Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
roubaixtuesday
Posts: 2561
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby roubaixtuesday » 6 Feb 2020, 10:47am

Pastychomper wrote:The problem with a written constitution is someone would have to write it, and others would want to rewrite or amend it. If we were lucky it might eventually go for a generation or two without any changes, after which some would say it had stood the test of time and others would call it old-fashioned.

I get the impression that written constitutions work well for some countries, but I'm struggling to see the difference between one and the established body of law we already have.


The main difference is the difficulty in amending it. The current unwritten constitution can be effectively rewritten by a government with a simple majority. Almost every other country in the world requires either a plebiscite or supermajority eg 2/3 in parliament.

Together with our first past the post system, that leaves us uniquely vulnerable to an elected dictatorship.

Oldjohnw
Posts: 2839
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Oldjohnw » 6 Feb 2020, 11:43am

Even the sacred US Constitution is not actually sacred. The super sacred 2nd Amendment by which some US citizens think they can go round with military rifles shooting each other is just that: an amendment. There have been 27 amendments, the most recent of which was in 1992.
John

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6310
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Tangled Metal » 6 Feb 2020, 12:17pm

mjr wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Hmmm! There's been a lot of English innovations that has led to the idea of human rights.

Innovations including the Treaty of London leading to the ECHR and Human Rights Act! Why should we reject our own inventions? Just because it has the E word in its current name?

Why do you think our country can't defend human rights in its own lands but others can?

They can't either. That's why we have the ECHR and UN and other as-yet-imperfect attempts to defend each other.

So we have the un, do we need the ECHR as well? Is it a case of as many layers as possible? Perhaps we haven't got enough. We need another court to second guess the ECHR and UN. How can we set that up?

I would bet that the UK politicians involved in the treaty of London were thinking along the lines of the UK courts being the ideal so let's help the European barbarians with their legal system. The superiority of the English elites looking down on Europe. That sounds like Churchill to me. :D

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14721
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 12:33pm

Tangled Metal wrote:
mjr wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Hmmm! There's been a lot of English innovations that has led to the idea of human rights.

Innovations including the Treaty of London leading to the ECHR and Human Rights Act! Why should we reject our own inventions? Just because it has the E word in its current name?

Why do you think our country can't defend human rights in its own lands but others can?

They can't either. That's why we have the ECHR and UN and other as-yet-imperfect attempts to defend each other.

So we have the un, do we need the ECHR as well? Is it a case of as many layers as possible? Perhaps we haven't got enough. We need another court to second guess the ECHR and UN. How can we set that up?

I feel that the UDHR is weaker than the ECHR and the flaws in the UN's decision-making, such as the security council vetos and potential for intercontinental interference, are well-known, which is probably why Churchill said "a Council of Europe was a subordinate but necessary part of the world organisation".

Of course, we already have other courts that second-guess the ECHR and UN, including our Supreme Court.
I would bet that the UK politicians involved in the treaty of London were thinking along the lines of the UK courts being the ideal so let's help the European barbarians with their legal system. The superiority of the English elites looking down on Europe. That sounds like Churchill to me. :D

I find it interesting that Churchill rarely sounded like the petty nationalist/jingoist that many people seem to think. First of all, it's important to remember that he was the son of a migrant (albeit a rich migrant who married an aristocrat) who "crossed the floor" between Conservatives and Liberals twice. But secondly and more importantly, we can read his speeches from things like the 1948 Congress of Europe that led to the 1949 Treaty of London and EHCR: https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/address_give ... 4f42c.html

"Europe requires all that Frenchmen, all that Germans, and all that every one of us can give. I therefore welcome here the German delegation, whom we have invited into our midst. For us the German problem is to restore the economic life of Germany and revive the ancient fame of the German race without thereby exposing their neighbours and ourselves to any rebuilding or reassertion of their military power of which we still bear the scars. United Europe provides the only solution to this two-sided problem and it is also a solution which can be implemented without delay. [....] We aim at the eventual participation of all European peoples whose society and way of life, making all allowances for the different points of view in various countries, are not in disaccord with a Charter of Human Rights and with the sincere expression of free democracy. We welcome any country where the people own the Government, and not the Government the people."
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6310
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Tangled Metal » 6 Feb 2020, 12:54pm

Yes, later speeches. I believe he was known for a different tone to his speeches in his earlier public life. There's a story about him being knocked down a peg or two in a battle of wits with one Mark Twain on one of his early speaking tours of America. MT being completely opposed to war and WC was a jingoistic, empire supporting war correspondent making a career on his journalistic accounts of his experience of war in b the empire.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 9453
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby 661-Pete » 7 Feb 2020, 4:13pm

Another example of what certain individuals on the "other" side of the political spectrum get up to. ("Other" side from me, and from many reasonable people, I mean).

I suppose we should be trying to maintain a "civil discourse" whilst this sort of thing goes on. But it's not easy...
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

merseymouth
Posts: 1375
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 11:16am

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby merseymouth » 7 Feb 2020, 4:25pm

Hello again, Yet again it seems to b said that only right wing folk make abusive attacks in a political scrap, WRONG!
I myself was subjected to a vile, abusive & threatening attack on the platform of an election count declaration! That was perpetrated by a member of the Liberal Party, who went on to defect to the Labour Party, later becoming an M.P. !
I won't name her, but she currently expects the power of law & order to protect her from threats such as carried out by herself?
People who live in glass houses should not only not throw stones, but should be aware that their behaviour is in clear sight! MM

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 9959
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Cunobelin » 7 Feb 2020, 5:28pm

The problem will always be listening to the middle ground

supporter of brexit - everything will be elysian Fields with Unicorns happily Grazing
Remainer -the world is going to end

The middle ground - I think that there will be a problem with importing and exporting Artichokes - let's make a plan so that if that happens we are prepared

This is the point where the supporter of brexit squeals "remainer", "Project Fear" and dismisses the genuine concerns and sensible approach with no evidence whatsoever.

Civil discourse needs recognition of an opinion other than yours, and that is not happening

User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 11186
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby NATURAL ANKLING » 7 Feb 2020, 8:47pm

Hi,
Cunobelin wrote:The middle ground - I think that there will be a problem with importing and exporting Artichokes - let's make a plan so that if that happens we are prepared

Cant knock that!
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 9453
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby 661-Pete » 7 Feb 2020, 9:20pm

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
Cunobelin wrote:The middle ground - I think that there will be a problem with importing and exporting Artichokes - let's make a plan so that if that happens we are prepared

Cant knock that!
We grow our own, in England. 8)
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).