Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The elite that failed

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: The elite that failed

#21

Post by benmmurphy »

adrianratnapala wrote: post #18
paulpauper wrote: post #4

2016: brexit vote indicates failure of elite 2019: failure to ratify vote indicates failure of elite pick one

The vote has been "ratified" because it only asked if Britain should leave the EU, and without a new referendum, it will. If I had to model an elite failure it is this: people on both sides began to pretend a "hard" Brexit was an unthinkable catastrophe, this after an even sillier period when people talked as if Britain got to choose between soft and hard Brexits as a kind of policy choice. In truth such things could…

I think you are assuming a lot of things. If you think Britain leaving the EU is massively -EV then failing to negotiate trade agreements with other countries in order to create a better fallback position when negotiations fail with the EU is actually +EV.

Re: The elite that failed

#22

Post by bduerst »

tomp wrote: post #15
InitialLastName wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about "Forcing a brexit vote indicates a failure of the elite. Failure to ratify a brexit deal indicates a further failure of the elite"

"Too much democracy indicates a failure of the elite." "Too little democracy indicates a failure of the elite." Pick one.

The article specifically talks about how other countries correctly handle these decisions democratically. It's not the quantity of democracy under question, but how democracy is being applied by political leadership is repeatedly a signal of failure.

This nuance you're overlooking is why false dichotomies like yours and GP's are considered fallacies.

Re: The elite that failed

#23

Post by makomk »

I've seen the argument this article trots out that the referendum should've required a supermajority a lot, but it always seems more like an attempt to block something the author doesn't want than an actual principled argument.

There was no supermajority required to take the major and quite possibly irreversible step of joining the EU. Indeed, there was no referendum on it at all; the 1975 referendum was on leaving after we'd already joined, and came with the same terrifying warnings about the perils of leaving as the more recent one. The government of the time just decided to join and put it through parliament like any other law. It squeaked through the House of Commons on an incredibly tight 309-301 vote...

Re: The elite that failed

#24

Post by Gibbon1 »

topspin wrote: post #5
paulpauper wrote: post #4

2016: brexit vote indicates failure of elite 2019: failure to ratify vote indicates failure of elite pick one

> pick one That is a model example of a false dichotomy.

Yeah that is just sophistry.

2016: Incompetent elite's create a problem.

2019: Incompetent elites make it worse.

Deeper problem is part of the neoliberal revolution was popular will was to be neutered, the political process was to be neutered. So that they couldn't interfere with the the free market or oppose the power of the rentier class.

So now you have voters, politicians, and the media that see politics and policy as a game that doesn't matter. Two generations of this and people wonder why there is no competence. Big wonder!

Re: The elite that failed

#25

Post by jbob2000 »

georgeecollins wrote: post #7

There is a great Alvin Toffler quote that foretold this: " One of the functions of a legislature is to negotiate compromises among various constituencies. Well, the constituencies today are so numerous, their demands are so complex, and the rate of change in their demands and in the constituencies is so high that nobody in Congress represents anybody anymore. They represent themselves. Because their constituency chan…

I had this same thought when thinking about Toronto and their distinct lack of action on public transit. We keep flip flopping on whether or not to build this or build that or tear down this or that, blah blah blah.

It’s all because the city is waaaayyy too diverse and there’s literally no way to meet in the middle on this; somebody is going to lose, and anybody losing is unfathomable, so the better option is... for everybody to lose.

Re: The elite that failed

#26

Post by toyg »

paulpauper wrote: post #4

2016: brexit vote indicates failure of elite 2019: failure to ratify vote indicates failure of elite pick one

You equate a target (EU membership) as the criteria for failure, whereas the failure is in the approach to the problem itself, regardless of outcomes.

A decent elite would not have gambled away the future of the country just to get rid of a couple of party rivals (2016) or to keep a schizophrenic party together (2019). In both cases, machinations were set in motion in a completely careless way, with an outrageously cavalier attitude, and now the country as a whole is falling apart - regardless of whether we get back to pre-2016 state or we become Singapore-on-Thames, 20m people will forever feel angry and disenfranchised. No party intrigue is worth that price.

(It is incredibly funny and sad at the same time, that the guy who started it all was elected on a platform of fixing the "Broken Society" that Britain, in his words, had become. Good job, Dave - you really broke it for good now.)

Re: The elite that failed

#27

Post by kuhhk »

benmmurphy wrote: post #19

I'm not sure how this is a failure of the elite. The elite want to be in the EU and we are still in the EU. That doesn't seem to be a failure to me. That seems to be a success.

> and we are still in the EU

Ben, I hope you do realize your premise changes in roughly ~10 weeks, unless something extraordinary happens. Theresa is determined to leave..

Re: The elite that failed

#28

Post by User23 »

lainga wrote: post #3
lettergram wrote: post #2

This is a time where the monarch can and should apply mild pressure. That’s kind of the benefit of a monarchy, they have the long term interest at heart and can (used sparingly) knock people into place

Wouldn't that only aggravate republicans?

Note: Republican means something very different in the UK than in the US.

Re: The elite that failed

#30

Post by AnimalMuppet »

paulpauper wrote: post #4

2016: brexit vote indicates failure of elite 2019: failure to ratify vote indicates failure of elite pick one

Holding the referendum was a failure of David Cameron. He tried to use the referendum to shut up a wing of his party. He should have picked a different tool, or else just ignored them.

The wording of the referendum, the non-specificity of it, was an additional failure.

Then Cameron failed in that the referendum passed. This was the opposite of shutting up that wing of his party. He should have campaigned for Remain, instead of just doing nothing. (Shooting down some of the Leave lies would have been useful, too.) The referendum passing is a failure of leadership.

Cameron, apparently tired of failing, bailed at this point, and Theresa May became Prime Minister.

May's first failure was regarding the referendum as binding, when it wasn't.

May got the best deal she could out of Europe. Parliament failed to ratify that deal. That is the success of Parliament, rather than a failure - they saw a bad idea, and they chose not to do it.

But May's failure is her determination to press on with a hard Brexit, even though that is also a bad idea. She seems totally unwilling to stand up and say, "No, this is a bad idea, and we're not going to do it" - and pay the political price for doing so. She acts as though Corbyn becoming PM would be a greater disaster than a hard Brexit.

In fairness, nobody else is willing to stand up and call a halt to this travesty, either. That's a failure of leadership.

So, yes, the 2016 vote was a maelstrom of fail. It wasn't just one event, it was a whole series of them. Events since then have also been a series of failures. The only exception was a moment of sanity by Parliament, in failing to ratify the negotiated deal.

There may be one more moment of sanity to come. If I understand correctly (and I may well not, I'm not in the UK), Parliament gets to vote on a hard Brexit, too. If they reject that, nothing remains but to revoke the invocation of Article 50. Doing so would be the opposite of a failure.

Post reply on HN