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

[reohn2]

Yep.
No specific reason(s) as far as I'm concerned. I just want us out of the EU before it's too late. You argue that it's too late now, and I would admit that it could (sadly) be true. This doesn't and didn't stop me voting Leave.

You say no specific reason
Then you say before it's too late,too late for what?

As far as I can see, and lots of others see it, the next step after EU is United States of Europe. May not happen this decade or the next, or even before I'm in my dotage, but it will happen.

Get out whilst we can.

How do you figure out that there'll be a USE if we were in the EU where we would have a say on the matter one way or the other and also the veto on such a huge decision,and could leave then if it came to it?
Whilst on the outside looking in we would have no means of influencing such a decision.
If your predicitions on a USE were true would not us leaving accelerate that happening,and making such a USE even more tight knit and more economically aggressive to smaller countries outside their union in the same way the USA is?

[mjr]

As far as I can see, and lots of others see it, the next step after EU is United States of Europe. May not happen this decade or the next, or even before I'm in my dotage, but it will happen.

I think that won't happen but even if it did, what's so bad about that? It's likely to be more democratic than the UK (where we still only elect a minority of our parliament) and the cycling policies and budgets should be much better!

[bovlomov]

As far as I can see, and lots of others see it, the next step after EU is United States of Europe. May not happen this decade or the next, or even before I'm in my dotage, but it will happen.

I think that won't happen but even if it did, what's so bad about that? It's likely to be more democratic than the UK (where we still only elect a minority of our parliament) and the cycling policies and budgets should be much better!

Received wisdom says that our Common Law way of doing things puts more emphasis on personal liberty. I have a lot of sympathy with that view. We don't have ID cards, we can home educate, we have more theoretical choices over birth and medical interventions, we have been more socially liberal in a number of ways.

But the past twenty years has rather shaken my faith in that romantic vision of Britain. Unregulated CCTV, ANPR, Electronic surveillance, and the reckless attitudes of the state towards personal privacy and security put us behind many of our European cousins. The same goes for the UK's attitude to electoral fraud, patronage, banking fraud and money laundering.

I wouldn't like to see a USE, but not because I worry about a democratic deficit or about being ruled by EuroNazis. At present we have more to fear from the home grown variety.

[Edited for clarity]

[mercalia]

As far as I can see, and lots of others see it, the next step after EU is United States of Europe. May not happen this decade or the next, or even before I'm in my dotage, but it will happen.

I think that won't happen but even if it did, what's so bad about that? It's likely to be more democratic than the UK (where we still only elect a minority of our parliament) and the cycling policies and budgets should be much better!

Received wisdom says that our Common Law way of doing things puts more emphasis on personal liberty. I have a lot of sympathy with that view. We don't have ID cards, we can home educate, we have more theoretical choices over birth and medical interventions, we have been more socially liberal in a number of ways.

But the past twenty years has rather shaken my faith in that romantic vision of Britain. Unregulated CCTV, ANPR, Electronic surveillance, and the reckless attitudes of the state towards personal privacy and security put us behind many of our European cousin. The same goes for the UK's attitude to electoral fraud, patronage, banking fraud and money laundering.

I wouldn't like to see a USE, but not because I worry about a democratic deficit or about being ruled by EuroNazis. At present we have more to fear from the home grown variety.

[Edited for clarity]

+1

not as if the countries we have are an old invention? once upon a time many were part of the Roman Empire as provinces. Even later Under the Normans then the Plantagenets the UK and large part of France were under one rule? We have had Dutch Kings & Queens ( William of Orange) and Germans ( The Georges of Hanover) Aslong as we dont have to drive on the right side of the road. I dont have anything against a USE, might mean less waste in terms of military/Naval forces and more money for social matters? Will take a long time to happen though?

[horizon]

The problem with democracy is that, as has been said many times before, it is a poor system of government*, it's just better than anything else anyone has ever tried.

*people ignorant of the facts have a vote that carries as much weight as those who know what's going on

I was brought up half-Quaker, and Quakers don't do democracy (or didn't then), in business meetings they just discussed a question until everyone agreed what to do. This was partly so that people with more information to contribute could influence the outcome more than those who didn't know anything about it. It did mean everyone was committed to the decision. It could also take a very very long time to decide things. It also relied on things like the fact that Quakers are very strict about truth, not the case now in the population as a whole, and about respecting other people, and that people had to be open about their opinions rather than saying one thing and secretly voting another way. It's not practical at a national level. Unfortunately, therefore, at a national level, we're stuck with everyone getting a vote however little they understand the issues, however reluctant they are to listen to people and organisations that do, and however dishonest and ill-intentioned they may be.

In the UK lots of things are decided by a vote, from parish councils to company boards to Parliament to referendums. The great advantage of a vote is that something gets decided (unlike your Quaker meetings). And the second great advantage is that it can be reversed (by a vote) later if required. Unfortunately, the rules of the EU referendum weren't clearly laid out so although it's now it's time to vote again, Leavers shout "Foul!". And even if everyone has the right to vote, committees and countries generally make quite good decisions provided they do get to vote and provided they can change their minds later.

[merseymouth]

Hi Horizon , So let me get it straight, Leavers are accused of shouting "Foul" when they object to not liking a re-run of the "Once in a lifetime" referendum?
But surely that means also that Remainers are guilty of the "Foul" Shout! Pot. Kettle and Black springs to mind.
So let us hope that the gang of M.P.s do a bit of reading during their holiday, like looking up what the Democratic System of Government is all about.
Somehow I don't think enlightenment will dawn on them . IGICB MM

[kwackers]

So let us hope that the gang of M.P.s do a bit of reading during their holiday, like looking up what the Democratic System of Government is all about.
Somehow I don't think enlightenment will dawn on them . IGICB MM

Democracy is nothing more than letting people have their say. No more, no less.

OTOH denying people a say is most definitely not democratic.

Voting on something twice, three times, a thousand times is democratic. It can't be otherwise, MP's can't make you change your mind you can vote the same thing over and over.
The result can only change if the people themselves change their mind - and you can't deny them that right without taking away democracy from them.

What isn't democratic is not allowing people whose future you're affecting to have a say, be they people who were initially too young or more importantly British citizens living abroad whom by definition are more likely to be impacted by the decision - that most definitely isn't democratic.

[Cunobelin]

[youtube]v-xLmI352vE[/youtube]


Is it not ironic that having put himself outside the EU Gravy Train (he so dislikes and condemns) that he is now desperate for the 8th attempt at a House of Commons seat.... absolutely NOT a career politician

Except of course Leave MEANS Leave, bit with a £171,000 handshake, and your £73000 per year pension

Leave Means Leave.... complete exit from Europe except for the bits where I lose financially

[Cunobelin]

Hi Horizon , So let me get it straight, Leavers are accused of shouting "Foul" when they object to not liking a re-run of the "Once in a lifetime" referendum?
But surely that means also that Remainers are guilty of the "Foul" Shout! https://youtu.be/v-xLmI352vE
So let us hope that the gang of M.P.s do a bit of reading during their holiday, like looking up what the Democratic System of Government is all about.
Somehow I don't think enlightenment will dawn on them . IGICB MM

Not at all....

The Brexit campaign likes to claim that the referendum is democratic and permanent, yet hypocritically were quite happy to claim that neither applies to the 1975 referenda .....that they were quite happy to ignore and overturn.... the stench of hypocrisy is overwhelming

The only genuine argument is that what we have now is totally different from what was voted for in 1975.... and a total and hypocritical denial that what we have now is equally different from what was voted for in 2016

So let's agree ...So let us hope that the gang of M.P.s do a bit of reading during their holiday, like looking up what the Democratic System of Government is all about.
Somehow I hope enlightenment will dawn on them and they will recognise the validity of a second refdrendum

[mercalia]

A chat EVERYONE should attend

The new populism: In conversation with Tony Blair

go o,n he must be having hard times needs the cash

https://membership.theguardian.com/event/the-new-populism-in-conversation-with-tony-blair-59043808621?utm_source=eml&utm_medium=emaq&utm_campaign=MK_LI_Listing140419&utm_content=A

[reohn2]

A chat EVERYONE should attend

The new populism: In conversation with Tony Blair

go o,n he must be having hard times needs the cash

https://membership.theguardian.com/event/the-new-populism-in-conversation-with-tony-blair-59043808621?utm_source=eml&utm_medium=emaq&utm_campaign=MK_LI_Listing140419&utm_content=A

I'd attend if they paid me £20+£1.50 booking fee

PS,providing I can take a bucket of rotten tomatoes in

[horizon]

Hi Horizon , So let me get it straight, Leavers are accused of shouting "Foul" when they object to not liking a re-run of the "Once in a lifetime" referendum?
But surely that means also that Remainers are guilty of the "Foul" Shout! Pot. Kettle and Black springs to mind.

Yes, either side can shout "Foul!" because the UK doesn't have a commonly understood set of rules regarding referenda (though there is an Act of Parliament that covers them). How often can the same one be re-run? What percentage constitutes a reasonable majority (sometimes it's higher than just 1%)? Is the referendum result binding on the government? Does Parliament have a say? What if the result cannot be practically implemented? Few people know the answers to these questions and few bothered to find out.

So Leavers are naturally concerned that their result is not only not being implemented but could be overturned in a fresh referendum. That isn't the fault of Remainers but is certainly the fault of the Government that set it up. I might suggest though that it is partly the fault of Leavers who couldn't be bothered to vote in the 2011 referendum (yes, that one) and so missed the chance to have a solid base in Parliament to make sure the 2016 result was enacted: a non-binding referendum result needs a lot of MPs to back it up.

[pete75]

Hi Horizon , So let me get it straight, Leavers are accused of shouting "Foul" when they object to not liking a re-run of the "Once in a lifetime" referendum?
But surely that means also that Remainers are guilty of the "Foul" Shout! Pot. Kettle and Black springs to mind.
So let us hope that the gang of M.P.s do a bit of reading during their holiday, like looking up what the Democratic System of Government is all about.
Somehow I don't think enlightenment will dawn on them . IGICB MM

Yeah but it wasn't once in a lifetime. That's a lie. Loads of people who voted in it were alive when the 1975 referendum was held.

[syklist]

I can try and check that, although the quote I provided suggests that the Folkeregister only keeps sufficient information in order to supply the ID service.

I understand it would be relatively simple to devise an ID service in which the individual has control of the data. The same goes for a medical database. Unfortunately, while the benefit to the individual is the pretext, UK schemes have been designed for the benefit of government and data collectors. In other words, they have started at the wrong end.

If you are right about its limited scope, the Folkeregister will probably be of no interest to UK governments.

An ID service? The government is sure enough of my identity to tax me as me. If they're certain of my identity when it comes to taking money from me then they should be certain about it for any other purpose.

The UK government was able to identify Windrush deportees when it came to taxing them too...

[syklist]

As far as I can see, and lots of others see it, the next step after EU is United States of Europe. May not happen this decade or the next, or even before I'm in my dotage, but it will happen.

Get out whilst we can.

You seem dislike federal states.

Do you think that the United States of America should also disband?

The structure of the UK is heading towards a federal type structure by devolving powers to the constituent states. Is that a bad thing too?