• European dismay at UK 'chaos and confusion' over Brexit
    114 replies, posted
[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;52913260]Aw ye- wait, UK is still part of the EU, right?[/QUOTE] Look at what it has done to me.
[QUOTE=Owlz?;52917034]Also, the hate culture against people who voted Leave is disgraceful. While I acknowledge there have been horrific things said by Leave voters such as "We voted Leave, everyone foreign should get out" and then just petty stuff like the term 'Remoaner' but does that mean you retaliate with equally poisonous attitudes? Not all Leave voters are racist or xenophobic, just like how not all Remain voters are university students that read one article about the EU and think they're academics on the subject. The entire subject of Brexit and the referendum has sadly been turned into a bitter and toxic slanging match from both sides, which fucking sucks.[/QUOTE] There's countless benefits to remaining in the EU and very little benefits to a hard Brexit. It's not nearly close in terms of what the rational choice is. Also, how about you actually answer somebody before you go and post another rhetorical question?
Hey, if it's the people's will to fuck their country up, so be it, it's the people's will so it can't be questioned at all ever, because absolute democracy is fucking [b]great[/b].
[QUOTE=Electrocuter;52917127]Hey, if it's the people's will to fuck their country up, so be it, it's the people's will so it can't be questioned at all ever, because absolute democracy is fucking [b]great[/b].[/QUOTE] And don't you dare get mad at the retards who voted for the measure that completely fucked your life and the lives of your family, cause that'd just be impolite.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;52917134]And don't you dare get mad at the retards who voted for the measure that completely fucked your life and the lives of your family, cause that'd just be impolite.[/QUOTE] Cultural hate even. [editline]23rd November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=David29;52916848]Actually, I do consider the will of the people, (AKA: democracy) to be pretty sacred.[/QUOTE] The "will of the people" is, more accurately, an [b]absolute[/b] democracy and it's a complete and utter clusterfuck of a form of democracy, it's not a form of democracy any country should ever run. The "will of the people" can not be an absolute way to decide on political matters, it should be there yes but it should not be the ultimate deciding factor to every and all political issues.
[QUOTE=David29;52916785]So what about Istanbul 2010?[/QUOTE] Turkey and other countries which had cities chosen in the past all have an agreement with the EU i.e. the EU Customs Union or the EEA. They don't know WHAT the UK's stance is going to be post-Brexit so they have every right to say we can't be a part of it. So yes, fuck this government.
I don't understand the issue with "what about remain of 52%?". The referendum was about changing the status quo. It's between changing nothing, and making a huge change. It always should have been a supermajority leave vote for it to have taken effect due to the nature of it. To say that " 52% remain" would've been unfair is a fallacy.
[QUOTE=David29;52917032]Define "clear majority".[/QUOTE] More than < 4%, that's for fucking certain. Even a solid 10% would be significantly more certainty when you're running a referendum on a topic that could (and has) severely impact your country for the worst. (Not that they should have just gone "you vote 4 it u get it lol" in the first place. The referendum should have triggered proper discussion in Parliament, not been used as an excuse to dive dick first into A50 without any semblance of a plan. Fuck the Tories and fuck leave voters who are still hanging on to their delusions of "control").
We all know the referendum was a mess, Cameron thought it was an easy win and thus stated no rules around it, and then calling out this was the final time this sort of question would be asked, effectively locking in the result. Even if there was a change of government tomorrow, you can say with confidence the path the government is currently taking would remain unchanged and Brexit would continue to go ahead. As much as we can stand around and try and claim that we have representatives for this kind of thing, we know just off the pure amount of them being idiots through the news in this section alone that even if Brexit was needed for whatever reason, they wouldn't do it because its just grounds for not being elected again and considered too hard among a ton of other reasons. If you take a swing at referenda you are effectively putting it in the grave, a lot of people here think you can just 'meme ignore' a referendum, not taking into consideration that it will hurt the process forever and also receive a massive amount of hate from the international community while doing it. I mean, you can even throw the idea of a Scottish referendum out the window at that point, yeah sure, Scotland leaving the UK is a vastly different thing, but you've given government the power to ignore, to ignore that referendum to 'save those people from themselves' under the guise Scotland can't stand alone, dangerous precedent to provide. Referendums are a requirement of this coming age just off the pure distrust of government alone to act in your behalf. This is why some people are hesitant to call for a 2nd referendum, because theres a risk the same outcome may happen. Governments are formed on 1-2%, you don't want to go near this shit at all. tl:dr ignoring referendums is bad and leads to large democratic problems going forward apologies, rushed, lacks details
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52917349]We all know the referendum was a mess, Cameron thought it was an easy win and thus stated no rules around it, and then calling out this was the final time this sort of question would be asked, effectively locking in the result. Even if there was a change of government tomorrow, you can say with confidence the path the government is currently taking would remain unchanged and Brexit would continue to go ahead. As much as we can stand around and try and claim that we have representatives for this kind of thing, we know just off the pure amount of them being idiots through the news in this section alone that even if Brexit was needed for whatever reason, they wouldn't do it because its just grounds for not being elected again and considered too hard among a ton of other reasons. If you take a swing at referenda you are effectively putting it in the grave, a lot of people here think you can just 'meme ignore' a referendum, not taking into consideration that it will hurt the process forever and also receive a massive amount of hate from the international community while doing it. I mean, you can even throw the idea of a Scottish referendum out the window at that point, yeah sure, Scotland leaving the UK is a vastly different thing, but you've given government the power to ignore, to ignore that referendum to 'save those people from themselves' under the guise Scotland can't stand alone, dangerous precedent to provide. Referendums are a requirement of this coming age just off the pure distrust of government alone to act in your behalf. This is why some people are hesitant to call for a 2nd referendum, because theres a risk the same outcome may happen. Governments are formed on 1-2%, you don't want to go near this shit at all. tl:dr ignoring referendums is bad and leads to large democratic problems going forward apologies, rushed, lacks details[/QUOTE] I'd wager that ignoring the result of the referendum would cause a bigger change in the political establishment than going through with the result. The "will of the people" line that both the Tories and Labour are touting is pandering to voters to allow them to maintain relevance. I mean, the Commons was in favour of Remain by 73% (of those who revealed their stance). Talk about a total u-turn. If they were firm in their convictions, they'd have disregarded the result, but it's very clear they'd rather hold onto their power whether it results in the ruination of the country or not - at least they did what they were told! No, as damaging as ignoring the result would seem, I think it could cause a total political shake-up that would overcome the stagnation of current politics, but neither wants to be martyrs for the betterment of the nation because they know they'll never be elected again.
[QUOTE=David29;52916785]So what about Istanbul 2010?[/QUOTE] "According to the rules adopted by the European Parliament and the Council (Decision 445/2014), this action is not open to third countries except candidate countries and European Free Trade Association/European Economic Area countries. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-42097692[/url]
[URL="https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/1123/922380-brexit-border/"]https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/1123/922380-brexit-border/[/URL] [QUOTE]The Minister for Foreign Affairs has said there will not be a complete solution as to what happens the Irish border by the time of the next EU summit in three weeks time. Simon Coveney said though he hopes for more clarity around the parameters within which a solution will be finalised, if and when it is decided to move onto the next phase of the Brexit talks. Speaking before the Oireachtas Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, he said we needed a lot more clarity that recognises the uniqueness and vulnerability of Northern Ireland and of the island of Ireland as a result of the UK's exit from the European Union. "I am hopeful this can be reached in December, but it is by no means pre-determined... We need a lot more clarity," Mr Coveney said. Before it can sign off on the first phase of talks, the Government wants Britain to spell out in writing how I tintends to make good on its commitment that the border will remain seamless post-Brexit. The Government has said this can be best achieved if London commits, on behalf of Northern Ireland, that there would be no regulatory divergence both sides of the border. Mr Coveney said that includes all areas from agriculture to state aid rules. [B] "We have been very clear in terms of what we're asking for, that hasn't changed for months. What has changed, perhaps, is the expectation that Ireland, maybe when we came under a bit of pressure, that we might back off or accept that this would be deferred into phase two," Mr Coveney said. "Some people seem to be surprised that that's not happening, maybe they weren't listening when we told them the first time, or the second time or the tenth time but I think people are listening now," he said.[/B][/QUOTE] A fairly big covert "fuck you" to anyone who thought we'd bow to British pressure. Still, my panic intensifies.
[QUOTE=CMB Unit 01;52917408]I'd wager that ignoring the result of the referendum would cause a bigger change in the political establishment than going through with the result. The "will of the people" line that both the Tories and Labour are touting is pandering to voters to allow them to maintain relevance. I mean, the Commons was in favour of Remain by 73% (of those who revealed their stance). Talk about a total u-turn. If they were firm in their convictions, they'd have disregarded the result, but it's very clear they'd rather hold onto their power whether it results in the ruination of the country or not - at least they did what they were told! No, as damaging as ignoring the result would seem, I think it could cause a total political shake-up that would overcome the stagnation of current politics, but neither wants to be martyrs for the betterment of the nation because they know they'll never be elected again.[/QUOTE] Yes, it is true, ignoring the referendum result would change the political establishment, but it may not be in the way people like, if that did happen back after the result came out, then we would be seeing probably some sort of UKIP lead government by now as the major parties would suffer in the polls as everything good old Nige had been saying about the EU would turn out to be true in the eyes of the public, as well as the UK being attacked left, right and center for ignoring the people and losing what is left of its respect in the rest of the world. It technically is 'the will of the people' whether it is 60% or 52%, it isn't a u-turn, the Commons may have been in favour of Remain by 73% but that means nothing as that isn't representative democracy, that is why the bills are passing, because they know they can't hold up a result of a referendum. They asked the people, and the people responded, and now they are following through with that even if their political lives are over as that is responsible government, that is why even if a new government rolled in, it would continue.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52917349]We all know the referendum was a mess, Cameron thought it was an easy win and thus stated no rules around it, and then calling out this was the final time this sort of question would be asked, effectively locking in the result. Even if there was a change of government tomorrow, you can say with confidence the path the government is currently taking would remain unchanged and Brexit would continue to go ahead.[/QUOTE] Calling a referendum was a stupid move. Everyone has acknowledged this. But putting the sole blame on David Cameron is just passing the buck. The leave campaign and everyone who supported leaving are the ones who should have come up with a plan. Instead they bailed as soon as they could with a big "mission accomplished" banner in the background. This is your victory Boilrig, don't be bashful. [QUOTE=Boilrig;52917349]As much as we can stand around and try and claim that we have representatives for this kind of thing, we know just off the pure amount of them being idiots through the news in this section alone that even if Brexit was needed for whatever reason, they wouldn't do it because its just grounds for not being elected again and considered too hard among a ton of other reasons. [/QUOTE] That representatives can be stupid is not sufficiently good cause to switch to rule by referendum. This is not an argument. [QUOTE=Boilrig;52917349]Referendums are a requirement of this coming age just off the pure distrust of government alone to act in your behalf.[/QUOTE] I don't even know how you can say this with a straight face. The Brexit vote is a perfect illustration of why you shouldn't rule by referendum. Nobody genuinely looks at the Brexit debacle as a model to conduct modern politics.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52917949]Calling a referendum was a stupid move. Everyone has acknowledged this. But putting the sole blame on David Cameron is just passing the buck. The leave campaign and everyone who supported leaving are the ones who should have come up with a plan. Instead they bailed as soon as they could with a big "mission accomplished" banner in the background. [/QUOTE] It was a political move that cost him dearly, an attempt to remove UKIP from the field by promising to hold a referendum that then backfired when Leave won. [QUOTE=Raidyr;52917949] That representatives can be stupid is not sufficiently good cause to switch to rule by referendum. This is not an argument. [/QUOTE] Unless you have "ruling by referendum" on some sort of daily or weekly basis then it is still a representative democracy. Referendums aren't exactly common. [QUOTE=Raidyr;52917949] I don't even know how you can say this with a straight face. The Brexit vote is a perfect illustration of why you shouldn't rule by referendum. Nobody genuinely looks at the Brexit debacle as a model to conduct modern politics.[/QUOTE] Brexit is the perfect example of a referendum, it failed in its duty of providing a minimum vote percentage but was a referendum none the less, and giving a question of a decision as big as Brexit fits perfectly into what referendums are for, it is up to the government to implement that decision, and because of that isn't exactly direct rule by the population. The referendum has given the government a mandate and it must follow that.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52917972]It was a political move that cost him dearly, an attempt to remove UKIP from the field by promising to hold a referendum that then backfired when Leave won.[/QUOTE] Stop blaming everyone else because the Leave campaign had no plan and was built on disinformation. [QUOTE=Boilrig;52917972]Brexit is the perfect example of a referendum, it failed in its duty of providing a minimum vote percentage but was a referendum none the less, and giving a question of a decision as big as Brexit fits perfectly into what referendums are for, it is up to the government to implement that decision, and because of that isn't exactly direct rule by the population. The referendum has given the government a mandate and it must follow that.[/QUOTE] I don't know if I'm wording my posts poorly or you are being purposefully obtuse but while yes it's an example of a referendum my point was that it's not an example of something other governments want to participate in. The rest of the world looked at Brexit the same way it looked at the election of Donald Trump; despair and laughter, or just laughter in the case of Russia. It's a dumb idea that has plunged Britain into economic, diplomatic, and security uncertainty. Nobody wants that.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52917985]Stop blaming everyone else because the Leave campaign had no plan and was built on disinformation. [/QUOTE] The government failed to make a plan, not the Leave campaign, unless suddenly the Leave campaign was in charge of government and on the fact of disinformation, I believe it is currently being investigated and will await that decision, however it was still an underlying political gamble that didn't pay off. [QUOTE=Raidyr;52917985] I don't know if I'm wording my posts poorly or you are being purposefully obtuse but while yes it's an example of a referendum my point was that it's not an example of something other governments want to participate in. The rest of the world looked at Brexit the same way it looked at the election of Donald Trump; despair and laughter, or just laughter in the case of Russia. It's a dumb idea that has plunged Britain into economic, diplomatic, and security uncertainty. Nobody wants that.[/QUOTE] Any major government decision through referendums have the potential to cause economic, diplomatic, and security uncertainty, that is the nature of large scale government decisions. Whether the world laughs or not, it is still a referendum, and it is up to individuals whether they view that as some sort of 'protest' vote. Nobody wants to cause economic, diplomatic or security uncertainty, but if we didn't we wouldn't move anywhere, because even staying in the EU itself can possibly create that uncertainty as well.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52918375]You don't do a referendum on a shower thought. Both sides should have had concrete plans. Leave side especially, as remaining isn't a difficult task.[/QUOTE] Not exactly, as I said, Leave wasn't in charge of the government, it was a lack of care by Cameron/Conservatives not instructing government to prepare for both, they approached the entire thing with an attitude of "It won't pass, staying is easy", it was poor government planning if anything. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;52918375] Referendums don't cause uncertainty. Having no plan or roadplan does.[/QUOTE] Referendums do cause uncertainty, pretty sure the market had a fit even before the Brexit vote, among all the conclusions economists were coming to in a Leave or Remain situation. Do a vote in parliament, usually someone has an idea of who is voting what and the numbers, but referendums are up to the public, thus the uncertainty is quite high. Having no plan just adds to the uncertainty.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52917349] tl:dr ignoring referendums is bad and leads to large democratic problems going forward[/QUOTE] If you're found to cheat in an examn you won't pass it. So I figure that if you're found lying in a referendum it shouldn't pass either. Shouldn't be that hard to make up some legalese for that
[QUOTE=gokiyono;52918685]If you're found to cheat in an examn you won't pass it. So I figure that if you're found lying in a referendum it shouldn't pass either. Shouldn't be that hard to make up some legalese for that[/QUOTE] Going off that, we wouldn't have governments either.
If nothing else, if this thread is anything to go off, at least a large portion of Facepunch doesn't support a Scottish Referendum. Either that or there is some serious Trump-tier levels of hypocrisy going on.
I mean the UK was allowed to have a referendum, it was just done in such a poor and batshit way that it's really stupid that it happened. The UK has no referendum commission like we do. Or really any experience with referendums, like we do. Honestly I don't think the UK can decide not to leave now since Article 50 is triggered. Europe would collectively have a fit at the British changing their position [I]again[/I] and would definitely want the UK to give up their special privileges. Honestly your only hope to not fuck yourselves up OR us (which is what the Irish are concerned about - we dodn't mind you screwing yourselves as long as you don't screw us!) is to stay in the common market.
[QUOTE=David29;52917024] So you are suggesting that the government denies the UK public it's collective right to self-determination?[/QUOTE] I'm suggesting that, in this case, the right thing for Parliament to do is to disregard the referendum and remain in the EU. The downsides to leaving are far worse than the downsides to remaining(Which amounts to a couple of weeks of whining before the general public's collective attention span snaps to the latest celeb gossip or whatever). Elected officials are expected to do what's right for the country. And in the case of Brexit, remain is what's right for the country. You don't need a degree in economics or even first-hand experience with British politics to know how dumb an idea leaving is at this juncture. Plus, Brussels has said there's an out. They've outright told British negotiators that cancelling Brexit outright is still on the table.
[QUOTE=TestECull;52918743]I'm suggesting that, in this case, the right thing for Parliament to do is to disregard the referendum and remain in the EU. The downsides to leaving are far worse than the downsides to remaining(Which amounts to a couple of weeks of whining before the general public's collective attention span snaps to the latest celeb gossip or whatever). Elected officials are expected to do what's right for the country. And in the case of Brexit, remain is what's right for the country. You don't need a degree in economics or even first-hand experience with British politics to know how dumb an idea leaving is at this juncture. Plus, Brussels has said there's an out. They've outright told British negotiators that cancelling Brexit outright is still on the table.[/QUOTE] As I've said before, unless people can actually give us a glimpse of the future, then you can't say "remain is what's right for the country" as some sort of statement of fact, but sure, as an opinion that's fine, but technically in this situation the people have decided whats best for the country thanks to the opportunity given to them by those they voted in. The ramifications for ignoring a referendum will go on for years, not a 'couple weeks of whining', and you'd probably end up with another referendum eventually regardless. The government mandate has been set, its happening, out isn't even on the table.
[QUOTE=TestECull;52918743]I'm suggesting that, in this case, the right thing for Parliament to do is to disregard the referendum and remain in the EU. The downsides to leaving are far worse than the downsides to remaining(Which amounts to a couple of weeks of whining before the general public's collective attention span snaps to the latest celeb gossip or whatever). Elected officials are expected to do what's right for the country. And in the case of Brexit, remain is what's right for the country. You don't need a degree in economics or even first-hand experience with British politics to know how dumb an idea leaving is at this juncture. Plus, Brussels has said there's an out. They've outright told British negotiators that cancelling Brexit outright is still on the table.[/QUOTE] Ok, so yes you are.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52918721]Going off that, we wouldn't have governments either.[/QUOTE] Didn't know your government did everything with referendums
[QUOTE=gokiyono;52918754]Didn't know your government did everything with referendums[/QUOTE] They tried to change our flag and we said no.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52918224]The government failed to make a plan, not the Leave campaign, [/QUOTE] Why would the leave campaign not have to have a plan, this is stupid. [editline]24th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Boilrig;52918752]As I've said before, unless people can actually give us a glimpse of the future, then you can't say "remain is what's right for the country" as some sort of statement of fact, but sure, as an opinion that's fine, but technically in this situation the people have decided whats best for the country thanks to the opportunity given to them by those they voted in. The ramifications for ignoring a referendum will go on for years, not a 'couple weeks of whining', and you'd probably end up with another referendum eventually regardless. The government mandate has been set, its happening, out isn't even on the table.[/QUOTE] So your response to every business, experts, scientists and pretty much everyone who thinks about more than "muh sovereignity" saying that this is very very bad is "that's just like.... your opinion, man"
[QUOTE=Killuah;52918772]Why would the leave campaign not have to have a plan, this is stupid.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, but the issues around having a plan require money, research papers. working groups etc, which if you are actually in government are very easy to do but not so easy outside of government. But with referendums, it isn't an election and the elected government is still the elected government, they just didn't think they would lose. But yeah, pretty much everyone agrees it was cringe. [QUOTE=Killuah;52918772] So your response to every business, experts, scientists and pretty much everyone who thinks about more than "muh sovereignity" saying that this is very very bad is "that's just like.... your opinion, man"[/QUOTE] The response to that is that it had an equal amount come out in favor of it. I mean, FT basically got hold of every economist it could and asked them about Brexit, and per usual with economists, it was 50/50. For every article you find against Brexit, you end up finding one for Brexit, its a mess that even I don't enjoy. Even right now theres articles discussing the financial passport and the arguments over whether pre-existing deals will need to change when Brexit happens. The biggest issue we face is that we have no idea what the trade deal will come out to be like, and until then we can't actually get a clear view of what has been gained/lost in Brexit.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52918779]Well yeah, but the issues around having a plan require money, research papers. working groups etc, which if you are actually in government are very easy to do but not so easy outside of government. But with referendums, it isn't an election and the elected government is still the elected government, they just didn't think they would lose. But yeah, pretty much everyone agrees it was cringe. [/quote] But that was not the point. The point was [quote]You don't do a referendum on a shower thought. Both sides should have had concrete plans. Leave side especially, as remaining isn't a difficult task.[/quote] So your concentration on one side alone is a quote dishonest especially since you are concentrating on the side that initially wanted to stay. [quote] The response to that is that it had an equal amount come out in favor of it. I mean, FT basically got hold of every economist it could and asked them about Brexit, and per usual with economists, it was 50/50. For every article you find against Brexit, you end up finding one for Brexit, its a mess that even I don't enjoy. Even right now theres articles discussing the financial passport and the arguments over whether pre-existing deals will need to change when Brexit happens.[/QUOTE] I doubt this and there is literally no way for you to prove this, especially since search results show that this is not what is happening [url]https://www.google.de/search?q=financial+times+brexit&oq=financial+times+brexit&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3303j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8[/url] [editline]24th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Boilrig;52918779] we can't actually get a clear view of what has been gained/lost in Brexit.[/QUOTE] Actually we can. So far you lost 2 EU agencies 10.000 very high paying jobs in banking [url]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-jobs-exclusive/exclusive-10000-uk-finance-jobs-affected-in-brexits-first-wave-reuters-survey-idUSKCN1BT1EU[/url] More than 100 000 people [url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-british-citizens-leaving-migration-impact-irish-passports-latest-eu-referendum-fears-racism-a7914606.html[/url] Shitloads of investments [url]https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/840917/European-Investment-Fund-halts-UK-venture-capital-funding-Brexit[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.