[skinster]

This guy.

[Beren]

Not sure what you're trying to say here

You don't have a sense of irony then, although it's easy to make you .

However, that's just how you react to anything and finish any conversation.

As to being boring, maybe you should check yourself too.

[B0ycey]

If Lexit is a thing and the Horseshoe is not, why is Lexit voting Brexit???!?!?!

I might add this isn't an anti Corbyn thing. He is calling for another referendum as subtlety as possible. Perhaps why there is no agreement yet with the Tories over the impasse. But while the right rally behind Farage, the far left are doing likewise. If the line is linear and not bent that would mean they are voting for their polar not their equals - which makes no sense if the theory is merely rhetoric.

[SolarCross]

Anne Widdecombe just signed up with the Brexit Party.

[snapdragon]

Lexit is a belief that Brexit can free Britain to be a socialist country.

There isn't a Lexit Party a person can vote for that will deliver in its promises - and although Corbyn would like to in his weird dreams, he isn't going to be able to do so because Labour isn't a Lexit Party despite having a Lexit leader, but also because it's entirely impractical.

People who support leaving the UK are chasing all sorts of different things that nobody is going to deliver for them because most of those things are either rainbows or unicorns.

That's why we're in this fucking mess.

[layman]

Yes of course you can be left wing and genuinely vote for brexit although it is only rational if you are far left. The first reason is that economic disaster is a Trotskyist tactic for revolutionary change. Secondly, converting one country to socialism is arguably easier than converting a whole continent from within a capitalist framework.

Now, brexit is not at its core a white nationalist or ethno nationalist movement. At its core it is Thatcherite, liberal/libertarian. Of course it used popularist, anti immigration and racist dog whistle tactics but that isn’t the same thing. Also, yes all racists would vote for it.

all politics involves a degree of telling different things to different people. You simply have to to get the numbers when the other side does. Brexit took this to a fairly extreme level which is why many confuse its core proponents to new facist movements like those in Italy.

[Negotiator]

Quite frankly listening to pro-Brexit britains is giving me a headache. It is as if these people mentally still live in the british empire. They dont understand that in order to be free to choose your own way of living, you better are as many people as possible.

China for example is outrageous in many respects. They can afford it because they have 1.4 billion people and are an enormous economic power. United Europe is merely something like 300 million people, and a lot of that isnt even part of the EU. It is already obvious China alone will soon have more economic power than combined Europe.

I fully understand why people dont like the EU, I dont like it in its current state either. But if we can get it to work, it would be very helpful for our independence. Which is challenged, and hard, even today. Europes sovereignity is under aggressive attack by the USA. If we could unite and, well, could grow our politicians spines, the USA would have no choice but to take us more seriously, and stop telling us what to do. Instead UK, Germany and others seem to want to play the lapdog of the USA, following riddiculous commands like spending 2% of your GDP on the military or the sanctions against an increasing number of countries - Russia, Iran, whatever USA currently fancies as an opponent.

It is thus in our best interest that:
- We combine as many countries as possible in the EU, including Russia and Turkey (at least once Turkey decides to rejoin civilization, anyway), and certainly including UK.
- Keep the EU attractive to the people, namely by good social standards, tax regulations (cannot have single countries with outrageously low taxes for companies, draining the rest of the EU of their tax income), and NOT by militarization, austerity, and whatever other garbage the neoliberal ideology comes up to alienate people.
- Install a common economic government, to harmonize the economic power between countries over the EU, especially removing the unfair advantages through too low wages that Germany and Austria are currently running with programs like Hartz IV.
- Avoid domination of any single country, like it is currently the case with Germany.
- Stop being the friggin lapdog of the USA, like we're currently getting bullied into sanctions against Iran.

[Beren]

Lexit is a belief that Brexit can free Britain to be a socialist country.

Which is a fantasy.

converting one country to socialism is arguably easier than converting a whole continent from within a capitalist framework.

But it's easier to fail that way as well. How could Britain remain a socialist country in the long term if Europe doesn't convert to socialism too? But even that wouldn't be enough, I'm afraid, because socialist Europe would be crushed either if the rest of the world remains capitalist.

[Zionist Nationalist]

skinster you are full of shit and out of money apparently

if you are so confident in corbyn why wont you bet with me?

[layman]

@Beren i disagree with it too and disagree with socialism as a whole.

My point is that socialism in one country is a consistent and genuine position.

Other brexit positions are more conflated. For example, trying To reconcile right wing liberal free markets with little England nationalism. The two are fundamentally opposed.

[SolarCross]

I don't think brexit can be fairly said to be overly little englanderisch. Farage is in clacton right now talking up the commonwealth, the US and the rest of the world. There are all sorts into brexit and some of them are petty nationalists for sure but lots of us are interested in engaging with the wider world and being free to do so by virtue of being independant.

[B0ycey]

My point is that socialism in one country is a consistent and genuine position.

Define Socialism.

There is nothing wrong with Socialism if executed correctly. Where the issue lies from history in regards to Socialism is that it is always perfected towards the interests of the state rather than the interests of the individual - and as such the individual suffers. We have our resident Stalinists on here who don't even know what they really support, but lucky they are restricted to the halls of public forums rather than the voice on the streets so I usually ignore their rants as meaningless gibberish.

Other brexit positions are more conflated. For example, trying To reconcile right wing liberal free markets with little England nationalism. The two are fundamentally opposed.

It is fair to say that Brexit for the right has different objectives to Brexit for the far left. Where the right want to liberate themselves from EU rules to decide their own rules and open up the market to the rest of the world in excahnge for our valued European trade, the far left want to restrict the labor market so they can gain an upper hand in the value of their surplus labor. But you cannot deny that both are xenophobic and closed borders thinking and ultimately under Smith thinking this will reduce the wealth of our nation as that is what happens when you reduce your market up.

Although it does need to be said that if the left vote for a right wing party such as "The Brexit Party" and not a Lexit party like Corbyn's Labour, you have to question how anyone can conclude that "The Horseshoe Theory" is nonsense.

[Beren]

My point is that socialism in one country is a consistent and genuine position.

Historic experiences alone should be enough to prove the idea false while Marx and Engels also argued socialism should be universal, although they were sympathetic to any sporadic socialist revolutions, of course. It's as much consistent and genuine as socialism in one city would be. And this is not really about socialism, this is rather about anti-capitalism. A Marxist revolution should reach a critical mass on a global scale to have a chance of success, which means it should sweep through the West at first strike at least. It also must be noted that Marxism was supposed to be a Western philosophy for Western people in the first place.

However, your argument could be a perfect anti-socialist argument as you're an anti-socialist yourself.

[Rich]

The funny thing about "Socialism in one Country" is that no one seemed to notice that the Soviet Union and the Russian Soviet Federation that preceded it were not one country. The Trotskyist line against "socialism in one country" is just an excuse for the failure of the Russian Trotskyist revolution. But what ever the idea that Socialism failed in a huge state like the post 1920 Soviet state, but could succeed in a small, resource poor trading nation like Britain is absurd.

The reason the far left have opposed European membership is, what Lenin would have called opportunism, pure and simple. The far left saw opposition to joining the EU as a way to ride populist, chauvinist sentiment, while pretending to themselves, that they were engaged in principled revolutionary opposition. The far left's first port of call is always out group chauvinism, hence the reason they were always cheer leaders for the Provisonal IRA, despite the fact that the Provos were specifically created at the behest of the Eire government as an anti Communist move. We see it in the Far Left's accommodation to Muslim reactionaries in the so called anti war movement.

But the far left also accommodate to chauvinism in white native majority population, where it doesn't contradict their commitments to out group races and nationalisms. So during the Miners Strikes and other industrial struggles, there was a complete avoidance of challenging the miners and other industrial workers on their sexism and homophobia. Our own beloved Decky just took this the next level, trying to ride the hyper masculine traditional, bigoted, macho manual working class culture at the same time as being a politically correct, gay loving feminist.

When I say far left, I don't mean Tony Benn. Tony Benn was a Christian of a peaceful disposition, he really believed in a Little Socialist Independent Britain. Corbyn may have been Benn's campaign manager, but he's of a very different sort. He's much closer to the open Marxists, but he's actually been quite disciplined in what he's said over the years. Hence why his political opponents including the majority of the press have had such difficulty in getting mud to stick on him. I really feel people fail to appreciate, what a feat it has been that such an extreme leftist has been able to hang onto the Labour Party leadership position.

[skinster]

You don't have a sense of irony then, although it's easy to make you .

However, that's just how you react to anything and finish any conversation.

As to being boring, maybe you should check yourself too.

No, I honestly had no idea what you were talking about in the part that I quoted where I was clear I didn't know what you were talking about. Maybe you could clarify? Maybe someone can translate? Or maybe next time attach an article in your post to support your position so it's clear what you're talking aboot. Thanks in advance.

If Lexit is a thing and the Horseshoe is not, why is Lexit voting Brexit???!?!?!

Lexit is voting Brexit because it is also a left position to exit the EU.

I might add this isn't an anti Corbyn thing. He is calling for another referendum as subtlety as possible.

He and others have repeated over and over again that they would leave it to the membership to vote on a second referendum post-election, which unfortunately isn't newsworthy for the same reason most sensible things Corbyn states are not newsworthy, so sorry this all appears "subtle" to you but really, Labour's position or most things are pretty clear and easily found on their website.

To leave a second vote up to the membership to vote on is pretty smart considering within Labour there are those who support Brexit and those who support Remain.

But while the right rally behind Farage, the far left are doing likewise.

This is just for the Euro elections and there is no left rallying behind Farage, it's just on this vote alone, to support the outcome of the original vote on Brexit, democracy etc. and again, because Lexit is also a thing.

If the line is linear and not bent that would mean they are voting for their polar not their equals - which makes no sense if the theory is merely rhetoric.

They're not voting for the right, they're voting on one particular issue which is the topic of this thread and which has support from people within the left, right and centre.

and although Corbyn would like to in his weird dreams, he isn't going to be able to do so because Labour isn't a Lexit Party despite having a Lexit leader, but also because it's entirely impractical.

Actually Corbyn voted to remain, to shut up the crybabies, but there were Labour MPs who voted to exit the EU and euro skepticism within the Labour party has been a thing for decades.

Also, yes all racists would vote for it.

But there's lots of racist remainers too, esp within the government.

skinster you are full of shit and out of money apparently

if you are so confident in corbyn why wont you bet with me?

This guy.

Although it does need to be said that if the left vote for a right wing party such as "The Brexit Party" and not a Lexit party like Corbyn's Labour, you have to question how anyone can conclude that "The Horseshoe Theory" is nonsense.

Because it is.

[Atlantis]

This is just for the Euro elections and there is no left rallying behind Farage, it's just on this vote alone, to support the outcome of the original vote on Brexit, democracy etc.

So you presume to know what the "intention" of the far-left is and that this intention has any bearing on the real world? You must truly have superhuman knowledge, because no human can know any such thing.

The fact is that the far-left is the objective ally of the far-right - not just in the Brexit vote. Or how else do you explain that the assorted ecologists and leftists of the M5S in Italy help the neo-fascist Lega Nord into power? It really beats me what it is about the far-left. Why do they always have to serve as stirrup holders for the fascists? Is it some sort of inborn self-hatred? Some sort of self-destruction drive?

And if there is one thing that is absent from the far-left (like the far-right) then it is a concern for "democracy". Both have an innate dislike for democracy.

[Beren]

It will be a real British absurd if Farage knocks out Corbyn with leftist votes.

'For Brexit and democracy, comrades!'

[SolarCross]

In other news: pro-brexit pundit Priti Patel wants to be leader of the conservative party.

[Rich]

Priti is pretty pretty in looks but not necessarily in her politics. She backed the Israelis in their aid to Al Qaeda and ISIS Sunni Muslim terrorists from the Golan in the Syrian civil war. I think there definitely could be a future for Brexit supporting, Jew worshipping, non-White leader.

[Beren]

I'm not sure if why she feels like emphasising so much that she's ambitious for Britain. It's so obvious she is, let's be clear about that.