What's the point of trying to convince a side that has farmers who are being damaged but would still vote to leave knowing it could put them out business and knowing they will be putting other people out of business.
They aren't sceptical of Europe, because that would mean actually acknowledging European benefits after subjecting them to scepticism.
When did we ever see that?
Scepticism of the European project could possibly involve being sceptical of the negatives, which we never see.
People in the UK will cite contradictory negatives of the EU precisely because they haven't subjected them to any scrutiny.
Now we're at the point where people are saying they are happy to damage themselves personally, their professions, and the country itself.
Any why? For a power grab by some of our parliamentarians.
That is who ends up with the sovereignty return, not the people.
If this was control that went back to the people, why are we doing a trade deal that our farmers don't want?
This venture of politicians was never about giving the people back control.
And with all this sovereignty, can the UK solve the problem with the NIP?
No, of course not.
We shared large amounts of sovereignty with the EU precisely because we needed to share our sovereignty to solve certain problems.
So what Brexit actually amounts to is politicians convincing people they are taking back control, when in fact the politicians are the ones getting more power that they intend to do whatever they want with.
A political movement that insisted we can solve our problems if we have more sovereignty, but in fact, turning our international sovereignty into national sovereignty created very serious problems for this country that all the national sovereignty in the world can't solve.
In the face of self-harm, if they haven't sat down and worked out who is gaining and who is losing yet, they probably will never come to this realisation.
My tip for today is don't try and engage in rational debate with someone lining up for the Kool-Aid.
It's a complete waste of time.
/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Does everyone remember when politicians said we can't have a referendum on the deal because people had voted for Brexit and it would be asking the public again?
Does everyone remember when they said that the problem with the deal had nothing to do with Brexit?
Does anyone remember them being pulled over the fact they have now argued that the deal *was* Brexit and *isn't* Brexit?
The thing about "Taking back control of your laws" is that you can make decisions about your laws, not other people's laws. Especially not the laws you said you wanted no say over.
People who knew nothing about global trade refuse to accept the the most common method globally, attributes it to "EU thinking" and says they don't accept the position.
Gee, I hope we haven't listened to a whole load of people who didn't have a clue.
And as for making fools of themselves, why advertise on a platform that is targeting a specific set of people unless you explicitly want to as part of your campaign?
For the majority of products, it will make more sense to spend their advertising budget on more inclusive platforms with broader audiences.
This article about honesty in politics shows us why the European Union is in a difficult position with regard to the Northern Ireland Protocol. (Thread)
It begins with a quote, we are told, that was written by Lord Thorneycroft in 1947 about a plan that must be kept from the public.
Lord Thorneycroft may not have written those words.
He was the principal author of the pamphlet ‘Design for Europe’, published by the Tory Reform Group, but we don’t know who wrote that particular passage.