EU immigration row / time to get out

[UndercoverElephant]

W
When I was in Cypress recently

Cyprus. Cypress is a type of tree.

[AndySir]

... because of a deliberately constructed false dichotomy on your part to assume that our position is predicated on whether or not one particular influx from one particular location occurs at one specific time.

It was exactly this issue that was called out by UE in the opening post as being what 'pushed him over the edge' on the EU (Hey, UE is the opposite of EU. Never noticed that before.) As it has failed to happen, I simply wondered whether he had been pulled back over the edge again.

Oh, yes. This may be helpful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

[PS_RalphW]

I'm having a doh! kind of day. My eyesight is so blurred I'm having trouble reading the screen. There is a Nepali consulate in Cyprus. My wife's cousin is quietly nuts, but in a good way.

[UndercoverElephant]

... because of a deliberately constructed false dichotomy on your part to assume that our position is predicated on whether or not one particular influx from one particular location occurs at one specific time.

It was exactly this issue that was called out by UE in the opening post as being what 'pushed him over the edge' on the EU (Hey, UE is the opposite of EU. Never noticed that before.) As it has failed to happen, I simply wondered whether he had been pulled back over the edge again.

Oh, yes. This may be helpful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Steve's response pretty much summed it up already. And from my own personal viewpoint, as a person who has seen the damage being caused by eastern Europeans to our countryside because of their antisocial, vandalistic foraging habits, I won't be in a position to judge any changes until the autumn has been and gone.

[biffvernon]

I wonder if the complete absence of a Bulgarian and Romanian invasion has altered UE's (and others) opinions at all?

It hasn't altered UKIP's policies, but since they are not founded on rational analysis of facts, altering the facts cannot be expected to result in change.

Look who's talking. Since when was your own position based on an analysis of facts, Biff Vernon? Your position on everything non-scientific is driven by ideology and wishful thinking, not facts.

I wasn't writing about you UE but just a droll observation about UKIP. Why launch the personal attack on me?

[UndercoverElephant]

It hasn't altered UKIP's policies, but since they are not founded on rational analysis of facts, altering the facts cannot be expected to result in change.

Look who's talking. Since when was your own position based on an analysis of facts, Biff Vernon? Your position on everything non-scientific is driven by ideology and wishful thinking, not facts.

I wasn't writing about you UE but just a droll observation about UKIP. Why launch the personal attack on me?

Sorry, but it seemed like you were attacking me.

As I've said before, I don't think UKIP are a particularly intellectual bunch. On the whole they appear to be public-school educated, right-wing, inherited-money individuals with low IQs. That they are becoming a real, relevant force in British politics just demonstrates a disastrous failure by the mainstream parties to face up to real problems faced by ordinary people right across the political spectrum.

UKIP are a one-policy party who have tried, not very impressively, to turn themselves into something more. They are not competent to govern, and you're right that most of what they say has little to do with facts or analysis. But that doesn't matter, because their foundational one policy is based on certain facts.

Fact: the core of the EU/eurozone is a long-term project to create a unified European superstate.

Fact: the British people have never been asked their permission as to whether or not they want to be part of that project. They voted to join a free trade zone.

The libdems and labour apparently want Britain to become part of that superstate without giving the people a democratic choice in the matter. They KNOW BEST. And the Tories are hopelessly split on the issue and for that reason they don't want to offer a referendum either. The result is that none of the mainstream parties are facing up to political reality on this issue, and so long as that remains the case, UKIP will continue to gain support and votes, regardless of the fact that most UKIP members are basically stupid.

[biffvernon]

Fact: the core of the EU/eurozone is a long-term project to create a unified European superstate.

Fact: the British people have never been asked their permission as to whether or not they want to be part of that project. They voted to join a free trade zone.

A unified European 'superstate' is a bit of a simplification. I see it more as doing things at the appropriate level. The location of the dog-poo bin is a matter for parish council, global warming mitigation requires global action. Concentrating all power at certain levels, such as the traditional nation state, risks acting at an inappropriate level.

In the referendum in the Heath government, I voted with a clear idea of what the EU was all about (my father was a civil servant working on the legislation in the Ministry of Agriculture - it was a constant subject of discussion round the table). I think it was pretty clear generally that votting yes in the Common Market referendum was a much bigger thing than to join a free trade zone - we were not voting to join EFTA.

[AndySir]

The libdems and labour apparently want Britain to become part of that superstate without giving the people a democratic choice in the matter. They KNOW BEST. And the Tories are hopelessly split on the issue and for that reason they don't want to offer a referendum either. The result is that none of the mainstream parties are facing up to political reality on this issue, and so long as that remains the case, UKIP will continue to gain support and votes, regardless of the fact that most UKIP members are basically stupid.

AFAIK Conservatives have promised a referendum next parliament, and liberal and labour promise a referendum in the case of 'substantial change' to the treaties. Greens have been calling for a referendum for some time (because they want further European integration to have a democratic legitimacy).

[AndySir]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-eu-27133977

For those who like to deny the link between anti-immigration rhetoric and racism. This fellows quite open about it - and he's ahead in the polls.

[biffvernon]

If Geert Wilders isn't a racist then I'm a banana.

[Little John]

Fact: the core of the EU/eurozone is a long-term project to create a unified European superstate.

Fact: the British people have never been asked their permission as to whether or not they want to be part of that project. They voted to join a free trade zone.

A unified European 'superstate' is a bit of a simplification. I see it more as doing things at the appropriate level. The location of the dog-poo bin is a matter for parish council, global warming mitigation requires global action. Concentrating all power at certain levels, such as the traditional nation state, risks acting at an inappropriate level.

In the referendum in the Heath government, I voted with a clear idea of what the EU was all about (my father was a civil servant working on the legislation in the Ministry of Agriculture - it was a constant subject of discussion round the table). I think it was pretty clear generally that votting yes in the Common Market referendum was a much bigger thing than to join a free trade zone - we were not voting to join EFTA.

The referendum to join the common market was a referendum to join a common market.

To suggest that it was, "in reality", something else is disingenuous at best and, at worst, is a downright dishonest account of the terms of that referendum. Whatever you or you father may or may not have interpreted the referendum on the common market to be, based on your father’s privileged level of knowledge of European politics, is completely irrelevant..

[Little John]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-eu-27133977

For those who like to deny the link between anti-immigration rhetoric and racism. This fellows quite open about it - and he's ahead in the polls.

And once again, we see the pathetic little trick from the usual quarters of conflating concerns with immigration and racism. It is possible to conflate any two views if you look for a person who fits the profile.

[biffvernon]

The referendum to join the common market was a referendum to join a common market.

To suggest that it was, "in reality", something else is disingenuous at best and, at worst, is a downright dishonest account of the terms of that referendum.

No, that's just not right. Re-writing history will not do. But don't take my word for it. Here's the Wkipedia entry for starters:

The European Union is a geo-political entity covering a large portion of the European continent. It is founded upon numerous treaties and has undergone expansions that have taken it from 6 member states to 28, a majority of states in Europe.

As distinct from ideas of federation, confederation or customs union the main development in Europe depends on a supranational foundation to make war unthinkable and materially impossible and reinforce democracy enunciated by Robert Schuman and other leaders in the Europe Declaration. The principle was at the heart of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in the Treaty of Paris (1951), following the "Schuman Declaration" and the later the Treaties of Rome establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC). Both the ECSC and EEC were later incorporated into the European Union while the EAEC maintains a distinct legal identity despite sharing members and institutions.

There's more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... pean_Union

I think that makes it abundantly clear that it was not just a common market. We left EFTA to join the EU.

[Tarrel]

The actual question on the voting paper in 1975 was:

"Do you think that the United Kingdom should remain part of the European Community (the Common Market)?"

(We had, of course, already joined the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973, without a referendum.)

[biffvernon]

Ah yes. I'm not quite sure how widespread across Europe the phrase 'Common Market' was or whether it was mostly used within the UK. The phrases 'single market' and 'internal market' seemed to have been used more often.

For those not trusting Wikipedia, here's a bit more from history:

1945 - 1959

A peaceful Europe – the beginnings of cooperation

The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.

http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/index_en.htm