Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Klopper76 said:
Same. The whole European army thing seems sensible as well.
Click to expand...

Ireland has a history of neutrality which im quite fond of but I agree, think its a much harder sell than cooperating elsewhere and I'm not as convinced but agree overall. Realistically if were invaded an army made of european nations are probably (hopefully) going to show up to protect us. We can contribute to that financially if nothing elsee.

Kinsella said:
I suppose because a European superstate would involve more than just the things you mention.
Click to expand...

It doesn't need to. Thats a lot of stuff we could cooperate on that I think is pretty hard to argue isn't in our mutual interest.
 
That'sHernandez said:
Unfortunately, that is where you are wrong. Almost all of the members of the cabinet are elected members of parliament, therefore unless the environment minister is from the House of Lords, they are elected. That minister is then supported by the civil service, who largely are experts in their field but they do not direct policy.

This is probably part of why the transparency of the EU gets lost in translation in the UK.
Click to expand...

You mean the incompetence of Grayling, Davis, Johnson, Hunt, Raab, Gove, Rudd, Mordaunt and the list is endless is nothing to do with them?
 
mancan92 said:
It's sad but I understand it. These people were brainwashed for 200 years plus to believe the white British were the epidome of life and they were privileged to be in their presence. You will find that people of the Windrush generation who were essentially tricked into coming to the UK for extra cheap labour (ironically the same reason the British government encouraged great EU immigration to the UK) they are probably more nationalist than most people born here.
Click to expand...

How do you view your own national identity?
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Think the Uk is on its way out. Perhaps it should start reforming its own system first. Parliament is a joke.
Click to expand...

Yes and No.
Yes of course Parliament is in dire need of reform. There can be very few who think it is fit for purpose or the 21st century for that matter.

However, I would not agree that the UK is on it's way out.
Just because our politicians are unable to manage the process for leaving the EU in an orderly manner, the UK itself is very much alive and kicking.
We continue to punch well above our weight in many levels and our future in or out of the EU remains extremely bright.
I have a very strong sense that the battering we are currently taking will play itself out and as a result we will be even more determined to succeed.
Never write the UK off. We will quickly bounce back from this debacle believe me.
 
Buster15 said:
Yes and No.
Yes of course Parliament is in dire need of reform. There can be very few who think it is fit for purpose or the 21st century for that matter.

However, I would not agree that the UK is on it's way out.
Just because our politicians are unable to manage the process for leaving the EU in an orderly manner, the UK itself is very much alive and kicking.
We continue to punch well above our weight in many levels and our future in or out of the EU remains extremely bright.
I have a very strong sense that the battering we are currently taking will play itself out and as a result we will be even more determined to succeed.
Never write the UK off. We will quickly bounce back from this debacle believe me.
Click to expand...

When I said, on its way out, I meant next week out of the EU.
 
caid said:
I dont really understand the fears of the european superstate. Cooperating on trade, standards, freedom of movement, security and infrastructure just seems an eminently sensible approach to me.
Click to expand...

There is a massive difference between between cooperation as individual countries and a relentless drift to a Federal Europe.
 
caid said:
Ireland has a history of neutrality which im quite fond of but I agree, think its a much harder sell than cooperating elsewhere and I'm not as convinced but agree overall. Realistically if were invaded an army made of european nations are probably (hopefully) going to show up to protect us. We can contribute to that financially if nothing elsee.



It doesn't need to. Thats a lot of stuff we could cooperate on that I think is pretty hard to argue isn't in our mutual interest.
Click to expand...

It may not be but these things tend to have a direction of travel. A European superstate (the so called 'United States of Europe') is a legitimate aspiration of course. My primary problem with it is that it's led very much from the top down. In other words it's very inorganic, and this is usually a recipe for disaster. I also notice that those who most in favour of it tend to care more about the strength of their vision as opposed to its affects on real flesh and blood people.

You mention Irish neutrality above, so let's take that example. Personally, I'd hate the idea of Ireland becoming involved in some bloody foreign war and having that stain on our nation's history. No thanks.
 
Dante said:
There's no way a United States could work. There's no precedent for it.
Click to expand...
There's no precedent so it wouldn't work? That makes no sense...

I don't know enough about it but that's not a solid arguement. No precedent just means we don't have a proof of concept. :confused:
 
Paul the Wolf said:
When I said, on its way out, I meant next week out of the EU.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the clarification. Nevertheless my comments on the UK future stand.

We are quite naturally feeling down and depressed and the level of self flagilation is understandable, it is important to look at the key economic numbers which despite all the forecast doom and gloom are surprisingly resilient.
 
Buster15 said:
Thank you for the clarification. Nevertheless my comments on the UK future stand.

We are quite naturally feeling down and depressed and the level of self flagilation is understandable, it is important to look at the key economic numbers which despite all the forecast doom and gloom are surprisingly resilient.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the UK will be resilient but why put itself in this position. And for sure the people who are going to suffer the most are the people who voted for it (other than Mogg and co). I think there's a terrible shock to a lot of people coming.
 
That'sHernandez said:
Unfortunately, that is where you are wrong. Almost all of the members of the cabinet are elected members of parliament, therefore unless the environment minister is from the House of Lords, they are elected. That minister is then supported by the civil service, who largely are experts in their field but they do not direct policy.

This is probably part of why the transparency of the EU gets lost in translation in the UK.
Click to expand...

Not really, you do not elect a minister into a specific ministry in the UK the PM is responsible for choosing the members of the government. Now in the EU, the head of states are responsible for choosing the members of the commission, they each pick one of their national, parliament vote them in and then the commission president appoint them, so in terms of transparency it's fairly easy to know who nominated who and who to blame if that's what you want. Some commissioners were MEPs others weren't, personally I don't have a problem with that but that's because it matches with french system. Also the commission is part of the EU civil service.
.
 
The EU has always been transparent if you've been interested enough to read the many, many documents online. It's just that most folk (me included) couldn't really be bothered or don't feel the need. I've always been happy to have a vote for an MEP who represents the region where I live, that's democracy. I also get email briefings from some MEPs because I'm a Labour Party member, I assume the other parties do the same for their members.

I just had a look at the EU parliament website front page - loads of info. It's no good folk saying it's not democratic, it's a leviathan, no-one knows what's going on blah blah. If you want to know what's going on, it's easy. And of course it's big - it's representing a lot of people.
 
Penna said:
The EU has always been transparent if you've been interested enough to read the many, many documents online. It's just that most folk (me included) couldn't really be bothered or don't feel the need. I've always been happy to have a vote for an MEP who represents the region where I live, that's democracy. I also get email briefings from some MEPs because I'm a Labour Party member, I assume the other parties do the same for their members.

I just had a look at the EU parliament website front page - loads of info. It's no good folk saying it's not democratic, it's a leviathan, no-one knows what's going on blah blah. If you want to know what's going on, it's easy. And of course it's big - it's representing a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Think about the amount of british people that elected Theresa May as an MP and then the amount of MPs that elected her as the prime minister. That's not a lot of people that directly and indirectly made her head of state.
 
JPRouve said:
Think about the amount of british people that elected Theresa May as an MP and then the amount of MPs that elected her as the prime minister. That's not a lot of people that directly and indirectly made her head of state.
Click to expand...

That’s a bad analogy in the context of British politics because plenty of people are dead against leaders with no democratic mandate, like May was initially and Brown was a few years back. It undermines them.
 
Penna said:
The EU has always been transparent if you've been interested enough to read the many, many documents online. It's just that most folk (me included) couldn't really be bothered or don't feel the need. I've always been happy to have a vote for an MEP who represents the region where I live, that's democracy. I also get email briefings from some MEPs because I'm a Labour Party member, I assume the other parties do the same for their members.

I just had a look at the EU parliament website front page - loads of info. It's no good folk saying it's not democratic, it's a leviathan, no-one knows what's going on blah blah. If you want to know what's going on, it's easy. And of course it's big - it's representing a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Who needs information and transparency when you alreafy have your opinion based on Tory/News Corp propoganda?
 
Brwned said:
There's not a lot of evidence to support fear of immigration being the main message that swayed people, never mind the only one:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

It's just more palatable for you to believe it so.

And of course this is based on the premise that people make decisions because of what people on the TV tell them to do. Which is just a little bit of an exaggeration of the effect of political messaging. People actually have their own thoughts too.
Click to expand...
Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about :rolleyes:

People can't even properly explain now why they think it's better for us to be out of the EU, it's bullshit to claim they knew before the referendum
 
Penna said:
The EU has always been transparent[/B] if you've been interested enough to read the many, many documents online. It's just that most folk (me included) couldn't really be bothered or don't feel the need. I've always been happy to have a vote for an MEP who represents the region where I live, that's democracy. I also get email briefings from some MEPs because I'm a Labour Party member, I assume the other parties do the same for their members.

I just had a look at the EU parliament website front page - loads of info. It's no good folk saying it's not democratic, it's a leviathan, no-one knows what's going on blah blah. If you want to know what's going on, it's easy. And of course it's big - it's representing a lot of people.
Click to expand...
Not if you shut your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears whilst humming Rule Brittania to yourself.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
That’s a bad analogy in the context of British politics because plenty of people are dead against leaders with no democratic mandate like May initially and Brown a few years back. It undermines them.
Click to expand...

It's not a bad analogy when leavers use the UK as an example of proper democracy. By making that analogy, I'm just pointing to the fact that the system isn't that different, it's an indirect democracy where leaders with a popular mandate take decisions for us, now if I was totally honest I would say that the commissioner proposed by the french president has more legitimacy than the commissioner proposed by the UK PM since the french president is directly elected by the french electorate, in that sense we do have a problem.:)
But seriously I don't think that your system is bad or non democratic, it's just not that direct and you don't have as much say as some pretend even when we are talking about your head of government.
 
Mogget said:
Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about :rolleyes:

People can't even properly explain now why they think it's better for us to be out of the EU, it's bullshit to claim they knew before the referendum
Click to expand...

WTO! They're all experts.
 
Mogget said:
Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about :rolleyes:

People can't even properly explain now why they think it's better for us to be out of the EU, it's bullshit to claim they knew before the referendum
Click to expand...

None of that actually contradicts anything I said. Yes some people left because they are xenophobic. Yes some people decided to leave the EU because the leave campaign had some key messages that emotionally resonated with them, and had no substantive supporting evidence. What we're discussing is "the real reason people left". Implicit in that is the idea that this is the reason people voted for Brexit, not why some people voted for Brexit. The distinction is a pretty big one.

It is categorically untrue that this is why everyone voted Leave, and the evidence doesn't support the notion that it's the primary reason most people voted for it. It doesn't make sense to attack people for a belief unsupported by the evidence, based on your own belief unsupported by the evidence. I mean, you still get to claim the moral high ground, but logically it falls apart.

Beyond that, if you don't think that people cared about the sovereignty of the UK before Brexit, you should look at what some of the people said during the first referendum on the EU. There were multiple reasons why some people didn't vote for it then. Those people have been there since then, and new ones have been born. It's a real thing people care about, whether or not you deem it legitimate. For some people it's a smokescreen, for others it's genuine.
 
That'sHernandez said:
It really is, because instead of having their beliefs challenged by being asked why the think the way they do, they are instead being called wrong and having the riot act read to them. This in turn only further entrenches their views instead of changing them.



See above. I don't really see how you can know why everyone voted the way they did.
Click to expand...

Well many of them are wrong and are simply too stubborn and bitter to admit or realise it.
Everyone is talking about it now and everyone talked about it when the referendum happened. You can get a good picture very easily.
 
JPRouve said:
It's not a bad analogy when leavers use the UK as an example of proper democracy. By making that analogy, I'm just pointing to the fact that the system isn't that different, it's an indirect democracy where leaders with a popular mandate take decisions for us, now if I was totally honest I would say that the commissioner proposed by the french president has more legitimacy than the commissioner proposed by the UK PM since the french president is directly elected by the french electorate, in that sense we do have a problem.:)
But seriously I don't think that your system is bad or non democratic, it's just not that direct and you don't have as much say as some pretend even when we are talking about your head of government.
Click to expand...

Do leavers use the UK as an example of a ‘proper’ democracy though? My point was that most people in the UK are not happy with leaders taking office without a GE.

The problem with EU is that it is a leviathan, it is remote and it is opaque to the average voter. The vast majority of people struggle with dryness and complexity of domestic politics so I can’t see how a more integrated EU could possibly result in more effective democracy. Having millions of pages of legislation and debate on a website doesn’t help either!
 
Last edited:
Classical Mechanic said:
Do leavers use the UK as an example of a ‘proper’ democracy though? My point was that most people in the UK are not happy with leaders taking office without a GE.

The problem with EU is that it is a leviathan, it is remote and it is opaque. The vast majority of people struggle with dryness and complexity of domestic politics so I can’t see how a more integrated EU could possibly result in more effective democracy. Having millions of pages of legislation and debate on a website doesn’t help either!
Click to expand...

I will be honest, I don't really understand you.
 
Uri Diculous.
 
Does he predict these interventions before the events occur?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.