** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

[Bonefishblues]

One expects that we will, collectively (but mainly the poor) bear the costs of exit until we get through the economic reversal. Memories will fade, as they tend to, and we will get on with life.

As the tents on our streets grow in number as they have over the past 10 years,whilst the rich build even taller walls with sharp spearpoint railings atop to keep them out,and laws are passed to enable the use of water cannon vehicles,once outlawed despite the purchase of,are used to disuade those undeserving poor from getting above their station.........

I'm not a proponent of the above as you know, but it's how the UK typically copes with economic hardship, sadly. I've said in my own case that I'll be OK if Brexit, because I'm a 'have', as it were. That's what's so nonplussing to me, turkeys voting for Christmas is just mad

[al_yrpal]

And how will we do that; give me one thought through example ?

John.

Reform our parliamentary system for a start. Composition, boundaries, elected second chamber, smaller. It's clearly not fit for purpose.

Al

How,without a revolution,do you propose that we go about it?
That's a very serious and straight question

Have a long serious national debate, come up with various alternatives and then have a peoples vote on what system to adopt. Try and reach a consensus. It shouldnt involve parliament as such but political parties should be able to participate if they so wish. Could be an elimination contest, transferable vote type of thing.

Things like, how many MPs, constituency sizes, second chamber elected or appointed, bishops and hereditaries yes or no etc etc. But, thats just my view,

Al

[mercalia]

some criticise Cameron for calling a referendum but the results show it was a correct thing to do. Shame Parliament took the wrong decision to start article 50 rather than step back and ask what next?

In most democracies a 66% majority is needed to change the constitution, and even though the UK has no constitution worth the name, leaving the EU was certainly a decision of that magnitude.

If Cameron wasn't a fool for calling the referendum, he certainly was a fool for making such a cataclysmic change dependent on a single simple-majority vote. The thing is, he expected to win and approached it in a spirit of "let the fools bray, the results will shut them up and then I can get on building my career as PM".

Unfortunately the fools were better at braying than he thought; and many voted as they did simply to teach him a lesson.

well was he responsible for depending on a simple vote? Remember it was only advisory - that surly gives wriggle room for parliament to have said that the majority was not conclusive ( which it wasnt )? so though setting the majority to a super-majority would have been better, it isnt all Camerons fault. And who any way decided on a simple majority, just Cameron? He presumably had nameless advisers in the civil service?

[mercalia]

seems like the torys are rding high in the polls inspite of all the <expletive deleted> hitting the fan

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... GTUK_email

hard to understand if you ask me

[Bonefishblues]

seems like the torys are rding high in the polls inspite of all the <expletive deleted> hitting the fan

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... GTUK_email

hard to understand if you ask me

Because visibly trying to do something*?

*And for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that I support either the thing or how it's being gone about...

[pete75]

Talking of democracy it seems Brexit supporters can't even accept views that differ from their own in a civilised manner. You may think that's democratic I don't.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-ne ... at-3320860

Why would I think that democratic, or defend it? I don't need to defend anyone. I am responsible only for my own views and actions. Why didn't you put the word "some" before "Brexit supporters"?

The point is brexiters seem to cloak it with the virtue of their view of democracy.
What sort of democracy is it that allows no opposing point of view calling those who oppose it traitors, one that is once and for all and shouldn't be revisited though it may well not be the majority views three years later and one that disregards the view of a very large minority that voted differently etc etc.
It's a fine example of one's been called the tyranny of the majority and certainly fits with what Alexis de Tocqueville describes as a decision "which bases its claim to rule upon numbers, not upon rightness or excellence".

[Bonefishblues]

Talking of democracy it seems Brexit supporters can't even accept views that differ from their own in a civilised manner. You may think that's democratic I don't.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-ne ... at-3320860

Why would I think that democratic, or defend it? I don't need to defend anyone. I am responsible only for my own views and actions. Why didn't you put the word "some" before "Brexit supporters"?

The point is brexiters seem to cloak it with the virtue of their view of democracy.
What sort of democracy is it that allows no opposing point of view calling those who oppose it traitors, one that is once and for all and shouldn't be revisited though it may well not be the majority views three years later and one that disregards the view of a very large minority that voted differently etc etc.
It's a fine example of one's been called the tyranny of the majority and certainly fits with what Alexis de Tocqueville describes as a decision "which bases its claim to rule upon numbers, not upon rightness or excellence".

It's just a regular democracy where people can call each other names.

We need to do the thing that we voted to do.

Then we might decide we need to do a different thing to the thing that we did.

[PDQ Mobile]

Reform our parliamentary system for a start. Composition, boundaries, elected second chamber, smaller. It's clearly not fit for purpose.

Al

How,without a revolution,do you propose that we go about it?
That's a very serious and straight question

Have a long serious national debate, come up with various alternatives and then have a peoples vote on what system to adopt. Try and reach a consensus. It shouldnt involve parliament as such but political parties should be able to participate if they so wish. Could be an elimination contest, transferable vote type of thing.

Things like, how many MPs, constituency sizes, second chamber elected or appointed, bishops and hereditaries yes or no etc etc. But, thats just my view,

Al

What relevance to Brexit?
How does Brexit involve any of those things?

They are domestic issues that should and could be addressed by ourselves.
Inteoduce PR first and take it from there?

[reohn2]

Have a long serious national debate, come up with various alternatives and then have a peoples vote on what system to adopt. Try and reach a consensus. It shouldnt involve parliament as such but political parties should be able to participate if they so wish. Could be an elimination contest, transferable vote type of thing.

Things like, how many MPs, constituency sizes, second chamber elected or appointed, bishops and hereditaries yes or no etc etc. But, thats just my view,

Al

Providing only the truth,and nothing but the truth is guaranteed to be put forward at all levels,then it's the basis of a start.
Call me a cynic if you will but we saw what happened three years ago,when the Establishment got away with spouting any amount of lies that came to hand,and were illegally funded by who knows who,to win over people to their 'side' if we can stop that happening again then I'm all for it.
One thing's for sure,the present system is irrecoverably broken IMO

[reohn2]

One expects that we will, collectively (but mainly the poor) bear the costs of exit until we get through the economic reversal. Memories will fade, as they tend to, and we will get on with life.

As the tents on our streets grow in number as they have over the past 10 years,whilst the rich build even taller walls with sharp spearpoint railings atop to keep them out,and laws are passed to enable the use of water cannon vehicles,once outlawed despite the purchase of,are used to disuade those undeserving poor from getting above their station.........

I'm not a proponent of the above as you know, but it's how the UK typically copes with economic hardship, sadly. I've said in my own case that I'll be OK if Brexit, because I'm a 'have', as it were. That's what's so nonplussing to me, turkeys voting for Christmas is just mad

I understend that,IMHO the country has been on the slide for some time now,at the heart and cause of that slide is the Tory party,which has lurched ever further to the right,and has in the past few weeks taken an extremely large leap in that direction,dare I say an ultra right wing and despicably anti demoratic step?
The problem I'm witnessing is a government taking a similar course the USA is taking,which is making me very nervous.

[reohn2]

What relevance to Brexit?
How does Brexit involve any of those things?

Because it's the present system of government that's got us into this mess,it's the at the beart of the brexit issue.

They are domestic issues that should and could be addressed by ourselves.
Introduce PR first and take it from there?

We first need to examine what sort of PR system we want.
FWIW IMHO,brexit should stopped immediately A50 revoked before any more money and time is wasted on it ,and a whole new debate started on the way we want to be governed because as sure as eggs is eggs,the present system is an embarassing shambolic ruin,presently lorded over by a political elite who aren't fit to wash dishes in greasy spoon cafe let alone govern a country.
When that's sorted we can revisit the EU issue.

[Cunobelin]

What relevance to Brexit?
How does Brexit involve any of those things?

Because it's the present system of government that's got us into this mess,it's the at the beart of the brexit issue.

They are domestic issues that should and could be addressed by ourselves.
Introduce PR first and take it from there?

We first need to examine what sort of PR system we want.

My emphasis

One of the things we can learn from the fiasco of Brexit and the claims of the Extremists

The Brexit paper was flawed with only two answers.

Logically we know that everyone who voted would have voted for their own reasons and for their own concept of Brexit. The binary question has allowed the Extremists to make bizarre claims such as "Everyone voted for No Deal"

What should have been done is to look at the deals available, the consequences and then put all the options to the vote.... let's not repeat the same mistake with any debate on PR

[Audax67]

some criticise Cameron for calling a referendum but the results show it was a correct thing to do. Shame Parliament took the wrong decision to start article 50 rather than step back and ask what next?

In most democracies a 66% majority is needed to change the constitution, and even though the UK has no constitution worth the name, leaving the EU was certainly a decision of that magnitude.

If Cameron wasn't a fool for calling the referendum, he certainly was a fool for making such a cataclysmic change dependent on a single simple-majority vote. The thing is, he expected to win and approached it in a spirit of "let the fools bray, the results will shut them up and then I can get on building my career as PM".

Unfortunately the fools were better at braying than he thought; and many voted as they did simply to teach him a lesson.

well was he responsible for depending on a simple vote? Remember it was only advisory - that surly gives wriggle room for parliament to have said that the majority was not conclusive ( which it wasnt )? so though setting the majority to a super-majority would have been better, it isnt all Camerons fault. And who any way decided on a simple majority, just Cameron? He presumably had nameless advisers in the civil service?

All that is true; however, Cameron would have had the last say before the referendum was launched, and after the populists had shafted him so comprehensively with the result he - and the Tories - would have had a hard time back-pedalling even though it was only advisory.

You can discern a sequence of priorities there: 1. Cameron, 2. Tory Party, 3. country. Not that BoJo is all that different: his priorities go BoJo, BoJo, BoJo.

[Cunobelin]

seems like the torys are rding high in the polls inspite of all the <expletive deleted> hitting the fan

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... GTUK_email

hard to understand if you ask me

I have said this again but it is worth repeating... It is because the hard-line extremists are desperate and no longer thinking of anything outside Brexit.

15 years ago, a Political Party led by a corrupt leader, with proven fiddling of expenses, proven criminal behaviour in finance and living off one of his sponsors, would have been unacceptable. Never mind even contemplating the existence of a Political Party that refuses to say what it stands for, or what its policies are.

However, just say you are "pro-Brexit" and the lemmings will vote for you for that reason alone

[reohn2]

What relevance to Brexit?
How does Brexit involve any of those things?

Because it's the present system of government that's got us into this mess,it's the at the beart of the brexit issue.

They are domestic issues that should and could be addressed by ourselves.
Introduce PR first and take it from there?

We first need to examine what sort of PR system we want.

My emphasis

One of the things we can learn from the fiasco of Brexit and the claims of the Extremists

The Brexit paper was flawed with only two answers.

Logically we know that everyone who voted would have voted for their own reasons and for their own concept of Brexit. The binary question has allowed the Extremists to make bizarre claims such as "Everyone voted for No Deal"

Quite!

What should have been done is to look at the deals available, the consequences and then put all the options to the vote.... let's not repeat the same mistake with any debate on PR

Whilst I agree,it would've been a bit of a problem as no one had done it(or been daft enough to want to) before the UK,so deciding on a course of action should've been discussed well in advance of any referendum,however when youre sure of winning and haven't counted on being stabbed in the back by your best friend or the opposing side telling abject lies and being funded by corrupt billionaires,I s'pose it' all a foregone conclusion