The scientific Remoaner
"Look at the statistics; look at our armaments production, military strength, renewal capacity and expected levels of attrition. They prove without a scintilla of doubt that there is absolutely NO WAY we can beat Nazi Germany. It just can't be done. It's quite impossible. I'm an expert and I'm telling you that Britain simply cannot win this war."
The Socialist die-hard
"The National Socialists in Germany are in permanent alliance with the Union of Soviets; all over Europe, socialism and communism are in the ascendant. We should invite Comrades Hitler and Stalin to come and take control here, to end the disgrace of warmongering capitalists who just want a war to sell weapons and munitions. Our future can only be as a socialist republic under the wise control of the German-Soviet pact leaders."
The mindless thug
"So what's the worst that Hitler can do to me then? Sanction my benefit again? Like these c***s keep doing by calling me in at 8.45 when I'm in breakfast mode bro, know what I mean? I bet Hitler wouldn't tell me to hand out my CV instead of doing my shift on the anti-racist march, yeah? I hate authority, I do - I hate being told what to do. That's why we should chuck this lot out and get Hitler in, innit?"
The liberal mum Remoaner
"Basically war will prevent my two, Tarquin and Murgatroyd, from reaching their potential. We took them across the Channel to Le Touquet last year and they came back with several words of French and after the Olympics they sooo want to see the torchlight processions in Nuremberg and Tarquin in particular wants to go on Erasmus to meet his Hitler Youth penfriend - he even keeps a photo of Horst wearing his athletic vest by his bedside! You can't travel freely when armies are trying to kill eachother."
The Remoaner MP
"War with Germany will mean the total extinction and annihilation of this country -starvation, economic collapse and in ten years by 1948 we'll be little more than apes scratching in the dirt with sticks. If we take what Germany is offering we'll keep a model Parliament that's free to make laws on dog fouling, loud noises, garden shed colours and similar matters and life will be pretty much as it is now, well, except for the Nazi troops on the street, loss of freedom, confiscation of our wealth and so on. Most importantly, the Germans have promised to keep-on in Parliament all MPs that sign up now .."
9 comments:
"Tarquin in particular wants to go on Erasmus to meet his Hitler Youth penfriend"
Indeed, who can forget the youtubes of our own dear Queen (Gawd bless 'er I sez h'and h'all wot sails in 'er) as a child princess, goose-stepping around Buck Pally, throwing Nazi salutes at the scullery maids and cheerfully humming the Horst Wessel?
Yes, those names. "Yurt! Leave Pashmina alone!"
The Blocked Dwarf, Your comment is a particularly nasty bit of sarcastic propaganda. I think "our own dear Queen" was only 7 years old at the time (1933), and was being encouraged by her adult uncle Edward. It is a bit farfetched to hang any political comment on a 7 year old, 6 years before the outbreak of WW2.
Budgie. Really? And to think that "our own dear Queen" who has done precisely f**k all vis-a-vis the EU. Edward was an avid Nazi sympathiser as were many of the aristrocracry. Oh, did I mention her husband's sisters? Blood being thicker than water an' all.
Then there were all those "absolutely tip top secret" missions to Germany at the war's end to recover all sorts of embarrassing bits of evidence - embarrassing for the Royal Family of course, with the real name of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.
. . . just sayin'
Rapscallion, Really? Can you show me where I said anything different? I even pointed out that the future Queen "was being encouraged by her adult uncle Edward". Even so, I would not want anything I said or did as a 7 year old to be used against me at 27, or 90, and I wouldn't think much of anyone who tried. Perhaps you have never done anything foolish, or been encouraged by others to do so. Well, bully for you.
The acceptance of a monarch as head of state in the UK is precisely based on the monarch's public neutrality. That is why the Queen could not take a public position on the EU. Both the publicly opinionated Prince Charles, or an elected President Blair would be more divisive. Like democracy, a neutral constitutional monarch is a bad idea - except all the others are worse.
Few comments on this post - IMO it deserves no more.
Back in 1941 the Japanese started their war based on wishful thinking (the great wind would overpower the enemy, etc.). And here are we, wishful thinking based on wartime myths from before most of us were born.
How about we deal with the hear and now? Such as the likely customs gridlock when we (by our own act) become a "Third Country" outside the EEA single market and how we plan to avoid food riots?
Ok, we got what we wished for, and no doubt it can be good in the long term, but we have some "interesting times" in the short.
(just saying...)
gareth
Gareth, You seem to have turned Raedwald's post upside down. He parodied Remoaners, not Brexiteers. Perhaps the title: "If Remoaners had been around in 1938 ..." should have given the game away. His "wartime myths" are retold by Remain characters. So, not wishful thinking, but an amusing take on Remain inadequacies.
As for "how we plan to avoid food riots" you will have to explain your imagined mechanism whereby we get food riots here as a result of leaving the EU's EEA. To give you a hint: when the UK is an independent nation again we get to decide what tariffs we apply to imported food, not the EU.
1. The "imagined mechanism" is gridlock caused by EU customs requirements on Third Country imports. We will go from free flow to operation mega-stack overnight. So even if we want to wave our imports through tariff and inspection free, there will be no trucks available as they will all be waiting to get in to the EU. This needs only be a short term "hiccup" to have the food riot effect.
2. Note: Under WTO rules we have to apply the same tariffs to all so can't treat EU diferently.
3. It's the non-tariff barriers that are the real issue.
4. It's not the EU's EEA - it's the EEA's EEA, of which the EU is part, along with EFTA.
And I think you probably missed the point on the first bit :-)
Cheers, gareth
Gareth, Even if the EU makes it difficult for us to export to the EU (against WTO rules), there will be more food left in the UK, not less. Trucks used for distribution within the UK are not the trucks used for the UK's exports. If the EU wants to sell us less of their food there are plenty of other countries around the world only too eager to sell us their produce.
Under WTO MFN rules no country can discriminate, that includes the EU. But the EU's food tariffs are extremely high (apart from odd exceptions like a tariff free quota of lamb from NZ). We could choose to halve our food import tariffs, which cuts the prices of world market food imports and, simultaneously, increases the tariffs on EU food. Result: we eat more lower priced world market food but less high cost EU food. Win - win.
"The objective of the EEA Agreement is to create a homogenous European Economic Area. All relevant EU legislation in the field of the Single Market is integrated into the EEA Agreement so that it applies throughout the whole of the EEA, ensuring uniform application of laws relating to the Single Market." (Source: EFTA). The EU makes and controls the EEA rules.
Post a Comment