Seen that happen too many times, Why should there not be pride in being a "Little Englander", I have no respect for people who use the racist card without proper reason.
Racism sexism ageism are all borne out of ignorance and intolerance. No place in modern society regardless of who you are.
Unfortunately the term "little englander" was used on this Forum by someone we all admired and respected: But as he also said: we can forgive his momentary lapse. (Sean was, of course, joking - but only half-joking. He saw Ukip as a means to split the "right" vote and stop the Tories forming a government.)
I never understand why "Little Englander" is used as a term of abuse... Is that not racist? (And dwarfist)
Arguably it is. Originally it applied to a wing of the Liberal Party opposed to expansion of the British Empire in the 19th century, who wanted "England" to extend no farther than the borders of the United Kingdom. For example, the Liberal politician Arthur Ponsonby wrote of his party's leader Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman's opposition to the Boer War: "The impression one got of him from the Press in those days was… that he was an unpatriotic Little Englander".
Indeed so. But rather inconveniently for those who employ that epithet, some of the most vocal opponents of the EU and strongly pro-British are migrants that have been living in the UK for many years.
Pinned to the wall and squirming. If the issues raised by A.M. weren't so depressing it would be funny to watch.
I'm out of the country now for a week or so and I'm already missing the EU coverage, I only have BBC world at the hotel and they don't appear to be covering it. Second bad thing, I'm in Morocco and just learned that Ramabloodydam starts tomorrow and I've already been told to eat breakfast at the hotel as there will be no food at the plant tomorrow. I'm going to have to rely on the clips you chaps post and the BBC news website, I do enjoy the live action though
As I suspected, the "Remain" treachery would go as far as not respecting the People's mandate in case of a "Brexit" referendum win.........
The referendum question is very clear Dom on the brexit side it says "Leave the European Union" at which point its up to the Government to do just that, what happens next is a negotiation to set out our relationship with the EU and our Government is free to consider what that is. Its not long ago as I recall that the Norway and Swiss EEA models where being touted by the jolly brexiteers. Otherwise the question should have read "Leave the EU and the single market" which it isnt "the peoples mandate" isnt about immigration and in fact was never meant to happen at all . What we have now is a tory leadership battle cynically being fought over Europe nothing to do with your average guy in the street . There are real structural issues to resolve in Europe and thats where our energy should be applied not in cutting our nose off to spite our face
The problem is that there are too many career politicians, people who have no other experience, skills or aptitude to offer an alternative employer. They need as many political openings as possible and since there are only 650 jobs available at Westminster, they need the extra 65 or so provided by the Brussels franchise. Career politicians do not represent those who elected them and only pretend to give some semblance of democracy by providing us with an opportunity to elect them once every five years. They'd prefer to ignore us completely for the four and a half years until the next campaign. Of course, once they have a stretch or two at Westminster or Brussels under their belt, then they become marginally more employable. Positions offered depend on how high they rise; ministers covet lucrative positions as consultants or executive directors receiving a well-decent remuneration package for, maybe, less than a couple of hundred hours work a year. They arrogantly believe that they know what's best for us, even ignoring those who are better qualified than them but who deign to disagree. Some, like Sajid Javid and Jeremy Corbyn, cast aside their long held beliefs in the name of expediency and self-interest. Others, like Johnny Mercer, a Plymouth MP, ask their constituents how they should vote and then disregard the overwhelming popular result as "total bollocks" because it doesn't coincide with their career-enhancing strategy (his constituents voted 74% in favour of leaving the EU in a poll he organised). Career politicians are less trustworthy than Estate Agents or secondhand car dealers and just as useless to society. But there are honest, decent politicians whose experience of life outside the Westminster and Brussels bubbles makes them more empathetic to the rest of us. People such as Frank Field, Kate Hooey and Gisela Stuart who remain true to their long-held Euroscepticism. Unfortunately we currently have a situation where the honest and decent politicians are outnumbered by the pushy and self-serving careerists who'd sacrifice their first born if such would advantage them. So one should not be terribly surprised if they threaten to - or actually do - disregard the will of the people. In so doing, they are carrying out one of the stated aims of their (probable) masters, the Bilderberg Group. This shadowy and secretive organisation seeks the formation of something close to being a 'one world government'. No surprise that its members include José M. Durão Barroso, the former President of the EU Commission, Mark Rutte, the Dutch Prime Minister, the German, Irish and Norwegian finance ministers, Charles Michel, the Belgian Prime Minister, the Turkish Deputy Prime Minister and the disgraced head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde. Its members also include the Labour MP Helen Goodman and the former Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls. In 2001, the former Labour Chancellor Denis Healey, a Bilderberg group founder and a steering committee member for 30 years, said, "To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."
In July of last year, veteran Tory Eurosceptic MEP, Sir Geoffrey Van Orden who is the spokesman on Defence and Security Policy, wrote the following letter to The Times: "Sir, your commentator Bill Emmott (Opinion, July 9) is right to suggest that in today's increasingly globalised world all national sovereignty is circumscribed in some ways. But he is mistaken in his comparison of the EU with other international organisations such as NATO. The fundamental difference is that NATO is an inter-governmental organisation whereas the EU is essentially a supra-national body whose very purpose is to erode the sovereign prerogatives of its member states and replace these with a new federal form of government. Article 5 of the NATO Treaty does not automatically oblige us to go to war if another NATO member is attacked. It states that each member will take "such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force..." While it is expected that Alliance solidarity will be maintained, decisions remain firmly with each national government. That is not the case across a range of EU policy areas. And it should be recognised that the 'eurosceptic' position, properly defined,is the centre ground in British politics, shared by a majority of British people of many different political persuasions - to the right are the 'outists' and to the left the federalists. There must be a referendum on the nature of our EU membership - the issue remains one of timing and content. Geoffrey Van Orden MBE MEP Conservative Spokesman on Defence & Security Policy" His website's Home Page contains the following sentence: "I didn't become an MEP in order to promote the EU - I want us to govern our own country." BUT ... He's the latest politician to have suddenly experienced a Pauline conversion and has written a letter to his local rag, the Ipswich Star, to inform them of his sudden decision to back Remain. In his letter, he states that most immigrants to the UK did not originate from an EU country - even though the official figures state otherwise - and that Britain has negotiated itself "a special position within the EU". In his latter point, he is absolutely correct. Britain has no intention of joining the Euro-Zone whose nations will move ever closer to form in political, economic and fiscal union which will decide the direction of travel. Being outside that bloc, Britain will have to abide by decision the EZ countries make and will have no part in that process nor any vote in it. We will, effectively, be paying a huge price simply so that the Germans can sell us cars and the French wine and cheeses. Matters that affect the whole EU would be decided upon by qualified majority voting which means we have no real voice.
