In the latest in a series of “Will Trump destroy X?” (not “X” as in what you still think of as Twitter, I mean “X” as in, something new each week) videos, I explore whether Trump will be the death of right-wing populism in Europe, as his anti-European policies (in every sense) make Trump deeply unpopular throughout the continent.
Brexit destroyed any desire to leave the EU among continental parties with representation in parliaments. Trump is already having a similarly opposite effect on countries he is attempting to bully and predate upon. This is one of the problems at the heart of nationalism as a creed. One set of humans in one territory says we are more special, exceptional, rightful and powerful than you and you must submit to us and give us what we want. Then the other side's humans spring up and say No you're not, we're the special ones and we will oppose you to the end. The result is trade war or actual war and everyone loses from disruption, obstruction, chaos, destruction and uncertainty.
The exceptions in the past where nastialism, I will call it, under colonialism clearly won was where when one people brought something to the fight that gave them a clear advantage to take a territory by force, something now undertaken purely by pariahs such as Putin. The British taking India was lampooned by comedian Al Murray as The Pub Landlord, who portrayed that as by "a bloke in a pith helmet and khaki shorts with a bike". What it was at essence was through the products of the industrial revolution, i.e guns, to a knife fight.
Every 70-80 years, people forget previous hard learned lessons and repeat them. But with trade wars, they have been attempted by recent U.S Presidents, most recently Bush Jnr., which were quickly withdrawn due to unimaginable, unintended consequences and way more damage caused to their own side. Drumpf has no historical perspective and described the Canadian border as a straight line ( it follows the great lakes and ancient New England territory borders pressing way further north) and said the line was set "decades ago". It was in the 1800's with Canada made a separate country by an act of the UK Parliament in 1867.
Another good article - and video. I think you're right to focus on what you find interesting and on which you have something interesting to say, rather than trying to rehash old stuff for fans... Not least because I don't think the latter is sustainable. You, they or both will very likely get dissatisfied with that approach.
I also think that changing your focus is ultimately helpful for handling Brexit too. Brexit was and became all things to all people. The answer to any perceived (or real) problem and/or a threat to benefits of modern life that we took for granted. One of the main reasons the Remain campaign failed was because it did NOT provide answers to the questions people wanted to ask. (The Leave side's answers were mostly untrue or at least were mutually incompatible, but at least they answered questions people wanted answers to.)
Whether or not we ever rejoin the EU, British politics has to answer questions about how we govern ourselves. And those of us that want to rejoin will have to engage with those debates in the meantime and work out how we can rejoin the EU in a way that both deals with the issues people want addressed and in such a way that allows advocates of rejoining to be seen to be engaging with them. So I think by 'shifting away from covering Brexit' you are at least addressing things that need to be addressed and you are potentially laying the groundwork for revisiting Brexit / rejoin if / when the opportunity arises.
I do though want to pick you up on what I think is an inconsistency in your reading of the Lib Dems (and not just because I am one - full disclosure!).
Your argument for shifting away from covering Brexit is essentially that you've run out of things to say, because nothing is happening that gives you anything to talk about. Even though you've not lost your desire to rejoin... banging the same old drum isn't working.
Surely though... that's essentially what the Lib Dems are doing too. With 72 MPs the Lib Dems cannot force the country to rejoin. (And the EU won't engage with the idea until and unless they think there is a stable majority in the UK in favour of rejoining.) The Lib Dems have to compete in the electoral system we have and against a backdrop of everything else that is going on today. Some (you?) make or have made the argument that the Lib Dems could tap into either a majority who want to rejoin or enough support to win power... But that doesn't seem to be the case. It's not like the Lib Dems didn't try before. A desire to rejoin in the abstract is not the same as a desire to fight another massively divisive culture war... You can argue until you're blue in the face that the Lib Dems should lead rather than follow public opinion... but by shifting away from Brexit both you and the Lib Dems are concluding that this isn't a viable strategy.
While promoting joining a customs union isn't the sexiest of subjects, and it doesn't offer the full benefits of rejoining... it IS relevant to the wider debate going on today about how we get growth back into the UK economy. If it could be achieved, it could a step on the road to rejoining too. The Lib Dems have laid out a strategy for joining. Fundamentally it's about doing so step by step, improving the state of the country in the gap between now and an eventual rejoin date and in doing so hopefully building consensus towards the ultimate goal of rejoining.
I don't see that anyone else has laid out an alternative 'big bang' strategy for rejoining.
The Lib Dems are not offering a 'rejoin now' option, but I don't seriously think that they could. Even if they shifted to saying 'we want to rejoin now' I don't see how they could deliver it, even if such a campaign gained traction. And I don't think it's likely that such a campaign would gain traction given everything else that's happening right now. I don't see an alternative rejoin strategy to the one the Lib Dems are proposing... And I don't see that you have one either.
I can think of numerous reasons why the Lib Dems annoy you (I can think of ways in which they annoy me too, even though I'm a member)... but if you're trying to be objective, I can't see how you can argue that they ought to be pursuing a different rejoin strategy.
Brexit destroyed any desire to leave the EU among continental parties with representation in parliaments. Trump is already having a similarly opposite effect on countries he is attempting to bully and predate upon. This is one of the problems at the heart of nationalism as a creed. One set of humans in one territory says we are more special, exceptional, rightful and powerful than you and you must submit to us and give us what we want. Then the other side's humans spring up and say No you're not, we're the special ones and we will oppose you to the end. The result is trade war or actual war and everyone loses from disruption, obstruction, chaos, destruction and uncertainty.
The exceptions in the past where nastialism, I will call it, under colonialism clearly won was where when one people brought something to the fight that gave them a clear advantage to take a territory by force, something now undertaken purely by pariahs such as Putin. The British taking India was lampooned by comedian Al Murray as The Pub Landlord, who portrayed that as by "a bloke in a pith helmet and khaki shorts with a bike". What it was at essence was through the products of the industrial revolution, i.e guns, to a knife fight.
Every 70-80 years, people forget previous hard learned lessons and repeat them. But with trade wars, they have been attempted by recent U.S Presidents, most recently Bush Jnr., which were quickly withdrawn due to unimaginable, unintended consequences and way more damage caused to their own side. Drumpf has no historical perspective and described the Canadian border as a straight line ( it follows the great lakes and ancient New England territory borders pressing way further north) and said the line was set "decades ago". It was in the 1800's with Canada made a separate country by an act of the UK Parliament in 1867.
Another good article - and video. I think you're right to focus on what you find interesting and on which you have something interesting to say, rather than trying to rehash old stuff for fans... Not least because I don't think the latter is sustainable. You, they or both will very likely get dissatisfied with that approach.
I also think that changing your focus is ultimately helpful for handling Brexit too. Brexit was and became all things to all people. The answer to any perceived (or real) problem and/or a threat to benefits of modern life that we took for granted. One of the main reasons the Remain campaign failed was because it did NOT provide answers to the questions people wanted to ask. (The Leave side's answers were mostly untrue or at least were mutually incompatible, but at least they answered questions people wanted answers to.)
Whether or not we ever rejoin the EU, British politics has to answer questions about how we govern ourselves. And those of us that want to rejoin will have to engage with those debates in the meantime and work out how we can rejoin the EU in a way that both deals with the issues people want addressed and in such a way that allows advocates of rejoining to be seen to be engaging with them. So I think by 'shifting away from covering Brexit' you are at least addressing things that need to be addressed and you are potentially laying the groundwork for revisiting Brexit / rejoin if / when the opportunity arises.
I do though want to pick you up on what I think is an inconsistency in your reading of the Lib Dems (and not just because I am one - full disclosure!).
Your argument for shifting away from covering Brexit is essentially that you've run out of things to say, because nothing is happening that gives you anything to talk about. Even though you've not lost your desire to rejoin... banging the same old drum isn't working.
Surely though... that's essentially what the Lib Dems are doing too. With 72 MPs the Lib Dems cannot force the country to rejoin. (And the EU won't engage with the idea until and unless they think there is a stable majority in the UK in favour of rejoining.) The Lib Dems have to compete in the electoral system we have and against a backdrop of everything else that is going on today. Some (you?) make or have made the argument that the Lib Dems could tap into either a majority who want to rejoin or enough support to win power... But that doesn't seem to be the case. It's not like the Lib Dems didn't try before. A desire to rejoin in the abstract is not the same as a desire to fight another massively divisive culture war... You can argue until you're blue in the face that the Lib Dems should lead rather than follow public opinion... but by shifting away from Brexit both you and the Lib Dems are concluding that this isn't a viable strategy.
While promoting joining a customs union isn't the sexiest of subjects, and it doesn't offer the full benefits of rejoining... it IS relevant to the wider debate going on today about how we get growth back into the UK economy. If it could be achieved, it could a step on the road to rejoining too. The Lib Dems have laid out a strategy for joining. Fundamentally it's about doing so step by step, improving the state of the country in the gap between now and an eventual rejoin date and in doing so hopefully building consensus towards the ultimate goal of rejoining.
I don't see that anyone else has laid out an alternative 'big bang' strategy for rejoining.
The Lib Dems are not offering a 'rejoin now' option, but I don't seriously think that they could. Even if they shifted to saying 'we want to rejoin now' I don't see how they could deliver it, even if such a campaign gained traction. And I don't think it's likely that such a campaign would gain traction given everything else that's happening right now. I don't see an alternative rejoin strategy to the one the Lib Dems are proposing... And I don't see that you have one either.
I can think of numerous reasons why the Lib Dems annoy you (I can think of ways in which they annoy me too, even though I'm a member)... but if you're trying to be objective, I can't see how you can argue that they ought to be pursuing a different rejoin strategy.