English Chess Forum

Mick Norris wrote:

Jonathan Rogers wrote:Kasparov on Brexit

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... r-putin-eu

pointing out that the main worldwide political supporters of Brexit are Trump, Johnson, and Putin, just the sort of people who have the interests of working English people at heart and who couldn't possibly have underhand motives for supporting the cause. Includes the line

"If you’re not sure of the best course of action, you could do worse than look at what Putin wants and do the opposite."

Well, we'll see tonight about that, as Putin seems to have invested a lot in Russia winning Eurovision

John McKenna wrote:

Pleased to hear that he's so interested in the "soft power" of pop culture, Mick.

No matter what the result, tonight, he's already very upset with the Romanians -

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/photos/u-miss ... 173317116/

Edit - This is also in the pipeline-

https://utopiathecollapse.com/2016/04/2 ... n-s-korea/

A comment from below the above Romanian link -

Fran Sancisco22 hours ago

I love the idiots who talk about “American Tyranny” on here. Yes, it was “American Tyranny” that denied all of the wimps in Europe the right to be forced to speak either German or Russian. Let’s remember that both World Wars started in Europe and the Europeans also dropped their guard against the Soviets after WWII. Hey, why spend so much in defense when the ignorant Americans will defend you? Time to pay up for the bodyguard service you socialists!!

There's another comment in there from "Don" (Trump? From the sound of it.) castigating "Hussein" Obama.

Edit Putin's response -

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/russia-warns- ... html?nhp=1

NickFaulks wrote:

Jonathan Rogers wrote:Kasparov on Brexit

Kasparov has piled in with Carney and Fifi Lagarde on "Britain should be a province of the European Co-Prosperity Sphere" circus. Yep, that clinches it.

I rather think that it clinches it for me the other way, Nick. Fifi Lagarde indeed - I'd rather trust her than Michael Gove, Boris J and UKIP. The economic arguments are inescapable.

John Moore wrote: I'd rather trust her than Michael Gove, Boris J and UKIP.

Each to their own. The names you mention might at least have some reason to understand and concern themselves with what is best for British people. Lagarde, Carney and the rest have none whatsoever.

...

James Byrne wrote:Perhaps not good reasoning, but I'm voting to stay in to spite Farage and UKIP.

You are right, that is strange reasoning. You may prefer to be ruled by Jean-Claude Juncker than by Nigel Farage, but that isn't the choice you are being offered.

Just heard that Ukraine pipped AUSTRALIA at the post to win Eurovision. What's happening to geography - tectonic plates shifting geopolitically?

Breaking news: Boris mentioned Hitler and the Nazis in a formal speech; based on Godwin's law the EU referendum is officially over and the leave side lost the argument!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-e ... m-36295208

Except, as I said above, Godwin's Law is quite specifically not applicable here ( according to Godwin, anyway ).

NickFaulks wrote:Except, as I said above, Godwin's Law is quite specifically not applicable here ( according to Godwin, anyway ).

Of course it's not applicable in the sense that you still need to hold the referendum and you can't simply claim a result as of now. However, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi are completely irrelevant to the EU referendum and the reference only shows how desperate Boris's side is. To be fair, the leave side also showed weakness in this direction quoting WWIII threats and such, but the Nazi reference brings that to the next level. Or they might just tune their speech to their audience: as a useful trick to decide whether I should follow a tv show or forget about it, I sometimes watch carefully the ads during the show and it's often pretty easy to understand if I identify in their target audience.

John McKenna wrote:Just heard that Ukraine pipped AUSTRALIA at the post to win Eurovision. What's happening to geography - tectonic plates shifting geopolitically?

Well, the people of Europe voted:
1. Russia
2. Ukraine
3. Poland

Whereas the (professional) juries voted Australia by quite a margin from Ukraine, with Russia mid-table and Poland dead last (Edit - actually, might have been second last)

UK did ok from the juries, getting top marks from Malta, but second last from the public vote

Not sure what this says about the view of Europeans of the UK, unless you believe the clue is in the name and it is actually about the songs

Paolo Casaschi wrote: However, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi are completely irrelevant to the EU referendum

That is your view and you are fully entitled to hold it. You are not entitled to dismiss the view of millions of British people, particularly those old enough to have parents who fought for the nation's independence in WW2, who see the decision taken in 1939 ( which was highly contentious ), as comparable to that being taken in 2016. In my opinion, that is why the threats of the horrors the EU can inflict upon us are proving ineffective - Churchill warned that independence does not come for nothing, and the nation followed him.

Why do you think it is that in a recent MORI poll 48 per cent of Italians said they would like Italy to leave the EU? My guess is that this is at least in part because of folk memory - Italy has experienced rule from Berlin and didn't like it.

Please forgive my ignorance.

I've two questions -

First, how did Australia get into the contest - was it a one-off 'guest-worker' admission?

Second, if AH is irrelevant to the debate about the EU referendum - when, as we all really know, his existence was one of the primary reasons for its creation - why is it permissible for the 'IN' crowd to use not only the threat of WW III but also the name of Putin to frighten people into voting to remain?

[* I've already pointed out that war is usually not a totally one-sided affair when it comes to who's to blame. If there is another major war in the future the United States of America will have played a major part in bringing it about. And, where they tread their European allies will be compelled.to follow...

The US-EU powerbloc like trying to build the road to peace via a dead-end street to an armed camp. In which fully-comp protection premiums will be demanded from junior members in order to pay for the upkeep.

"A confederation called the Delian League was formed... to fight the Persians, and command of the common fleet was given to an Athenian. As time passed members contributed money, not ships. As the Persian threat declined some no longer wished to pay. Athenian intervention to ensure they did not default... grew harsher. Naxos, for example, was besieged back in. (And lost its independence.) The League gradually turned into an Athenian Empire... with the removal of its HQ from Delos to Athens and use of the tribute money for Athenian purposes...
When peace was made with Persia in 449 B.C. the League continued though Athenian protection seemed less justified.

Later, during the Peloponnesian War (which Athens and its 'allies' eventually lost after many years of bitter fighting against Sparta and its 'allies' - in a complete disaster by their all-or-nothing invasion of Sicily) the state of Mytilene suffered a similar fate, to that of Naxos, for daring to rebel. At its peak 150 Greek states were paying tribute to Athens." (Pelican History of the World, by J. M. Roberts)]

NickFaulks wrote:

Paolo Casaschi wrote: However, Adolf Hitler and the Nazi are completely irrelevant to the EU referendum

That is your view and you are fully entitled to hold it. You are not entitled to dismiss the view of millions of British people, particularly those old enough to have parents who fought for the nation's independence in WW2, who see the decision taken in 1939 ( which was highly contentious ), as comparable to that being taken in 2016. In my opinion, that is why the threats of the horrors the EU can inflict upon us are proving ineffective - Churchill warned that independence does not come for nothing, and the nation followed him.

I think it's very sad that both sides of the EU referendum are pitching their campaign not around the view of the future and their proposals and chose instead to focus on exaggerated negatives of the other side. Also, to your point, I do not see why anyone would be offended by my personal opinion that referring to the Nazis or WWIII in the context of the EU referendum is nothing more than cheap rhetoric.

NickFaulks wrote:Why do you think it is that in a recent MORI poll 48 per cent of Italians said they would like Italy to leave the EU? My guess is that this is at least in part because of folk memory - Italy has experienced rule from Berlin and didn't like it.

I really do not know but I suspect most of the discontent comes from the current economic situation, a long intermittent recession with a number of unpopular reforms being slowly introduced. When you feel you have to blame someone else for your problems there's always some options; you can sometimes spot reflections of that in Italian politics. As far as I'm concerned, I think Italy would have ten times the problems that the UK will/would have if they decided to leave the EU. Fortunately, I read that the Italian legislation forbids referendums about international treaties, I guess deeming the subject too complex for a popular vote.
Finally, I do not know either how my granddad would have felt about leaving the EU, but as someone born in the year 1900 and whose personal life was deeply affected by both WWI and WWII, I do not think he would have felt appropriate to remotely compare the troubles he went through with the situation at hand at the moment.

With this, as someone not even entitled to vote on the subject, it's probably time for me to leave this discussion.

Nick, care to mention any aspect of your life which is actually worse on account of Britain being in the EU? (If you were unemployed because lots of better qualified EU citizens were taking the jobs you were most suited to, I would understand your opposition, but I doubt that is the case).

I mean, really, comparisons with 1939, what absolute **^%%

John McKenna wrote:how did Australia get into the contest - was it a one-off 'guest-worker' admission?

They were invited as guests last year, and I assume will be permanent - if they win, they have to team up with an existing EBU member so that the following year's contest is actually in Europe (which may be the only way we ever see it back in the UK at Brighton/Harrogate/Birmingham or wherever)

The contest was shown live for the first time in China, and the USA which is why Justin Timberlake pitched up as the special guest who did 2 songs (thankfully, not while I was watching)

Its reach is now possibly exceeding the European Golf Tour?