Agreed frecnchie Wee were just talking about this very issue in my French class last night Are we now putting Personality or Populism above Philosophy Ideology or Policy A further discussion point is are people now distinguishing themselves more by Nationalism vs globalism as opposed to the left/right party lines People who identify more with a place more likely to vote nationalist People who idenitfy more with multiculturalism etc more likely to vote globalist
I agree that personality politics is becoming too important Yorkie - it shouldn't really matter that Corbyn is being destroyed by the media. We should be judging parties purely by their policies but we aren't. As to the second theme - we are seeing a resurgence of tribalism of all sorts in the World, on the basis of nation, race, religion etc. Is this a reaction against globalization ? People worry, quite rightly, that their jobs are being threatened by decisions made in Beijing, or elsewhere. They feel helpless, and they react - normally directed against a readily available scapegoat. However - can we combat global warming and leave the present rate of World trade untouched. Can we continue to produce, consume the same (or more) using alternative technology ? This strikes me as a sort of techno fix solution ie. trust in technology and everything will be all right. If we are to really take consequent steps against global warming it will be necessary to consume less, consume more locally, trade less etc. etc. In order words, turn the clock back on globalization (at least some aspects of it). I see myself as a globalist in some aspects ie. open to all cultures, neighbours etc. but as a localist in other ways ie. I see no problem with trade protectionism to shelter workers from direct competition with those in China. The environment needs more people, towns, perhaps even regions, to consume local goods, be self sufficient in as many ways as possible. But this is anti globalization of a left wing kind, of a 'green' kind - the right have their own version of anti globalization. Unfortunately the 2 brands have points of contact to each other.
For me globalization is about the planet as a whole..... as an entity or community we need to find ways to make it work for all. I think tribalism if we call it that is the basis for nationalism based on fear..... the problem is out there etc etc. That is also the trouble with party politics...... there is no room for common ground etc etc.... (and of course the globalization of trade based on free markets is not what i was thinking of.... but trade is always considered so important in stopping conflicts) Fair to say though that a fair proportion of people see this and hopefully can counter the worst effects......
Seeing as the UK imports nearly half of it's food, I hope that the Colorado Beetles do not get at the potato crop.
You could say that trade has also caused many wars as well - protecting trade routes, battling over oil etc. Things like the free market and the mobility of capital have become much more globalized than anything else. Despite this so called 'globalization' only around 2% of the World's population live in countries other than that of their birth - compare this to the movement of goods and it is minute. I would rather that the firm in my town were a worker's cooperative - run by local people who share the environment which I live in. I would rather that the products I use are not shipped from one side of the World to the other. I also rather suspect that what we call 'globalization' is a rather polite word for capitalism taking over the earth, or for American cultural imperialism, rather than for people actually coming together. Don't get me wrong Yorkie - when it comes to accepting Rumanian neighbours I am a globalist - but not when it comes to my consumption of goods. It is absolutely insane for a rural area to be importing 95% of its food supplies for retail through a couple of supermarket chains - this is the side of globalization which I will not accept.
There will be a great incentive to enlarge the UK's food production once we stop subsidising France farmers.
Good points well made. I have just been reading about the Silk Route and it was all about money.. and the caravans had to pay 'taxes' to go from one territory to the next.... Oil of course is fought over this very day.... Your point about capitalist globalization is so true and of course not what i mean.... I think I am more interest in the EU for all the added value it has brought... and trade has tied us together. MY wife goes mad about food travelling all round the world and i agree with her.... and of course supermarkets have really taken control here....
General Election 2017Jeremy Corbyn's approval rating plummets to all-time low, while Theresa May is most popular PM in 40 years Does it get any better than this?
Many third world producers are put at a damaging financial disadvantage by the CAP subsidies originally devised just to keep the French happy. These vast subsidies are the reason why France only contributes approx half what the UK pays into the EU coffers. The UK can help many of these non EU suppliers by having free trade deals.
Ever worked on a small farm and seen how they get 50% of their incomes from the EU? No of course you haven't, but I have. Ever been with a French farmer and seen how these vast subsidies you believe in have been whittled away to nearly nothing. No of course you haven't, but I have. Many of these families are already living at levels you would find totally unacceptable. Many of the EU grants go towards protecting the countryside and the environment, something you would sacrifice seemingly. When the UK government says it will protect the farms, what it actually means it will continue as it has in the past, handing out money that they could distribute from the EU to the large landowners, while leaving the small farmer for months with no income at all. Still maybe you do not want to see the small farmer continue, the person who frequently looks after his small number of acres, but move towards the large land owner who rips out hedges, and turns decent pasture into dust bowls.
If the French want to subsidise their farmers then that is perfectly ok. There is no reason why the UK should borrow money to subsidise them. No other uncompetitive sectors are financially propped up if they are not viable. If France cannot afford to maintain the present substantial grants why should they expect other countries to fund them. There are many industries that have to adapt, sometimes drastically such as the UK coal mines. There has been several tv reports about poverty in France's rural areas which is suffering dwindling numbers of inhabitants due to the lack of work. The French government needs to look at itself and take responsibility for labour inflexibility, high labour costs and an anti business environment. It will be interesting to see who makes up the financial shortfall once the UK stops the subsidies enjoyed by France.
Maybe you should turn your attention to the small farmers in the UK. Not one word about them in your comments. Are you happy for them to wait six months for the monies that are due? Are you happy to see the large millionaire land owners who can get by receiving their money on time? Are you happy to see fields that have supported wild life for centuries ripped apart? Instead of side stepping the issue, tell us what you really believe.
I believe the UK should look after its own farmers not borrow money to subsidise French farmers. Once we stop sending large amounts to the EU there will be more funds to improve the plight of UK farmers. Many small UK farmers are diversifying their activities to survive. Generally farmers need to be weened off relying on subsidies, there are still other measures the government could take to help, such as further relaxation of planning laws and long term finance. I obviously support protection of the countryside, who would not? The hedgerows around my area are very well looked after by our local farmers.
On countryfile three weeks ago they interviewed a welsh sheep farmer for whom subsidies amounted for 90% of his income... he could not survive clearly without. Just cant compete with cheap imported lamb otherwise
