With politicians and broadsheets now attacking the integrity and independence of the judiciary, it feels like the transformation into banana republic (without bananas but with added Queen) is gathering pace. Even if we clawback something workable from this mess, our global reputation for stability and pragmatism has gone out of the window.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
With politicians and broadsheets now attacking the integrity and independence of the judiciary, it feels like the transformation into banana republic (without bananas but with added Queen) is gathering pace. Even if we clawback something workable from this mess, our global reputation for stability and pragmatism has gone out of the window.
How they're allowed to openly incite conflict like that is mind-boggling. That is not free press, it's rogue press. A similar action or speech from an individual would get you arrested.
In before a Brexiter strolls in and tells us all to 'man up'.
In before a Brexiter strolls in and tells us all to 'man up'.
So is the danger the gay judge will try to impale me on his sword?
I have a lot of problems with MPs of all parties but I wouldn't advocate abandoning our parliamentary democracy. It seems a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water to want to get rid of Parliamentary sovereignty because the MPs might be less eurosceptic than the public.
And on undermining/diluting Brexit - 48% of those who voted wanted no Brexit, so the overall solution should hopefully try to find a middle way. And at the very least should be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny. If Parliament decides extreme Brexit is for the best then that's our democracy at work. We probably do need an election now though.
All are part of the policy framework set out by Vote Leave, the official Leave campaign. Thus, they can be reasonably defined as those measures for which people voted. In the same fashion, Remain hinted at future reform but essentially stood for no change whatsoever.
It means that there is scope for limited Freedom of Movement, while still remaining true to the result. It could be something which might help in EU negotiations.
You, and most Remaienrs in this thread, are expecting to be appeased to a degree that would not have been reciprocated were the roles reversed? I struggle to see why such a special status should be granted, not in the context of all that has gone before.
I am curious to know what you and others would see as palatable or workable, whilst at the same time being a fair representation of Leave's victory the referendum?
Exactly. It's not as if there is a recent of example of someone being labelled "an enemy of the people" or "traitor", leading to them being murdered in the street or anything.
Well the question was straight up black and white, but there are a variety of shades of grey available as answers? Seeing as it was 52/48, that would be #858585.
Oh come on, we all know that was staged by the remainers to swing the referendum our way.
To be honest both sides are as bad as each other, Jo Cox stabbing though isn't representative of the leave side. Both sides have belittle each other and made sweeping generalisations. The right and left wing media have both attempted to create an us and them divide between the two sides.
Can we have the proportions from the Brexit side though?
It would be lovely to know what percentage of the voters were:
- Biffers, kippers and assorted swivel eyed loonies looking to protect our nation from the muslim invaders.
- Tin foil hatted fruitcakes who believed the illuminati and big business were running the EU.
- What percentage wanted to reclaim our sovereignty but could not name a single rule imposed on us by the EU other than mumbling something about bananas.
- What percentage believed it was all about paying the NHS £350M a week more
- What percentage actually have some salient reason they could rationally explain as to how Brexit will be of any benefit to the UK.
My position is that, had we voted to remain, then obviously we would just have continued to remain a member of the EU. That much was on the ballot.
As the vote was to leave the EU, I accept that we must now leave, but the question of what that entails is now up for debate. I will be arguing for a Norway style solution, you will be arguing for a more substantial severing of ties with Europe. That's fair enough, and that's the debate to be had. What I do not accept is that because you voted to leave, your opinion on what kind of deal we now seek should be any more valued than my opinion. None of that was on the ballot.
As you can see from the resignation of the conservative MP today, some leave voters very much wanted to remain in the single market outside of the EU. To be pedantic, all remain voters wanted to remain within the single market by definition, and a minority of leave voters will also want to remain within the single market. On that basis, it can be inferred there is a majority in favour of remaining in the single market outside of the EU rather than seeking a hard Brexit like you want!
The referendum wasn't between remaining in the EU and hard Brexit. It was between remaining in the EU and 'something else'. You (or the government) don't get to define what that 'something else' is on your own I'm afraid. It's a matter for parliament to decide. Call a General Election if needs be.
Last edited:
What percentage were just using this as a protest vote about their situation rather than on the relative merits of EU membership.
More explaining away the inexcusable. The story of British politics in 2016 and this referendum in a nutshell.
Can't wait for more bullshit along the lines of 'they're as bad as each other' when the two sides are clearly not.
Can't wait for more bullshit along the lines of 'they're as bad as each other' when the two sides are clearly not.
I really don't think that "both sides are as bad as each other" in any way. There aren't people within the remain side vocally calling for personal attacks and treason indictments above and below the line in the national press, there aren't people within remain campaign are questioning the ability of a judge to make decisions because he's gay, there aren't remain supporters declaring their name as "Britain First, death to traitors" as they're charged in court with the murder of an MP, there aren't remain supporters standing before billboards of brown skinned people declaring enough is enough, etc, etc, etc.
Whilst there is no way that anyone can claim that all these opinions exist within all leave voters (I'm sure many are horrified), there is rich veins of these opinions throughout the leave campaign and the media supporting it that cannot be ignored and have no equivalent on the remain side.
All the referendum asked was "Remain" or "Leave", nothing more nothing less. Multiple people have said this to you in various ways yet you still don't seem to get it.
It is unfair for you, as a Leave supporter, to suggest that the entirety of the policy framework (which contained an awful lot of mistruth) set out by Leave should be implemented to the letter without parliamentary influence - that is not what we voted for. Parliament exists to make our laws balanced and fair for all. Including, you'll be surprised to know, the minority Remainers. All 16.1 million of them. The special status you have concocted is absolute nonsense. If it had been a Remain result with such narrow margins a clear message would have been sent to Parliament as to how divided the country felt and there may well have been a response to that. Nigel Farage openly admitted if it was close he would be campaigning for another referendum and clearly reforming our relationship with the EU was on the agenda.
Your rhetoric implies, by saying things such as a "dismal betrayal of the electorate", that the electorate contained only Leavers. That if leave don't get all of their policies exactly as they wished we'd be undermining the system. It implies that you 'Leavers' want 'special status' (whatever that is) in these negotiations in having it all your way or the highway - that was never the deal. The sooner you understand that the better.
We are leaving, that much is clear and that is what should happen, I accept that. The advisory opinion that the public gave was that leaving is what the majority wanted. But that's where it ends. As for what Brexit constitutes and ultimately looks like is a matter for parliament.
Jeremy Corbyn you mean?
There's been a smear campaign in the press to label all Brexiters as racists, and there were calls after the vote to strip old people of their right to vote. The remain side has lobbied for the decision to be reversed in spite of it being a democratic vote. I'm not trying to excuse the actions of the Brexit camp who have misled the people and have thrown us into turmoil with no clear plan but people have become so ideologically opposed to the other side that they now see this almost as a battle of good vs. evil. You've had people on the remain side on here wanting everyone who voted leave to be named and shamed, I have no doubt this would still occur had it been the other way round. In fact, I have no doubts that the leave side would be trying to avert democratic processes if the vote was different.
I seldom come in this thread because it has a hostile atmosphere and the debate often descends into character attacks from both sides.
I think its starting to become a genuine question on which is worse the US election or Brexit.
I was going to say those newspaper front pages represent a low point in UK journalism but sadly that isnt true.
I was going to say those newspaper front pages represent a low point in UK journalism but sadly that isnt true.
Can you give me an example of an article calling all brexiters racist, as you've just implied?
Can you show me the calls to strip old people of the vote? The petition, the marches, the parliamentary debates? Or have you extrapolated a lot of young people who will have to live with this latest feck up of our generation being pissed off that it was that demographic that pushed us over to exit?
Can you show me the serious campaign to have all 16 million + brexiters named and shamed?
And how many people of any real significance have actually seriously called for the vote to be completely ignored?
There is no equivalence between the two sides and to suggest otherwise is nonsense.
I see the phrase used a lot but there really is no need to force the word democratic in front of vote every time the referendum is mentioned.
I dont know if a particular point is trying to be made but if it is then make it. Not to single you out of course.
So were many other things, on the surface very popular (enough perhaps to affect a 4-point swing), but they've been very quickly and unceremoniously dumped. Perhaps if the people thought they would be getting all that the campaign promised, they were ok with the costs the opposite side spelt out; if they're getting only some of the promised benefits, maybe the rest of the promises (which have a potential to negatively impact the economy as a whole) aren't so palatable now?
They were in Boston on Radio 4 this morning, the area with the highest margin of Brexit voters in the UK.
'Have we not left the EU yet?!'
'I don't understand any of it'
Were the type of comments from Leave voters.
'Have we not left the EU yet?!'
'I don't understand any of it'
Were the type of comments from Leave voters.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...referendum-racist-incidents-politicians-media
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/campaign-bigotry-racist-britain-leave-brexit
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/27/media-calls-ban-old-people-voting-brexit-vote/ (Yes I know it's Breitbart but see the tweets inside calling for old people to lose the vote)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-says-leading-asylum-campaigner-a7102456.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...question-was-the-brexit-vote-based-on-racism/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...e-brexit-debate-has-made-britain-more-racist/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nd-bigots-directing-parts-of-the-brexit-camp/
The bold I was talking about on here, there was a post calling for people who voted leave on the Caf to be named and shamed, one person actually did post the names of people who did vote leave on here.
Those were what I could find in just a few minutes.
Why is there such a lack of understanding that this referendum WAS NOT legally binding and that in fact Leave voters (along with the rest of the country) are entitled the square root of feck all as far as what happens next.
In layman's terms the government essentially did a big survey to seek the peoples ADVICE. They CAN choose to ignore it. That is the law as it stands. We elect a democratic parliament to vote on these issues and we should let them get on with it.
Anti-intellectualism (we're fed up of experts), aggressive ignorance ("I don't understand it but I'm passionate about it") and sheer intolerance have taken over and are starting to further pressurise our government into making a hasty, imbalanced and damaging decision for the country.
In layman's terms the government essentially did a big survey to seek the peoples ADVICE. They CAN choose to ignore it. That is the law as it stands. We elect a democratic parliament to vote on these issues and we should let them get on with it.
Anti-intellectualism (we're fed up of experts), aggressive ignorance ("I don't understand it but I'm passionate about it") and sheer intolerance have taken over and are starting to further pressurise our government into making a hasty, imbalanced and damaging decision for the country.
Yes, there are undoubted character attacks, stupid generalisations and foot stamping from both sides. However, can you not see the differences between, for example, arguing that a binary referendum vote with a marginal win for one side on an unclear mandate is a problem and the current Daily Mail and Express vitriol?
This country is descending into anarchy.
Judges are being displayed on front pages for them to be bullied.
None of this is equivalent to even today's Pro-Brexit media coverage. And whilst it is true that there is not a one to one synonymity between anti immigration and racism, there's certainly a Venn diagram to be made.
I agree, I'm not saying nobody who voted out didn't do so for bigoted reasons but I don't think out of the 51% of people who did vote Leave, more than 25.5% are bigots.
I can see the difference but the debate rarely becomes that nuanced, and in fact the leave campaign has been just as guilty of late of wanting to avert democratic processes with regards to the recent decision about the vote for Brexit in Parliament. In a nutshell, both sides love the system when it works in their favour.
come on we all know what the mandate was to leave the EU, take control of our borders and make our own laws.
I don't agree with parts of that, but with the leave side winning that was the clear mandate.
the saying "hit the nail on the head' seems appropriate here!
Irrespective of whether it was a clear mandate or not, which I was not judging in my post, I was merely pointing out that disputing the validity of the result on reasoned grounds, whether correct or not, is not comparable with aggressive and, often, bigoted rhetoric.
Then why was that not on the ballot?
The fact was we already had control of our own borders and made our own laws. There were Brexiters talking about being like Switzerland or Norway aplenty before the vote, those models would have meant we maintained freedom of movement. Were they all misled and missed the smallprint on the mandate?
Yes, that's probably true. But an act of parliament being required (i.e. open to democratic scrutiny) to enact a constitutional change is hardly the system being partisan, although a large part of the media is portraying it as so.
Is that why a leave MP resigned today due to the fact he wanted the UK to stay in the single market.
TBF I doubt that's something the UK might have a say on
i happen to agree with you the referendum was far two narrow minded, the debate which lead up to it was beyond childish(on both sides) and their was no plan laid out in the event of a leave vote and no plan to address people concerns about the EU if we remained. The hole thing was an absolute disgrace (again on both sides)
But come of it every one know what the people who voted leave wanted... claiming their wasn't a clear mandate is just nip picking an we all know.
I have yet to see a coherent argument from a Leaver as to why the court ruling is a bad thing. Yet according to YouGov that is the view held by the majority of the population including a decent percentage of Remainers.
Are people really that stupid?*
* Yes. Yes they are.
Are people really that stupid?*
* Yes. Yes they are.
