this year is in Manchester where various films are being shown with live orchestral accompaniment in place of the scores. A friend recently went to see La La Land done in this way. Not a film he would otherwise have watched but apparently transformed by the live score.
My daughter got her mum 2 tickets for Love Actually in Edinburgh for her birthday/ Christmas. It's one of her favourite films. I fear I may be incredibly busy that night and my daughter is in Holland. Someone is going to be taking one for the team.
Love Actually is sentimental rubbish. The heartstrings are too obviously being pulled. And the actress playing the No 10 cleaner can’t act for toffee. It makes me think of what Oscar Wilde is reported to have written about the death of Little Nell. “It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.”
But what the comments on this site show is that many people closely interested in politics haven't moved on.
Literally every single day, the vast majority of comments on every thread consist of both Brexit and Remain supporters going on and on and on and on regurgitating the same old points over and over and over and over again.
Because people have moved on doesn't stop Brexit being the most important issue of this and perhaps the next generation.
A perfectly sensible topic for PB to discuss on a daily basis.
Fair point - but I think there are two different things here.
If people were discussing what TMay said today or other latest reports re the negotiations then I would find that perfectly interesting, understandable and topical.
But the point I was making was that (at least largely) people seem to just be regurgitating Remain / Leave arguments from "first principles" - repeating points already made endlessly beforehand.
Idly scanning the Guardian site, I came acorss this interview with Ken Clarke last February. Prescient stuff.
" ‘If you actually encounter any person who says that he or she can predict what is going to happen in the next 12 months, then he or she is by definition an idiot.’
“Because there isn’t anybody who knows what is going to happen in the next 12 months, from Theresa May downwards."
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
(snip)
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
Many of its supporters see the EU as symbolic of a peaceful, rule based world order based on co-operation between nations prompted by two inconcievably destructive wars. By contrast, Brexit represents a rejection of this system, an expression of crude nationalism based on xenophobia, ignorance and populism.
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
A very good post. Your first two paragraphs are an accurate portrayal of this EU supporter's feelings.
A benevolent dictatorship, then. You only needed two words. Not two paragraphs.
I believe I've already made my feelings on the subject clear, but thank you for enlightening me on what you see as the positives. For me, they are vastly outweighed by the democratic deficit.
Ironically I would probably be an enormous cheerleader for a completely democratic EU that took subsidiarity seriously. But it's not, and it doesn't, and here we are.
I personally think that Brexit is more likely to ultimately lead to the removal of protections in law for human rights and democracy, and the installation of a nationalist, authoritarian government than any long lasting, democratic resurgence. But there we go. Just my opinion. No one can really predict the future.
As a democratic event though, the 2017 election was something to behold.
Sheriff in Vegas has just said that paddock has taken a lot of steps to hide much of his life / planning beforehand. It doesn't sound like we will ever know why he did this.
Yes, I think this is probably it - most of the country has moved on and just wants the government of the day to get on with making the best of it.
What has taken me aback over the year is the sheer ferocity of the loyalty to the EU shown by the ultras. I didn't know they existed. I didn't know anyone could feel love for, let alone allegiance to, a bureacracy I regard as nothing more than meddlesome.
(snip)
The sheer strength of feeling for the EU by the ultras on the other side has surprised me. The last year has been something of an eye opener, to put it mildly.
Many of its supporters see the EU as symbolic of a peaceful, rule based world order based on co-operation between nations prompted by two inconcievably destructive wars. By contrast, Brexit represents a rejection of this system, an expression of crude nationalism based on xenophobia, ignorance and populism.
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
A very good post. Your first two paragraphs are an accurate portrayal of this EU supporter's feelings.
A benevolent dictatorship, then. You only needed two words. Not two paragraphs.
I believe I've already made my feelings on the subject clear, but thank you for enlightening me on what you see as the positives. For me, they are vastly outweighed by the democratic deficit.
Ironically I would probably be an enormous cheerleader for a completely democratic EU that took subsidiarity seriously. But it's not, and it doesn't, and here we are.
I personally think that Brexit is more likely to ultimately lead to the removal of protections in law for human rights and democracy, and the installation of a nationalist, authoritarian government than any long lasting, democratic resurgence. But there we go. Just my opinion. No one can really predict the future.
As a democratic event though, the 2017 election was something to behold.
Again one wonders how we managed to get by as a democracy prior to joining the EEC. There is absolutely no reason at all that we should become a less democratic country by leaving the EU. Indeed the immediate effect is to make us more democratic by returning all powers we have ceded to Brussels back to the UK.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
I think they'll say "Whatever. Do you have a new proposal or have you just decided to leave?"
That may well be their attitude. Since we've made a perfectly good, albeit necessarily a bit vague, proposal, which they so far think they don't need to bother to respond to, they are setting themselves (and us) up for a seriously nasty period of economic, and probably political, disruption.
Up to them, of course. We can't force them to act in their own interests. Clearly, though, we need to start planning for mitigation measures. At least we'll have saved €100bn on the 'exit fee', and €10bn a year for a couple of years from March 2019, which will help.
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
I'm only telling you why I like the EU. I don't expect any Leavers to agree.
But you are an intelligent man who has proved himself open to debate and discussion so I do at least feel it is worthwhile engaging you in what I feel are misconceptions.
Do you really not see that the EU has laid claim to the preservation of peace ( as was the wish of its founders) but that this claim is false and the peace we have benefitted from lies with the geopolitical balance between East and West, Warsaw Pact and NATO rather than having anything to do with the EU. As I say, it was only after the collapse of that balance that we began to see wars again in Europe in spite of the existence of the EU.
Ok I will respond, although we might both get banned from PB for engaging in constructive dialogue, rather than name-calling and mud-slinging!
Firstly, let me say you might be right - I don't have a monopoly on the truth - but I think you are wrong...
Armed conflicts between the historic European adversaries (France, Germany, Britain, Spain, Austria, Italy, The Netherlands, or any of their predecessor states) are inconceivable whilst those states are part of the EU. I do not think there has been any continuous period of 50 years in Europe before the EU without armed conflict between at least two of those nations. Maybe that's a coincidence; but I think not.
The Balkan war involved states not in the EU. Now most of those states are in the EU, the danger of further conflict is, imo, very much less likely.
If it was the East West geopolitical power balance, rather than the EU, that kept western Europe peaceful, we should expect conflict soon amongst some of the nations I listed, because it's already been 27 years since the fall of the Iron Curtain and that's historically usually been long enough for a conflict to erupt between the major western European states.
While the EU exists armed conflict between EU nations simply cannot happen.
(NATO helps too but it's a much weaker block on conflict between members because it's a much looser association - see what happened with Greece and Turkey in 1974 for example)
A benevolent dictatorship, then. You only needed two words. Not two paragraphs.
I believe I've already made my feelings on the subject clear, but thank you for enlightening me on what you see as the positives. For me, they are vastly outweighed by the democratic deficit.
Ironically I would probably be an enormous cheerleader for a completely democratic EU that took subsidiarity seriously. But it's not, and it doesn't, and here we are.
I personally think that Brexit is more likely to ultimately lead to the removal of protections in law for human rights and democracy, and the installation of a nationalist, authoritarian government than any long lasting, democratic resurgence. But there we go. Just my opinion. No one can really predict the future.
As a democratic event though, the 2017 election was something to behold.
Yes. While I'm not a Corbyn fan, I admit I got a sense of satisfaction out of seeing the democratic process in action - an imperious leader with an autocratic style humbled before the people, who will now be forced to listen to and act on the concerns of the electorate if she and her party are to survive.
A demonstration of the importance of democracy in action. "If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system," as Tony Benn put it.
If there were a way to "kick the buggers out" so to speak while remaining part of the EU I might have considered voting to remain.
Love Actually is sentimental rubbish. The heartstrings are too obviously being pulled. And the actress playing the No 10 cleaner can’t act for toffee. It makes me think of what Oscar Wilde is reported to have written about the death of Little Nell. “It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.”
It's a lot worse than that. Like with much of the music written by Coldplay, the world would be better off without it.
I wouldn't class myself as an ultra (it's a term new to me in this context) but I do feel the benefits of the EU vastly outweighed the drawbacks.
I don't expect committed
Actually Ben the history of fighting was pre-NATO not pre-EU. The post war peace in Europe was borne out of the balance of power between East and West with neither wanting to risk a fight in Europe escalating into something more serious. It is no coincidence that almost as soon as that balance was destroyed we had war in Yugoslavia with East and West each backing their own sides - in spite of the existence of the EU.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
I'm only telling you why I like the EU. I don't expect any Leavers to agree.
But you are an intelligent man who has proved himself open to debate and discussion so I do at least feel it is worthwhile engaging you in what I feel are misconceptions.
Do you really not see that the EU has laid claim to the preservation of peace ( as was the wish of its founders) but that this claim is false and the peace we have benefitted from lies with the geopolitical balance between East and West, Warsaw Pact and NATO rather than having anything to do with the EU. As I say, it was only after the collapse of that balance that we began to see wars again in Europe in spite of the existence of the EU.
Peace is more than the absence of armed conflict. Peace is a positive act, of nations constructively engaged in building bridges between peoples, of encouraging links between old enemies, of enshrining the rule of Law and establishing respect for human rights.
This is what the EU has done for peace. Within my lifetime most of Southern and Eastern Europe were dictatorships with secret police spying on their own people. Now many are still imperfect in their Democracy, but they are far better places politically, socially and economically. We played a major part in that progress and it is a real benefit to the EU that we did.
Perhaps that job is now done, but perhaps it still is not.
The symbol at the centre of the flag represents the Trident of the mythical sea god, Neptune - the shaft of the trident is broken symbolising Barbados' break from Britain.
Love Actually is sentimental rubbish. The heartstrings are too obviously being pulled. And the actress playing the No 10 cleaner can’t act for toffee. It makes me think of what Oscar Wilde is reported to have written about the death of Little Nell. “It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.”
It's a lot worse than that. Like with much of the music written by Coldplay Radiohead, the world would be better off without it.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
That is perhaps more rhetorical than analytic, I think? Somebody spreading a story in English via the UK press is trying to reach the UK public, not trying to reach someone who speaks French and lives in Brussels.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
In my younger days I was more into Fassbinder and Almodovar, although I have a very soft spot for "Wings of Desire". Truffaut passed me by, and though I kept trying to get into Fellini (and I can see the value of him and Mastroianni), he always slid off. But there was always an alternative, and for every European arthouse you could find an North American indy: you gotta Wenders or Hertzog, I can raise you a Coppola or Cassavetes and slip in an Egoyan or Hal Hartley just for fun. I don't think you get that rich ecology of arthouse these days (or maybe I'm just showing my age), although I suspect it's just migrated to television.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
That is perhaps more rhetorical than analytic, I think? Somebody spreading a story in English via the UK press is trying to reach the UK public, not trying to reach someone who speaks French and lives in Brussels.
I’m sure the EU can follow the British press. But I rather think that they’ve formed their view, have set out their strategy, realise that the British government does not have a clue and are waiting to see what we do next, in the expectation that we will fold.
Just because a deal ought, in a sane, sensible world, to be done and is in both our and the EU’s interests, does not mean it will happen.
I thought - wrongly - that Remain would win. I thought - wrongly - that if Leave were to win, both us and the EU would take a deep breath, pause and try and find a way forward, including the possibility of remaining on better/different terms. I thought - wrongly - that Britain would go for some sort of EEA/EFTA option to minimise disruption. I thought - wrongly - that May would be safe and boring and more or less competent and go for an option which slowly and sensibly disengaged Britain from the EU while trying to maintain civilised relations with it. I thought - wrongly - that May would speak some necessary truths to her own party and the voters about the reality of our options, much as she spoke some hard truths to her own party and the Police Federation. I thought - wrongly - that she would take her time to think through the options and work out a negotiating strategy before triggering Article 50.
I think now that no deal is more likely than not and that there will be some of Brexit-related chaos which will engulf the government. This will leave the mother of all hospital passes for the next government.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
In my younger days I was more into Fassbinder and Almodovar, although I have a very soft spot for "Wings of Desire". Truffaut passed me by, and though I kept trying to get into Fellini (and I can see the value of him and Mastroianni), he always slid off. But there was always an alternative, and for every European arthouse you could find an North American indy: you gotta Wenders or Hertzog, I can raise you a Coppola or Cassavetes and slip in an Egoyan or Hal Hartley just for fun. I don't think you get that rich ecology of arthouse these days (or maybe I'm just showing my age), although I suspect it's just migrated to television.
I love Cassavetes. Agree on the arthouse stuff tho I too may be showing my age. There are lots of good indy films out there but you have to hunt them out. When younger I used to see everything at my local indy cinema and got to see lots of films from round the world. Really opened my eyes. Kurosawa’s reworking of MacBeth for instance is astonishing. And the Turkish Dersu Uzala.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
That is perhaps more rhetorical than analytic, I think? Somebody spreading a story in English via the UK press is trying to reach the UK public, not trying to reach someone who speaks French and lives in Brussels.
I’m sure the EU can follow the British press. But I rather think that they’ve formed their view, have set out their strategy, realise that the British government does not have a clue and are waiting to see what we do next, in the expectation that we will fold.
Just because a deal ought, in a sane, sensible world, to be done and is in both our and the EU’s interests, does not mean it will happen.
I thought - wrongly - that Remain would win. I thought - wrongly - that if Leave were to win, both us and the EU would take a deep breath, pause and try and find a way forward, including the possibility of remaining on better/different terms. I thought - wrongly - that Britain would go for some sort of EEA/EFTA option to minimise disruption. I thought - wrongly - that May would be safe and boring and more or less competent and go for an option which slowly and sensibly disengaged Britain from the EU while trying to maintain civilised relations with it. I thought - wrongly - that May would speak some necessary truths to her own party and the voters about the reality of our options, much as she spoke some hard truths to her own party and the Police Federation. I thought - wrongly - that she would take her time to think through the options and work out a negotiating strategy before triggering Article 50.
Me too with most of that. Though from at least the time of the Hinckley decision it seemed likely May wasn't up to the job.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
She is indeed. Mark Kermode once did a rather cruel impression of the way she speaks, which I've since been unable to unhear.
The symbol at the centre of the flag represents the Trident of the mythical sea god, Neptune - the shaft of the trident is broken symbolising Barbados' break from Britain.
Love Actually is sentimental rubbish. The heartstrings are too obviously being pulled. And the actress playing the No 10 cleaner can’t act for toffee. It makes me think of what Oscar Wilde is reported to have written about the death of Little Nell. “It would take a heart of stone not to laugh.”
It's a lot worse than that. Like with much of the music written by Coldplay, the world would be better off without it.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
That is perhaps more rhetorical than analytic, I think? Somebody spreading a story in English via the UK press is trying to reach the UK public, not trying to reach someone who speaks French and lives in Brussels.
I’m sure the EU can follow the British press. But I rather think that they’ve formed their view, have set out their strategy, realise that the British government does not have a clue and are waiting to see what we do next, in the expectation that we will fold.
Just because a deal ought, in a sane, sensible world, to be done and is in both our and the EU’s interests, does not mean it will happen.
I thought - wrongly - that Remain would win. I thought - wrongly - that if Leave were to win, both us and the EU would take a deep breath, pause and try and find a way forward, including the possibility of remaining on better/different terms. I thought - wrongly - that Britain would go for some sort of EEA/EFTA option to minimise disruption. I thought - wrongly - that May would be safe and boring and more or less competent and go for an option which slowly and sensibly disengaged Britain from the EU while trying to maintain civilised relations with it. I thought - wrongly - that May would speak some necessary truths to her own party and the voters about the reality of our options, much as she spoke some hard truths to her own party and the Police Federation. I thought - wrongly - that she would take her time to think through the options and work out a negotiating strategy before triggering Article 50.
I think now that no deal is more likely than not and that there will be some of Brexit-related chaos which will engulf the government. This will leave the mother of all hospital passes for the next government.
I really hope I’m wrong on this.
Goodnight all.
Cyclefree, if we are going to be fair and balanced about this, there is one - wrongly missing angle from your list.. And that is the one I thought most significant in this discussion - that wrongly, the EU have chosen not only to disrespect a democratic referendum, but also they have failed to have the humility to understand how it came about before launching into their undemocratic defencisive actions which are targeted at punishing the UK for daring to democratically holding a Referendum which resulted in the UK disagreeing with the future direction of the EU.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie. Or Star Wars.
I know, I know: I haven’t lived. What can I be thinking? What have I been doing? Well, I can assure you I have been doing lots of lovely things.
For instance:
I did see ET in an open air cinema in Venice. That was lovely. And my rather gorgeous Italian date had tears in his eyes at the end, which made him even more irresistible.
There is plenty of bad SciFi, but the best films are not just special effects and dodgy costumes. They are a genre to explore themes and ideas without the constraints of earthly mundanity.
I particularly like the orginal "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers", for example as an exploration of cold war paranoia.
I have a long list of favourite films which explore themes like this and what it means to be human etc without the need for sci-fi. It just leaves me cold. Human beings are so infinitely interesting there is no need, to my mind, to escape into other worlds.
Science fiction and fantasy stories can do everything other genres can do, but with added spaceships or dragons,that's why I prefer them - they can be silly, they can be serious, they can be philosophical or comedic, all things other genres can do, as you point out, but with added creativity just to be cool.
They also can explore some themes that other genres would struggle to, ideas of artificial inteillgence, alien contact, development of society hundreds of years from now, which a present day or historical real world setting would find more difficult, or allow for imagining of totally different ways of society (particularly impacted by technology) which a present day setting could not, or in the case of fantasy stories without being restricted by real world cultural and historical knowledge and parallels. Sometimes maybe a story could be improved by being divorced from the real world, with all its baggage.
Personally I don't understand ruling out entire genres of fiction. The question is how does a setting and style improve the story being told. If you want a story about how society might develop in the future then by definition you do need it to be sci fi, you simply cannot explore an idea of future human development beyond a couple of decades without it. If you want to explore deep human themes it doesn't have to be sci fi, so what about the setting is helping explore those themes?
And if you dont care to explore deep themes but just want some escapism, well, that isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, sure.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
She is indeed. Mark Kermode once did a rather cruel impression of the way she speaks, which I've since been unable to unhear.
Ah, Gwyneth Paltrow - the Gerald Ratner of obsessive living for people with too much money. She called her website "Goop" which means "a stupid person".
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I like Gwyneth Paltrow, she's a talented actress, albeit as a person she seens either a bit dim or just pretentious and self obsessed, at least in how reports have it.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie. Or Star Wars.
I know, I know: I haven’t lived. What can I be thinking? What have I been doing? Well, I can assure you I have been doing lots of lovely things.
For instance:
I did see ET in an open air cinem. e.
There is plenty of bad SciFi, but the best films are not just special effects and dodgy costumes. They are a genre to explore themes and ideas without the constraints of earthly mundanity.
I particularly like the orginal "Invasion of the Bodysnatchers", for example as an exploration of cold war paranoia.
I have a long list of favourite films which explore themes like this and what it means to be human etc without the
Science fiction and fantasy stories can do everything other genres can do, but with added spaceships or dragons,that's why I prefer them - they can be silly, they can be serious, they can be philosophical or comedic, all things other genres can do, as you point out, but with added creativity just to be cool.
They also can explore some themes that other genres would struggle to, ideas of artificial inteillgence, alien contact, development of society hundreds of years from now, which a present day or historical real world setting would find more difficult, or allow for imagining of totally different ways of society (particularly impacted by technology) which a present day setting could not, or in the case of fantasy stories without being restricted by real world cultural and historical knowledge and parallels. Sometimes maybe a story could be improved by being divorced from the real world, with all its baggage.
Personally I don't understand ruling out entire genres of fiction. The question is how does a setting and style improve the story being told. If you want a story about how society might develop in the future then by definition you do need it to be sci fi, you simply cannot explore an idea of future human development beyond a couple of decades without it. If you want to explore deep human themes it doesn't have to be sci fi, so what about the setting is helping explore those themes?
And if you dont care to explore deep themes but just want some escapism, well, that isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, sure.
Also, particular in the case of fantasy, practically anything can fall into the genre. Telling a historical setting story with people with oddly 21st century views, or without due acknowledgement of the societal views at that time on women, race or religious belief?it isn't a high fantasy tolkienesque fantasy tale, but it would just as much if not more escapist and, indeed, a fantasy, even if it was utterly realistic in every other way.
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
Highly recommend Ex-Machina or Gattaca [and even Minority Report] as entry points into serious sci-fi and to see what it can do in terms of enlightening on the human condition, although both succumbed to the need for a 'Hollywood' ending.
Just as literature allows us to explore difficult human situations and relationships vicariously from the safety of the sofa, so sci-fi has the potential to explore those same issues pushed to extremes that would not be so credible in an earthbound setting.
All these 'Prepare for no-deal Brexit' headline are potentially rather helpful to the negotiations. Dunno if they'll be sufficient to draw the realities of the situation to the attention of our EU friends, though; I rather think not.
That is perhaps more rhetorical than analytic, I think? Somebody spreading a story in English via the UK press is trying to reach the UK public, not trying to reach someone who speaks French and lives in Brussels.
I’m sure the EU can follow the British press. But I rather think that they’ve formed their view, have set out their strategy, realise that the British government does not have a clue and are waiting to see what we do next, in the expectation that we will fold.
Just because a deal ought, in a sane, sensible world, to be done and is in both our and the EU’s interests, does not mean it will happen.
I thought - wrongly - that Remain would win. I thought - wrongly - that if Leave were to win, both us and the EU would take a deep breath, pause and try and find a way forward, including the possibility of remaining on better/different terms. I thought - wrongly - that Britain would go for some sort of EEA/EFTA option to minimise disruption. I thought - wrongly - that May would be safe and boring and more or less competent and go for an option which slowly and sensibly disengaged Britain from the EU while trying to maintain civilised relations with it. I thought - wrongly - that May would speak some necessary truths to her own party and the voters about the reality of our options, much as she spoke some hard truths to her own party and the Police Federation. I thought - wrongly - that she would take her time to think through the options and work out a negotiating strategy before triggering Article 50.
I think now that no deal is more likely than not and that there will be some of Brexit-related chaos which will engulf the government. This will leave the mother of all hospital passes for the next government.
I really hope I’m wrong on this.
Goodnight all.
I feel increasingly confident we will avoid a cliff edge - we will at least get some kind of transition period which buys time. let's see.
This may be an unpopular opinion, but I like Gwyneth Paltrow, she's a talented actress, albeit as a person she seens either a bit dim or just pretentious and self obsessed, at least in how reports have it.
Not entirely. She used to be a fine actress - but I don't think she's done anything worthwhile since the Kermode impression. Coincidence .... ?
I am just popping in to say hello and also that I have never seen any Bladerunner film. Or any other sci-fi movie...
It's a rather large field to make such a sweeping statement. Gattaca? Frankenstein? The Truman Show? Sliding Doors? Jurassic Park? Aliens? Planet of the Apes? It would be difficult to watch movies and not hit at least one sci-fi one.
Nope. Not seen any of them, apart from Sliding Doors, which I’d never categorise as sci-fi. Gwyneth Paltrow is a rather irritating actress IMO.
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
Highly recommend Ex-Machina or Gattaca [and even Minority Report] as entry points into serious sci-fi and to see what it can do in terms of enlightening on the human condition, although both succumbed to the need for a 'Hollywood' ending.
Just as literature allows us to explore difficult human situations and relationships vicariously from the safety of the sofa, so sci-fi has the potential to explore those same issues pushed to extremes that would not be so credible in an earthbound setting.
Highly recommend Ex-Machina or Gattaca [and even Minority Report] as entry points into serious sci-fi and to see what it can do in terms of enlightening on the human condition, although both succumbed to the need for a 'Hollywood' ending.
The ending of ex-machina is not what I would call Hollywood
Comments
Have you won your bet with SeanT yet? I can't remember the exact terms and am interested to know how the transition period mooted affects it.
As for promoting democracy in Spain I am afraid the ongoing silence from the EU (with one honourable exception) regarding Spanish violence against voters really shows what they think of that concept.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4963380/Matt-Damon-Russell-Crowe-helped-spike-Weinstein-expos.html
A perfectly sensible topic for PB to discuss on a daily basis.
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-09/catalonia-decision-expected-on-independence-from-spain/
This overriding analysis, coupled with the association between the EU and progressive politics, mean that many of its supporters don't look too far in to the deficiencies within the EU and the way it actually works.
Although I consider myself a eurosceptic, one of the main reasons that I voted remain was that I percieved that the forces behind Brexit were a far greater threat to the country than any risks of remaining in the EU. And events since the referendum have justified that analysis.
Likewise, the ideas of Philip K Dick's novels weren't the cultural commonplaces they are today.
It remains a powerful film, and I still find Rutger Hauer's performance mesmerising.
Do you really not see that the EU has laid claim to the preservation of peace ( as was the wish of its founders) but that this claim is false and the peace we have benefitted from lies with the geopolitical balance between East and West, Warsaw Pact and NATO rather than having anything to do with the EU. As I say, it was only after the collapse of that balance that we began to see wars again in Europe in spite of the existence of the EU.
I believe I've already made my feelings on the subject clear, but thank you for enlightening me on what you see as the positives. For me, they are vastly outweighed by the democratic deficit.
Ironically I would probably be an enormous cheerleader for a completely democratic EU that took subsidiarity seriously. But it's not, and it doesn't, and here we are.
If people were discussing what TMay said today or other latest reports re the negotiations then I would find that perfectly interesting, understandable and topical.
But the point I was making was that (at least largely) people seem to just be regurgitating Remain / Leave arguments from "first principles" - repeating points already made endlessly beforehand.
" ‘If you actually encounter any person who says that he or she can predict what is going to happen in the next 12 months, then he or she is by definition an idiot.’
“Because there isn’t anybody who knows what is going to happen in the next 12 months, from Theresa May downwards."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/05/ken-clarke-on-brexit-ive-never-seen-anything-as-mad-or-chaotic-as-this
As a democratic event though, the 2017 election was something to behold.
Up to them, of course. We can't force them to act in their own interests. Clearly, though, we need to start planning for mitigation measures. At least we'll have saved €100bn on the 'exit fee', and €10bn a year for a couple of years from March 2019, which will help.
Firstly, let me say you might be right - I don't have a monopoly on the truth - but I think you are wrong...
Armed conflicts between the historic European adversaries (France, Germany, Britain, Spain, Austria, Italy, The Netherlands, or any of their predecessor states) are inconceivable whilst those states are part of the EU. I do not think there has been any continuous period of 50 years in Europe before the EU without armed conflict between at least two of those nations. Maybe that's a coincidence; but I think not.
The Balkan war involved states not in the EU. Now most of those states are in the EU, the danger of further conflict is, imo, very much less likely.
If it was the East West geopolitical power balance, rather than the EU, that kept western Europe peaceful, we should expect conflict soon amongst some of the nations I listed, because it's already been 27 years since the fall of the Iron Curtain and that's historically usually been long enough for a conflict to erupt between the major western European states.
While the EU exists armed conflict between EU nations simply cannot happen.
(NATO helps too but it's a much weaker block on conflict between members because it's a much looser association - see what happened with Greece and Turkey in 1974 for example)
A demonstration of the importance of democracy in action. "If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system," as Tony Benn put it.
If there were a way to "kick the buggers out" so to speak while remaining part of the EU I might have considered voting to remain.
This is what the EU has done for peace. Within my lifetime most of Southern and Eastern Europe were dictatorships with secret police spying on their own people. Now many are still imperfect in their Democracy, but they are far better places politically, socially and economically. We played a major part in that progress and it is a real benefit to the EU that we did.
Perhaps that job is now done, but perhaps it still is not.
And, to make it even funnier:
The symbol at the centre of the flag represents the Trident of the mythical sea god, Neptune - the shaft of the trident is broken symbolising Barbados' break from Britain.
http://www.barbados.org/emblems.htm
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-vegas-shooting-gambler-20171009-story.html
I do however have very good knowledge of French and Italian films. Francesco Rosi is one of the great film-makers of our time
Just because a deal ought, in a sane, sensible world, to be done and is in both our and the EU’s interests, does not mean it will happen.
I thought - wrongly - that Remain would win.
I thought - wrongly - that if Leave were to win, both us and the EU would take a deep breath, pause and try and find a way forward, including the possibility of remaining on better/different terms.
I thought - wrongly - that Britain would go for some sort of EEA/EFTA option to minimise disruption.
I thought - wrongly - that May would be safe and boring and more or less competent and go for an option which slowly and sensibly disengaged Britain from the EU while trying to maintain civilised relations with it.
I thought - wrongly - that May would speak some necessary truths to her own party and the voters about the reality of our options, much as she spoke some hard truths to her own party and the Police Federation.
I thought - wrongly - that she would take her time to think through the options and work out a negotiating strategy before triggering Article 50.
I think now that no deal is more likely than not and that there will be some of Brexit-related chaos which will engulf the government. This will leave the mother of all hospital passes for the next government.
I really hope I’m wrong on this.
Goodnight all.
Now that I have more time on my hands.......
Though from at least the time of the Hinckley decision it seemed likely May wasn't up to the job.
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/12/-em-love-actually-em-is-the-least-romantic-film-of-all-time/282091/
Is there something similar with Coldplay ?
(Let us agree not to mention Radiohead.)
They also can explore some themes that other genres would struggle to, ideas of artificial inteillgence, alien contact, development of society hundreds of years from now, which a present day or historical real world setting would find more difficult, or allow for imagining of totally different ways of society (particularly impacted by technology) which a present day setting could not, or in the case of fantasy stories without being restricted by real world cultural and historical knowledge and parallels. Sometimes maybe a story could be improved by being divorced from the real world, with all its baggage.
Personally I don't understand ruling out entire genres of fiction. The question is how does a setting and style improve the story being told. If you want a story about how society might develop in the future then by definition you do need it to be sci fi, you simply cannot explore an idea of future human development beyond a couple of decades without it. If you want to explore deep human themes it doesn't have to be sci fi, so what about the setting is helping explore those themes?
And if you dont care to explore deep themes but just want some escapism, well, that isn't going to be everyone's cup of tea, sure.
Yes.It was quite a good impression. 2nd one in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXFmlkqhCkA
Just as literature allows us to explore difficult human situations and relationships vicariously from the safety of the sofa, so sci-fi has the potential to explore those same issues pushed to extremes that would not be so credible in an earthbound setting.
But at least Trident renewal must be secure.....
Coincidence .... ?