| Historians on brexit on 20:55 - Nov 13 with 2121 views | gordon |
There's not much to disagree with there, apart from Liam Fox not getting a mention for promising the easiest deal in history, and similarly no mention of David Davis promising a free trade area '10 times bigger than the EU', which is my personal favourite. |  | |  |
| Historians on brexit on 20:56 - Nov 13 with 2124 views | Ftnfwest |
Whereas they were so clever they ran out of money |  | | |
| Historians on brexit on 21:13 - Nov 13 with 2091 views | Herbivore |
| Historians on brexit on 20:55 - Nov 13 by gordon |
There's not much to disagree with there, apart from Liam Fox not getting a mention for promising the easiest deal in history, and similarly no mention of David Davis promising a free trade area '10 times bigger than the EU', which is my personal favourite. |
Sorry, managed to fat finger down arrow you but I cancelled it out.
Hard to disagree with any of the article. Some of the ignorance is utterly staggering, we're an embarrassment. |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:26 - Nov 13 with 2072 views | factual_blue |
| Historians on brexit on 20:56 - Nov 13 by Ftnfwest |
Whereas they were so clever they ran out of money |
How have historians run out of money? |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:29 - Nov 13 with 2064 views | Footballpete |
| Historians on brexit on 21:26 - Nov 13 by factual_blue |
How have historians run out of money? |
Austerity? |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:29 - Nov 13 with 2062 views | Herbivore |
| Historians on brexit on 21:26 - Nov 13 by factual_blue |
How have historians run out of money? |
Too busy living in the past to plan for the future. | |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:29 - Nov 13 with 2061 views | factual_blue |
| Historians on brexit on 21:29 - Nov 13 by Footballpete |
Austerity? |
Historians are smart people, and wouldn't make that sort of mistake. | |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:32 - Nov 13 with 2057 views | factual_blue |
| Historians on brexit on 21:29 - Nov 13 by Herbivore |
Too busy living in the past to plan for the future. |
'Any fool can make history, but it takes a genius to write it.'
Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Historians on brexit on 21:35 - Nov 13 with 2058 views | BloomBlue |
Will that be Irish historians?
I wonder what they will write about their own government after the financial crash and a foreign country (the UK) had to give them millions to help bail them out |  | | |
| Historians on brexit on 21:42 - Nov 13 with 2041 views | Herbivore |
| Historians on brexit on 21:35 - Nov 13 by BloomBlue |
Will that be Irish historians?
I wonder what they will write about their own government after the financial crash and a foreign country (the UK) had to give them millions to help bail them out |
I imagine they'll say something along the lines of "At least we didn't really balls it up like our neighbours in the UK". | |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:51 - Nov 13 with 2014 views | eireblue |
| Historians on brexit on 21:35 - Nov 13 by BloomBlue |
Will that be Irish historians?
I wonder what they will write about their own government after the financial crash and a foreign country (the UK) had to give them millions to help bail them out |
Probably factually.
Just like a UK Historian could point out that during the financial crisis around 35% of UK debt was held by foreign investors, and is now around 25%.
And of course an educated historian probably would point out the irrelevance of mentioning debt with respect to the article. |  | | |
| Historians on brexit on 21:55 - Nov 13 with 2004 views | Moriarty |
| Historians on brexit on 21:35 - Nov 13 by BloomBlue |
Will that be Irish historians?
I wonder what they will write about their own government after the financial crash and a foreign country (the UK) had to give them millions to help bail them out |
Whereas there were internal failings in Ireland which contributed to the severity of the crash, I really doubt any historian with a modicum of common sense and basic understanding of economics, or either, would take such a simplistic view.
They’d also be likely to allude to Ireland facing up to the issue when it happened, not taking an easy way out. And recovering quite well in the process.
Both Britain and Ireland can point to examples of resilience in their histories. Both will need it following brexit. |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:55 - Nov 13 with 2009 views | WeWereZombies |
In the case of the Dominic Raab quote I think there is a misunderstanding of the use of language to emphasize a truism that Raab felt was understated, and his language was directed at his own party rather than an international audience. However, it does not detract from the general thrust of the article, that UK politicians are naive and lightweight. And it is difficult to argue with that. |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 21:59 - Nov 13 with 1989 views | Moriarty |
| Historians on brexit on 21:42 - Nov 13 by Herbivore |
I imagine they'll say something along the lines of "At least we didn't really balls it up like our neighbours in the UK". |
Brexit will balls us all up. Def info. | |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 10:48 - Nov 14 with 1805 views | Guthrum |
I'm inclined to think that is overly harsh, to the point of being unfair.
There did exist significant arguments that the EU leadership was inclining in an unwanted direction (full-blown federalism). That there were issues with policy at a time of increasing migration and economic constraint. Plus there had been long-standing ideological discontent with the EU among (mostly right-leaning Tory) politicians.
However, it was four things which tipped the situation over the edge:
1) Fear of Farage.
Particularly among the Conservative Party, but also in economically poorer Labour constituencies, there was a terror that UKIP was rising up - despite the fact the only significant elections they won were a by-election with the existing defected Tory MP standing and EU parliamentary votes with low turnout on PR. This led to ...
2) Everybody being in a terrible hurry.
Cameron suddenly had one shot at negotiating reforms from within the EU. Something that tricky was never going to be achieved at a single summit, so we shouldn't really have been surprised he didn't return with anything startling. So then it was felt necessary to hold a referendum ASAP. Don't leave time for detailed discussions, certainly do not bother coming up with some plan for what Brexit would amount to or how it could be achieved. This being largely down to governmental hubris that they could easily secure a Remain outcome. Farage would be shown up, discomifted and cease to be a problem. All this was upset by ...
3) Boris' opportunism.
Johnson thought he could play the situation to his advantage and gain traction for his ambition to become Prime Minister. So, from wavering, he plumped for the Leave side. Unfortunately for Remainers, Boris has a lot of charisma and bold (if misleading) slogans will always trump complex economic arguments. Assisted by ...
4) The public's disillusionment with contemporary politics.
Many people felt betrayed by complacency at Westminster, especially those areas hard hit by austerity. The modern social media era has little respect for authority and even, at times, truth. A lot of people wanted to "punish the politicians" and register their discontent.
Result: The vote goes in favour of Leave and chaos ensues as people try to sort out some kind of process amid a welter of competing ideological standpoints, mindless tribalism and immense practical difficulties.
The fact that some of the ministers attempting to achieve the practically impossible aren't the brightest or best-educated does not help, but wasn't really fundamental in swinging the vote in June 2016 (when most of them were still very junior). |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 11:16 - Nov 14 with 1778 views | Darth_Koont |
| Historians on brexit on 10:48 - Nov 14 by Guthrum |
I'm inclined to think that is overly harsh, to the point of being unfair.
There did exist significant arguments that the EU leadership was inclining in an unwanted direction (full-blown federalism). That there were issues with policy at a time of increasing migration and economic constraint. Plus there had been long-standing ideological discontent with the EU among (mostly right-leaning Tory) politicians.
However, it was four things which tipped the situation over the edge:
1) Fear of Farage.
Particularly among the Conservative Party, but also in economically poorer Labour constituencies, there was a terror that UKIP was rising up - despite the fact the only significant elections they won were a by-election with the existing defected Tory MP standing and EU parliamentary votes with low turnout on PR. This led to ...
2) Everybody being in a terrible hurry.
Cameron suddenly had one shot at negotiating reforms from within the EU. Something that tricky was never going to be achieved at a single summit, so we shouldn't really have been surprised he didn't return with anything startling. So then it was felt necessary to hold a referendum ASAP. Don't leave time for detailed discussions, certainly do not bother coming up with some plan for what Brexit would amount to or how it could be achieved. This being largely down to governmental hubris that they could easily secure a Remain outcome. Farage would be shown up, discomifted and cease to be a problem. All this was upset by ...
3) Boris' opportunism.
Johnson thought he could play the situation to his advantage and gain traction for his ambition to become Prime Minister. So, from wavering, he plumped for the Leave side. Unfortunately for Remainers, Boris has a lot of charisma and bold (if misleading) slogans will always trump complex economic arguments. Assisted by ...
4) The public's disillusionment with contemporary politics.
Many people felt betrayed by complacency at Westminster, especially those areas hard hit by austerity. The modern social media era has little respect for authority and even, at times, truth. A lot of people wanted to "punish the politicians" and register their discontent.
Result: The vote goes in favour of Leave and chaos ensues as people try to sort out some kind of process amid a welter of competing ideological standpoints, mindless tribalism and immense practical difficulties.
The fact that some of the ministers attempting to achieve the practically impossible aren't the brightest or best-educated does not help, but wasn't really fundamental in swinging the vote in June 2016 (when most of them were still very junior). |
I think you're right overall bringing these into the overall picture. There are other factors that contribute not just different types of ignorance or "unknowledge".
But I think it's still a root cause of all your points. We've got politicians, a political system and a political debate (in the media and over a beer) that celebrate deliberate unknowing, self-delusion and pig ignorance. |  |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 11:27 - Nov 14 with 1748 views | No9 |
Much of the history of how we got to where we are is the infigting in the tory party since Ted Heath signed up, despite the fact joining was in the 1971 tory manifesto they have never accepted that no matter how often being part of Europe has been at the heart of tory party policy
B Johnson is a liar & got sacked for telling the public lies - they still haven't woken up to that.
Historians sometimes misquote the truth |  | | |
| Historians on brexit on 11:53 - Nov 14 with 1709 views | No9 |
| Historians on brexit on 21:35 - Nov 13 by BloomBlue |
Will that be Irish historians?
I wonder what they will write about their own government after the financial crash and a foreign country (the UK) had to give them millions to help bail them out |
You answer to that lays in how many tories would have lost a lot of money had Mr Osborn not stepped in | | | |
| Historians on brexit on 12:04 - Nov 14 with 1692 views | WeWereZombies |
| Historians on brexit on 11:53 - Nov 14 by No9 |
You answer to that lays in how many tories would have lost a lot of money had Mr Osborn not stepped in |
In fairness, I think Osborn was only progressing, perhaps with bias but not as instigator, a process put in place by Gordon Brown and Christine Lagarde. | |
| |
| Historians on brexit on 12:13 - Nov 14 with 1683 views | No9 |
| Historians on brexit on 12:04 - Nov 14 by WeWereZombies |
In fairness, I think Osborn was only progressing, perhaps with bias but not as instigator, a process put in place by Gordon Brown and Christine Lagarde. |
The bankers crash concieved a lot aof actions that otherwise may not have happened.
The Irish situation is still a thorn in the tories side | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
