Wrestling Forum banner

101 - 120 of 690 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,661 Posts
So, there are now literally no politicians left that actually campaigned for Brexit.
They have all resigned.

And yet there are people out there that still believe voting "leave" was anything but completely fucking stupid.

Just take a look at the situation. We are allegedly preparing to sever ties, but we will still be bound by EU laws surrounding immigration and the free movement of people. We will still be paying the EU for the right to trade, and we will still be subject to laws passed by the EU if we expect to have continued access to those trade deals.

Essentially, voting "Leave" has removed the UK Government's ability to have any say over the laws we will be bound by. Nothing more.

It doesn't remove immigrants from our country. It doesn't allow us to "take back control" of our borders. EVERYTHING that the leave voters think they voted for was never actually on the table. They were played, plain and simple.

And now, the politicians that played them have all run for the hills.

But again, they still argue that Brexit is good for the country. I guess because to admit anything else, is to admit that they were wrong.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,171 Posts
So, there are now literally no politicians left that actually campaigned for Brexit.
They have all resigned.

And yet there are people out there that still believe voting "leave" was anything but completely fucking stupid.

Just take a look at the situation. We are allegedly preparing to sever ties, but we will still be bound by EU laws surrounding immigration and the free movement of people. We will still be paying the EU for the right to trade, and we will still be subject to laws passed by the EU if we expect to have continued access to those trade deals.

Essentially, voting "Leave" has removed the UK Government's ability to have any say over the laws we will be bound by. Nothing more.

It doesn't remove immigrants from our country. It doesn't allow us to "take back control" of our borders. EVERYTHING that the leave voters think they voted for was never actually on the table. They were played, plain and simple.

And now, the politicians that played them have all run for the hills.

But again, they still argue that Brexit is good for the country. I guess because to admit anything else, is to admit that they were wrong.
This is also something that we are able to do as a member of the EU anyway. It's not the EU's fault that we are too lazy/unorganised to have control over people that choose to come here and not work. Other countries in the EU are able to implement it, but we couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery OR an orgy in a brothel. Our Brexit 'negotiations' are proof of this :lol
 

·
E:16
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
We've had full control of our borders, why the fuck do people think the camps at Calais exist if we didn't?

The whole immigrating thing was a lie from the start. Just like the straight banana myth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ninja Hedgehog

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,870 Posts
We've had full control of our borders, why the fuck do people think the camps at Calais exist if we didn't?

The whole immigrating thing was a lie from the start. Just like the straight banana myth.
https://brexit853.wordpress.com/2016/09/27/powers-that-the-uk-has-failed-to-use-to-control-eu-freedom-of-movement-directive/
LOOKING AT THE FOM CONTROLS AVAILABLE AND WHERE THE UK HAVE FAILED TO USE THESE POWERS.

The EU Freedom of Movement of workers into the UK has been a major success – despite the spin and deception surrounding these rights. However, by failing to demonstrate control, successive UK Governments have invited criticism – to the point that it was used by the Leave campaign as a representation of how the EU has lost control of it’s borders.

POWER 1 – RESTRICTION/STOPPING OF EU MIGRATION FROM NEW MEMBER COUNTRIES.

The FoM directive allows for the “old” countries to restrict the rights of migrants from “new” countries for up to 7 years. The powers vary from stopping migration completely or allowing only for selected categories of work on a work permit basis.

IN 2004 THE UK CHOSE NOT TO USE THIS POWER AT ALL.

One of the sharpest rises in net migration came in 2004, when the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joined. The UK was one of only 3 of the original EU members (UK, Sweden and Eire) to choose not to apply transitional restrictions on these eight countries.

In contrast Germany and Austria kept the transitional restrictions in place for a full seven years. Other countries kept restrictions for between 2-5 years and the Netherlands reserved the right to impose further restrictions if there were ever more than 22,000 migrants in a year.

By not implementing the restrictions the UK invited the surge of migration. They could have avoided the surge and the enormous bad press that accompanied it if they so chose.

POWER 2 – ABILITY TO PROSECUTE BENEFIT FRAUD AND “WELFARE TOURISM” BY EU MIGRANTS

The FoM directive is clear. The directive enables Member States to adopt the necessary measures to refuse, terminate or withdraw any right conferred in the event of abuse of rights or fraud, such as marriages of convenience. Article 35 of the directive expressly grants Member States the power, in the event of abuse or fraud, to withdraw any right conferred by the directive. The Migrant could be removed from the UK as well as prosecuted for Fraud.

The UK have not used this power – ever. As the UK does not know or track how many migrants are using the welfare system in this way then it is unable to even try to exercise this power.

Other EU members insist on migrants proving that they can support themselves. For example Belgium requires all migrants to prove they have sufficient funds, health insurance and suitable housing.

Whilst the FoM directive is now widely blamed for an “unacceptable burden” (Theresa May) the problem would seem to be more one of lack of control by the UK Government rather than “Benefit Tourism” by migrants.

POWER 3 – ABILITY TO RETURN EU MIGRANTS TO HOME COUNTRY IF NOT “ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE” AFTER 3 MONTHS

After 3 months in the UK EU migrants need to be either working, have a member of the family working or have sufficient funds to live (and have full sickness insurance). If not then they can be returned to their home country.

The UK does not register migrants as they arrive and as such has no way of knowing how long they have been in the UK. There are no efforts to track or control this movement *. This once more allows the EU-skeptics to portray the FoM as “uncontrolled migration”.

In contrast Belgium requires all migrants to register at their Town Hall within 3 months of entering the country and if they intend to work their claim will be assessed and will be processed within 6 months. During this time they can reside in Belgium provided they can prove they have sufficient funds, health insurance and suitable housing. If permission is granted they will be issued with a Foreigners ID card. Only after 5 years of legal and continuous residence in Belgium will EU/EEA and Swiss citizens automatically acquire the right to permanent residence in Belgium (residence card E+)

It is not the FoM that causes the lack of control in migration it is the UK Government themselves.

POWER 4 – EMERGENCY BRAKE ON WELFARE PAYMENTS

As part of the pre-referendum renegotiation, Mr Cameron secured a further power. This “emergency brake/Red Card” mechanism would allow any EU country whose welfare system has come under strain, as the result of an influx of EU migrants of ‘an exceptional magnitude’, to restrict access to certain kinds of welfare benefits.

This power was lost once the UK voted Leave in the June Referendum.

CONCLUSION

To summarize it was the UK’s choice to not implement a 7 year partial or full migrant break in order to prepare for fresh immigration from new EU countries, almost all other countries did so.

Even with that failure, considerable EU powers already exist to manage migration. It is legally possible to register & track all immigrants, ensure they are entirely financially and medically self supporting, prevent and/or prosecute benefit fraud and return home any migrants who are not economically active.

Furthermore, Cameron secured an “emergency brake” to suspend Welfare Payments to migrants if necessary – powers which are now lost.

Other EU countries use these powers which might explain their reluctance to fix something that is not broken.

It is entirely likely that we are leaving the EU in part because successive UK governments have failed to understand or have been unwilling to use these significant existing powers.
It's a shame we didn't implement these powers back in 2004, 2010, 2015 or heck even after the vote in 2016. If we had and did what Germany does to EU migrants entering their country (monitoring who enters and making sure migrants are working/well financed and not taking much out of the state) the whole control our borders probably wouldn't have been as big an issue as it was in 2016. This was the fault of Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg and May during their runs not the EU itself.
 

·
E:16
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Chief brexiteer liam fox says it's more likely we'll get no deal now. Is this 4d chess to convince the EU to abandon their decades of economic policy or a realisation that little old England is not strong enough to get a decent deal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
No deal == "Hard" (actual) Brexit. Bring it on. We can take the pain, the EU would rather do without it. They might after all be losing Poland and Italy soon.

Also lol at Liam Fox being a chief Brexiteer. May as well say I'm a chief Brexiteer too while at it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,870 Posts
More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU

Major new analysis shows most constituencies now have majority who want to Remain

More than 100 Westminster constituencies that voted to leave the EU have now switched their support to Remain, according to a stark new analysis seen by the Observer.

In findings that could have a significant impact on the parliamentary battle of Brexit later this year, the study concludes that most seats in Britain now contain a majority of voters who want to stay in the EU.

The analysis, one of the most comprehensive assessments of Brexit sentiment since the referendum, suggests the shift has been driven by doubts among Labour voters who backed Leave.

As a result, the trend is starkest in the north of England and Wales – Labour heartlands in which Brexit sentiment appears to be changing. The development will heap further pressure on Jeremy Corbyn to soften the party’s opposition to reconsidering Britain’s EU departure.

Researchers at the Focaldata consumer analytics company compiled the breakdown by modelling two YouGov polls of more than 15,000 people in total, conducted before and after Theresa May published her proposed Brexit deal on 6 July.

It combined the polling with detailed census information and data from the Office for National Statistics. The study was jointly commissioned by Best for Britain, which is campaigning against Brexit, and the anti-racist Hope Not Hate group.

The 632 seats in England, Scotland and Wales were examined for the study. It found that 112 had switched from Leave to Remain. The new analysis suggests there are now 341 seats with majority Remain support, up from 229 seats at the referendum.

One seat has switched support in Scotland and 97 have switched in England, while 14 of the 40 seats in Wales have changed from Leave to Remain. Overall, the model puts Remain on 53% support, with 47% backing Leave.

It suggests that there is now a majority for Remain in Scotland and Wales – meaning greater pressure on the union following the UK’s departure. Young voters and those from ethnic minorities have also driven the switch to Remain.

It comes with the prime minister still having to negotiate Commons votes over Brexit later this year and also the prospect of a parliamentary vote over the final Brexit deal. Plans are already being drawn up by May’s opponents to try to force a new referendum or election.

On Saturday Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said those opponents had to work together to bring about a chance for people to have another say. “We have to work across party frontiers,” he said, speaking in Bristol at the first of a series of regional rallies in a planned summer of action by the People’s Vote campaign.

Data scientists compiling the study used a technique known as multi-level regression and post-stratification, similar to that used by YouGov in its pre-election model, which proved far more accurate than conventional opinion polls. However, the polling sample used by YouGov for its election model was much bigger, covering some 50,000 people.

Among the constituencies to switch from Leave to Remain is that of Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary and face of the Leave campaign. Support for Remain in his Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituency has risen from 43.6% to 51.4%, according to the new model.

Surrey Heath, the constituency of the other Leave figurehead, Michael Gove, also emerged as having a pro-Remain majority. Support for Remain increased from 48% in 2016 to 50.2%. There was also a 12.8-point swing to Remain in shadow chancellor John McDonnell’s seat of Hayes and Harlington.

The seats of three pro-Leave Labour MPs switched to Remain. Birkenhead, Frank Field’s constituency, now has a 58.4% majority in favour of Remain. Graham Stringer’s Blackley and Broughton constituency now has a 59% in favour of Remain. Kelvin Hopkins’s Luton North seat now has 53.1% backing Remain.

The doubts among Labour Leave voters have been accompanied by a less dramatic hardening of Brexit support among Tory voters. While no constituencies saw a switch from Remain to Leave, support for Brexit went up in some constituencies.

Of the seats that have switched to Remain since the referendum, some of the most dramatic swings have taken place in Liverpool Walton, where support for Remain has risen from 46.2% to 60.5%, Knowsley on Merseyside, where Remain has increased from 47.6% to 61%, and Swansea East, where Remain has risen from 37.9% to 50.7%.

Remain campaigners said that the findings should give more MPs the confidence to back a Brexit rethink. However, some pro-Remain MPs are still doubtful that there has been a significant shift and think a second vote would be a huge risk.

Eloise Todd, the chief executive of Best for Britain, said: “This groundbreaking research shows that Brexit is still not inevitable. People across the UK have witnessed the last two years of uncertainty with dismay and are thinking differently – 112 constituencies have switched to majorities that back staying in our current bespoke deal with the EU.

“The sands of public opinion are shifting and politicians risk falling behind. Our research shows that the deal must be put to the people. Westminster should legislate for a people’s vote on the Brexit terms, giving the public the option to stay and build our future on our current deal with the EU.”

Nick Lowles, head of Hope not Hate, said: “Our data shows a clear shift in public opinion against Brexit and people’s growing anxiety over how leaving the EU will affect themselves and their families. This cannot be ignored.

“The rate of change appears to be quickening as the realities of what Brexit would mean become more apparent and the fears of a no-deal Brexit grow, especially for Labour Leave voters who initially believed that leaving the EU would improve their economic prospects. Brexit is failing these voters and the country as a whole. Politicians need to understand that public opinion has changed.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/11/more-than-100-pro-leave-constituencies-switch-to-remain

Quite a few folk now calling for a second referendum on the deal, such as Justine Greening who called for one to be held under AV with three options: Remain, Leave with Deal (soft/medium brexit), Leave with No Deal (hard brexit). Some columnist in the Guardian or Independent even called for a fourth option Hard Remain which would have the UK not just remain in the EU but also join Schengen and the Eurozone! Just imagine the screams of torture from UKIP and the ERG!

A good few brexiteers in the Conservatives are hoping for a leadership challenge this October, mainly hoping for Boris Johnson to takeover Theresa May as Conservative leader and Prime Minister.

But at the same time, some Conservative MPs have threatened to leave the party if Boris becomes leader, including Justine Greening, Anna Soubry and Dominic Grieve which is why this doesn't surprise me:

Secret plot to oust Theresa May in Brexiteer putsch and install David Davis as 'interim' PM with Boris Johnson urged to delay his leadership bid until after Brexit

Boris Johnson is being urged to anoint David Davis as ‘interim’ Prime Minister as part of a Brexiteer putsch to oust Theresa May as early as October, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

The burka row which has engulfed the party in the wake of Mr Johnson’s incendiary remarks about Islamic dress, has emboldened anti-May plotters, who think it could help trigger a leadership contest when MPs return to the Commons next month.

Senior allies of Mr Davis have told this newspaper a contest would be a ‘disaster’ for the country, so the party should agree to make the former Brexit Secretary a caretaker leader until after the UK leaves the EU.

They have privately urged Mr Johnson to agree to the plan and postpone his bid for the leadership until Mr Davis steps down. The latest bout of Tory leadership plotting came as:

  • Ukip’s former bankroller Arron Banks announced plans to flood the Tory Party with supporters of Mr Johnson as part of a Donald Trump-style campaign to make him Prime Minister;
  • Mr Johnson’s allies turned their fire on party chairman Brandon Lewis over the probe into the burka comments, accusing him of covering up ‘more serious’ allegations against a pro-Remain MP;
  • Plans were drawn up for a series of rallies to be held across the country for leading Brexiteer Tories to set out the case for a hard Brexit;
  • Mrs May’s former deputy Damian Green warned Mr Johnson against going ‘full Trump’ by joining forces with Right-wing figures such as Steve Bannon, an ex- adviser to the US President.
Mr Johnson infuriated Tory high command by writing in his newspaper column that burkas made women look like ‘letterboxes’.

When Mr Lewis called for the former Foreign Secretary to apologise for the remarks – forcing the Prime Minister to echo his call – he triggered a furious backlash from Mr Johnson’s supporters.

Their anger intensified when the party launched a probe that could lead to him being forced to undergo ‘diversity training’.

One Boris ally accused Mr Lewis of ‘double standards’ for sanctioning an inquiry into Mr Johnson’s behaviour immediately – but ‘stalling’ on more serious allegations against another Tory MP who is a Remain supporter.

Mr Lewis was said to have ‘parked’ the results of an official party inquiry into bullying claims against the MP – whose identity is known to The Mail on Sunday – even though the probe was months ago.

Tory sources rejected the accusation against Mr Lewis, saying the party board had decided no further action was needed.

Mr Johnson’s friends say he has been bombarded with supportive messages from Tory MPs, and is now surging in the leadership stakes.

Last night, one senior party figure predicted Mrs May could face a leadership contest as soon as next month when the Commons returns from its summer break. A contest would be triggered if 48 Tory MPs demand one.

The source said: ‘The membership is massively behind Boris on this. If there weren’t enough Tory MPs ready to support no-confidence letters when we left Westminster last month, there probably will be now.’

But Mr Johnson himself is being urged to ‘park’ his own leadership ambitions and allow Mr Davis to take over until Brexit is achieved.

The ‘coronation’ plan has been drawn up to try to avoid a full-scale Tory leadership contest, with Davis backers saying only he would be trusted by both Leave and Remain MPs to take up the reins without needing to consult grassroots members.

Sources said the ex-Brexit Secretary would be trusted by both wings of the party to take over the final exit negotiations and deliver a deal which honoured the 2016 referendum.

They point out that Mr Davis was involved in the Tories’ last so-called leadership coronation – in 2003, when his decision not to stand paved the way for Michael Howard to become leader without a full-scale contest.

One senior ex-Minister said last night: ‘Everyone knows Boris would romp home in any leadership poll where party members get to vote.
Basically, David Davis would be the Prime Minister for around eight months (or maybe until early 2020 if a transitional period is still on the cards) then the Boris Johnson will be appointed the position of Prime Minister which he feels he is greatly entitled to. Obviously the ERG would want this in hope that the likes of Soubry and Greening don't ditch the party before brexit as the Conservatives/DUP would lose their majority and could put brexit in jeopardy.

Imagine the direction of a Boris Johnson government. The man doesn't really have any values imo, he just wants the keys to 10 Downing Street for his own ego. I can see the ERG (the UK equivalent to the Tea Party) controlling Boris like a puppet, just watch Jacob Rees-Mogg be appointed a Cabinet Office Minister and manipulate Boris to implement a manifesto written by Mogg himself and the rest of the ERG like Peter Bone, John Redwood, Christopher Chope et al.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5657345/British-holidaymakers-heading-Europe-face-6-visa-fee-Brexit.html

Daily mail upset that after voting to end free movement of people the EU charge for movement of people...the state of brexiteers.
Does the Mail not realise we would also charge EU nationals and other foreign nationals the same or maybe more? I thought they would advocate such a policy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,176 Posts
https://brexit853.wordpress.com/2016/09/27/powers-that-the-uk-has-failed-to-use-to-control-eu-freedom-of-movement-directive/


It's a shame we didn't implement these powers back in 2004, 2010, 2015 or heck even after the vote in 2016. If we had and did what Germany does to EU migrants entering their country (monitoring who enters and making sure migrants are working/well financed and not taking much out of the state) the whole control our borders probably wouldn't have been as big an issue as it was in 2016. This was the fault of Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg and May during their runs not the EU itself.
Excuse me?
You think this immigration we have now in Germany, against national and international laws, is something to aspire and admire?
The immigrants from EU countries, with a valid passport, aren't the problem. The problem is the thousands and thousands of non-EU immigrants, who conveniently lost their passport, and who travel through several EU countries with the goal to enter the country with the best social welfare, which is Germany, and who are only "monitored" in the sense that border officers wave them hello, because they have the ILLEGAL order by Merkel to let them in.

None of these people are refugees. Someone whose life and body is threatened is happy to be safe. He doesn't travel through up to 7 countries to come to Germany. Someone trying to come in from a third party country can't be granted refugee status.

Not taking much out of the state? The big majority of these non EU immigrants can't write or read. If they are allowed to stay, they will be a massive burden on social welfare. Who do you think has to earn the money for that? And if they aren't allowed to stay, but can't be expelled, because reasons, then they become a criminal threat. Which they are now anyway. Already rejected immigrants right now are commiting crimes, theft, attack, rape, but the government is just not willing to send them back.
That's truly criminal.

Other EU countries must not bleed for Merkel's criminal actions.

I'd feel a hell of a lot safer under Trump, that's for goddamn sure.

Whether some Brussels fanboys want to see it or not, Europe had peace for 40 years, and friendship out of respect, but ever since Maastricht 1992, which defined a common currency and common internal and foreign politics, the political European Union became increasingly a construct of power and war, that now in the end sees itself as a global force like America, without being even its own country.
Great Britain was never part of the €, only part of the political EU, and the aggressive reaction by Brussels to something that was and is a rightful and democratic move, is coming from scorned ideology. The UK will not have any problem whatsoever with this move, unless Brussels is deliberately starting a trading war, that would have contours of a terror regime.

The € construct had to end in chaos, and the profoundly undemocratic and preposterous way the Lisbon Treaty 2007 was forced into existence was a turbocharger for all of this.
It wasn't until 1992 onwards, when the EU parliament started to reach for all encompassing power in all European countries, that anger, envy, injustice and war started.

A dying regime will go to extreme measures to supress the naturally unfolding protest and movement for change, that's what we're seeing here. One measure is to spread propaganda that these movements of freedom and democracy are right wing populists.
Someone using the word "populistic" in a negative way is dumb anyway, because it literally means "of the people".
So, if being "of the people and the common man" is negative today, you know exactly what mindset you're dealing with.

Insulting democratic majorities, like Brexit or Trump voters, as wholly unintelligent, is fascism to the very core. And everyone who thinks that: fuck you!
 

·
E:16
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Insulting a democratic majorities is core fascism...

Parody account detected.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,302 Posts
Not to rain on the Anti-Brexit parade. Just wanting to give another side to the story.

Has there actually been any significantly permanent negative effect in the economic statistics since Brexit was announced? As in, GDP, unemployment, inflation, etc? Because I went and checked the stats on tradingeconomics and none of them showed anything really bad.

Can’t help but feel Brits are being way too paranoid on the effects of Brexit.
 

·
E:16
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
Good news, May and the EU have agreed a deal!

Bad news is it seems to stink and none of the brexiteers are backing it.

Looking forward to another line of resignations tomorrow, although I think every brexteer MP has already quit their role.
 

·
E:16
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
I've changed my mind on Brexit!!! I am now convinced that immigration is a major problem.

Look at the latest foreigner we let in:

You joking right? Trump could fix this shitshow we got going on.
I'll give Trump credit in that he would definitely do a better job of Brexit than May. Although, that's not saying much.

He'd still be an odious cunt about everything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ninja Hedgehog

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,251 Posts
Good news, May and the EU have agreed a deal!

Bad news is it seems to stink and none of the brexiteers are backing it.

Looking forward to another line of resignations tomorrow, although I think every brexteer MP has already quit their role.
The problem is, May right from the beginning gave concessions to the EU without fighting for any positions or policies that would benefit us (at least from my POV, I know you'd probably disagree and that's fine). The deal which May and the EU have agreed upon from what I can see puts us firmly as a Vassal state to the EU which nobody wants. May has given further concessions in order to solve the Northern Irish border problem.....which would be fine had she stayed strong during the original negotiations and not bent over to the EU at every given turn. Now we essentially have a deal which nobody wants, Brexiteers or Remainers.

Honestly, and this will please you and @RavishingRickRules but I could see Brexit being overturned at this rate. More MP's are becoming bolder in coming out for a 2nd referendum which was probably their true feeling all along and I could see either May being the weak leader that she is and truly a Remainer at heart too offering a 2nd referendum or calling a general election if the deal doesn't go through (which it won't) and Corbyn offering a 2nd referendum in the event that he wins because he is power hungry at his core. I think the Tory government has fucked up so much negotiating a Brexit deal and so much fear has been driven up by the Remain aligned papers and media like the BBC and LBC that we would end up voting to stay in the EU if the 2nd referendum had that option. It's essentially been the goal all along for quite a number of people.

Honestly I think a 2nd referendum would leave the country more divided rather than united, I certainly wouldn't vote again should Brexit be overturned because I would lose complete faith in the British democratic system upholding any policy or value in which I voted on. And I think that would be the same for millions of other voters.

I won't be shy in saying I think remain if it is an option would win in a 2nd referendum because both May in her weak negotiations with the EU and the media who are against Brexit (not that there aren't pro brexit media obviously but when you have the BBC and the rest of the televisions networks against it clearly plus radio stations and papers putting forward how bad Brexit is going to be daily it has an effect) have had such an impact on the whole process that those who were tepidly for Brexit plus some who were for Brexit wholeheartedly will change their minds out of fear that we will be so much worse off that the potential long term benefits plus being away from an unaccountable undemocratic political union won't be worth it.

So I won't be surprised if you guys will be celebrating in 6 months to a years time, because clearly either May has no clue what's doing or she's deliberately sabotaging the process because she doesn't believe Brexit can work. Either way, I'm sure you can see I'm very pessimistic about the whole thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,050 Posts
Democracy. It's best when it's 2 out of 3 :mj4
It's certainly better than having one decision which stands forever.

Having multiple referenda on the same question is actually perfectly normal and democratic. It happens frequently in countries which regularly have them. Even in the UK, where there have only ever been 3 national referenda in history, 2 of them have been on membership of the same organisation.
 

·
There is no duty we so much underrate as... being
Joined
·
19,029 Posts
Democracy. It's best when it's 2 out of 3 :mj4
:lol

Well-said.

Reminds me of G.K. Chesterton writing in a 1926 edition of Illustrated London News:

"The truth is that those who developed the democratic doctrine in modern times did not intend it for anything at all resembling the modern world, perhaps the most ancient of all possible worlds. They thought of the agricultural commonwealths of antiquity, and went back past even the Roman Empire to find the Roman Republic. But Rome was a republic when Rome was a village. Those eighteenth-century idealists often actually lived in villages. They did not know what sort of world of steam and steel their descendants were going to inherit...

"It is highly characteristic of the tone of the eighteenth century that they generally talked of London as 'the town.' They said: 'All the town is talking about my Lord Banglebury's duel with Mr. Pickles.' In the sound and sense of the word there was something compact and comfortable; as of a world still small enough to know itself, like a village. When these people talked about democracy they did indeed mean the government of the people, by the people, for the people. But they meant the government of people they knew, by people they knew, for people they knew. They meant the government of people who knew each other, by the people who knew each other, for the people who knew each other. I think it is highly doubtful whether any of the eighteenth-century democratic theorists, whether Payne or Jefferson or Condorcet, would have expected a vast and vague society like ours to be a democracy. I think they would have thought it, however reluctantly, a case for Caesar and the panem et circenses."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reaper

·
tombstone blues
Joined
·
14,293 Posts
May's sekrit plan to have Daniel Craig, as Agent 007 James Bond, seduce Merkel and Macron has worked. Deal? That was the deal! May gets them laid by 007, they stop being such big jerks about everything.
 
101 - 120 of 690 Posts
Top