Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Feb 20 00:07:27 PST 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / happy freedom day seb
Sam Adams
Member
Sat Feb 01 11:14:43
Lol!!!!
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 01 11:24:09
No freedom, just loss of representation. The terms of freedom must now be negotiated.
Rugian
Member
Sat Feb 01 11:24:59
http://i.k...s/newsfeed/001/139/551/59f.png

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Rugian
Member
Sat Feb 01 11:36:10
Three years of Remoaner attempts to undo the will of the British people. Come to NOTHING.

Soubry gone, Grieve gone, Rory Stewart gone, Umunna gone, Letwin gone, Greenin gone, Rudd gone, Hammond gone, Gyimah gone, Kenneth Clarke gone, Jo Swinson gone, Corbyn about to be gone, Bercow gone and sans a Lordship (lol get fucked Bercow!) Lord Adonis is a loser, May is being put out to pasture, the Lib Dems are irrelevant, Labour is in the wilderness for at least another decade, SNP can't do shit, Rees-Mogg is Leader of the House, and BORIS FUCKING JOHNSON is Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

Get fucked, traitorous and sabotaging remoaners. YOU LOSE!
Sam Adams
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:05:31
"The terms of freedom must now be negotiated."

Wahahahahahaha.

I feel bad for you euroweenies sometimes.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:21:46
I seen some articles saying that the UK wants a trade agreement with the US and Trump waa very willing....but probably salty that they didnt ban Huawei.
Rugian
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:21:52
You just know jergul spent the summer of 1990 bemoaning the fact that Lithuania "lost its representation" in the Supreme Soviet when it declared independence.

Euroweenies literally think that you can't run a country unless anti-democratic foreign mandarians are given the ability to override 90% of your laws. It's amazingly pathetic.
Rugian
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:26:25
Habebe -

Yeah, Huawei was a mistake. Boris was probably going with the low bid and hoping to keep things friendly with China, but he seriously misjudged how negatively the commies are viewed right now, both in the UK and the US.

The UK also fucked up when it tried to set up an alternative exchange mechanism to buy Iranian oil, in effect greenlighting an attempt to subvert the supremacy of the dollar. Not a very friendly move from a so-called "ally."

Given this, the UK should still be given a trade deal, but should be punished pretty significantly on the terms.
Paramount
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:28:08
” No freedom, just loss of representation. The terms of freedom must now be negotiated.”

Like Norway then? ;)
Sam Adams
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:35:24
"Given this, the UK should still be given a trade deal, but should be punished pretty significantly on the terms."

Agreed. Restoring free speech rights to white people should also be a requirement for any deal.
Paramount
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:35:26
But its true. Lots of things are being decided in the EU that is having an effect on Norway and now Britain too.

Just like many things that are decided in the US does also have an effect on other countries.

But in the case of the EU, if you are member, you can at the least be able to be a part of and have a say at the decisions being made.
Paramount
Member
Sat Feb 01 13:38:43
I take it that Rugian wants the American States to break free from the union and declare independence so that freedom and the rights of the white man can be restored?
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 01 16:31:29
Id be happy if they banned Huawei amd we gave them a sweet deal. The US is better off with a strong UK.


Sam Adams
Member
Sat Feb 01 17:01:41
Seb wont even come to his own freedom celebration.

Lulz.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 01 19:11:38
"Like Norway then?"

Yepp. Best case scenario.

You see the vultures sweeping in this thread. That is probably about right for the predatory approach to expect from the US.

The EU is a fine anchor from which to express nominal independence.
EuropeanPussy
Member
Sun Feb 02 05:05:35
This means war:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-guernsey-51333924

French condemn Guernsey 'ban on fishing boats'

1 February 2020

Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 05:29:48
As Sam and Rugian debate exactly how to use trade to dictate UK policy, and the EU adopts a negotiating stance explicitly demanding that we follow their rules adjudicated by their courts for even the most basic FTA; I think it is quite obvious why I don't see this as "independence Day".

The fact that Rugian and Sam can't see the hypocrisy in their own position tells us all we need to know about them.

We are out now though, so we should refuse any and all FTAs that come with strings attached. Even if it means poverty. Even if it means we find ourselves allied with China, Turkey and Russia as opponents of the current global architecture run by the US and EU that we've fallen out of.

That's the consequence of this upheaval.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 05:33:18
Seb
Or you could just accept lack of representation as a reasonable price to pay for liberty, freedom, and sovereignity.

And keep it at that.
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 07:23:41
Jergul:

Following rules we don't get a day in isn't liberty, feedom or sovereignty, particularly if trade becomes a lever against issues of fundamental importance: namely territorial integrity (Gibraltar), national health etc etc

If we find ourselves on the wrong side of the international architecture, our obvious interest is to change that architecture, and so our obvious geopolitical interest is in working with like-minded partners whether actively or merely passively.

Sometimes, the best strategy is to wait for they next big thing to shake things up.

But there's no point leaving the EU simply to become it or the US's client state. So let's not.
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 07:25:26
This is likely to upset US and EU who appear to be banking on having their cake and eating it as much as the Brexiteers.

This is unfortunate for everyone.

jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 07:44:00
That sounds an awfully lot like doubling down on stupid.

Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 07:51:11
jergul,

Doubling down on stupid is remaining in the EU for the sake of "representation" while simultaneously being unable to prevent the efforts of other members in striving for ever-closer union. Which the UK does not want.

Seb,

Due to the special relationship, we're naturally inclined to want to make a deal with the UK. But at the end of the day, such deals are reserved for allies. Has the UK acted like an ally lately?

No. Rather than acknowledge that the Iran deal was fatally flawed from the start, you not only sided with the mullahs of Tehran against the US, but you helped up an alternative payment system for oil transactions which comes across as a blatant attempt to subvert the supremacy of the dollar on the international stage.

Rather than wake up to the existential threat that a resurgent China poses to not only its own people but the entire world generally, you signed a major infrastructure deal with a company that has direct links to the Chinese government, undermining the security integrity of the entire Five Eyes system in the process.

Unless the US sees some improvement on these fronts, we're going to need to react appropriately. Chlorinated chicken, NHS access and tax code reform are all on the agenda now.
Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 07:56:12
jergul's love for Soviet-style centralized supranational unions that sacrifice democracy for the sake of economies of scale is well known. That needs to be kept as context for every subsequent post he makes in this thread.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 08:43:54
lol ruggy. I voted no in the EU referendum.

But I recognize that in practical terms we have sacrificed representation for roawr freedum. We are otherwise completely aligned with the EU.

Seb
See what Ruggy's idea of a free UK looks like?
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 08:53:58
Rugian:

Ok. Cool. We're not allies.

Let's turn off the US ballistic missile early warning radars and lease the next atol over from Diego Garcia to China.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 09:11:14
Ruggy
As an American, you should know better than most that the idea of freedom has value even when unsupported by practical independence.

You can ponder that if you like the next time you consider the prohibitive costs of quitting your job, or the agony of subjecting yourself to a TSA inspection.
Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 09:21:45
jergul,

Let's be 100% clear here. When you talk about the "loss of representation," we are not talking about the representative rights of the people of Great Britain. You couldn't give half a toss about them.

If it was up to Chairman Jergul, Parliament would have simply ignored the results of the referendum and never even triggered Article 50. That's an argument that you've made here many times. It couldn't be a clearer example of how little you care about the rights of the little people to determine the future of their own country.

I am frankly surprised that you consider elections to be anything more than advisory. Wouldn't the government be far more capable of selecting qualified and competent persons to represent their constituencies in the legislature? It's not like the idiotic voters themselves have any idea what's best for them. The ex-miners in the north voted Tory for God's sake.

Rather, the "representation" you care about simply relates to UK representation within the EU. And what does that mean, actually? A few British legislators get to sit as a minority in a parliament that doesn't really matter, while Boris Johnson gets to sit in a council in which most of the other members are planning for ever-closer union. Which is the polar opposite of what the UK wants. Wow, what value the UK is walking away from.

To some, your pious defense of the representative rights of Britain, while holding the representative rights of the British people in absolute contempt, would be enough to cause actual offense. I though find it amusing. Our resident Sovietphile gives a rare insight into the mindset of a 20th century Moscow state planner, and I kind of dig that.
Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 09:26:12
Seb,

The US of course doesn't expect the UK to follow the US 100% of the time on international matters. In terms of enemies of the US you chose to side with though, I can't think of anyone worse than the Mullahs of Tehran and Chairman Xi. Especially after they spent the bulk of 2019 making themselves look as cartoonishly evil as possible (turning entire provinces into outsize concentration camps, gunning down women protestors en masse, tearing up One Country Two Systems, attacking US soldiers and compounds).

Even so. However hardheaded we're being at the negotiating table, at least we're not threatening to destroy the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom if we don't get our way. The EU has truly shown its true colors with Gibraltar there.

(Say jergul, what was your reaction again when one European country illegally invaded and annexed the territory of another European country? I don't recall it being very positive. lol)
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 09:31:56
Rugian:

You don't get it. The UK should run a Britain first policy.

Our special relationship with the US was based around the defence of the global post war architecture, most notably, our place in Europe and the need to defend Europe given its vital importance to the UK economically and diplomatically.

If we don't have a relationship with Europe, we don't need to defend Europe. If we don't need to defend Europe, we don't need a special relationship with the US, and we certainly shouldn't be paying any price for one, as it's now redundant.

Geopolitically, we need to forge a relationship with Russia, Turkey and other regional powers that have the same vested interests in disrupting/containing the EUs influence.

A relationship with the US is a hindrance to that.

So we should either be looking up extract maximum capital for hosting key US defence capabilities on UK soil, or actively seeking their removal as redundant obstacles to our new foreign policy.

Nor do we need to concern ourselves that much with any security gaurantee from the US - the only credible threat is Russia, and we should be among for an alliance with them - but in any case the US provides little value there; bar trident missiles, add that's a capability we should invest in as the price for strategic autonomy.

Any US trade deal needs to stack up in its own terms.

In short, the future of the UK strategy is to be like France was after Suez, but more so.

If the US wants a relationship with us, it is transactional and needs to be based around UK interests which at the moment are fluid to say the least, most commercial, and you are not in a position given your current leadership to make that kind of trade.
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 09:36:44
Rugian:


Your enemies are not our problem. Why do we care is China locks up its citizens? It's regrettable, but no reason for us to cut access to medicines to placate trump.

Yes, the EU stance on Gibraltar is a threat, but then so is the US's stance. But caving into the US won't help on Gibraltar, and your Congress supported the EU on NI.

What shared interests do we actually have with the US? I see little, other than supposedly shared values which are a lovely period feature in an expensive property on the wrong side of town from work.

jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 11:17:23
Ruggy
I think it should have been clearer that the only thing the UK is gaining without massive pain is the loss of represention.

Norway made that choice and I am happy with it. Symbolic independence is more important to me than represention in Brussels. Also because I like to spite the elite. Why should they or their children have nice jobs with European level compensation lined up for when they tire of national politics?

The UK is simply faced with the same dilemma Norway had. Symbolic independence is fine. Are you willing to even contemplate the cost of true independence?

True independence is WTO rules regulating trade. All preferential deals have strings attached.
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Feb 02 12:21:40
Actually now that i think about it we should give the UK a very favorable trade deal.

To help prop up heroes Farage and Boris!
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 13:06:09
Sammy
Too late. The UK has already fucked up by its timeline.

You cannot give it a deal in 11 months. Only the EU can.
Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 14:09:36
Seb,

Wow, you've gone full nihilist in the wake of Brexit and Trump.

No one suggested you should have no relationship with Europe post-leaving - not even the Faragists believe in that.

Similarly, appeasing the mullahs of Tehran and kowtowing to China just harms you in the long run - you think America is bad now, just wait until the the PRC is trying to act like a superpower on the global stage. It'll be ugly for everyone involved, including the UK.

Make no mistake. China is your enemy, as is Iran. Both on a strategic level, as well as on an ideological one. If you don't believe me, just wait and see what happens when a British firm with interests in Beijing attempts to express a remotely anti-PRC message.

The US and UK are two powerful countries that enjoy a strong relationship due to a shared/similar history, language, culture, and form of government. Those are valuable qualities that naturally bring peoples together. In your case specifically, that gives you unprecedented potential access to the markets of the world's sole remaining superpower. I'm sad that you can't see the value in that.

But then again, half of your opposition to Brexit has been based on the argument of "well if we stay we'll be in an anti-democratic union that doesn't represent British interests, but that's still preferable to a 1% drop in GDP for a couple of years." Anything that isn't directly and immediately monetizable seems to hold no worth to you, including your very sovereignty. So I guess I understand your position here, much as I think it's off base.

Rugian
Member
Sun Feb 02 14:12:20
jergul,

If you can't tell the difference between being a member of a free trade deal and a member of a supranational entity that has effectively subsumed your lawmaking process, I can't help you.

The UK has no interest in full regulatory alignment and it isn't going to agree to that. If your opinion is that full alignment is the only option that can be completed in eleven months, then your doom-and-gloom outlook is no more capable of understanding the Brexiteer mentality than it was in 2016.
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 15:40:22
Rugian:

Our relationship with the EU is lining up to be WTO only. That's what our PM said today "the Australia model".

If so, that's the same basis Russia trades with the EU. Completely locked out. The only way to improve access would be for the EU to break up. So any geological upheaval that did that looks like an opportunity, not a threat.

Ergo: Russia and Turkeyv are natural allies.

Relationship with the US beyond any commercial one: redundant. We have no shared security interests. Instead, we should look at US dependencies on UK for force projection and defence as points of leverage to be ruthlessly exploited. You want Diego Garcia to remain private and isolated? Cough up. You want to keep your radars in the UK? Cough up.

We have no enduring enemies or friends, only interests, and we should adopt a policy of playing you of against each other.

" a British firm with interests in Beijing attempts to express a remotely anti-PRC message."

Why should we express a remotely anti-PRC message?
If we wanted to do that, why on earth would we have given up the clout that comes with being a decisive voice in the world's largest economy?

Let the US and the EU do the sermonising, and we get on with business.
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 15:43:38
The primary goal of the UK govt should be looking to the UK's prosperity.

That is no longer aligned with EU security needs, and the US under trump views these things as zero sum games and has as its main negotiating goals making the population of the UK unhealthier by adopting lower food safety standards and higher medicine costs.

Fuck that. We trade in WTO basis with the US, but we have other leverage. I say we use those instead, given we have no vested interests in EU stability and security.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 15:46:55
Seb
Would you not gain the same benefit if the US broke up? First amongst equals and all that?

You would be the largest country in the Anglosphere!
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 15:47:34
Make the Commonwealth great again!
Seb
Member
Sun Feb 02 15:50:52
Jergul:

Far less achievable. The EU breaking up leads to a bunch of similar minded states, and the UK exit looks prescient, leading to options for reintegration of trade under a different model. And it's on our doorstep.

US breaking up leads to chaos, and it's far away, even if
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 16:13:54
Seb
Don't be so negative. The US has not been tested for a while is all.

We will see how it does once the need for a global reserve currency fades.

I suspect poorly. There is a lot of US dollar liquidity that should come home to roost.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 02 16:15:58
What is the implicit size of its economy assuming a trade balance and balanced federal buget?

12-13 trillion GDP maybe?
Sam Adams
Member
Sun Feb 02 23:01:55
Lol jergul remains so butthurt that the US economy isnt 12.5%.

Lulz.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 03 00:29:25
Sammy
Not really. I did not see frackin coming in like it did. Oil imports were part of the 12.5 by 2020 equation. I was incorrect on that, instead of coincidentally wrong.

The way the subprime crisis was globalized and every western country stuck to austerity except the USA was just stupid.

And I did not account for stupid either. Silly of me.

Perhaps you will dodge bullets forever. Who knows? But I would not bet on it.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Feb 03 14:52:24
Lol @ excuses
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 03 18:19:36
lol@lol@excuses
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share