Politika u UK

[MancMellow]

Ama nema šanse, mislim, ali to je ipak ne toliko novina, mislim da je manjina javnih glasila definitivno. Mislim, znaš i sam, nije to ko kod nas kad se govorilo tipa "glasa za radikale", to je tamo duboko. To je prosto odbrambeni mehanizam onih koji sebe vide kao unprivileged, ali ćemo vam bar nabijati na nos da ste, najblaže rečeno, uncool. To je u stari zaistavština new labour godina koju stranka ne zna da iskoristi. Nikada pre toga levica u britaniji nije uspela da se popne na moral high ground kao za to vreme. i sad - ideja kako ćemo odatle da se vratimo average malkolmu iz fabrike je budalasta. prvo, ta fabrika uglavnom više ne postoji, a drugo niko živ vas više ne vidi tako. Oni su direktno izgubili zbore od Torijevaca, upravo ovakve glasove kao njene. Ali ne zbog piskaranja na fejsu. 

Edited May 27, 2015 by MancMellow

[Budja]

Ma nema to veze sa New Labour. Ne znam iz kog kruga je autorka, vrlo verovatno iz drustvenih nauka.

Cini mi se slicnim fenomenu potpune izopstenosti konzervativaca u art/social sciences departments u Americi.

 

 

Moje licno iskustvo je da nisam video konzervativce u EFM departmentu u Bristolu, vec se te 2010 bitka vodila da li ce LibDems u dep. imati dvotrecinsku ili samo natpolovicnu vecinu, nesto kao glasanje za Raduleta na PPPu od onih sa pravom glasa, sto je, je l da, oko pola deprtamenta posto su ostali stranci.

[MancMellow]

Da pojasnim. Nisam rekao da je zaostavstina New Labour, nego "New Labour godina". Naravno da je to siri fenomen i od stranke na vlasti (a i od UK, naravno, ali ovde pricamo o toj zemlji). 

[adam]

ma vadi se zena. al eto, makar priznaje (retko ko to javno radi) koliko god objasnjenje bilo nebulozno.

 

ovde je in biti za socijalu, kuditi sve sto ima veze sa zavrtanjem drzavnih slavina, javno se deklarisati kao levicar ali to bas nema veze sa glasanjem nego sa imidzem koji neko zeli da kreira o sebi. ako se sudi po tome sto narod prica, niko za torijevce nije glasao niti ce, bas kao ni za tacerku ili milosevica.

 

ali kad dodje do glasanja, onda dobar deo tih levicara glasa za razjareni biznis jer ih na dnevnoj bazi plase da ako se njima ne titraju muda, prvo ce radni narod da najebe. uz stalnu nesigurnost (mogucnost gubljenja posla bez ikakve zastite) plus zaduzenost prosecnog radnika (razni krediti sto za kucu, kola, ostalo) ta mantra donosi vrlo lepe rezultate.

[MancMellow]

ovde je in biti za socijalu, kuditi sve sto ima veze sa zavrtanjem drzavnih slavina, javno se deklarisati kao levicar ali to bas nema veze sa glasanjem nego sa imidzem koji neko zeli da kreira o sebi. 

 

e, a ma znam, nego upravo je tu prednost labour, zato sto ljudi, naravno, prvo se odredjuju prema svojim strahovima i racionalnim ocekivanjima, pa onda prema to sta je "cool" kad glasaju. Medjutim prednost je u tome sto je idealno svakom ako to moze da spoji. Dakle, zato i kazem, samo maaalkice treba da se pomere ka centru i da oduzmu neka oruzja iz ruku suna i telegrapha. priznajem, bili su saterani nacionalizmom na koji nisu nasli dobar odgovor ovoga puta, ali sad sve okrenuti naopacke i trcati za onimakoji su protest-vote za UKIP je po meni jako losa strategija. 

[Budja]

Da, ali je isto malo bezveze ideja da su danasnji konzervativci isto sto i Norman Tebit.

 

Zapravo, tu ima mnogo vise varijacija i nije da su konzerve isti brend kao u devedesetim. Ipak je Kameron jahao haskije po severnom polu.

 

Mislim, od Borisa preko Dejvisa preko Piklsa do Majkla Gova. Gej je okej. Itd. Jedini zaista odbojnii odvratni lik jeste Osborn.

 

 

Sa druge strane, Portilo i Dzonson pravili odlicne dokumentarce. Ja nekako ne mogu da zamislim Ed Bolsa ili Milibanda da rade to isto.

[MancMellow]

Pocelo je 

 

http://www.historytoday.com/david-abulafia/britain-apart-or-part-europe

 

http://historiansforbritain.org/about/

 

http://www.historytoday.com/various-authors/fog-channel-historians-isolated

[Prospero]

Merkelica je danas natuknula da ima mesta za dogovor oko remonta ugovora (Grci se pitaju "što nama ne kaže tako nešto?").

[MancMellow]

Ma dobiće to za benefite (što je imho no biggie, osim možda poljacima) i možda još poneku siću, proglasiće Reform in our time i - referendum 

Edited May 29, 2015 by MancMellow

[MancMellow]

 

 

England should boycott the 2018 World Cup because someone needs to take a stand against corruption in Fifa and military aggression by Russia, Andy Burnham, the favourite to be the next Labour leader, has said.

[Budja]

To, brale!

Severni white working UKIP voting class ce biti odusevljeni.

[Budja]

 

Ex-Lib Dem leader Kennedy dies at 55

 

:(

[MancMellow]

Da :(

[Prospero]

Hamond daje četiri osnovna predloga kao podlogu torijevskog shvatanja remonta odnosa unutar EU:

 

 

Opinion
Britain’s four-point package for EU reform

We want a renegotiation of market regulation, ‘ever-closer union,’ subsidiarity and welfare.
By Philip Hammond
| 10/6/15, 12:01 AM CET
| Updated 10/6/15, 7:59 AM CET


LONDON — Right across the continent, anti-EU parties have made huge gains in recent years — in local, national and European elections. We need to respond by making the EU more democratic and far better equipped to help deliver the growth and jobs its citizens expect.

Since the UK joined, the EU has changed beyond recognition. The fall of the Iron Curtain has seen the EU expand with 16 new countries becoming members; the Euro has been created, and EU rules now regulate our affairs across a huge area stretching from environment to social policy. There is no doubt that EU membership has brought clear benefits to Britain in some areas. But in others it has led to loss of national sovereignty and an increase in bureaucratic burdens on business that has resulted in the British people’s consent for membership wearing wafer thin.

So what does the UK government want from this negotiation? To restore the confidence of the British people in the EU we need to work with our European partners to agree a package of reform that will ensure the EU is fit for the 21st century; reforms that will benefit not only the UK, but all 28 member states.

First, on jobs and growth, the uncomfortable truth is that the EU’s growth rate is far below that needed to reduce unemployment to acceptable levels and is being challenged not only by Asia, but also by the US. If we are to preserve European living standards, we need to empower our businesses to compete more effectively in the world by enhancing the single market, especially in services, digital, and energy. We have to be open to world trade and complete trade agreements with the US, Japan, and other developed economies, as well as with the fast growing economies of Asia and South America. And we must create a regulatory framework that supports, not hinders, business to create the growth and jobs we need.

Secondly, we seek reforms that will allow those countries that want to integrate further to do so, while respecting the interests of those that do not. This applies most clearly to the Eurozone where the UK does not seek to prevent further euro-integration — indeed supports it — but does need guarantees that the interests of those not in the euro will be protected. This concept of a two-pillar Europe, with a properly defined relationship between the Eurozone and non-Eurozone within a single market, and sharing the same institutions, builds on the existing architecture of Schengen and Banking Union and is good for everyone. It allows Eurozone integration to progress, respecting the interests of the non-Eurozone Member States. And it recognises that, while the concept of ever-closer union appeals to some Member States, it is not right for all.

Thirdly, we think national parliaments must have a greater say, both in connecting citizens to EU decisions and in properly implementing the concept of subsidiarity — the idea that decisions should be made as close as possible to the citizens they affect. All too often the EU has exercised power in areas where decision-making could be done at national, regional, or local government level without interfering with the operation of the single market or the effective functioning of the EU. We want to strengthen the role of national parliaments, for example, by allowing groups of them to be able to block regulations in future. The EU must respect the layers of government that are closest and most accountable to European citizens. We agree with the Dutch Government: “Europe where necessary, national where possible.”

Fourthly, while we accept that the free movement of people to work is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the EU and these negotiations do not seek to curtail this freedom, we do want to protect the UK’s welfare system from abuse and reduce the incentives that encourage highly skilled workers to travel to the UK to do low-skilled jobs. This undermines economic growth in their countries of origin and belief in the fairness of free movement in destination countries. We must also develop the other freedoms, in particular freedom of movement of services and of capital, to ensure that it is not just free movement of people that contributes to convergence of living standards across Europe.

We approach these reforms in a positive and engaged manner, listening to our partners and intending to agree reforms that will help all Member States to thrive in the 21st century.

We will negotiate a package of reform and will then ask the British people their view, in a straightforward “in or out” referendum by the end of 2017, and earlier if we can.

The stakes are high: the UK is a large and open economy with a long history and a significant role on the world stage which can contribute hugely to Europe’s success. If we can resolve the issues that have so troubled the British people and achieve a “Yes” vote in the referendum, we will settle the question of Britain’s place in Europe and enable the UK to play a fully engaged role in a more competitive, prosperous, outward-looking and confident EU in the future.

That is an outcome that really will be in the best interest of Europeans on both sides of the English Channel.

Philip Hammond is the foreign secretary of the United Kingdom.

 

[MancMellow]

Pa dobro, ovde nema ničeg toliko radikalnog. Jedino skromno mislim da ovaj two-pillar sistem nije u interesu UK, već da bi trebalo da unutra traže saveznike i "shape-uju" EU na onu stranu na koju UK odgovara i to je problem sa UK i EU još od osnivanja. Prvo se sklanjaju, a onda kaskaju za odlukama. 

 

Takođe, ako ovo četvrto na kraju bude značilo da ne može neko samo da se spusti negde i odmah traži benefite, to mi je takođe ok. 

 

Mislim da je ovo oko nacionalnih parlamenata podložno diskusiji - koliko parlamenata. Mislim, u EU već postoji preglasavanje, a države imaju različit broj glasova. 

 

Mislim da će na ovoj bazi za pregovore dobiti nešto, e sad, da li će to ubediti evroskeptične torijevce ostaje da se vidi.