Iris wrote: ↑
1 week ago
You presume too much about my memory, and the search function appears not to be able to do "search for all posts by User X in this thread".
My extremely rusty and unreliable memory of every conversation I've had about this is that all the "good reasons why belonging to the EU does harm to all sorts of liberal and progressive causes" boil down to "we can't have nationalised industry while we're in the EU", which is inaccurate. If I've oversimplified, please enlighten me.
(a) No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when you poke the supposed (leftwing) "valid reasons to leave" they fall over - because they are things that people claim you can't do within the EU which you actually can do, or could easily do if you tried. And you don't even need to poke the supposed rightwing "valid reasons to leave" to make them fall over because they're vacuous or simply obviously factually wrong ("Laws forced on us by Brussels", "Take back control", "£350m per week").
(b) And by claiming that I'm saying that "every single person who supports leave is completely deluded" you're putting words into my mouth I didn't, and would never, say. Please don't do that.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but when you say that every argument you've heard for leaving falls over when poked, that still sounds to me like saying that the people who want to leave for those reasons are deluded?
Me, I voted and support remain, I think leave under the present circumstances spells disaster, but I can hold those positions and still recognise that are valid arguments for leave, and leave, under other circumstances, could have been a reasonable choice.
I think one of the different approaches you and I have is that you are more inclined to take an organisation at face value for what it says about itself, whereas I am more inclined to judge by the proof of the pudding. This applies to both the EU and Cyclibg UK!