From defence to trade, the incoming US president is upending the old order – and standing apart from our neighbours leaves us dangerously exposed, says Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland
Which is why it has already been done. Oh wait. No it hasn’t. Because your idea of simple is nuts.
Labour should simply take the UK back into the EU - in line with majority of the informed public.
Surely you can see that this wouldn’t work on at least two levels. The EU has said repeatedly that it doesn’t want the UK back until there a strong majority across the board of the population to avoid the UK turning round in another forty years and leaving again. Do you think forcefully taking the UK back proves that to the EU? And on a more basic level, Labour would destroy itself if it ignored it’s voters a lot of which voted to leave. What you’re calling for is electoral suicide. Even if they did try and do this you think it would be simple? The only simple thing that would happen is Labour would be out of office or dismantled for a hundred years.
Creating a criminal offence for a public person/figure to lie to the public with an intention to mislead them.
They already have this in the ministerial code and it doesn’t get enforced. The cop out is always, “I genuinely didn’t believe I was lying at the time” creating a high bar to prove otherwise. Have you seen a libel or slander case in the UK recently? Do you think they’re quick or cheap to run? This would be “simple” you say? 😂
Public education for the wide public, promoting anti racism and explaning the benefits of EU membership and how much it costs to be outside. People don’t need convincing, they need education. Once they know the facts, the rest will follow
Compulsory re-education for racists. Like speed awarnes courses for people expressing racist views. Fines for reoffenders, increasing with each offence.
This I can agree with. But I still don’t imagine it would be simple. We need this regardless and it it will take a generation or two to change attitudes.
Proportional representation and constitution forbidding parties supporting racist agenda to field candidates in any election. Some countries have something similar banning neo nazi parties.
PR is a good first step and something I think the Labour government should support. But they like the Tories won’t as it will prevent them from the soaring majorities they’re both used to. And whilst you can ban outright racist parties such as a Nazi party how do you police a party campaigning to reduce migration? That in itself isn’t racist, but a lot of people might lean towards that party. If you keep banning parties eventually you become a despot. Again, really not as simple as you make out. Otherwise UKIP, Reform, et al would have all been banned instantly. But they haven’t.
More direct democracy. More referendums, legally binding but informed ones - taking a simple multiple choice test confirming you know what you voting for would be necessary to be allowed to vote. For your information, vast majority of Brexshit voters brainwashed by racist/£350million propaganda would fail.
The simplest way to create civil unrest. Why would you pay your taxes if you’re going to ban people from voting? Absolute insanity. You’ve broken the civil contract between people and Parliament. People pay taxes and instruct their MPs to vote on issues on their behalf knowing that if they are dissatisfied they can replace them in five years. But your answer is to now remove votes from people? Jaysus I imagine women’s groups and minorities would be up in arms about that.
You know what? I can’t be arsed to reply to you, so just a few points as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about which firmly places you in one of the groups I mentioned.
Public lies - . There is already number of offences where intent must be proven and it is up to the court to decide.
Banning racist parties - again, this is up to the court to decide where legitimate criticism ends and blatant racism starts.
Referendums - there is no link between paying taxes and right to vote. People on benefits have right to vote and taxes paying migrants do not so again you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. There is absolutely no reason for the ignorants to be able to decide, starting with you.
This isn’t a simple thing as you are implying though. That’s the point I’m making. Your “solutions” are more like wishes in an ideal world. They aren’t workable and would add massively to the overstretched resources.
there is no link between paying taxes and right to vote. People on benefits have right to vote and taxes paying migrants do not
These are the exceptions. What do you think I mean when I say the social contract? Why would you live and pay into a society… and by pay that could be taxes if you can afford them or in other ways if not… if you get nothing out of it? The government is just seizing your money for what? And you suggest to just band or ostracise people at a whim? Again, unworkable.
Imagine being told that you’re not allowed to vote because you don’t think the same way as someone else. Madness. Absolute madness.
Which is why it has already been done. Oh wait. No it hasn’t. Because your idea of simple is nuts.
Surely you can see that this wouldn’t work on at least two levels. The EU has said repeatedly that it doesn’t want the UK back until there a strong majority across the board of the population to avoid the UK turning round in another forty years and leaving again. Do you think forcefully taking the UK back proves that to the EU? And on a more basic level, Labour would destroy itself if it ignored it’s voters a lot of which voted to leave. What you’re calling for is electoral suicide. Even if they did try and do this you think it would be simple? The only simple thing that would happen is Labour would be out of office or dismantled for a hundred years.
They already have this in the ministerial code and it doesn’t get enforced. The cop out is always, “I genuinely didn’t believe I was lying at the time” creating a high bar to prove otherwise. Have you seen a libel or slander case in the UK recently? Do you think they’re quick or cheap to run? This would be “simple” you say? 😂
This I can agree with. But I still don’t imagine it would be simple. We need this regardless and it it will take a generation or two to change attitudes.
PR is a good first step and something I think the Labour government should support. But they like the Tories won’t as it will prevent them from the soaring majorities they’re both used to. And whilst you can ban outright racist parties such as a Nazi party how do you police a party campaigning to reduce migration? That in itself isn’t racist, but a lot of people might lean towards that party. If you keep banning parties eventually you become a despot. Again, really not as simple as you make out. Otherwise UKIP, Reform, et al would have all been banned instantly. But they haven’t.
The simplest way to create civil unrest. Why would you pay your taxes if you’re going to ban people from voting? Absolute insanity. You’ve broken the civil contract between people and Parliament. People pay taxes and instruct their MPs to vote on issues on their behalf knowing that if they are dissatisfied they can replace them in five years. But your answer is to now remove votes from people? Jaysus I imagine women’s groups and minorities would be up in arms about that.
You know what? I can’t be arsed to reply to you, so just a few points as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about which firmly places you in one of the groups I mentioned.
Public lies - . There is already number of offences where intent must be proven and it is up to the court to decide.
Banning racist parties - again, this is up to the court to decide where legitimate criticism ends and blatant racism starts.
Referendums - there is no link between paying taxes and right to vote. People on benefits have right to vote and taxes paying migrants do not so again you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. There is absolutely no reason for the ignorants to be able to decide, starting with you.
This isn’t a simple thing as you are implying though. That’s the point I’m making. Your “solutions” are more like wishes in an ideal world. They aren’t workable and would add massively to the overstretched resources.
These are the exceptions. What do you think I mean when I say the social contract? Why would you live and pay into a society… and by pay that could be taxes if you can afford them or in other ways if not… if you get nothing out of it? The government is just seizing your money for what? And you suggest to just band or ostracise people at a whim? Again, unworkable.
Imagine being told that you’re not allowed to vote because you don’t think the same way as someone else. Madness. Absolute madness.