Live data from Hacker News

Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

twitter.com

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#11
post #10

I'd say Brexit is a change from one set of rules to the other, but I would not call EU or GB free markets or capitalist states, as major parts of economies are heavily regulated, including agricultural and money sector (central banking). I dislike decentralisation as war analogy, it is anything but war.

Can you give examples in history of capitalist states?

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#12
post #9

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the UK. Then around point 16 he straight up jumps into conspiracy theory teritory when he talks about "money's overlords". Kind of disappointing that this post somehow made it to the front page.

It would very naive to believe extremely wealthy interests did not play a very large part in Brexit. One example of such dark money is the funnelling of half a million euro through Northern Ireland [1] to influence London voters.

[1] https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-...

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#13
post #9

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the UK. Then around point 16 he straight up jumps into conspiracy theory teritory when he talks about "money's overlords". Kind of disappointing that this post somehow made it to the front page.

He seems pretty on point to me. And he offered more explanation than you just did. Care to defend your position?

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#14
> Brexit is an opportunity not just to rip up specific rules, which it overtly aims to do, but also to tear down the uneasy truce between capitalism and democracy under which pro-social rules are set and enforced.

wut.

The EU may be many great things, but democratic it is not - particularly when compared to a democratic national government.

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#16
post #9

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the UK. Then around point 16 he straight up jumps into conspiracy theory teritory when he talks about "money's overlords". Kind of disappointing that this post somehow made it to the front page.

Actually he talks about "money's warlords", which from context refers to those who would have control in a plutocracy.

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#17
post #9

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the UK. Then around point 16 he straight up jumps into conspiracy theory teritory when he talks about "money's overlords". Kind of disappointing that this post somehow made it to the front page.

It would very naive to believe extremely wealthy interests did not play a very large part in Brexit. One example of such dark money is the funnelling of half a million euro through Northern Ireland [1] to influence London voters. [1] https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-...

Of course wealthy interests played a role. And there's also evidence of foreign interference which was never fully investigated or disclosed. Those are seriously problematic. But they are different from implying (like point 16 in the OP does) that there is an organised global network or wealthy people whose goal is to take over countries and who have taken over Chile and Indonesia and are now happy to add the UK to their list.

Re: Brexit can best be understood as a civil war within capitalism

#19

I've got a wild theory, so hear me out. Maybe Britain wanted to be governed by a set of law's made by British people?

and the british electorate could have used its power in controlling the levers of one of the most pampered and privileged members of the eu to keep laws friendly to british business in the same way they've done it since thatcher, but apparently that wasn't good enough
Post reply on HN