Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

I agree with much of what you are saying.  But all of that is true without making the claim that it is an important principle of Liberal Democracy that political decision makers be allowed to be wrong.

Where you and I agree is that decision should be made by politicians and all too often they delegate away (or abdicate) that decision making authority.  Where you and I disagree is that once a decision is made, you seem to be suggesting that the only body that can then intervene is subsequently elected politicians.  That is certainly a tenant of Parliament Supremacy.  But it is inconsistent with having strong Liberal Democratic institutions, like the courts, playing an important part in reviewing public decisions. 

To be clear the political decision makers I think can be wrong are voters - and the ones who (generally) should correct their errors are voters. If political decision makers are wrong then in general the people who punish them should be voters. But to be honest I'm not really thinking about the courts in this - I think the way some campaign groups want to use them maybe have a role in perhaps encouraging  performance of politics that they cannot enact.

To be honest I was thinking more of "independent" decision makers - quangos, technocrats, central bankers etc. Which I think is where we agree of politicians abdicating responsibility. I wasn't really thinking of judicial review.

What you seem to be arguing is essentially Parliamentary Supremacy, where only future Parliamentarians can change things and there is no Rule of Law which constrains those political decisions. 

It has some attraction, unless you live through things like the long reign of Duplessis in Quebec or the rule the GOP in the US.  Then one gives more serious thought to the importance of liberal democratic institutions which place restrictions on the raw power of the political class. 

The rule of the GOP is precisely because they have captured the less democratic bits of their constitutional order (both the courts, senate and the electoral college). They were all consciously designed to be counter-majoritarian because the founders as sensible enlightenment thinkers imbued the classical and enlightenment fear of democratic politics as mob rule. I'd place the US as an example of a system that could do with a bit more democracy. I think there's a similar risk for the EU which I think is a "civilisational turn" - as the boundary between centre and far-right is eroded and those institutions will be used by whoever is in power. As institutions are tools and what they do will shift as we see more governments influenced by or including the far right - in Sweden, Finland, Poland (which may get worse), Hungary, Italy and after the next election possibly also the Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain and France.

You're not wroong though - but as I say I don't think the system is about getting the right answer because I don't think there is a right answer. I'd also add that I think if democratic politics is the primary way of achieving change then it will encourage what I think are broadly virtuous and democratic behaviours - campaigning, activism, involvement with and reaching out to your fellow citizens to build a majority. If change is primarily through consultations to independent technocrats of one form or other, or through litigation I think it makes power less available to normal citizens. In that system the route to change is lobbying, instructing lawyers etc and I'm not sure that's healthy and it is certainly less open.

I don't know what I'm arguing for, because I think, in Europe, we have two inter-locking problems. One is the hollowing out or abdication of democratic power and the other is death of the mass political party as a way for citizens to do politics and exercise power in a democracy. I think the party issue is structural, but the hollowing out has been a result of decisions by politicians. I've been struck by research I saw recently that people basically don't really buy or agree with the "representative" bit of representative democracy. I wonder if the path is to a more directly democratic model (like, in different ways, Macron and Grillo pointed to), or perhaps it is a more participatory system through citizens' assemblies as have been really interesting and (as a cynic about them) surprisingly effective in Ireland.

But I think that the we're moving into an age of inflation driven by external shocks (particularly increasing climate events/impact of climate on supply chains), great power competition and moves towards protectionism globally - as well as, from a European perspective, war. With all of the human and economic effects of those problems. I think that means the areas of politics that were previously seen as technocratic, consensual matters will become increasingly contested and there will be increasing demand for democratic power over them. How that develops I'm not sure.

[crazy canuck]

All good points.  And if we move toward more democratic power over important decisions (and I hope we do) my point still stands.  Democratic Institutions which act as a restraint on that power within the Rule of Law are essential

[Sheilbh]

Its worrying considering the Tories fucking with local electoral systems to make them less democratic too. I believe this will be straight FPTP?
The woman who got the nomination instead, out of a field of 2, is a thoroughly uninspiring careerist.

I really can't see Driscoll winning. I worry however he will leech off enough of the Labour vote to hand victory to a Tory- especially if they can convince the fascist candidate to bow out.

I don't know if his local brand is big enough to do what Ken did in 2000 - but he is the incumbent.

Although it definitely feels like Starmer is maybe taking the Blair playbook too far - banning locally popular candidate to the left of the leadership, prompting them to run as an independent and supporting some morally indefensible benefits policies that will definitely cause a massive revolt 

[Josquius]

Its worrying considering the Tories fucking with local electoral systems to make them less democratic too. I believe this will be straight FPTP?
The woman who got the nomination instead, out of a field of 2, is a thoroughly uninspiring careerist.

I really can't see Driscoll winning. I worry however he will leech off enough of the Labour vote to hand victory to a Tory- especially if they can convince the fascist candidate to bow out.

I don't know if his local brand is big enough to do what Ken did in 2000 - but he is the incumbent.

Although it definitely feels like Starmer is maybe taking the Blair playbook too far - banning locally popular candidate to the left of the leadership, prompting them to run as an independent and supporting some morally indefensible benefits policies that will definitely cause a massive revolt 

North of Tyne incumbent.

I'm surprised Labour have kept quiet about excluding him as I could see a valid excuse if they claim this is meant to be a fresh start and not just Newcastle annexing Sunderland and so on. That's an angle I could really see opponents trying on him. Especially considering his pretty Meh record as north of Tyne mayor. He's locally popular in Labour but pretty anonymous to the general public.

I'm not seeing starmer supporting any bad benefits policies? Is this the thing about him saying they couldn't afford to raise the 2 child cap?

[Sheilbh]

By the by - absolutely incredible story from the Tories up your way

Seaham Conservative Club fined for 'death match'
    Published    6 hours ago


Several complaints claiming the match was not suitable for children were made after the show

A club that hosted a "death match" wrestling event in front of families has been fined, a council said.

The show, at the Conservative Club in Seaham, County Durham, in April 2022 saw blood-soaked performers attacked with garden tools and glass.

At Peterlee Magistrates' Court the club admitted three charges including hosting the event without a suitable licence, Durham County Council said.

The authority's investigation followed several complaints from the public.

Footage taken during the event showed the two performers being cut with a garden strimmer and having glass lighting tubes smashed over them as the audience of about 80 people watched on, just yards from the violence.

Complaints the event was not suitable for children - who were seen in the footage and heard in the audience - were made to the local authority.

The club was fined £300, ordered to pay £550 in costs and also made to pay a £120 victim surcharge, the council, which brought the prosecution, said.


Video of the event shows blood-soaked wrestlers smash glass tubes on one another within yards of families

Speaking after the event in 2022, James Barrass of Colliery Championship Wrestling (CCW) apologised but said the audience had enjoyed it.

The East Durham-based promoter claimed the match, between wrestlers Ronnie Thatcher and Blizzard, "escalated" and he said the weapons were used without his prior knowledge.

He admitted the event "wasn't everyone's cup of tea", adding: "We have apologised but how many times do you say sorry? How many times do you have to be penalised in life?"

On the injuries the men suffered, he added medics were present and they "didn't have to do too much".

He said there had been "a couple of scratches here and there".


At one point one wrestler was attacked with a garden strimmer

Durham County Council said the club was charged with holding the event despite not being licensed for such activity, that children were present after 22:00 without licensing authorisation and that alcohol was sold to non-members without having a premises licence or temporary event notice.

What is 'death match' wrestling?

A "death match" is a style of hardcore wrestling in which participants use a wide range of objects and weapons.

The format was popular throughout the 1990s with promoters such as WWF (which became WWE) and ECW (Extreme Championship Wrestling) hosting hardcore matches and championships.

Well-known performers including Terry Funk and Mick Foley became renowned for their "death match" shows, including matches where the ring's rope was replaced with barbed wire.

Although these matches are no longer on mainstream television, there are a number of UK promoters who specialise in them.

Durham Police, which had previously probed the event, said there were no ongoing investigations.

CCW has been approached for comment.


The poster advertised admission deals for families

"Colliery Championship Wrestling (CCW) apologised but said the audience had enjoyed it." Magnificent

[Richard Hakluyt]

My home town finally makes the news, I'm so proud 

[Richard Hakluyt]

I used to go to that club once a week back in the day. It was during a spell of unemployment back in the 1970s. On quiz nights they had something called "the easy six", some difficult quiz questions thrown out to all assembled, first one to stick their hand up and answer correctly got a free pint. I could rely on getting two free pints, sometimes three, on one occasion four; so a free night out during a time of cash shortage 
The committee tried to recruit me into their quiz team for the interclub league, but I had to decline, explaining that I couldn't square it with my conscience as I was a socialist 

[Josquius]

Always used to amaze me towns like Seaham have conservative clubs.
These days I'm not at all surprised and that they'd have an event like this seems perfectly expected. I'm just surprised the character getting the shit kicked out of him wasn't wearing a turban and called Refugee Ricky or something

[Richard Hakluyt]

I'm not sure how many of them were conservatives back in the 1970s, but the place used to be quite "respectable" so a selling point (back then) was that people could go there with their wife/gf. There were over two dozen pubs down the harbour back then, all within a few hundred yards of each other; it was, perhaps, less violent than one might imagine, but still not a great place to take your wife/gf.

[Sheilbh]

There must be some sort of release of papers from the National Archives going on. Some interesting stories on Blair and Ukraine as well as Thatcher (and Paddy Ashdown) offering Blair strong support over his response to 9/11.

But I really enjoyed this piece on the rather troublesome effort to appoint the Poet Laureate in 1967/8. It's really largely about the poetry establishment (failed poets) blocking (successful) poets they dislike from getting the appointment. I really love that the eventual Laureate, Cecil Day-Lewis, was eventually appointed and described as a "good administrative poet"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66224984

Edit: also I feel like "good administrative poet" massively sums up Britain in the 60s and 70s.

[HVC]

Falkland Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo

EU and CELAC signed some agreement where the Falklands were referenced interchangeably with Malvinas and now Argentina is all uppity and UK all butt hurt.

[Josquius]

It's weird as usually places get to set their own name in foreign languages.

[Tamas]

Yeah I am not with the EU on this one.  Argentina's only claim on the islands I believe is that they happen to be closer to them. Even Russia has more claim on Ukraine and yet we don't want to entertain that.

Must be a mix of colonial guilt and leftist anti-Thatcher leftovers.

[Duque de Bragança]

Falkland Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo

EU and CELAC signed some agreement where the Falklands were referenced interchangeably with Malvinas and now Argentina is all uppity and UK all butt hurt.

As you probably know,    it's Les Malouines in French, so maybe the Daily Mail is exaggerating the EU side of things.

Bonus: As Malvinas in Portuguese.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I am not with the EU on this one.  Argentina's only claim on the islands I believe is that they happen to be closer to them. Even Russia has more claim on Ukraine and yet we don't want to entertain that.

Must be a mix of colonial guilt and leftist anti-Thatcher leftovers.

Good to see that Living in the UK citizenship course is teaching the essentials

I feel like an overactive sense of colonial guilt is perhaps a little question-begging in an organisation that stretches from the coast of Venezuela, through the Rif all the way to the atolls of Polynesia.

More generally this will annoy Whitehall/the FCDO. On a purely practical level, it seems odd to snub a neighbour and ally who is actively helping defend Europe to please Latin American leaders who aren't.

As you probably know ,  it's Les Malouines in French, so maybe the Daily Mail is exaggerating the EU side of things.

So are the Argentine government:

Cancillería Argentina 🇦🇷
@CancilleriaARG
Triunfo de la diplomacia argentina: por primera vez la Unión Europea y la CELAC adoptaron una moción sobre la Cuestión Malvinas 🇦🇷

Accedé al texto de la declaración: https://cancilleria.gob.ar/userfiles/prensa/declaracion_de_la_cumbre_ue-celac_de_2023.pdf