Exactly my point.
There’s an apocryphal story about a senior Israeli Labor politician who, upon seeing the results of the 1977 election, in which Labor was defeated for the first time ever, said, “If that is the will of the people, then we need to replace the people.” I see that attitude is still prevalent elsewhere.
So what are we supposed to do about people believing obvious lies about the EU, the UK’s relationship with it, and how trade negotiations and cross-border manufacturing works? And then when proven wrong, they double down and blame others? Indulge them? Give them the reigns of power?
Seriously, I cannot comprehend how we are supposed to be good little democrats in the face of complete fiction winning votes. This is different from simply differing philosophy winning. I’ve encountered that before, have lost, and have accepted it.
But now you seem to be suggesting that if people voted to declare human sacrifice legal because for each person killed a puppy appears, but those puppies haven’t yet appeared because not enough have been sacrificed yet, that we should respect voters wishes and get on with the butchering.
No, I’m saying you should *convince *them. You should work to get the people on your side, tell them the truth and get them to believe it.
Are you saying that being a Remainer should be a requirement for the next Labour leader? If not, what point are you trying to make?
How do I convince them? I’m friends with some of them, and I’ve tried everything I can think of. But when presented with the absolute God’s honest truth that the EU does not work the way they think it works, they choose to believe the lie.
Alessan: they refuse to be convinced.
Tell me what I’m doing wrong? Have you succeeded in changing anyone’s mind in this area?
I think Labour cannot be re-elected by abandoning the socially liberal wing of its voters in pursuit of the old working class, who are now British Trumpers who have gone to the Tories. We are facing a realignment. The Tories are abandoning their historical fiscal conservatism to spend like mad (at least in rhetoric).
That’s not your job, that’s the job of political leaders: to communicate with people and bring them around to their point of view. You think you’re at a disadvantage, because the other side lies? Then get a *really good *communicator. The Americans had Clinton and Obama; who do you have?
Yes, You don’t have a choice about that unless you are suggesting that some people’s votes are worth more than others, or that you are magically able to discern exactly why people voted a certain way and so can discount them.
Every person on the losing side for ever and ever has lamented the fact that the opposition “lies” drowned out their own sides “reasoned fact”. Nothing has changed and labour will be back in the fight when they have a better leader and a clearer and more palatable policy. Labour were down and out in the 80’s and 90’s until they weren’t. Ditto for the Tories 97-2010. This too shall pass and the speed of the passing will be down to tory and labour competencies.
Everything has changed. Brexit is the world’s biggest con, and those who voted for it have lapped it up, hoping for a return to a golden age and will get nothing but division and ruin.
If someone has been run down by a car it may not be the best course of action to insist that
a) they are wrong
b) that they have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the ICE works
And if your posts here are in any way representative of the tone you take with your friends then you are going to find it difficult to convince and you might want to start from a position of “what might* I be mistaken about? how do I* know what I *think *I know?”
People who are actively socially liberal only make up a small percentage of the electorate. Tolerance, aka passive acceptance, is pretty high, but that’s not the same thing. The attitudes of most of the British public, in general, are small-c conservative. If Labour elects a leader whose only intention is to fire up the Momentum portion of the party and campaign for social liberal issues, then they’re effectively conceding the majority to the Tories.
What in the name of Jiminy Smits are you talking about?
The tone is of exasperation at the close-mindedness of Brexiters. You haven’t been exasperated before?
Humour me. If someone insists that the EU is the Fourth Reich, that the UK is dictated to by it with no democratic input, and that despite all known models of trade (JIT, non tariff barriers etc) the UK will somehow flourish outside the EU because reasons, and yet everything I’ve read up on proves this all to be complete snake oil, how do I communicate that if they refuse to listen and insist all evidence to the contrary of their view is suspect as being from EU-funded sources/the establishment?
You don’t think you wouldn’t get just ateensy weensy bit fed up with being polite to them? Especially when (and I’ve had this just to the other day) someone I know from school decided my retorts were all untrue because ‘I don’t live in the real world’?
Why is it all the accusations of living in a bubble/being arrogant/being a bad communicator are all on me, and they get given a complete pass, like they’re the innocent victim and I’m the bad guy who deserves payback?
Regarding the Labour leadership campaigning, that might be a good slogan for a no-chancer who simply wants their name in the news. Know anyone who fits that bill?
That might be true, but it’s distinctly reminiscent of Brecht’s poem The Solution, about the June 1953 uprising in East Germany:
</pedantry>
Good luck with that pal, he’s there to represent his constituents despite his personal position. The fact he has said on record he is a remainer but respected the vote pretty much ensured his survival in his constituency. If what you’re advocating is him to retain his position and vote against the wishes of his constituents, well I know a whole host of MP’s who lost their jobs arrogantly posturing themselves in that fashion and will now be in no position to do anything to mitigate the worst effects of it.
Last word on the brexit thing (:)):
I think it’s the framing of any vote being a re-run that’s the problem. I would agree with others that if the only reason for holding another vote is that the voters were misinformed, then pretty much every vote needs to be re-run forever.
But in fact there’s another argument, in that for the initial referendum there were no bills going through parliament, and so it was unclear what brexit meant exactly, and it turned out there was a great deal of division over that. So we’ve had 3 years of chaos.
What should have happened next is a vote to pick exactly which flavor of brexit (and, yes, include a watered-down brexit in name only option), then the mandate is clearer and we really can just “get on with it”.
I don’t think it’s going to happen now, as the public is weary of voting at this point.
It is very sad to see this, instead of Labour looking forward and accepting that their campaign and tactics failed, their supporters are still insisting that its the fault of everyone else.
I can understand that for those who convinced themselves of the rightness of their cause have suffered a real shock - but it it is symptomatic of just how disconnected those Labour supporters have become in their social media bubble of like minded.
Feeling sorry or accusational will not do it and is an abrogation of responsibility of any opposition party.
The job of Labour is to obtain power, it is the threat of success that keeps the administration in line. As long as Labour supporters think along the lines that some posters here are indicating then that will not happen, and democracy is being failed.
Labour supporters must understand - their worldview was not popular, did not attract support and the electorate did not buy it - blame anyone or anything and sit in a corner sulking, that’s exactly what the Tories want and you are handing it to them - they can plan for the next election and the one after that, Labour cannot.
You are angry and upset - I get it, now think and persuade - no point in persuading people with a similar outlook, you need to change. Think of AA - first you have to acknowledge your problem and accept before you can gain the motivation to make a genuine change.
You need the political equivalent of the AA 12 step program.
I’ve been exasperated at both sides of the debate, frequently. Close-mindedness is not something purely on the side of Brexiters.
In any situation like that I ask people what evidence they have and try to understand why they think what they think. A key question is to ask what evidence could change their mind. That’s usually a good indication of whether they are open to facts or not (and of course you have to aim the same question at yourself)
I wouldn’t seek to comment on a specific argument where I don’t know what has been said and the tone in which it was said. If they are being inpolite or aggressive to you for no reason then I can understand why you’d do that back. I personally would not do that. I’d just say why I think what I think and leave it at that. Sometimes it is better to just let it drop, if the conversation is going nowhere it is better to let it drop and try another tack.
Who said anything about innocent/good/bad or payback? It is true to say that telling people they are stupid/evil etc. is not usually an effective way of changing hearts and minds.
Couldn’t have said it better myself. I know people who put their heart and soul into this campaign for Labour, leafleting in the cold and rain day after day.
But Labour didn’t lose because of the biased right wing Tory media or because the polls were rigged against Corbyn or whatever. Labour got their ass kicked, this wasn’t a football game lost on a bad call. Many voters cast their vote against Corbyn. Johnson may be a buffoon but the Tories can boot him out at leisure after Brexit if they want. There is no cult of Boris like there was around Jeremy.
At the very least, Labour needs a harsher version of Neil Kinnock that will tell the Labour fringe to go fuck themselves. Corbyn and his cronies did a lot of damage to Labour behind the scenes in order to purge the party of every last Blairite. They need to be invited back with open arms.