Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[LordSlowpoke]

hey because none of you have heard this for a while apparently

just remove national level and have it go local councils - regional - federal

seriously, nations are excessive. the largest thing you should have before the big union parliament level is the size of burgundy.

admittedly it would cause weird stuff like having to split scotland in half (or three pieces, if you decide to go by population instead of sheer size), but the point stands. nations are bloody pointless in the 21st century, and i'd love to hear your arguments as to why they're needed in any sort of fashion (within the eu, at least - without a higher authority you pretty obviously want a national level to exist)

[scriver]

Oh yeah, if everyone would just agree to become Swedish in every way and take after the way we do things, I'd totally agree.

No? No takers? You want to keep your customs, cultures and traditions and laws? Oh well. Then I guess there's a place for nations after all, because most of us up here in Scandinavia sure as hell don't want to lower our standard of life and government any further for no other reason than taking after the rest of you.

[Owlbread]

A) It was something of an overstatement, but in my defense I am thoroughly angry and disappointed at how my county has voted.

It's terrible, there's really no escaping it. Now you understand a little of how the 1.6 million Scots who voted Yes felt after the referendum.

B) A large number of Conservative voters I've spoken to swung from the Lib Dems as they didn't want a SNP coalition. Purely anecdotal ofc.

Yes, that's the problem. It's anecdotal. A far more likely cause of people backing the Tories was how utterly abysmal the Labour party were. The whole "Kinnock factor" raises its ugly head once again, and Tories routinely get underestimated by pollsters as a matter of course due to shy Tory syndrome etc. Here is a blog post explaining how all of this could have been predicted if our analysts had been reading the polls properly.

C) Yup, Labour was shit. Sadly, as someone in England, there wasn't even a better option IMO -_-. In Scotland, there was the SNP, which knocked Labour off a gigantic powerbase and thus ensured they didn't stand any chance.

That's 100% nonsense. The SNP were committed to backing a Labour government and locking the Tories out as long as the SNP + Labour + Lib Dems + whatever else could form an anti-Tory majority. Whether or not Labour actually gained or held any Scottish seats would have no effect on the outcome of the general election.

D) No comment is intended as an assignment of blame. I'm just.... disappointed.

I think the need to blame is part of the grieving process. Loads of pro-independence people threw blame around after the failed independence referendum but it didn't get us anywhere and it wasn't appropriate. Channel your energies into joining a political party and becoming active if you actually want to do something about it.

[LordSlowpoke]

yes, because removing a layer of governance obviously means you'll be brainwashed into some sort of homo europicus by the evil overlords in brussels

thank you for your contribution

[Owlbread]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

hey because none of you have heard this for a while apparently

just remove national level and have it go local councils - regional - federal

seriously, nations are excessive. the largest thing you should have before the big union parliament level is the size of burgundy.

admittedly it would cause weird stuff like having to split scotland in half (or three pieces, if you decide to go by population instead of sheer size), but the point stands. nations are bloody pointless in the 21st century, and i'd love to hear your arguments as to why they're needed in any sort of fashion (within the eu, at least - without a higher authority you pretty obviously want a national level to exist)

I think the fewer the number of monolithic super-states that exist in the world the better (the closer and more accountable executive power is to the people the better), but I'm not exactly sure why you're calling for the abolition of "nations" considering you've presented absolutely no evidence to support your argument other than "they're unnceessary".

I also like to think it would be easier to unite the world without dividing it into Eurasia, Oceania, Eastasia etc.

[Sheb]

It should also be pointed out that most European countries are already pretty small. Only 6 countries out of 28 have a population of over 20 millions.

[Sergarr]

nations are bloody pointless in the 21st century, and i'd love to hear your arguments as to why they're needed in any sort of fashion (within the eu, at least - without a higher authority you pretty obviously want a national level to exist)

I'm pretty sure that the nations themselves would disagree with them being useless. Nations are not only about governance and authority - they're also about history and culture, and you can't simply remove those elements.

[Frumple]

You totally can. Languages, cultures, history -- they die every year in droves. It's more troublesome (both from a logistic and moral standpoint) to induce that sort of loss, but it's also fairly trivial -- just get the kids and keep them from learning about the history and culture in question. Keep that up for one, two generations and it'd be dead. A nation without people to remember it and live in its ways is nothing.

[Sergarr]

You totally can. Languages, cultures, history -- they die every year in droves. It's more troublesome (both from a logistic and moral standpoint) to induce that sort of loss, but it's also fairly trivial -- just get the kids and keep them from learning about the history and culture in question. Keep that up for one, two generations and it'd be dead. A nation without people to remember it and live in its ways is nothing.

For every dead language, a new one appears. Just look at the Internet - think about how many different dialects of English people use there. Each with it's own special words, special sentence structures, special purpose... and that's only English.

And if somebody destroys history, people will make up a new one. It's how nations were born in the first place.

For hell's sake, is this the same bullshit that leads some people to cry against interracial marriages "because then everyone will be brown"?

[palsch]

So this weekend seems to be when I rebuild my resource list of links to spam at people in the upcoming debates.

A fantastic report from the Open Rights Group on the Snooper's Charter.

[Frumple]

And if somebody destroys history, people will make up a new one. It's how nations were born in the first place.

Hnnooo. That's how cultures were born, more or less. Nations were first born when some jackass decided to draw imaginary lines on the ground and kill anyone that disagreed with them. Cultures are a distinct, if often related, phenomena.

But nah, I'm pretty sure we've been losing languages and cultures on the net of things over the last few decades -- certainly the number of active and wide spread ones is diminishing fairly rapidly. Globalization is a hell of a drug.

For hell's sake, is this the same bullshit that leads some people to cry against interracial marriages "because then everyone will be brown"?

Zog if I know. M'mostly incapable of getting inside the head of idiot racists. Also never actually met anyone that spun that line of reasoning that was actually giving a damn about cultural intermingling or whatev', though. S'all been pretty straightforward bigotry looking for an excuse, in my personal experience.

... though that's an argument for interracial marriages, imo :V

[mainiac]

Racism is just an attempt to promote diversity.  And homophobia is just an attempt to make sure gay genes stay in the gene pool.

[Frumple]

... it'd be pretty neat to meet someone that actually thought like that. I'd give 'em a quarter or somethin' just as a gift for the novelty of it, I think.

In other news, I'm apparently hearing something about riots, or at least fairly sizable protests that are being downplayed by police, in UK? Anyone actually know anything about that?

[SirQuiamus]

... it'd be pretty neat to meet someone that actually thought like that. I'd give 'em a quarter or somethin' just as a gift for the novelty of it, I think.

Talk to right-leaning evolutionary psychologists. They'll tell you that racism improves the competitive fitness of ethnic minorities, and homophobia provides reproductive opportunities to homosexual individuals.

Which is exactly what mainiac said.

[Loud Whispers]

I'm assuming everyone Britpol had fun on the elections?