[Politics] UK Suspends Parliament
- Thread starter Terminal Blue
- Start date
Lots of tinned tomatoes, loo roll, rice, pasta.Baffle2 said:
I figure the UK grows enough cereals, meat and veg. that we'll be okay on that score even if there's a large drop in the different types of veg. available. Other than that, we'll manage. I don't eat fish, so the potential collapse in fish availability* is no big deal.
Incidentally, for those wondering why an island with lots of fishing waters that will now (potentially) have sole access to them will have a fish availability problem, it turns out that Britons don't eat that much fish that comes from British waters. Britain exports most of what it takes from the oceans to be eaten in Europe, and imports most of the fish it consumes from Europe. Globalisation, eh?
I always have lots of those things in stock anyway, but since it's fresh food we're going to be short of I'm not sure how much it helps. Lentils too. And a handy pack of 'I told you so' that I'm going to use at every opportunity.Agema said:
I don't eat meat so I'm not overly concerned by (actually a bit pleased to see) what I imagine will be increasing prices (even if our meat is home-grown, I understand many farms are going to go to the wall anyway, and increased fuel prices and shortages are going to make everything more expensive).
Bugger about the fish though, I eat that.
Sounds effishient.Agema said:
It seems clear to me which tragedy we're repeating as farce right now in the United States. It is not clear to me which tragedy you lot in the UK are repeating as farce.Agema said:
That sounds like it might have been a bit farcical the first time, though not quite so farcical as this time.Silvanus said:
It is just that the British like and have a lot of recipies for cod, a fish the continental Europeans don't like that much and it is the other way around for fish species that actually live in British waters in high numbers.Seanchaidh said:
The English Civil War: a clash where a bunch of people removed an hereditary autocrat who believed in absolute rule mandated by God, and ended up replacing him with an autocrat who believed God had guided his actions and left his son in charge of the country when he died.Silvanus said:
And both, incidentally, attempted shutting down Parliament. Though Charlie Boy and Olly Cromwell did it with troops which BoJo has yet to try...yetAgema said:
Olly was basically a military dictator. The Parliamentarians really consisted of several factions but Cromwell had the army: and when the king was gone and those factions started to disagree, Cromwell simply used the army to enforce his personal will over anyone who disagreed.Palindromemordnilap said:
The interregnum ended because the next military supremo after Cromwell, General Monck, realised that the country run by the army was a clusterfuck.
I mean personally I'd replace "basically" with "exactly". Imposed will with force, cracked down on expression, surrounded himself with religious cult, tried to install his own family as dynastic rulers...Agema said:
I feel a "press conference" in Cromwell's rule would be where they squeeze you in a press to torture you into admitting you were a witchBaffle2 said:
To be fair, I don't think Cromwell was that fond of witchcraft trials.Palindromemordnilap said:
Witch-hunting became popular in the late 16th century (I think connected to the religious turmoil of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation). It rocketed in the period of the civil war because of the chaos, a loss of central control and justice, which allowed unscrupulous individuals to appoint themselves as experts and exploit the fears of communities for self-enrichment. Once the civil war ended, however, witch-hunting rapidly dwindled away again and was effectively banned in the early 1700s.
Well, it looks like the Courts have ruled against Johnson.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49810261
What should expect next from this government?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49810261
What should expect next from this government?
BOOM! And the law has spoken.TrulyBritish said:
The right wing press will of course either launch an assault of the Supreme Court of the UK in their headlines tomorrow in order to protect their Saint Boris, or just ignore it like it didn't really happen and make fun of Jeremy Corbyn instead.
This clearly was an obvious attempt to block Parliament from doing its duty, and the courts have called that out. As to what will happen... I don't think Boris can or will climb down. His behaviour this far, bolstered by extremist advisors and an extremist clique of the Tory Party, has been almost entirely without shame, truth, or respect for the country's Parliamentary democracy (arguably chief amongst those advisors, Dominic Cummings, is outright hostile to our Parliamentary democracy). We can hardly believe that on this past behaviour Boris is suddenly going to change tack. He's already been fighting his pitch of "people versus parliament" where he claims to represent the people (albeit only ~35% of them, according to the polls) and Parliament a bunch of irrelevant elites betraying their country. That course is absolutely clear and set, and this is just another lost battle in a war that will only end in a general election.
That general election will either enshrine Boris and his neoliberal, Americocentric clique who want to turn the country upside-down and reconfigure it more to the interests of global capital, or a pro-EU centre / centre-left who will continue a more mixed economy. It's somehow become even larger than Brexit.
And indeed, there we go. The PM has been found in breach of the law and his comments are (my bold):
"Obviously this is a verdict that we will respect and we respect the judicial process. I have to say that I strongly disagree with what the justices have found"
"More importantly, let's be in no doubt that there are a lot of people who want to frustrate Brexit. There are a lot of people who basically want to stop this country from coming out of the EU. And we have a parliament that is unable to be prorogued, it doesn?t want to have an election, and I think it?s time we took this forward.
"As the law stands, we leave on October 31. And I'm very hopeful that we will get a deal. I think what the people of the country want is to see parliamentarians coming together in the national interest to get this thing done."
So to translate, I'm right and the law isn't. I'm right and people opposed to Brexit aren't. I'm right and parliament isn't. That I broke the small is small beans, the real problem is people won't do what I want. No retreat and no surrender, everyone just needs to knuckle down and do what I tell them.
I think one of the things about Donald Trump is he broke the concept of what a politician should be - that is to say, respectful of one's office, the law, and processes of government - and demonstrated that it worked. This I suspect underpins people like Boris, the realisation that you can shit all over these things but as long as you have a hook, and populist discontent against a distrusted legislation is ideal, that you'll get away with it.
Underneath that is an element of politics as usual. They aren't talking about what the real agenda is, and what it means for the country. They'll sell the public modern variants of bread and circuses up front, where the real changes are to be safely looked after by the elites, as normal.
"Obviously this is a verdict that we will respect and we respect the judicial process. I have to say that I strongly disagree with what the justices have found"
"More importantly, let's be in no doubt that there are a lot of people who want to frustrate Brexit. There are a lot of people who basically want to stop this country from coming out of the EU. And we have a parliament that is unable to be prorogued, it doesn?t want to have an election, and I think it?s time we took this forward.
"As the law stands, we leave on October 31. And I'm very hopeful that we will get a deal. I think what the people of the country want is to see parliamentarians coming together in the national interest to get this thing done."
So to translate, I'm right and the law isn't. I'm right and people opposed to Brexit aren't. I'm right and parliament isn't. That I broke the small is small beans, the real problem is people won't do what I want. No retreat and no surrender, everyone just needs to knuckle down and do what I tell them.
I think one of the things about Donald Trump is he broke the concept of what a politician should be - that is to say, respectful of one's office, the law, and processes of government - and demonstrated that it worked. This I suspect underpins people like Boris, the realisation that you can shit all over these things but as long as you have a hook, and populist discontent against a distrusted legislation is ideal, that you'll get away with it.
Underneath that is an element of politics as usual. They aren't talking about what the real agenda is, and what it means for the country. They'll sell the public modern variants of bread and circuses up front, where the real changes are to be safely looked after by the elites, as normal.