More protests in Westminster: Saturday & Tuesday

[Jenny1]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Now, it's the inference that you clearly make

>

> diable rouge Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > That's still not a reference to Nazi Germany.

> Keep

> > trying...

This is a long read but I think it makes some really interesting points about what comparisons we can and can't make between our current situation and the Weimar Republic. There are, of course, never any direct repetitions of history, and one shouldn't look for them, while at the same time trying to learn what lessons one can from the past.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/britain-proroguing-boris-johnson-parliament-suspension-richard-evans-weimar

[dbboy]

I believe learning lessons from history is important so that they are not repeated.

[diable rouge]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Now, it's the inference that you clearly make

Wrong, it's the inference that you clearly have made. Fascism seeks to destroy parliamentary liberalism, hence why I used it in the context of this Gov shutting down parliament. I deliberately used the term fascism in the generic term rather than a specific form of fascism. It was you that equated fascism to 'Nazi Germany'. By the way, fascism's roots are actually in Italian politics...

[Jenny1]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I believe learning lessons from history is

> important so that they are not repeated.

I think we can all agree with this.

[dbboy]

So how do you describe 1930's Germany, Hitler and the resulting catastrophe which resulted?

[Jenny1]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So how do you describe 1930's Germany, Hitler and

> the resulting catastrophe which resulted?

Sorry dbboy. Who are you asking this question of? What did you think of the article by the way. That focuses on Germany, not Italy. Though of course there are similarities as well as differences between the two countries.

[dbboy]

diable rouge

[Jenny1]

Oh OK. But do have a look at the article, if you have time, and let me know what you think. There do, sadly, seem to be lessons from the history of 1930s Germany that we need to bear in mind so that, as you say, we can avoid repeating them.

[diable rouge]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So how do you describe 1930's Germany, Hitler and

> the resulting catastrophe which resulted?

Clusterfuck seems appropriate, not to be confused with other clusterfucks that have happened during the history of time...

[dbboy]

IMO, what we are seeing is a Bojo enacting the will of the peoples democratic vote in June 2016 to leave the EU for a range of different reasons including immigration, self government and law making which May and her ministers faffed over for nearly three years and achieved nothing.

Whether the population agrees or disagrees Bojo is now actively working to take the UK out of EU (who may I add are laughing at the UK, for such an error of judgement) and which in time will be proven.I believe shutting down parliament is being done to prevent a repeat of the three failed votes May had.

The remainers are unhappy and are now citing this as unconstitutional coup which it is not. Without doing this Bojo is unlikely to achieve his goal of the UK leaving the EU on 31st Oct and quite possibly without a deal. However I also think he is not that concerned about getting a deal and is playing what may be described as hardball with the EU negotiators to try and get what a possible deal. But if that is not possible the UK will exit the EU on a no deal.

He took over from May to do what she failed to do. What will happen in parliament next week is unclear, if in the unlikely event a vote of no confidence is achieved by opposition parties, and I doubt it will, but if it does, I think he'll then call an election for 1st November (very short notice, again is this possible in such a short time span). The outcome will either be him winning a majority, a coalition, or something else (unknown??)

The parliamentary deadlock needs to stop as otherwise the mess the UK is already in will continue and unless someone is a crystal ball reader, no one knows what will happen to the UK thereafter which in reality is a frightening thought. What is clear is the last three years can't continue, something has to give.

People can continue to protest next week, the week, month and year after, I doubt it will make any difference. The parliamentarians know what a mess they've made of things so far. If in parliament they voted the way their constituencies had, we would not be in the mess we are. Because they ignore their constituencies and vote how they like, hence the problems in parliament continue.

[pk]

Loutwo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> they?ve followed quite a

> undemocratic and institutionalised path ever

> since!

>

> Louisa.

Based on elected representatives voting on things yeah, that kind of i undemocratic?

[Jenny1]

Apologies if your comments are addressed exclusively to diable rouge dbboy. But do you mind if I also contribute?

Firstly I think it would be good to continue discussing what lessons we should or should not be drawing from Weimar Germany. So would appreciate your views on that. You seem to have shifted the discussion in a different direction. But that's fine. We can do both. And all these issues are of course connected. You can call what's happened (and is continuing to happen) a coup or not, it doesn't really matter, what we have seen this week is very dangerous, as it undermines the legal and political structures and conventions of the country. That's one area where parallels to Weimar come in useful. See the article I linked to above.

Secondly, given the nature of Parliamentary Democracy (as defined by Churchill, among others), the first duty of MPs is to act in the interests of the country. So they would be in breach of their duty to enact a policy that they knew would damage its citizens.

I think MPs were at fault to vote to trigger Article 50 when there was no plan as to how Brexit was to be enacted. But it's arguable that they could have reasonably expected the government to act responsibly and either come up with a workable deal that did no harm to the country, or abandon the idea of Brexit altogether. Since neither thing has happened they are certainly within their rights to do all they can to force the government to now behave in a responsible manner.

[Jenny1]

This is a useful timeline from FT legal commentator David Allen Green on how we got to the point today where a leading cabinet minister has said that the government is not necessarily obliged to obey the law. This is, of course, constitutionally dangerous but is in line with a pattern of government behaviour over the past three years.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1168108396605857792

[Loutwo]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loutwo Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > they?ve followed quite a

> > undemocratic and institutionalised path ever

> > since!

> >

> > Louisa.

>

>

> Based on elected representatives voting on things

> yeah, that kind of i undemocratic?

You see here lays the problem. You seem to think the EU is perfect, others think it is a dictatorship, and the rest of us are somewhere in the middle. The famous ?democratic deficit? has been discussed for a nearly 40 years. The EU can and must become more accountable to its people. Voter turnout at European Parliamentary elections has fallen time and again over the years. I think voter turnout in some member states was as low as 16% in previous elections. This is just not acceptable in such a huge organisation in which the commission remains limited in powers, but ultimately not elected directly by the citizens of Europe. They have known this for decades, and refused to do anything about it.

Louisa.

[dbboy]

Use of language is important and particularly the use of terms

coup

noun

1.

a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government.

"he was overthrown in an army coup"

synonyms: seizure of power, overthrow, takeover, ousting, deposition, regime change; More

2.

an instance of successfully achieving something difficult.

"it was a major coup to get such a prestigious contract"

synonyms: success, triumph, feat, successful manoeuvre,

[Jenny1]

I agree it's not a coup. But it is dangerous constitutional impropriety. I think protestors against it are justified in using snappier language to get their message across. It's arguable that we are too complacent in this country about the separation of powers, given the comparative peace and stability of our recent history.

[dbboy]

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think MPs were at fault to vote to trigger

> Article 50 when there was no plan as to how Brexit

> was to be enacted. But it's arguable that they

> could have reasonably expected the government to

> act responsibly and either come up with a workable

> deal that did no harm to the country, or abandon

> the idea of Brexit altogether. Since neither thing

> has happened they are certainly within their

> rights to do all they can to force the government

> to now behave in a responsible manner.

As I said previously May & Co faffed for three years, Bojo is now enacting the outcome of the referendum. If the govt failed to do this it would not be doing the job it was elected to do (although like Brown previously and May and Bojo now) whilst not elected by the electorate, a consequence of which could be to say that is undemocratic, a govt we need and have.

If Corbyn and co were less left wing (almost communist with Monumentum) they may stand a better chance of winning a parliamentary cross party majority, but they're not and are unlikely to succeed. So what next, a national strike on 31st October???? I don't know.

This ridiculous deadlock needs to be resolved, again I don't know how, but perhaps the dreaded GE may be one solution. HRH does as she is advised by her PM, she has already rejected an approach from Corbyn, not surprising. Even HRH has never seen anything so farcical as the present situation, can she dismiss her Govt?

[dbboy]

On a lighter note

[Jenny1]

I doubt anyone knows what the next few weeks and months may hold (least of all Johnson). But at each stage it's vital that we oppose moves that undermine the political and legal structures we rely on. Any policy that requires the executive to drive a steamroller over law and constitutional principle is a wrong policy. Such actions set dangerous precedents.

[dbboy]

The only reason this is being done is to overcome the deadlock we currently have. Just think what a laughing stock UK plc is to the rest of the world.

[Jenny1]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On a lighter note

>

If only Larry the Cat and @borderish could run things between them, we'd be fine.

[Jenny1]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The only reason this is being done is to overcome

> the deadlock we currently have. Just think what a

> laughing stock UK plc is to the rest of the world.

I don't think the deadlock is the main thing that's making us a laughing stock to be honest....

[diable rouge]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As I said previously May & Co faffed for three

> years, Bojo is now enacting the outcome of the

> referendum. If the govt failed to do this it would

> not be doing the job it was elected to do

May agreed a deal to leave, thus enacting the outcome of the referendum, it was voted for 3 times by 'traitors' like Grieve and Hammond, even Johnson and Rees Mogg flipped on the third attempt. It failed primarily because of hardcore Brexiters voting against it, knowing it could lead to no deal.

Johnson is not enacting the outcome of the referendum if no deal happened, we were told there would be a deal, in Johnson's own words, ''we can have our cake and eat it'', that's what leavers voted for. I agree it can't go on, but neither can no deal be seen to be enacting the referendum...

[pk]

Loutwo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Loutwo Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

> You seem to think the EU is perfect,

No, I?m in favour of reform. Where do you think I said it was perfect?

others think it is a

> dictatorship

Who do they think is the dictator?

[Loutwo]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loutwo Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > pk Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Loutwo Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > You seem to think the EU is perfect,

>

> No, I?m in favour of reform. Where do you think I

> said it was perfect?

>

> others think it is a

> > dictatorship

>

> Who do they think is the dictator?

The unelected commission which, although only a restricted arm of the larger beast, still wields enough power to represent and perpetuate a lack of transparency. Can you honestly tell me that European Parliament elections have a big enough turnout to represent the true opinions of most European citizens? I don?t see how it could be.

Louisa.