Jump to content


Photo

Brexit


  • Please log in to reply
6252 replies to this topic

#5581 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,666 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 0249 AM

The EU´s only mission is to grant no special favours to the UK and treat it like a 3rd country. Because if you would grant special favours, all other treaties with 3rd countries come into question. Apart from that the red lines of the UK, leave the EU no option any way.

 

That's not the case at all, there are all kinds of special accomodations for 3rd countries, but on the basis of a quid pro quo. The Brexiters want a one way street in which they get to make their rules. For obvious reasons, this is unacceptable.


  • 0

#5582 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,442 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 0632 AM

I guess in 100 years historians will use Brexit as a prime example of why direct democracy is a terrible idea (and which is why we rejected it pretty fast in the 1790s). 

 

I was reflecting this week how much the European non-conservative idea of "the (Majority) Will of the People Must be obeyed" has crept into the thinking of American conservatives, who used to say (in slightly incorrect terms) that the US is a republic, not a democracy, that the latter is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner, and who thanked God for the electoral college that kept Hillary out of the White House despite winning the popular vote by the exact same margin as Leave in the Brexit referendum. I blame Steve Bannon and YouTube, personally.


  • 0

#5583 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,609 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 0659 AM

I guess in 100 years historians will use Brexit as a prime example of why direct democracy is a terrible idea (and which is why we rejected it pretty fast in the 1790s). 

 

Not historians, but propagandists to discredit direct democracy. But when you do not trust the people, you should not do democracy in the first place.

 

With the referendum were so many things done wrong. Remain and Brexit camps campaigned badly. Garbage in -> garbage out they say in science. Then it was promoted as a non-binding referendum, so an opinion poll, which may have dissuaded some voters because they just did not bother. Then Brits living abroad were excluded in the vote. The referendum came down from the government and was not started by the people. Cameron thought it was a smart gamble to improve his position in parliament and within the Tories believing it an easy win for him. Then referendums are held rarely in the UK, so people are simply not used to them. I may have forgotten some additonal points. So in the end it shows how not to do it in my opinion. Yes, the UK needs to sort out its relation with the rest of Europe, but for three years they still haven't gotten anywhere close to a consensus what a future relation may look like. 


  • 0

#5584 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 0735 AM

Ive always been fascinating by the Rousseau idea of the people being forced to be free. I dont claim to fully understand it, but that you in effect offering authoritarianism to force people be democratic is an interesting idea.

 

Where I think the new Democrats are coming from is that democracy comes directly from the people and they are always right. Which is getting back to the concept of natural freedom, and to my mind is fairly nonsensical unless you are living by yourself on a desert island somewhere. Its certainly alien to British politics, which since the Napoleonic era have always regarded the population as a potential threat to stability, and hence need to be carefully managed. Which makes no sense to Americans, but if you were living next door to Bonapartists, perhaps it would.

 

Referendums are not a solution to this problem, because they are always created by politicians with their own agenda to push. If the people somehow have the right to create their own agenda they can force through, that is a different matter, but practically you are leaving yourself open to every kind of tinpot tyranny society can up with. Execution for double parking, exile for being Conservative, that kind of thing. Of course Technology at least can made this possible. Im reminded of the movie 'The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer' which demonstrates this process taken to its naturally insane limit. :D

 

 

 

I dont know what it was about Peter Cook, but he was one hell of a prescient political observer. :D


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 14 September 2019 - 0735 AM.

  • 0

#5585 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,192 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 1021 AM

Alright, because you insist on using embed and it rapidly makes posts wholly unreadable, Ill lay it out like this.


It's really quite easy. Change to text mode. Type in your quote bits. It's like grade school level HTML encoding.  

1 Its different in that its not written down. Its different in that the law is not the lead point for the honoring the consitution and in fact try to stay out of political matters. We actually intended to have the system YOU have, but it never was adopted for various reasons. Your founding fathers adopted it, and frankly, I think we should too. Although that would mean codifying a constitution by writing it down. All that said, just because we write it down, doesn't make it any less real. Except to Tory spin doctors anyway.


What other laws in the UK are spoken, not written down and are 'just as real'?
 

2 Such as? This is the ONLY time I can recall a British court ruling on a constitutional matter. Its never brought to them because, by and large, everyone respects the rules.


What was this?
https://www.bbc.com/...litics-38720320

I'll bet you there are other such cases going back. Perhaps a survey of your Supreme Court's case docket would be in order for you?

3  Proroguing doesnt force an election, because if it did, then it would have been unnecessary for Boris Johnson to push a bill to end the fix term parliament to get an election. This is NOT the same thing.


So what is it?  

4 You prorogue parliament to end a session, so there is a new queens speech and they move onto another session (DB can correct me here, but this is my basic understanding). Its is NOT the case you exacerabte the period of time its prorogued for the purpose of stiffling debate. This may only be a week and a half, but in the perishingly short time till October 31, its actually a lot of debate time.


From what I've seen of British Pundits who've looked at this more than you have, it would not have been the longest instance of a prorogue duration.  

5 Doesnt matter what I like. Bojo has been in office for something like 6 weeks now, and there has been NO proposals on how to leave the EU.


You have two. The one your previous PM negotiated and no-deal. I think you want something else right? I'm pretty sure that's what I've seen. So, you have to threaten the EU with a no-deal in order to get something other than the bag of non-magic beans that May negotiated.


I keep hearing about how the remainers have been causing all the problems, but the problem is, the casting vote in the conservative party was remainers voting against the deal.


Do you WANT May's deal? Because it' doesn't result in a proper exit and the UK loses sovereignty to the EU. STILL. It's worse than staying in.
  • 0

#5586 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,192 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 1022 AM

More Stuart..:

This is something you dont seem to understand. Its these hardline brexiters that are now holding the country to randsom to have a hard deal, even though nobody has asked for it, nobody has voted for it, and even the Conservative manifesto does not embrace it.


It's haggling. Do I seriously need to cite that scene from the Life of Brian again?


6 Its not a gentleman's agreement. Its a constitution. Just because its not written down like yours, doesnt make it any less valid.


If it's valid, then please cite the text of the rule.

How does contract law work in the UK? If you make a verbal contract and the party thinks it was different and you go to court, what happens?


If we suddenly say precedent has no role, then we can essentially unlock all the monarchs powers and just take the entire hardline Brexit team down to the tower. Would they argue that was unconstitutional? You bet your life they would.


If precedent has a role, then new precedent also has a role.  


 

7  Ok, so you have far greater knowledge of your constitution than I have, Ive no reason to argue this point.


There's part of your problem.  


9  Examples would be helpful here. Im trying to illuminate Ryan, not obfuscate. If you arent reading my explanations there isnt very much I can do here.


Want to illuminate, cite some examples. Cite some law.  

Westminsters bubble narrative? If you say im in favour of democracy and the eradication of tyranny, then yes I am. I gather you Americans have a few issues with unrestricted power of politicians, or is this not the case anymore?


Remember that bit about tension of different segments of government in opposition to each other? Ours was built as a mk2 version of what you have with the intention of avoiding things like Cavaliers and Roundheads having to kill each other and/or your head of state over issues of legal differences.
  • 0

#5587 Harold Jones

Harold Jones

    Shaken but not deterred...

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,414 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 1054 AM

 

I guess in 100 years historians will use Brexit as a prime example of why direct democracy is a terrible idea (and which is why we rejected it pretty fast in the 1790s). 

 

Not historians, but propagandists to discredit direct democracy. But when you do not trust the people, you should not do democracy in the first place.

 

 

The people en mass are not worthy of trust.  They do stupid things routinely and there is no accountability.  If I vote for a stupid law that I know as stupid, I may have to live with my stupidity but I will be able to continue to vote for stupid laws.  If my congressman does the same there is at least the chance that he will piss off enough people that he won't be reelected next year and thus lose his power to vote for stupid laws.


  • 0

#5588 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 1411 PM

I guess in 100 years historians will use Brexit as a prime example of why direct democracy is a terrible idea (and which is why we rejected it pretty fast in the 1790s).

 
Not historians, but propagandists to discredit direct democracy. But when you do not trust the people, you should not do democracy in the first place.
The people en mass are not worthy of trust.  They do stupid things routinely and there is no accountability.  If I vote for a stupid law that I know as stupid, I may have to live with my stupidity but I will be able to continue to vote for stupid laws.  If my congressman does the same there is at least the chance that he will piss off enough people that he won't be reelected next year and thus lose his power to vote for stupid laws.

Exactly. We can guard against the stupidity of politicians. It's impossible to guard against the stupidity of the electorate. Which is why their opinion every 4 or 5 years is more than enough.
  • 0

#5589 Mistral

Mistral

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,497 posts

Posted 14 September 2019 - 1611 PM

Like I said, I would love to see a referendum in the US on reducing the US military budget to 100 mil a year and spending the rest on Social Programs!

I can just see the red double decker busses with the slogan “millions per week for single mothers”.

Can you imagine the reaction here?
  • 0

#5590 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0142 AM

'Would you like us to take all the AR-15's away?'

'Would you like Universal Healthcare?'

'Would you like us to send all Mexicans back home?'

'Would you like us to make Donald Trump President for life?'

 

All of which would probably prove wildly popular, at least in part of the electorate. Implementation of course would prove no less traumatic than Brexit.

 

I dont think most Americans really understand quite how difficult Brexit is. Its like separating Siamese twins with a Chainsaw.


  • 0

#5591 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0207 AM

Boris Johnson compares himself to the Hulk. No, really.

 

https://www.itv.com/...no-deal-struck/

 

 

 

Britain will break out of the European Union’s “manacles” like The Incredible Hulk if a Brexit deal cannot be struck by the end of next month, Boris Johnson has said.

The prime minister repeated his vow to take the UK out of the bloc on October 31 – suggesting he could ignore legislation designed to prevent a no-deal in order to fulfil his promise.

In an interview with the Mail On Sunday, Mr Johnson – who will meet European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker in Luxembourg this week – likened Britain to the fictional scientist Bruce Banner, who transforms into the monstrous green Hulk when he is angry in the Marvel superhero comics and movies.

“Banner might be bound in manacles, but when provoked he would explode out of them…," Mr Johnson said.

 

Sorry, this content isn't available on your device.

“Hulk always escaped, no matter how tightly bound in he seemed to be – and that is the case for this country.

"We will come out on October 31 and we will get it done.”

 


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 15 September 2019 - 0209 AM.

  • 0

#5592 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,899 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0304 AM

He is a great guy and he takes the vote of the people seriously, which is nice to see.


  • 0

#5593 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0314 AM

He takes the people seriously, and compares himself to the Incredible Hulk.

'k. :unsure:


  • 0

#5594 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,442 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0347 AM

Oh, the memes are going to be epic. :D

 

TM-comp-Boris-Hulk.jpg?w=620


  • 0

#5595 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0359 AM

Yeah, he just jumped into a fathomless pit of meme's. He clearly spends little time online. :D

 

https://www.bbc.co.u...litics-49698800

This is an interesting thing, the Lib Dems are considering changing their manifesto to an outright cancellation of article 50.

Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson says she hopes to convince members to back a policy of scrapping Brexit without another referendum, as the party's conference begins in Bournemouth.

Ms Swinson says holding the referendum got the UK "into a mess".

And she believes revoking Article 50 - the formal process to leave the EU - is the only satisfactory way out.

Ms Swinson said the party's anti-Brexit message should be "unequivocal" in a general election campaign.

She told the BBC: "The Liberal Democrats are crystal clear. We want to stop Brexit... If a Liberal Democrat majority government is elected, then we should revoke Article 50 and I think it's about being straightforward and honest with the British public about that."

Up until now, the party's policy on Brexit has been to campaign for another referendum - in which it would again call for the UK to stay in the EU.

But if Lib Dem members vote to back their leader's policy proposal on Sunday, revoking Article 50 would be written into the next election manifesto.

 

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Lib Dem deputy leader Ed Davey said a referendum would have been the best way to solve the problem, but "people want an end to this, and the only way you can stop Brexit in a democratic exercise like a general election is to say you would revoke".

Meanwhile, amid reports that a new version of Theresa May's Brexit deal could be supported by MPs, former Lib Dem leader Sir Vince Cable said the party would insist that it be put to a referendum, with an option to remain in the EU.

In an interview with the Guardian, Ms Swinson ruled out any kind of coalition with the Conservatives or Labour.

She said neither Conservative leader Boris Johnson nor Labour's Jeremy Corbyn were fit to be prime minister.

Mr Johnson did not care about anyone but himself, she said, and she criticised Mr Corbyn's failure to tackle anti-Semitism in his own party.

Parliament has so far denied Prime Minister Boris Johnson's request for an autumn election, because opposition parties wanted to first make sure a bill designed to avoid a no-deal Brexit became law.

But since the bill, which seeks to force Mr Johnson to ask for a extension to the deadline, has been given Royal Assent, opposition MPs are preparing to start their general election campaigns.

Revoking Article 50 would effectively undo the legal mechanism under the EU's Lisbon Treaty that was triggered to start Britain's withdrawal from the European Union. Lord John Kerr, the British diplomat who was involved in drafting Article 50, has publicly said the clause is reversible.

 

 

 

Now on the one hand this clearly is antidemocratic, in that its overturning a referendum, the will of the people. OTOH, by making a manifesto pledge, the LibDem's are effectively making themselves at the next election a second referendum. If they win, or can form a coalition that wins, they have the right to do this. This is either very dumb or very clever. It will make many people whom want to leave with a deal look at the Labour Party (Yeah, right) or to the Conservatives (yeah, yeah, right). But if nothing else it offers a clear alternative to labour (bumbling mess of an in and out  at the same time plan) and the Conservatives (bumbling mess of an out at any cost plan). So there is that going for it. It may in fact create further pressure for a second referendum from the conservatives, in the event that it looks like the LibDems are outpacing them at the polls. Unlikely, but frankly at this point, most of the unlikely things have happened already.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 15 September 2019 - 0400 AM.

  • 0

#5596 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,442 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0411 AM

Hulk Johnson vs. Captain Euro: Civil War.

 

norway-01.gif

 

norway-021.png

 

norway-12.png

 

BUT THEN! ...

 

TM-comp-Boris-Hulk.jpg?w=620

 

https://www.captaine...ot-an-option-2/


  • 0

#5597 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0418 AM

Captain Euro needs more gratuitous sex and violence I think.


  • 0

#5598 Leo Niehorster

Leo Niehorster

    Meow

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,644 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0535 AM

Captain Euro needs more gratuitous sex and violence I think.

Who doesn't? ^_^


  • 0

#5599 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,551 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0624 AM

Nice example of doublethink from the same people who blame Russia for "election interference" and "challenging NATO unity"

https://www.telegrap...a-donald-trump/

 

Jeremy Corbyn could pass classified US intelligence to Russia and Iran if he becomes prime minister, Donald Trump has been warned.

A report, backed by former advisers to the US president, urges Mr Trump to consider withholding sensitive information and even pushing for the country’s Nato membership to be “downgraded” if the Labour leader enters Downing Street.

The analysis, by a Washington DC think tank, highlights the support displayed for Mr Putin by some of Mr Corbyn’s advisers and claims the UK will “cease to become a reliable partner” under his leadership.


  • 0

#5600 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,367 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 0627 AM

Well Jeremy Corbyn is almost certainly an old source for the KGB, so you aren't off the hook Roman. :D

 

Corbyn wont be PM. The Queen wont allow it.


  • 0