• ill-informed in EU referendum campaign, says reform society
    32 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50987894]its undemocratic to listen to the majority. i see...[/quote] a 3 percent difference is not enough to declare a majority. Theres a reason that most reputable referendums go for at least a 60% majority. Hell even if that 3% is correct you're still throwing half of your population under the bus. [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=King Tiger;50987604]"It was close so it shouldn't count!" [/QUOTE] Yeah it really shouldn't actually. There's a reason most referendums require a 60% or so majority. 51% is barely a majority and there's a rather high chance that if they did another referendum it would drop well below 50% because of higher voter turnout. Furthermore even if the results were completely and 100% accurate Britain should've let things be. Throwing literally half of your country under the bus because the other half says so is pretty stupid. [editline]2nd September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=King Tiger;50987677]Constitutions were written by the elites and for the elites. They are difficult to change because the people who wrote them never had the plebs in mind and don't want them to have any influence. The EU was never constitutionally a part of the anyway UK so bringing this up is mostly irrelevant. [/QUOTE] So in your ideal world would the government be run by direct democracy?
[QUOTE=King Tiger;50987677]Constitutions were written by the elites and for the elites. They are difficult to change because the people who wrote them never had the plebs in mind and don't want them to have any influence. The EU was never constitutionally a part of the anyway UK so bringing this up is mostly irrelevant. [/QUOTE] The UK was most definitely constitutionally part of the EU. We don't have a written constitution but there are various laws and documents that form one, and the European Communities Act is (for now) certainly part of the British constitutional framework. It's also somewhat odd for an American to complain about constitutions being hard to change, considering yours has been amended 27 times, and most European countries have amended theirs multiple times as well; Austria has amended theirs hundreds of times, Italy's got loads, Germany has amended theirs 50 times, the French have amended theirs 24 times since 1958 - all of these were done with two thirds majorities (or three fifths, in France). Basic parliamentary procedure requires any legislation that alters the rights of a minority to be passed with a supermajority - there are very good reasons for this, and I think you're smart enough to realise that.
Referendums in the UK seem to have done more to divide the country rather than unite it. Honestly we have a representative democracy for a reason, so why not stick with that? I'd rather that someone that knows what they're doing is running the country rather than whoever can run the best populist scare campaign.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.