Carryfast:
We’ve already established the fact that Hitler was no Nationalist while Michael Collins certainly was.Hitler was just another Socalist scammer masquerading as a Nationalist to impose his version of a pan European EUSSR dictatorship.Just like the SNP and Sinn Fein.
We’ve also established that your meaning of “nationalism” is closer to that of the Japanese in the pre-Meiji period - a period of stagnant social and economic development. Nationalism (in the context of capitalism, anyway) always leads to imperialism because of the need to secure natural resources, and to a lesser extent because of the need to secure and maintain export markets (since there are always gains to be made by being an exporter, and it may be an absolute necessity to be an exporter if you are also an importer of raw materials).
Yes we know if you support Labour that means accepting its Socialist ideology which by your own admission means that it certainly won’t ‘Leave’ the EU in any meaningful way whatsoever.
But no sort of Leave ever will be “meaningful” for you, because no foreseeable Leave will involve Britain telling the rest of the world what to do - nor will it involve Britain ceasing to trade and becoming purely self-sufficient, because Britain doesn’t even have the natural resources for that (and never has since the Industrial Revolution).
For most people, taking back control of the economy and class relations (including limiting immigration where it is exploited by the bosses to drive down pay and conditions in occupations that are already low-paid), will be a reasonable sort of Brexit.
Which by definition totally contradicts Corbyn’s bs idea of a so called Labour ‘Brexit’.When the liar knows that his Party is tied to the EU by its own stinking ideology.In which case by your own logic how can Corbyn possibly deliver any type of Brexit at all when you’ve already stated that you’re not prepared to go against EU rulings which by implication go with Unite’s Remain agenda.The rule of free movement obviously being part of those rules.
It appears free movement is a condition of membership by now, but it remains to be seen whether all 27 EU members will go all-in and cease all trade with Britain (and abandon their factories and investments on the way out, and lay off substantial numbers of their own workers who work in export sectors), simply to reinforce the principle of free movement. The other members don’t have the political support at home for free movement to justify these sorts of all-out assaults.
Even the Eastern European states, quite rightly keen to protect their citizens who have moved away against a Tory assault, are not actually that fond of free movement, because it means all their skilled and educated workers being poached by the wealthier Western members: express.co.uk/news/politics … ing-Poland
So too in France and Germany: thetimes.co.uk/article/fran … -3v6v3vnqf
express.co.uk/news/politics … al-dumping
This is why I say that Corbyn is actually on much stronger ground with his demands, because he’s not assaulting citizens (including those who have already committed to a move to a foreign country), he’s assaulting the continuation of a system that everybody is against - except the centre-right national governments of members.
The same is true of state ownership and control of infrastructure and utllities. This is not just popular in this country but in many other EU nations.
Even for the Tories remember, they are not against free movement - which is why they continue to bring in hundreds of thousands of non-EU workers (on top of the hundreds of thousands from mostly Eastern Europe). Because if they stop bringing in non-EU workers, then the price of toilet cleaners in London is going to shoot through the roof, and there’ll also be a shortage of doctors and nurses because they’ve abolished all the training schemes and assistance for settled workers who want to enter those occupations and won’t be able to replace the settled workers they’re currently forcing out of those medical occupations due to pay cuts and and appalling and stressful working conditions.
As for non EU trade deals exactly what sovereignty does Japan have to give up in order to export stuff to any other country including India.
They have to either come to an agreement with India, or give up the right to export into India. The fact is, international trade deals involve a loss of national sovereignty - things that would be the domain of national governments, become the domain of international negotiation. It’s the same with the EU. We can already have a simple customs union with the EU - Turkey does. But then our banks and financial services cannot operate in the EU, because a customs union does not cover services - and moneylending is the real jewel in the crown for the Tories.
We can have, as you’ve said before, US car standards instead of EU car standards - but then our car production lines cannot export to Europe, because the products do not meet their standards.
Or for that matter New Zealand or Australia or Canada ?.IE why would India want to apply double standards in that regard to the UK and why would/should we want to accept such blackmail regardless ?.
Because India already has a full plate of trade deals - it already has its markets, including with much larger countries and blocs. There’s nothing extra that the UK are offering compared to the status quo. You don’t have to accept blackmail - we approached them, and India has been quite clear so far, they are happy with no deal whatsoever!
Bearing in mind that India has nothing to offer us other than tea and needs UK technical know how more than we need its tea imports.
And it’s precisely because of “know-how”, and the value of it, that India wants to send workers here. But besides that, remember that India has a huge manufacturing base. Their economy overall is the size of ours! And the British bosses need cheap Indian manufacturing labour, far more than the Indians need overpriced British managers.
That’s why the Tories are on a hiding to nothing, because they are going around the world with the begging bowl, collecting for rich British capitalists who already have a privileged position in the world.
While it’s clear that our economy obviously needs a massive shift in emphasis away from exports to replacing imports with domestic products anyway.With any ideas of compromising our National Sovereignty,for the privilege of being a excessive net importer with an unsustainable trade deficit to match,being an insult to injury in that regard…
But if you’re shifting back to domestic production, then countries like India will lose out, because they have huge export markets serving the Western world, based on Western capitalists being able to undercut Western workers’ wages, so British bosses have sent all their money and machinery to India, and then export the products back in (making larger profits in the process).