Quantcast
subscriber help

artisanal film reviews | by maryann johanson

from Facebook: the post-Brexit panic has not yet begun in the UK film industry


posted in:
easter eggs
  • David

    There’s not going to be any panic because there was no real danger in leaving the EU. The British people were given a choice between freedom and fear. They chose freedom.

  • Bluejay

    The Leave vote was fueled mainly by xenophobia, so you’ve got it exactly backwards.

    http://s.quickmeme.com/img/ab/ab2bd5c88cb2d3e7cb4494cdc612ac56ba8323925b6b8b6cc36946879227063c.jpg

  • David

    More fearmongering.

    “British society is filled with racists, xenophobes, and fascists so they need an unelected oligarchy in Brussels to control them. It’s too dangerous to let you control what happens within your country; there’s Global Warmi…er Climate Change, high sodium processed foods, right wing nationalists, and sharp corners. Give us power and we’ll protect you!”

    I’m glad the Brits said no to the Cocteau Plan! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JizGkM6gbvQ

  • Bluejay
  • David

    Translation: when people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong. We need to an unelected bureaucratic oligarchy to make sure that British citizens make the right choice.

    You can dress it up anyway you like it, but at the end of the day Supporters of Brexit wanted the British people to have more control over their lives while the anti-Brexit people are arguing for the British to have less control over what happens to them.

    https://ukoutofeu.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/13307420_1208705402473382_7423350090017678045_n.jpg

  • Bluejay

    Translation: when people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong.

    Sometimes. Are you seriously arguing that every choice that people freely make is correct?

    The British people WERE free to make this choice. That doesn’t mean their choice was a good one, or made for the right reasons.

    unelected

    That seems to be the key term to apply to any institution that makes decisions conservatives don’t like. They looove the US Constitution, but as soon as the Constitutionally-created Supreme Court hands down a ruling they hate, it’s “nine unelected judges!” Waah waah.

    Supporters of Brexit wanted the British people to have more control over their lives

    by appealing primarily to their fear of foreigners.

  • Danielm80

    I’m not sure even David takes his comments seriously anymore. Maybe he really does believe the nonsense he’s typing, but I think he’s just trying to get a rise out of the crazy SJWs here. Or to quote City of Death:

    Countess: [referring to The Doctor] My dear, I don’t think he’s as stupid as he seems.

    Count: My dear, nobody could be as stupid as he seems.

  • David

    Sometimes. Are you seriously arguing that every choice that people freely make is correct?

    The British people WERE free to make this choice. That doesn’t mean their choice was a good one, or made for the right reasons.

    Whether a decision is good or bad is a matter of perspective. I’m arguing that people should have the freedom to make choices that you consider “bad” so long as it doesn’t infringe on the negative rights of others. Are you arguing that people should not have the freedom to make choices that you don’t like?

    That seems to be the key term to apply to any institution that makes decisions conservatives don’t like. They looove the US Constitution, but as soon as the Constitutionally-created Supreme Court hands down a ruling they hate, it’s “nine unelected judges!” Waah waah.

    Us silly conservatives/rightwingers/racists/xenophobes/fascists/whatever buzzword you want to use to smear people you disagree with, etc. wanting the government to actually be accountable to the people they govern. You seem to be arguing for Oligarchy over Democracy.

    by appealing primarily to their fear of foreigners.

    Immigration is a serious issue that affects the people living in Britain and should be decided by people in Britain, not by Brussel bureaucrats who don’t have to deal with the consequences. Immigration was not the only issue though. Here is a list of many of the EU regulations that the British people were bound by; http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/586742/European-Union-barmy-decisions-rules-regulations-Britain-EU

  • David

    You can’t beat my argument with logic so now you’re resorting to petty insults. We’re talking about Brexit not the SJW movement.

  • Bluejay

    Are you arguing that people should not have the freedom to make choices that you don’t like?

    No, but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize choices that I see as made because of fear and bigotry. Whatever legitimate issues there might be with EU membership, the Leave campaign was conducted mainly by stirring up xenophobia (just as Trump is doing here, whatever legitimate issues people might have with the establishment).

    Here is a list of many of the EU regulations that the British people were bound by

    Yes, I’m sure the overwhelming reason that the Leave vote won is because people felt very strongly about the bendy-fruit rule and really wanted to eat their pet horses.

    I like this link better.

    http://www.vox.com/2016/6/25/12029786/brexit-uk-eu-immigration-xenophobia

  • David

    I never said that those regulations were the primary reason that the British voted to leave the EU, I merely used them as an example of laws that Brits were forced to adhere to despite being unable to vote for or against the people enacting them. I will freely admit that immigration was probably the most important issue (though not the only issue) driving the vote.
    Let me just clarify your position: should the British people be allowed to determine their immigration policy, even if that means that they make the “wrong” choice, or should an external political entity, which the British have little to no influence over, be able to force them to make the “right” choice?

  • Bluejay

    I will freely admit that immigration was probably the most important issue (though not the only issue) driving the vote.

    Yes, and the Leave vote, driven by concern over fictional excessive immigration, was a vote made out of xenophobia. Fear, in other words. So my argument stands.

    should the British people be allowed to determine their immigration policy

    Moot question. They just did, and they always have. If they want to go things completely alone (as they’ve just decided), they are free to pull out (and they did). But if they want to join a larger entity of nations — a club, in other words — it’s only fair to submit to the club rules and fulfill member obligations, in exchange for receiving club benefits. And yes, there were many benefits.

    an external political entity, which the British have little to no influence over

    Influence is a very nuanced and complicated thing to measure; see for instance the analyses here and here. It’s easy to make a soundbite out of “The UK is the most outvoted country!” but the reality is that the UK has been on the “winning side” of EU votes anywhere from 87% to 97% of the time depending on how you count, and that a LOT of negotiation goes on before votes are taken, during which the UK can exert its influence. Leaving the club now isolates the UK more, as they will now have ZERO influence on club policy, even as they’re surrounded by club members who can cooperate and do things to their advantage. Possibly not the smartest move.

  • Bluejay

    I seem to have duplicated one of my links, regarding the complexity of measuring UK influence in the EU. I’m sure you get the gist, but anyway, here are others.

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/is-the-uk-marginalised-in-the-eu-2/

    https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-brexit-debate-u-k-s-lack-of-influence-in-eu-is-greatly-exaggerated-1458154337

  • Bluejay

    Also, I realize it’s probably annoying for the British readers here to see two Americans trying to Americansplain what Brexit means. I’m done with this argument, and cede the floor to any British commenters who want to chime in. :-)

  • RogerBW

    I’m thoroughly bored with the whole business, and the only bright spot is that I get occasional royalty payments in dollars.
    I think the last best hope for avoiding another European war been destroyed, purely to salve failed politicians’ egos. Even if May is playing a long game and doesn’t pull the lever in the end, British influence in Europe has been pissed away; the economically sane side (mostly Germany and the Netherlands, plus historically the UK) is now desperately outweighed by the “grab all we can” side (France, Spain, Italy, Belgium) and that will not recover before the EU is destroyed.
    And, thanks to the fools who actually fell for all that nonsense about immigration and Britain having no influence in Europe, I can no longer even believe that, in spite of all the garbage in the media, most people are reasonably sensible and don’t fall for that nonsense. No, they clearly aren’t, and they did.

  • Bluejay

    I think the last best hope for avoiding another European war been destroyed

    Roger Cohen’s column on this was heartbreaking, I thought.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/28/opinion/britain-to-leave-europe-for-a-lie.html

  • David

    The question is not moot. The whole purpose of smearing Brexit supporters as “xenophobic/bigot/racist/misc buzzword”, etc. is to discredit the British electorate to justify imposition of rules and controls from outside the British citizenry. There are large numbers of anti-Brexiters who want a second referendum (and presumably a third, fourth, etc. until the people make the “right” choice) and they use the “buzzword” accusation to justify this. This question goes to the heart of the matter which is totalitarianism vs Libertarianism, Individualism VS. Collectivism, National sovereignty Vs. Internationalist hegemony. Where you stand on this will have a potent and direct impact on how you feel about the actions taken by governments.

    I would prefer not to get into a technical discussion of the mechanisms of EU governance, however there can be no doubt that the ability of individual British citizens to affect the laws and policies they lived under were significantly diluted by Britain’s membership in the EU.

  • David

    The chances of another continental war are very remote as long as the nations of Europe remain liberal democracies. As a general rule, liberal democracies do not make war on other liberal democracies.

  • Bluejay

    smearing Brexit supporters as “xenophobic/bigot/racist/misc buzzword”

    Ah, so even if I genuinely see xenophobia in the Leave vote, you’d rather I not SAY that I think it’s xenophobia? I shouldn’t call it like I see it? Anti-Brexiters aren’t allowed to exercise free speech and express a desire for another referendum? It sounds like you want anti-Brexiters to be more — how shall we say — politically correct in their criticisms, and to create a safe space for Brexiter sentiments. Very interesting.

    totalitarianism vs Libertarianism, Individualism VS. Collectivism, National sovereignty Vs. Internationalist hegemony

    Okay, first off, you gotta be more consistent in how you abbreviate “versus.” ;-)

    And granted, totalitarianism is never a good idea. But none of those other things are ENTIRELY good ideas either, when taken as pure absolutes to the exclusion of the others. We all necessarily exist on a shifting spectrum between all those ideals, because the problems we face generally can’t be solved entirely by one “ism” alone. Individuals should have rights, but any functioning society MUST operate with at least some level of collectivism, or cease being a society at all. There are things nations can do for themselves, and other things that nations must do together. Declaring yourself for, yes, buzzwords like “Individualism!” and “Freedom!” can result in a nice feeling of being vaguely principled, but can ignore the scope of the problems whose solutions might involve people not always getting what they want.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyqzPu5pX6U&t=127s

  • David

    Words like xenophobia/racist/bigot etc. have become so devalued that using them is roughly the equivalent of calling someone a “poopyhead”. They’re usually used as a substitution for making an argument based on logic and evidence.

    Anti-Brexiters aren’t allowed to exercise free speech and express a desire for another referendum?

    I never made that suggestion in any of my previous arguments. I will say that forcing people to vote over and over again on a measure until you get the result you want is anti-democratic similar to the way that trying someone multiple times for the same crime until they are found guilty is a perversion of a legal system.

    politically correct… safe space

    I never used those terms in this thread.

    buzzwords like “Individualism!” and “Freedom!”

    I did not use these terms as a substitution for making an argument.

    but can ignore the scope of the problems whose solutions might involve people not always getting what they want.

    Your lack of self awareness is staggering. I also notice how you keep attempting to rephrase my arguments in an attempt to use my rhetoric against me rather than coming up with your own arguments.

    Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way I can answer the part of your post that actually makes sense. You are correct that there needs to be a balance between pure Individualism (anarchy) and pure collectivism (totalitarian societies). Where the dividing line stands can often be murky and is something that reasonable people can disagree on. I have argued that the line is crossed when an external power like the EU attempts to force the British public to accept directives in regards to issues like immigration, economic regulation, etc.

  • Bluejay

    using them is roughly the equivalent of calling someone a “poopyhead”

    Oh, that’s rich. No thanks, I’m not buying any bridges today.

    They’re usually used as a substitution for making an argument based on logic and evidence.

    Gee, when I see candidates, campaigns, movements, and policies that demonstrate hostility to minorities, immigrants, and foreigners through their documented words and actions, I tend to take this evidence and logically conclude that they must be hostile to minorities, immigrants, and foreigners. Sometimes I even apply a term to this attitude, just to make the conversation go faster.

    (I also note, with an ironic cocking of my brow, that Brexiters’ blaming of immigrants for the woes of a nation is ITSELF a substitution for making an argument based on logic and evidence.)

    I did not use these terms as a substitution for making an argument.

    Ahem: “The British people were given a choice between freedom and fear. They chose freedom.” My, those buzzwords are buzzing all over the place!

    I also notice how you keep attempting to rephrase my arguments

    Ahem: “Translation: when people have the freedom to choose, they choose wrong.” Nice job putting words in my mouth there!

    Your lack of self awareness is staggering.

    Based on the evidence, I know YOURS is.

  • Dr. Rocketscience

    So… rather than attempt to demonstrate through logic and (*ahem*) evidence that Brexiters were uniformly not motivated by racism, bigotry, and xenophobia, you’re simply going to assert that the words themselves are meaningless. That’s not so much logic as sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling “LALALALALALAICANTHEARYOU!” And it’s blessedly free of evidence.

    Also, I could have sworn I muted you. Let me fix that…

  • David

    Just letting you know that increasing numbers of people aren’t going to let these words have power over them anymore. That’s both good and bad. It’s good because racial demagoguery is becoming less effective and bad because actual racists and white supremacists will have greater ability to recruit.

    I did not use these terms as a substitution for making an argument.

    Ahem: “The British people were given a choice between freedom and fear. They chose freedom.” My, those buzzwords are buzzing all over the place!

    These words were used to summarize an argument which I went into greater detail when asked.

    So I read this Vox opinion article and it basically confirms what I’ve been saying, people support the EU because they feel that it will reduce the ability of the British public to make decisions they feel are wrong. I don’t have an interest in learning all the facts and effects concerning the immigration debate in Britain. I don’t know if the negative aspects of immigration to Britain of large numbers of Eastern Europeans is overblown or not (Muslim immigration I am more familiar with and Muslim immigration does need to be strictly controlled). I will point out that the Vox article does not deal with the cultural impacts which are more important than economic impacts. I will say that British immigration policy should be based on the will of the British people, not EU bureaucrats.

    Here’s a British liberal arguing for why Brexit was right:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vpo9qzsfL4

  • David

    The burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused.

  • Bluejay

    I don’t have an interest in learning all the facts and effects concerning the immigration debate in Britain.

    Wow, you’re actually admitting to this? This is exactly what’s wrong with the conservative movement — its dismissiveness of actual facts. This way you get to make lofty pronouncements untethered from reality. So much for claiming to value “logic and evidence.”

    Muslim immigration does need to be controlled…cultural impacts… are more important than economic impacts.

    And what is this if not bigotry and xenophobia? You may brush it off as easily as “poopyhead” — but *I* know the seriousness of what I charge you with, whether you agree with it or not.

    I’m done here.

  • David

    Nobody has the time or ability to become experts on everything. It would take me about 15-20 hours of solid research to get to the point where I would be comfortable voicing an opinion on what Britain’s policy towards immigrants from Eastern Europe should be. You don’t know that much about it either, you just read a single article and regurgitated what you read as if it were your own opinion. I will say that this is an issue that affects the British people and they, not the EU, should decide on it.

    And what is this if not bigotry and xenophobia?

    Bigotry and xenophobia are irrelevant; my statement was correct.

    You never answered my previous question: should the British people be allowed to determine their immigration policy, even if that means that they make the “wrong” choice, or should an external political entity, which the British have little to no influence over, be able to force them to make the “right” choice?

Pin It on Pinterest