UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[OSR stands with Israel]

Since there hasnt been a thread started since the elections , here

[OSR stands with Israel]

Since people joke a parliamentary majority defacto makes you a king , what about this title:            King Boris I.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I’ll create a poll in a few hours and we can decide from there

[OSR stands with Israel]

Or "The Right Honourable Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero"?

Can you make that name smaller as it’s not fitting on the subject line

[OSR stands with Israel]

Or "The Right Honourable Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero"?

Can you make that name smaller as it’s not fitting on the subject line

For starters it's abbreviated The Rt. Hon.

Ok let me try that

[OSR stands with Israel]

How does the subject line look like now

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/12/20/uk/boris-johnson-brexit-deal-parliament-vote-gbr-intl/index.html


This is great news

[OSR stands with Israel]

Boris is already proving to be the best Tory PM since Thatcher

[OSR stands with Israel]

Boris is already proving to be the best Tory PM since Thatcher

He's objectively the worst PM in modern history, let alone since Thatcher.

Callaghan was clearly worse and objectively so were Brown and May . He still is behind Thatcher and Blair no doubt but Major barely got anything done and Cameron undermined his own legacy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Boris is already proving to be the best Tory PM since Thatcher

He's objectively the worst PM in modern history, let alone since Thatcher.

Callaghan was clearly worse and objectively so were Brown and May . He still is behind Thatcher and Blair no doubt but Major barely got anything done and Cameron undermined his own legacy.

What about Douglas-Home?

Depends on how modern is defined, if you just go past 50 years or post WW2

[OSR stands with Israel]

Harry and Meaghan?

Hello.

Lol at that being news , anyway the real monarch of the UK now is Boris Johnson, just like how it was Blair from 1997-2005 and Thatcher was in the 1980s

[OSR stands with Israel]

Harry and Meaghan?

Hello.

Lol at that being news , anyway the real monarch of the UK now is Boris Johnson, just like how it was Blair from 1997-2005 and Thatcher was in the 1980s

Well...yeah, a British PM with a strong majority can do to the country essentially whatever the hell he or she likes, to a point that even US Presidents with pronounced authoritarian leanings like FDR or Trump could only dream of, but to say that that constitutes being "the real monarch" shows a pretty off-base understanding of what the British monarchy is (ostensibly) there for.

The Queen has almost no actual power now, other than symbolic power .

[OSR stands with Israel]

Today was a Great Day for Britain

[OSR stands with Israel]

Today was a Great Day for Britain

Doesn't feel like it

The EU has become a total disgrace and my wish was it would be replaced with something like NAFTA but for Europe but since its not Im happy the UK is leaving.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty & shove it.

The US has been a far better ally to the UK than the EU ever has so UK will benefit from a trade deal with the US.


Also Europe adopting US style nationalism(not the Trump style, the pre Trump style more like)>>> the EU easily

[OSR stands with Israel]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

Again, this isn't a violation of soveriegnty because sovereign states chose to join this instutituion, and can (foolishly) choose to leave. If a new treaty does away with Article 50 or just fully embraces a United States of europe, that doesn't violate national soverignity because sovereign nations choose to agree to it and legitimately cede their sovereignty to the European Union which itself becomes a sovereign state deriving its legitimacy from the will of the European people. By your logic, the USA has no sovereign democratic legitimacy because it was preceded by quasi-sovereign states governed by the Articles of Confederation.

No. You are wrong. The member nations did not hold votes on the Union as it exists today. They joined a common market that has since grown unchecked into a political union. EU elections see abysmal turnout and many of the major positions in the bureaucracy are unelected. To say that the people in the member nations "chose to join" this Union is frankly asinine and a complete misrepresentation of how the EU has expanded its power since its inception. And if the EU does become a United States of Europe (as it is slowly gravitating towards), I'd bet good money that the legitimate qualms of EU citizens will once again go ignored.

The common market grew with a series of treaties ratified by EU members which expanded the scope of the EU in a clearly defined way. In some cases it was put to referenda or else the governments of each country agreed to it, but regardless, describing the process as unchecked and undemocratic is completely false. Many major positions in every bureaucracy are unelected and low turnout doesn't mean the EU is democratically illegitimate. Legitimate qualms of some citizens everywhere go ignored and that isn't a compelling argument against a federal Europe. I'd turn this question around: under what circumstances do you consider countries integrating and/or unifying to be legitimate? After all, if what the EU doesn't meet your standard, then nothing will, and expecting the unanimous consent of every single person in the EU for integration--which seems to be your standard--goes against democratic norms and the very notion of the clasically liberal social contract which ostensibly is the basis for your ideology.

The EU became unpopular precisely because it tried to govern like it was a nation instead of a trade pact. All the rules and regulations it was implementing over the last 10 years and then expecting nations to follow those even when they violate their own rules and laws showed the utter hubris and failure of the EU.

Also, the EU is not some great institution which promoted free-market economics at all, it is far more socialist than the UK and the UK being out means it can implement far more neo-liberal reforms and make it self like the US than it could have under the EU.

[OSR stands with Israel]

It will suck that the most likely Tory leader to take Johnson’s place would be someone even less conservative than him . Patel would be a great PM but is obviously too unpopular to ever become PM

[OSR stands with Israel]

My hot take is Partygate isnt what really caused this but rather what caused this was after 12 years of Tory rule, the voters were looking for any excuse to turn on the Tories. Partygate and Starmer being inoffensive enough gave that excuse and the rest is history

[OSR stands with Israel]

My hot take is Partygate isnt what really caused this but rather what caused this was after 12 years of Tory rule, the voters were looking for any excuse to turn on the Tories. Partygate and Starmer being inoffensive enough gave that excuse and the rest is history

I'm not sure this makes much sense. If the electorate wanted to turn on the Tories, they've had a number of opportunities before this year.

Yes but Corbyn was not inoffensive

[OSR stands with Israel]

Johnson's (few?) remaining supporters apparently saying he is serious about his threat to dissolve the current parliament "if that is what it takes".

I mean, it is still most likely a total bluff and even if he attempts that it will surely fail. But even so it is far from unbelievable that he might give it a go. Yet again, it would be just desserts for a party that in large measure voted for him to be PM *despite knowing what sort of person he was*.

Has the Fixed Terms Act been repealed cause if it isn’t then Boris would not be able to go through with this threat

[OSR stands with Israel]

Johnson's (few?) remaining supporters apparently saying he is serious about his threat to dissolve the current parliament "if that is what it takes".

I mean, it is still most likely a total bluff and even if he attempts that it will surely fail. But even so it is far from unbelievable that he might give it a go. Yet again, it would be just desserts for a party that in large measure voted for him to be PM *despite knowing what sort of person he was*.

Has the Fixed Terms Act been repealed cause if it isn’t then Boris would not be able to go through with this threat

It was repealed a few months ago.

Lol

[OSR stands with Israel]

I'm actually pretty shocked Boris is going down over what he is for. These sandals sound so minor in comparison to everything from the Trump Administration...a reminder other countries actually have some standards.

Trudeau has done far worse than Boris as well