Brexit Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Actually, when they voted on membership in the EEC a while back (almost completely an economic/trade arrangement) they voted to stay.

From what I read, the large measure of opposition to the EU and the reason for the exit vote centered on the non-economic influences/requirements. I do not believe it was the trade deal portion that motivated the exit vote.

---

As with any political debate this one operated on multiple levels depending on who you asked.

At the bottom level you had the "Immigration Debate" that boiled down to the Out people saying "Throw them all out" and the In group saying "that's Racist". Then you had the "Confidence" Debate just above that where people who voted out believed Britain could stand on its own feet, and people who voted in believed it couldn't. Then there's the "Economic" debate that functioned on several levels, the bottom most just wanting more money for the NHS (anyone who believed that figure deserves to be fleeced).

Right at the top you have the "Demographic" and "Democratic" debate about how we control immigration and how it affects our society on one hand and who decides our laws on the other hand.

The theme running through the whole thing was the lack of enthusiasm on both sides. The people voting to saty didn't really like the EU and the people voting leave didn't really want to leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Legs

I think most of the people voting didn't have the faintest idea what they were voting for or against.
Some people probably thought they were voting to give millions of pounds to the NHS, I wonder how they felt when they were told the money was going to farmers instead?

---

There you have it in a nutshell once again. The sneering contempt for the working classes.

Then again that's why they're against Grammar Schools, one can't have the hoi polloi thinking for themselves can one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

There you have it in a nutshell once again. The sneering contempt for the working classes.

Then again that's why they're against Grammar Schools, one can't have the hoi polloi thinking for themselves can one?

---

The assumption was that if they did think for themselves (and didn't just believe the false promises), they'd have voted remain.
But nice try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

The assumption was that if they did think for themselves (and didn't just believe the false promises), they'd have voted remain.
But nice try.

---

Not necessarily - after all, those right-wing types are discouraged from doing anything academic. I'm not really all that right wing, in the grand scheme of things, and I'm hardly welcomed in academic circles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

There you have it in a nutshell once again. The sneering contempt for the working classes.

---

Yes, its a tory trait isn't it.
They must have held the people reliant on the NHS in lots of contempt to peddle such a lie to them.

No idea, I'm not a tory. I am working class though, albeit an educated one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Not necessarily - after all, those right-wing types are discouraged from doing anything academic. I'm not really all that right wing, in the grand scheme of things, and I'm hardly welcomed in academic circles.

---

That is at best tangential to what I said.
Let me repeat in my words:

Legs: Said that people fell for false promises and that is why they voted leave. It is implied that if they thought for themselves instead of following false promises, they would have voted remain.

IA: Said Legs only has contempt for the people he was talking about and that people on the left like Legs don't want these people to be educated.

Husar: Said that IA's post made no sense since Legs obviously implied that he would prefer them to be educated and think for themselves instead of following political propaganda.

PVC: Said that right-wing types are discouraged from academics.

Now let me explain why that is not a good point to make.

First of all, education does not necessarily require one to have an academic degree. My highschool put a lot of effort into teaching us critical thinking skills. And while this continues at the university, a lot of what I do there is memorize things. There is some critical thinking and analysis left, but a lot of exams are about taking two or three weeks to memorize models and the language of the trade and so on.

The second problem is, why does someone arrive at academics as a right-wing type? That somehow implies immovable object and a closed mind, not a good starting point to acquire knowledge, or is it? And the same would be true if someone arrived there as an antifa or similarly closed-minded leftists. In academia, at least in my experience, it is more a requirement to be open to new ideas than to come there and expect to find more evidence for one's existing views. If a right-winger comes there with these expectations, it is their own fault that they don't fit in, again, I would tell a left-winger the same.
One cannot go to a place of learning with all of one's views already nicely laid out and fixed in place and then expect there to be no friction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

That is at best tangential to what I said.
Let me repeat in my words:

Legs: Said that people fell for false promises and that is why they voted leave. It is implied that if they thought for themselves instead of following false promises, they would have voted remain.

IA: Said Legs only has contempt for the people he was talking about and that people on the left like Legs don't want these people to be educated.

Husar: Said that IA's post made no sense since Legs obviously implied that he would prefer them to be educated and think for themselves instead of following political propaganda.

PVC: Said that right-wing types are discouraged from academics.

Now let me explain why that is not a good point to make.

First of all, education does not necessarily require one to have an academic degree. My highschool put a lot of effort into teaching us critical thinking skills. And while this continues at the university, a lot of what I do there is memorize things. There is some critical thinking and analysis left, but a lot of exams are about taking two or three weeks to memorize models and the language of the trade and so on.

The second problem is, why does someone arrive at academics as a right-wing type? That somehow implies immovable object and a closed mind, not a good starting point to acquire knowledge, or is it? And the same would be true if someone arrived there as an antifa or similarly closed-minded leftists. In academia, at least in my experience, it is more a requirement to be open to new ideas than to come there and expect to find more evidence for one's existing views. If a right-winger comes there with these expectations, it is their own fault that they don't fit in, again, I would tell a left-winger the same.
One cannot go to a place of learning with all of one's views already nicely laid out and fixed in place and then expect there to be no friction.

---

Perhaps the most relevant political education that I've received was at sub-university level, namely distinguishing between different levels of evidence, weighing their usefulness, and plumping for the closest possible sources to the subject being considered. Anyone who has had to consider evidence in a substantial way will see this as just a basic requirement, common sense for anyone with half a brain. Yet in the Labour thread, I saw Corbyn supporters dismiss contrary opinions of his (in)competence as unacceptably biased, because they came from sources close to the subject. That's the circle of wrongness in post-truth politics that I talk about. Part of the scientific method requires that a concrete assertion must be made, that can be tested and verified independently, and that therefore there can be something to be tested against, and the possibly that it can be proved wrong. Post-truth politics closes the circle in on itself, so that all contrary evidence is by its nature to be dismissed. Nothing from the outside is admissible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Post-truth politics closes the circle in on itself, so that all contrary evidence is by its nature to be dismissed. Nothing from the outside is admissible.

---

That reminds me of some discussions I recently broke off with our resident alt right representative. :sweatdrop:
It seems to me that the entire "western world" is currently seeing a rise in extremism of all kinds.
While I and other lefties long for communism without wanting to admit it... I mean, while I want social justice, others want a Hitler to lead them to the promised land while they try to bend their demands so that it looks like they don't want a Hitler because they can't even justify to themselves that they long for a Hitler. :dizzy2:

The only conclusion can be that humanity triggered its own self destruction. :end:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

No idea, I'm not a tory. I am working class though, albeit an educated one.

---

I shake my head when I read things like this. I know you mean them and I understand the context....but on a deep level I just don't "get" it.

Our "class system," such as it is, is far more malleable and almost purely economic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

There is some critical thinking and analysis left, but a lot of exams are about taking two or three weeks to memorize models and the language of the trade and so on.

---

Don't you think it is the way it should be? I mean you can't become a pro without knowing basics. What will the use of, say, an automechanic be, if he can critically think looking at the engine, but doesn't know what it consists of?

Quote:

---

Our "class system," such as it is, is far more malleable and almost purely economic.

---

On one hand, this is just something the new rich tell themselves at night to get to sleep.

On the other hand, it does demand more than just a couple of classes. It's interesting to note that the American rich have relatively poor income-retention across generations (i.e. rich children often fall out of that bracket in adulthood, or downward mobility for short); I wonder how this varies as a function of generational retrenchment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

On one hand, this is just something the new rich tell themselves at night to get to sleep.

On the other hand, it does demand more than just a couple of classes. It's interesting to note that the American rich have relatively poor income-retention across generations (i.e. rich children often fall out of that bracket in adulthood, or downward mobility for short); I wonder how this varies as a function of generational retrenchment.

---

Americans like to think that they can move up. British don't like to think that they have moved up. Both are delusional.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Let me repeat in my words:

Legs: Said that people fell for false promises and that is why they voted leave. It is implied that if they thought for themselves instead of following false promises, they would have voted remain.

IA: Said Legs only has contempt for the people he was talking about and that people on the left like Legs don't want these people to be educated.

Husar: Said that IA's post made no sense since Legs obviously implied that he would prefer them to be educated and think for themselves instead of following political propaganda.

---

Oh I thought he was agreeing with the long established fact that tories despise the working class and enjoy playing them as mugs.

So he claims to be educated and managed to take a simple statement and get it completely backwards, must be a very special education he has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Don't you think it is the way it should be? I mean you can't become a pro without knowing basics. What will the use of, say, an automechanic be, if he can critically think looking at the engine, but doesn't know what it consists of?

---

I hate memorizing things sitting somewhere with a book or other reading material instead of a more interesting "learning by doing" approach, but you won't get an argument from me there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Legs

Oh I thought he was agreeing with the long established fact that tories despise the working class and enjoy playing them as mugs.

So he claims to be educated and managed to take a simple statement and get it completely backwards, must be a very special education he has.

---

Your diverting from your fact-based approach into insults again.
You call someone stupid or badly educated based on anecdotal evidence.
Should I call you stupid now because you made an obvious mistake and didn't follow scientific procedure? :dizzy2:

:thumbsdown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Your diverting from your fact-based approach into insults again.
You call someone stupid or badly educated based on anecdotal evidence.
Should I call you stupid now because you made an obvious mistake and didn't follow scientific procedure? :dizzy2:

:thumbsdown:

---

The only "evidence" present was an unverified claim about being educated and a statement which implied a lack of education.

Quote:

---

a statement which implied a lack of education.

---

Offer a syllogism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Offer a syllogism.

---

Two pints of cream with 1 pint of white wine, 1 lemon and 5 spoons of sugar, whisk until frothy.

:inquisitive:

Were you imitating Fragony there? If so, that's quite a good impression.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

:inquisitive:

Were you imitating Fragony there? If so, that's quite a good impression.

---

Oh sorry, thats a syllabub, not a syllogism. I must have read it arseways, but hey I got skoolin as you can tell because I can understand what is written.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Legs

The only "evidence" present was an unverified claim about being educated and a statement which implied a lack of education.

---

First you draw a conclusion and then try to weasel out by saying you had not enough evidence for any proper conclusion. :rolleyes:
Simple solution, don't make hasty conclusions if you lack "evidence", people might think you're a nasty person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

That is at best tangential to what I said.
Let me repeat in my words:

Legs: Said that people fell for false promises and that is why they voted leave. It is implied that if they thought for themselves instead of following false promises, they would have voted remain.

IA: Said Legs only has contempt for the people he was talking about and that people on the left like Legs don't want these people to be educated.

Husar: Said that IA's post made no sense since Legs obviously implied that he would prefer them to be educated and think for themselves instead of following political propaganda.

PVC: Said that right-wing types are discouraged from academics.

Now let me explain why that is not a good point to make.

First of all, education does not necessarily require one to have an academic degree. My highschool put a lot of effort into teaching us critical thinking skills. And while this continues at the university, a lot of what I do there is memorize things. There is some critical thinking and analysis left, but a lot of exams are about taking two or three weeks to memorize models and the language of the trade and so on.

The second problem is, why does someone arrive at academics as a right-wing type? That somehow implies immovable object and a closed mind, not a good starting point to acquire knowledge, or is it? And the same would be true if someone arrived there as an antifa or similarly closed-minded leftists. In academia, at least in my experience, it is more a requirement to be open to new ideas than to come there and expect to find more evidence for one's existing views. If a right-winger comes there with these expectations, it is their own fault that they don't fit in, again, I would tell a left-winger the same.
One cannot go to a place of learning with all of one's views already nicely laid out and fixed in place and then expect there to be no friction.

---

OK, I accept I could have explained that better.

Education is not only factual, it's also social and moral. This is part of what Pannonian meant when head said Brits don't like to think they have "moved up". The implication is that an education elevates you socially. Going to university moves you from the Working Class to the Middle Class.

IA would counter that whilst his education might make his kids Middle Class it doesn't change his social class.

The truth - I think - is somewhere in between.

Now on to what I said.

Implicit in Legs' comments is the belief that if the right-wing working class were better educated they would be more left-wing and therefore would have voted In because all the right-wing out campaign had going for it was false promises.

However, the higher up the educational ladder they go the more Left-wing it becomes because it's a clique. I'm not sure how far you got but as you know I'm trying to finish my PhD and I've had a problem. My department has refused to give me teaching experience, despite the number of years I've been doing the PhD (I'm part time) I've been given a total of about 6 hours teaching to do - and that was from one academic who is a friend in the department. Aside from that I was frozen out, and that prevented me from getting my AHEA certification because you have to do a minimum of something like six sessions, and I only did four.

That pretty much locks me out of teaching once I finish the PhD, certainly at a university of comparable stature to Exeter.

It's a bit depressing, if I'm honest, and part of it is that, I don't quite "fit", my opinions don't fit with the rest of the College, a few years ago at a dinner I pointed out to the rest of the table that drugs are not exclusively a problem of the Urban poor, they afflict the rural poor just as much. I was taken seriously because I grew up on a small-holding and I have direct experience of this in the local town. I rather exposed the ignorance of the other diners though.

This is a problem both of my class and my political outlook - that would be landed middle class btw (as opposed to educated middle class).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Legs

The only "evidence" present was an unverified claim about being educated and a statement which implied a lack of education.

---

Oh, well we all know IA is educated, we can tell - having known him for a decade or more on average

What is your PhD, still Medieval Studies? I'm surprised, as across the board the professorship (if not the doctoral base) should be representative of the general population in terms of those leanings, plus a relative rightward-lean in that sort of discipline.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

First you draw a conclusion and then try to weasel out by saying you had not enough evidence for any proper conclusion. :rolleyes:
Simple solution, don't make hasty conclusions if you lack "evidence", people might think you're a nasty person.

---

Errrr no.
I draw a conclusion from the available evidence.
Additional evidence to support the conclusion is present in the first part of post #936
Since I stand by what I said and the conclusion I reached from the statements made where on earth are you getting the notion about weaseling out?
The last tory effort at concern for the working calss was the Big Society project...which was soon dropped and its final audit showed that the bulk of th funding went to the wealthiest ares rather than the poorer areas which were stated as the main focus of the project.
And you don't have to be a tory to know that , which raises further questions about Apaches claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Implicit in Legs' comments is the belief that if the right-wing working class were better educated they would be more left-wing and therefore would have voted In because all the right-wing out campaign had going for it was false promises.

---

And where do you reach that conclusion from? obviously it was not garnered from what was written.
Are you working off preconceptions and just basing your assesment on that and trying to make your point fit what you want it to fit ?

Quote:

---

Oh, well we all know IA is educated, we can tell - having known him for a decade or more on average

---

Well I don't know that , in fact going by what was written by apache it seems the opposite is true.
So are you just going on preconceptions again young man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

What is your PhD, still Medieval Studies? I'm surprised, as across the board the professorship (if not the doctoral base) should be representative of the general population in terms of those leanings, plus a relative rightward-lean in that sort of discipline.

---

You think because we study medieval Christianity we're all medieval Christians?

Nah. You're not Catholic.

Oi it's InsaneApache not Apache! :stare:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I hate memorizing things sitting somewhere with a book or other reading material

---

You lie down. Learning will become more bearable (unless you go to sleep).