UK - Politika i društvo

bruno sulak wrote:

KinderLad wrote:

Zapravo ja mislim da je Corbynu vreme vec isteklo, ali necu to na ovom mestu da potenciram do kraja

moguce ali su se blerovci bas usmrdeli. tako da je ono prilicno teska situacija kada su laburisti u pitanju.

inace ludilo je da je libdemsi imaju bilo kakav kredibilitet o bilo cemu. evo jedne male prognoze: oni ce radije paktirati sa brexiterom bojo-m nego sa socijalistom korbinom.

Spoiler:

wrote:Big picture na stranu, kako cenite šansu da Republika Irska uđe u Šengen nakon ovoga?

Spoiler:

Gargantua wrote:samo da ne dođe džeremi

William Murderface wrote:Pa da, a u Ameriki socijalizam, pa makar to znacilo aplaudiranje Trampu. Manje zlo.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/apr/26/nick-clegg-hung-parliament-labour

This article is more than 9 years old
Nick Clegg: I could work with Labour, just not Gordon Brown

Independent wrote:Brexit news: Ken Clarke prepared to be caretaker PM as senior Tory rebels join Swinson in rejecting Corbyn

"I wouldn't reject it, if it was the judgement of people that it was the only way forward,” he said.

It follows criticism over Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson’​s rejection of Jeremy Corbyn’s plan to lead a caretaker government. The Labour leader said it was “not up to Jo Swinson” who becomes the next PM.


Senior Tory rebel Dominic Grieve, meanwhile, said he would “not facilitate” having Mr Corbyn at No 10 temporarily.

DAWN FOSTER

...

On Wednesday, the Labour leader wrote a letter to the other main opposition parties proposing an alliance to block a No Deal Brexit, a prospect that has now become uncomfortably plausible with Boris Johnson as prime minister. Under the proposal, Corbyn would call a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government; once the motion is carried he would step in to become a caretaker prime minister for a brief term. Corbyn’s powers would be limited; he couldn’t introduce new legislation. The sole purpose of his tenure as prime minister would be to negotiate a postponement of the Brexit deadline and call a general election. Labour would then campaign for a new EU referendum with a Remain option on the ballot.

The suggestion is calm, serious, and thoughtful. Most importantly, it includes a promise of a campaign for that second vote that so many centrists have loudly rallied for; the election everyone on the Left has longed for; and as mentioned, it severely limits Corbyn’s powers, but importantly, also blocks No Deal. It should bring everyone on board. Sensible parties were furtively positive: Plaid Cymru (the Welsh nationalist party) and the Scottish National Party said they were interested in discussing the idea when they appeared on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

But with this proposal, Corbyn has called the bluff of the extreme centrists and the obsessive Remainers. Since his scheme involves an election in which Labour would campaign for a second referendum, with Remain on the ballot, attacking Corbyn now means attacking the very ideas they claim to be fighting for. Sure enough, the Liberal Democrats shot the proposal down immediately, stating they would never countenance backing Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister, even if it meant stopping a No Deal Brexit — though leader Jo Swinson was perfectly happy to back David Cameron in the austerity cabinet of 2010. Meanwhile, centrist runaways in the Change UK/Independent Group for Change/Independent Group told journalists they, too, would not back a vote of no confidence against the government in order to stop a No Deal Brexit.

Thus, the hideous truth is now revealed, confirming what many on the Left have long been saying about the Liberal Democrats, the Independent Group, and a huge number of highly vocal centrist ultras on social media: for all their yelling that stopping Brexit is their sole concern, as long as stopping Brexit means Corbyn in a position of power — however minor and effectively powerless — they would prefer economic obliteration. Given the choice between Corbyn spending a few weeks merely acting out a pre-agreed script, on the one hand, and medicine and food shortages, a tanked pound, an economy in ruins, and widespread social panic, many centrists would choose the latter. Their hatred for Corbyn really does expand to fill so much of their mind as to incapacitate them.

There are several manias present in British politics today; Borismania has forced us into our current position. But the hatred of Corbyn and the obsession with stopping Brexit must now compete, and are all found in the same milieu: the middle-class person who sees themselves as a “thinking person” and “mildly green” but doesn’t know a huge amount about politics. That kind of person is anti-Corbyn and part of the Remain rally.

Make no mistake: these people would rather the Conservatives remain in power than a mild social democrat. They would prefer to see the country enter another, far harsher period of austerity, or see the economy shrink; after all, they weren’t touched by the first term of austerity, and they know the second will fall on the same people — the poorest. But they are overrepresented in the media and political class: people who consider themselves “a bit of a lefty” or left of center, who would prefer Boris Johnson to Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister, and who couldn’t see the problem with either the last Conservative government, the motions Corbyn voted against when Labour were in power, or the public spending cuts that made up the last austerity scheme. They constitute a small but vocal class of people who are angered because their perception of themselves as progressives has been undermined by younger people backing Labour now when they never did before. But rather than triggering inquiry into who these new politics activists are, all this does is elicit more hatred, abuse, and dismissal. Engage on Twitter and get accused of being a paid Russian troll, part of The Corbyn Cult, or simply a young idiot.

It might simply be annoying, but if this remains the attitude of the Greens and Lib Dems, it will usher in a No Deal Brexit that everyone agrees will have immediate effects on the poorest first. For the Lib Dems to claim their one purpose is to fight to stop Brexit, then dismiss the action that is most likely to stop No Deal Brexit, shows up the duplicitous reality: forced to choose between socialism or barbarism, despite their fluffy exterior and behaviour, they would choose barbarism.


https://jacobinmag.com/2019/08/jeremy-corbyn-no-deal-brexit-referendum-boris-johnson-labour-party

kud_genijalci wrote:E sad on topic (dali mi da bidam koju redakciju hoću ja izabrao spoljnopolitičku, da ne rizikujem otkaz u unutrašnjoj politici): Boris hoće da uradi s britanskim parlamentom ono što je Maja Gojković radila tokom 90% mandata: da ga "prorogira", ali evo friška vest - 79 poslanika ide na sud da to ospori, jer kažu 

Ujan Mari /Ian Murray/ wrote:“When Boris Johnson unveiled his vacuous slogan ‘taking back control’, voters weren’t told that this could mean shutting down parliament."

Da li će Boris imati problema zbog ovoga. videćemo uskoro.

Вук Стефановић Караџић wrote:Јел' време да се отвара нова кладионица, колико ће прешједника владе д'измењају до изласка?
Боџо је тек други, још није ваљано ни загрејао столицу, већ се спремају замене.

kud_genijalci wrote:

kud_genijalci wrote:E sad on topic (dali mi da bidam koju redakciju hoću ja izabrao spoljnopolitičku, da ne rizikujem otkaz u unutrašnjoj politici): Boris hoće da uradi s britanskim parlamentom ono što je Maja Gojković radila tokom 90% mandata: da ga "prorogira", ali evo friška vest - 79 poslanika ide na sud da to ospori, jer kažu 

Da li će Boris imati problema zbog ovoga. videćemo uskoro.

 Najpre na samog sebe da se nadovežem, a inspirisan "Trampovim autobusima" u naprednjačkom stilu: - u UK Boris sada pokušava ono što je kod nas godinama radila (i radi) Maja (i ortaci): da ukine parlament.
Znači - i Amerika i Engleska se ugledaju na nas. Prvo viljuške i kašike i Krmčija i Dušanov zakonik, a sada i političko ponašanje. 
Dodajmo Tesline izume i - ko su onda svetski carevi?

QD wrote:

Вук Стефановић Караџић wrote:Јел' време да се отвара нова кладионица, колико ће прешједника владе д'измењају до изласка?
Боџо је тек други, још није ваљано ни загрејао столицу, већ се спремају замене.

U vreme izlaska ipak će nagovoriti krlajicu Elizabetu da iskoristi onaj član za vanredne situacije i da se Brekzit nekako izbegne. Zatim će (ponovo)
 uslediti referendumi u Škotskoj, Irskoj i Kitovima i kad se oni budu izjasnili za izlazaka iz VB, ta zemlja će onda mirnim putem prestati da postoji i samim tim će da ispari iz EU.

Gargantua wrote:

DAWN FOSTER

...

On Wednesday, the Labour leader wrote a letter to the other main opposition parties proposing an alliance to block a No Deal Brexit, a prospect that has now become uncomfortably plausible with Boris Johnson as prime minister. Under the proposal, Corbyn would call a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government; once the motion is carried he would step in to become a caretaker prime minister for a brief term. Corbyn’s powers would be limited; he couldn’t introduce new legislation. The sole purpose of his tenure as prime minister would be to negotiate a postponement of the Brexit deadline and call a general election. Labour would then campaign for a new EU referendum with a Remain option on the ballot.

The suggestion is calm, serious, and thoughtful. Most importantly, it includes a promise of a campaign for that second vote that so many centrists have loudly rallied for; the election everyone on the Left has longed for; and as mentioned, it severely limits Corbyn’s powers, but importantly, also blocks No Deal. It should bring everyone on board. Sensible parties were furtively positive: Plaid Cymru (the Welsh nationalist party) and the Scottish National Party said they were interested in discussing the idea when they appeared on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

But with this proposal, Corbyn has called the bluff of the extreme centrists and the obsessive Remainers. Since his scheme involves an election in which Labour would campaign for a second referendum, with Remain on the ballot, attacking Corbyn now means attacking the very ideas they claim to be fighting for. Sure enough, the Liberal Democrats shot the proposal down immediately, stating they would never countenance backing Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister, even if it meant stopping a No Deal Brexit — though leader Jo Swinson was perfectly happy to back David Cameron in the austerity cabinet of 2010. Meanwhile, centrist runaways in the Change UK/Independent Group for Change/Independent Group told journalists they, too, would not back a vote of no confidence against the government in order to stop a No Deal Brexit.

Thus, the hideous truth is now revealed, confirming what many on the Left have long been saying about the Liberal Democrats, the Independent Group, and a huge number of highly vocal centrist ultras on social media: for all their yelling that stopping Brexit is their sole concern, as long as stopping Brexit means Corbyn in a position of power — however minor and effectively powerless — they would prefer economic obliteration. Given the choice between Corbyn spending a few weeks merely acting out a pre-agreed script, on the one hand, and medicine and food shortages, a tanked pound, an economy in ruins, and widespread social panic, many centrists would choose the latter. Their hatred for Corbyn really does expand to fill so much of their mind as to incapacitate them.

There are several manias present in British politics today; Borismania has forced us into our current position. But the hatred of Corbyn and the obsession with stopping Brexit must now compete, and are all found in the same milieu: the middle-class person who sees themselves as a “thinking person” and “mildly green” but doesn’t know a huge amount about politics. That kind of person is anti-Corbyn and part of the Remain rally.

Make no mistake: these people would rather the Conservatives remain in power than a mild social democrat. They would prefer to see the country enter another, far harsher period of austerity, or see the economy shrink; after all, they weren’t touched by the first term of austerity, and they know the second will fall on the same people — the poorest. But they are overrepresented in the media and political class: people who consider themselves “a bit of a lefty” or left of center, who would prefer Boris Johnson to Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister, and who couldn’t see the problem with either the last Conservative government, the motions Corbyn voted against when Labour were in power, or the public spending cuts that made up the last austerity scheme. They constitute a small but vocal class of people who are angered because their perception of themselves as progressives has been undermined by younger people backing Labour now when they never did before. But rather than triggering inquiry into who these new politics activists are, all this does is elicit more hatred, abuse, and dismissal. Engage on Twitter and get accused of being a paid Russian troll, part of The Corbyn Cult, or simply a young idiot.

It might simply be annoying, but if this remains the attitude of the Greens and Lib Dems, it will usher in a No Deal Brexit that everyone agrees will have immediate effects on the poorest first. For the Lib Dems to claim their one purpose is to fight to stop Brexit, then dismiss the action that is most likely to stop No Deal Brexit, shows up the duplicitous reality: forced to choose between socialism or barbarism, despite their fluffy exterior and behaviour, they would choose barbarism.


https://jacobinmag.com/2019/08/jeremy-corbyn-no-deal-brexit-referendum-boris-johnson-labour-party

Breaking: Boris Johnson begins his Breixt renegotiation with a letter to Donald Tusk. In short, the backstop must go, completely. pic.twitter.com/gCGVMlG382

— Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) August 19, 2019

The Story of Boris and Václav, or How to Break Up the UK
De Waal is a senior fellow with Carnegie Europe, specializing in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus region.
@Tom_deWaal

Boris Johnson could end up being the English leader who allowed the breakup of the UK to achieve Brexit. There are lessons in the dissolution of two other unions, the USSR and Czechoslovakia, and the role played by Boris Yeltsin and Václav Klaus.

The words chilled me. I was talking over lunch in London to a businessman close to the Conservative Party. It was six months before the EU referendum of 2016, and, as an argument against Brexit, I raised the risk of Scotland voting again for independence and breaking up the United Kingdom. (The Scots had voted against independence in 2014, when Brexit was not on the agenda.) My interlocutor said he was not bothered. The Scottish economy was tiny, he said, the Scots would have to sink or swim, and the English would do fine without them.

For three years, the main line of the anti-Brexit argument in the UK has been that leaving the EU will badly harm the economy. A bigger danger, of another Scottish independence referendum and a messy breakup of the UK, has lurked further back in the shadows.

Only now is the alarm being raised. Former prime minister Gordon Brown is warning starkly not just of the ambitions of the Scottish National Party, which advocates independence, but of the narrow “English nationalism” of Tories who, like my businessman, would be quite happy to see Scotland go. Even if he does not admit it, Boris Johnson’s Brexit strategy is leading Tory England in that direction.

The breakup in the 1990s of two union states, the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, is a lesson in how history can speed up and dissolve a country in almost the blink of an eye. In both cases, the decisive factor was the sudden withdrawal of support for the union by the leaders of the ‘big brother’ nation: the Russians, who dominated the Soviet Union, and the Czechs, the bigger nation of Czechoslovakia.

The Soviet Union could have lived on beyond 1991. In March of that year, then Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev held a referendum on preserving the USSR in a looser federation in which a strong majority (more than 77 percent of all Soviet citizens who took part and 73 percent of voters in Russia) voted in favor. Six republics— Armenia, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Moldova—boycotted the vote and could have achieved independence in time on their own with Western support, but the rest of the union still looked quite solid.

Lest we forget, it was then Russian president Boris Yeltsin, desperate to oust Gorbachev and the Soviet Communist Party, who dealt the killer blow in December 1991 together with the leaders of Belarus and Ukraine, with a triple declaration of independence. Yeltsin’s maneuver meant that the union lost its core member and could only be dissolved.

A few months later, in July 1992, Václav Klaus became prime minister of the Czech Republic, one of the two halves of Czechoslovakia. Vladimír Mečiar, his counterpart in Slovakia, was pushing for independence. Together, the two men oversaw the quick and unexpected dissolution of Czechoslovakia within six months. There was no referendum. Had there been, the people would undoubtedly have voted to keep the country together. In an opinion poll taken in September 1992, only 37 percent of Slovaks and 36 percent of Czechs said they would vote for a split.

Klaus consistently said he regretted the end of Czechoslovakia. His actions suggested otherwise. A free markets zealot, he regarded industrialized Slovakia as an economic burden, holding the Czech Republic back. Once he could not get the deal he wanted with Mečiar, Klaus pursued a divorce with ruthless determination.

Could another Boris—Boris Johnson—do for the United Kingdom what Boris Yeltsin and Václav Klaus did for their unions? In his first speech as prime minister, Johnson pledged his loyalty to “the awesome foursome” of the UK: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.

That masks the reality that Johnson was elected leader of a party whose members are now overwhelmingly English and worship the cause of Brexit with religious devotion. In a YouGov poll in June, an astonishing 63 percent of Conservative Party members said they would not mind Scotland leaving the UK if this was the price to pay for Brexit. (The corresponding figure for Northern Ireland was 59 percent.)

The parliamentary arithmetic is also compelling. The Conservative Party currently has 311 seats out of 650 in the UK Parliament. Given its current ideology and demographic bias, it is unlikely ever to win a majority again. But if Scotland were taken out of the equation, the Conservatives would have 298 seats out of 591 and a magic formula for keeping power.

In Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, Johnson may see a (much more benign) Scottish Mečiar, pushing for a Slovak-style divorce from the UK. Where Scotland might begin, Northern Ireland might follow—with much more mayhem. As Irish journalist Fintan O’Toole has persuasively argued, the main Irish republican party Sinn Féin appears to be welcoming the potential “Great Disruption” a no-deal Brexit would cause to pursue their ambitions of a united Ireland.

The point is not to compare the democratic UK with the oppressive USSR. It is to say that a union state—free or unfree, decades- or centuries-old—needs renewing by an act of faith by every new generation. And that a state breakup will always be more traumatic and difficult than the splitters imagine.

The end of the USSR is not an event to regret, but it still caused huge economic disruption, territorial conflicts, and personal tragedies. As for Czechoslovakia, some Brexiteers will argue that its peaceful breakup is an example of how the same can be done for the UK—and also for leaving the EU.

But there was economic hardship and personal grief for millions who had mixed Czech and Slovak identity. What’s more, the reason why the Czech Republic and Slovakia have got on well and thrived is because both aspired, successfully, to do the very opposite of what Boris Johnson wants for his country—to join the European Union.

https://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/79707?lang=en