The Brexit thread

[backtoiam]

AD said:

Most Antifa want little to do with the neoliberal agenda of George Soros.

Of course not. They are supposed to be "unconnected" and acting "independently" of any outside funding and or support. Its supposed to look like a grass roots movement instead of an astroturf halftime show at a Superbowl game stadium. What is your point?

[slimmouse]

You seem to be missing a lot:

Left wing critics of the legacy of Brexit are not necessarily for "Remain".

The glaring contradiction you create between the ideal of "personal autonomy" and the actual lives of refugees and other migrants is somehow invisibilised.

Most Antifa want little to do with the neoliberal agenda of George Soros.

You don't seem to have much of any idea at all about Hegel and his thinking.

Soros and co have suffering in mind. Soros is about as close to antifa as anyone can get.

And Hegel is a thief anyway, a somehow divinely inspired creation

[backtoiam]

slimmouse said:
And Hegel is a thief anyway, a somehow divinely inspired creation

And there ye is a speak of wisdom. It goes back to Babel, which, coincidentally, sounds linguistically similar to Bible.....

ya just never never know....for sure.......

[SonicG]

I can't help but admire how many minds in the remain campaign have managed to steer those who wish to ultimately seek personal autonomy into some herd. of brainless racistts.

How does a vote for leave translate into "seek(ing) personal autonomy"? (If that is what you are trying to say)

[slimmouse]

I can't help but admire how many minds in the remain campaign have managed to steer those who wish to ultimately seek personal autonomy into some herd. of brainless racistts.

How does a vote for leave translate into "seek(ing) personal autonomy"? (If that is what you are trying to say)

Im not saying it does. Thats almost as stupid as suggesting that those who chose Brexit are racist.

[American Dream]

Hegel was a divinely inspired thief?

[slimmouse]

Hegel was a divinely inspired thief?

I reckon that the entire Hegelian dialectic is designed to distract humanity from truly achieving..

[SonicG]

I can't help but admire how many minds in the remain campaign have managed to steer those who wish to ultimately seek personal autonomy into some herd. of brainless racistts.

How does a vote for leave translate into "seek(ing) personal autonomy"? (If that is what you are trying to say)

Im not saying it does. Thats almost as stupid as suggesting that those who chose Brexit are racist.

Sure, we cannot blanket accuse every Brexit voter, but it is obvious that racist appeals for Brexit were prevalent, racist organizations used it as a rallying point...Certainly a much more realistic part of the situation than appeals to liberating "personal autonomy" but go ahead and continue trying to hammer AD...Such a great constant theme here...that and abstract poetry...

[JackRiddler]

You seem to be missing a lot:

Left wing critics of the legacy of Brexit are not necessarily for "Remain".

The glaring contradiction you create between the ideal of "personal autonomy" and the actual lives of refugees and other migrants is somehow invisibilised.

Most Antifa want little to do with the neoliberal agenda of George Soros.

You don't seem to have much of any idea at all about Hegel and his thinking.

That last one's a common tip-off. As if anyone gets through 3 pages of Hegel, let alone gets to summarize them in some laughable 3-step formula. Ha ha.

[Searcher08]

You seem to be missing a lot:
Left wing critics of the legacy of Brexit are not necessarily for "Remain".

I am unsure how one can be critical of the legacy of Brexit when it is still going on - and there is a possibility it might not even happen at all.

The glaring contradiction you create between the ideal of "personal autonomy" and the actual lives of refugees and other migrants is somehow invisibilised.

One wonders what "invisibilised a glaring contradiction" means. It sounds a bit Star Trek.
Curious what have you done personally for any refugee
(a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster), AD? Have you fed, clothed or sheltered any?

Most Antifa want little to do with the neoliberal agenda of George Soros.

Yet you are a consistent promoter for the neo-Liberal agenda in Ukraine. Your posts on the subject are about 90% Soros Party Line (Anton the Sorosian) , 10% Local Antifa.
Were you laughing when you typed that?
"I want nothing to do with your neoliberal agenda. "
PS Grateful for your funding.
PPS Err... will write articles for you.
PPS Errr... will work for you.

You yourself have posted dozens of "articles" from the Soros PAID and Soros-EDUCATED and Soros -EMPLOYED "AntiFa Researcher"
"AntiFa" is as full of Soros money and influence as Animal Liberation was full of MI5 and Special Branch. This happens at ALL levels of the AntiFa ecosystem. You also ignore the direct connections to the Israeli Right and Western Intel and MilIntel.
"Never let the truth get in the way of a good theory"

You don't seem to have much of any idea at all about Hegel and his thinking.

With an implication that YOU do.
Why don't *you* give a brief explanation of what Hegel and his thinking was all about, to help clarify matters?

[stefano]

Personal autonomy in the abstract was certainly not high on the list of Leave voters' priorities - most of them voted Leave precisely so that foreigners would have less autonomy to visit, work and live where they choose.

[JackRiddler]

Nitpicking on style and wordchoice isn't an answer to what AD wrote in response to slimmouse's nonsense.

The Brexit vote obviously had nothing either way to do with "personal autonomy" and it's a laughable trope to invoke.

Except of course with the autonomy of individuals who happen to be refugees or migrants, the pro-Brexit leaders want to restrict that even more (though it may not happen as dramatically as they hope) while a lot of Leave politicians tried to win support by supporting harsher restrictions.

Soros' efforts are among hundreds and thousands of foundations and entities set up by the super-rich to influence politics. This shouldn't be possible, but how are you going to stop it without more powerful state restrictions? The universe of super-rich money laundering itself and engaging in politics is absolutely fucking enormous, and even Soros is at most no more than a top-20 player, possibly lower. Those who focus on Soros more than other such figures (Thiel, Kochs, Gates, Peterson, Bloomberg, the older foundations and literally dozens of others) are usually pushing extremely stupid variants of NWO theory, in which Soros is some kind of lone kingpin of evil, usually owing to how nefariously Jewish he is and all. If you think mentioning his name is some kind of magic argument winner, you may be subject to such ideas too. That's my observation, tough. Most of what he does, I oppose. Some of what he does, I don't. If he came and gave me money to lobby for marijuana legalization, I'd take it. I'd also take Koch money for that, via the Cato Institute, as for example Greenwald once did.

[brainpanhandler]

Nitpicking on style and wordchoice isn't an answer to what AD wrote in response to slimmouse's nonsense.

The Brexit vote obviously had nothing either way to do with "personal autonomy" and it's a laughable trope to invoke.

Except of course with the autonomy of individuals who happen to be refugees or migrants, the pro-Brexit leaders want to restrict that even more (though it may not happen as dramatically as they hope) while a lot of Leave politicians tried to win support by supporting harsher restrictions.

Soros' efforts are among hundreds and thousands of foundations and entities set up by the super-rich to influence politics. This shouldn't be possible, but how are you going to stop it without more powerful state restrictions? The universe of super-rich money laundering itself and engaging in politics is absolutely fucking enormous, and even Soros is at most no more than a top-20 player, possibly less. Those who focus on Soros more than other such figures (Thiel, Kochs, Gates, Peterson, Bloomberg, the older foundations and literally dozens of others) are usually pushing extremely stupid variants of NWO theory, in which Soros is some kind of lone kingpin of evil, usually owing to how nefariously Jewish he is and all. If you think mentioning his name is some kind of magic argument winner, you may be subject to such ideas too. That's my observation, tough. Most of what he does, I oppose. Some of what he does, I don't. If he came and gave me money to lobby for marijuana legalization, I'd take it. I'd also take Koch money for that, via the Cato Institute, as for example Greenwald once did.

hear effing hear.

[Searcher08]

Nitpicking on style and wordchoice isn't an answer to what AD wrote in response to slimmouse's nonsense.

Querying wordsalad is not nitpicking on style but YMMV

The Brexit vote obviously had nothing either way to do with "personal autonomy" and it's a laughable trope to invoke.

I think it is more complex than that - most people I know who voted Leave had a visceral reaction to what they perceive as more and more de-facto rule by unelected figures, ones who had already fucked over several European countries.

Except of course with the autonomy of individuals who happen to be refugees or migrants, the pro-Brexit leaders want to restrict that even more (though it may not happen as dramatically as they hope) while a lot of Leave politicians tried to win support by supporting harsher restrictions.

I don't see any Pro-Brexit leaders left standing I certainly don't see a vote to Leave as being a vote for a particular party - it is an very complex picture, splitting along North South, Age, Devolution, and Class.

Soros' efforts are among hundreds and thousands of foundations and entities set up by the super-rich to influence politics.

This shouldn't be possible, but how are you going to stop it without more powerful state restrictions?

The universe of super-rich money laundering itself and engaging in politics is absolutely fucking enormous, and even Soros is at most no more than a top-20 player, possibly less. Those who focus on Soros more than other such figures (Thiel, Kochs, Gates, Peterson, Bloomberg, the older foundations and literally dozens of others) are usually pushing extremely stupid variants of NWO theory, in which Soros is some kind of lone kingpin of evil, usually owing to how nefariously Jewish he is and all. If you think mentioning his name is some kind of magic argument winner, you may be subject to such ideas too. That's my observation, tough.

How to stop it? A VERY rich interesting and probably very difficult question. Just like with the CIA during Bush II, there seems to be a politicising of everything, that shows in different ways. For the police, as militarisation; in academia as "Dreaming Spires... brought to you by Charles Koch" or the nightmare totalitarian world of MIzzou's Melissa Click and PhD's in Twilight Studies, in social media as Clicktivism...

Sure, I am aware of the Beck / Limbaugh / assorted fruitloops foghorns about Soros.
You are shifting the 'system-in-focus' to the wider ecosystem, which I will touch briefly upon.
A couple of years ago I did the same research into the Kochs that I had done on Soros and am acutely aware of their (frankly) horrific impact on education, turning around failing Colleges and Universities by providing blank cheques and then writing the curriculum and transforming the cultures of the places. It was 'university as extension of the Koch polity. As someone located on the Libertarian Left, I find that abhorrent. Academia should be a marketplace of ideas, not a Cathedral of Koch.
My focus on Soros is kind of like studying the African Wild Dog. I certainly don't think he is the most powerful or only 'predator' on the plains; dont think he is 'evil' anymore than they are.

My mentioning of Soros here is specific and in the context of a) the Ukraine / Russia thread, and b) in the context of AntiFa, which I covered in that thread. Some Soros organisations are intimately tied with the State Department and US AID and have been engaged in activities in Ukraine and Central Asia that are very destabilizing and divisive. His involvement in AntiFa spreads the idea that fascism within the US and Israel is not to be studied. They are 'the dogs that dont bark' if you know the Sherlock Holmes riff...

Most of what he does, I oppose. Some of what he does, I don't. If he came and gave me money to lobby for marijuana legalization, I'd take it. I'd also take Koch money for that, via the Cato Institute, as for example Greenwald once did.

"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's..."
Similarly with me. I have been there and done that - worked as a subcontractor for the Thatcher Foundation. Anyone who has a kid to provide for (or a critically ill partner needing lots of £££ on meds) knows about that. It is up to each person to find their own line of principle. No disagreement there.

[stefano]

His involvement in AntiFa spreads the idea that fascism within the US and Israel is not to be studied.

Why do you say that, though? What's is specifically about his involvement that does this? I guess I ought first to ask what you definition of fascism is - I don't think either the US or Israel is fascist as far as the ruling structure is concerned. Neither has the leader figure who is personally revered, and the US doesn't have the pervasive militarism, like Boy Scout movements or Young Patriots or whatever. Perhaps people there are just beyond mobilising in a literal sense - they just leave them at home and work on their opinions remotely, ha. And the organs that are actually Soros ones - not the ones that he gets associated with on very flimsy grounds - do pretty good work studying and publicising rights abuses by both governments.

More broadly, and sticking to the OP - you can think what you want about AD's drive-by paste jobs, and I tend to think he overdoes it as well, but the racist spirit that this vote has prodded to quickening in England (and Wales, what the fuck Wales?) is very serious business. Everyone should know more about it. And if the New Margaret Thatcher (whichever formica lady ends up leading you - is it not amazing that two people like May and Leadsom can co-exist in a given universe, let alone Britain's ruling party?) walks back on the Leave promise, as seems certain, those fuckers are going to get worse.