Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Brexit?

Brexit? (Page 5)
Thread Tools
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 05:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
What gets me is that the entire Conservative party is acting is if it was a big surprise that Cameron decided to leave. Was that really a surprise to anyone outside the party? I mean, really?
That was completely obvious, Cameron couldn't stay on even if he wanted to. It also made sense to me that he left all of the details to his successor rather than pull the pin of the grenade, throw it into his party and then run for cover
Originally Posted by P View Post
Seriously, though - if the reports about the rivalry between him and Johnson are true, he is probably just as happy to let it all descend into chaos. This is the best way to show that Johnson isn't the man for the job.
In that case, mission accomplished.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
And is Cameron still the PM until a new election?
No, Cameron will step down in fall (September/October from what I understand). Country-wide elections are not necessary. Initially, it was widely expected that Johnson will be the most likely replacement — after all, he was the Tory's face of the Brexit campaign. But the way he is meandering now, it's no longer a foregone conclusion.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 05:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
And get blamed for the next 1000 years of darkness as Western Civilization goes down the drain and England is invaded by Iceland.
I'm not sure you could blame someone for enacting the democratic will of the people. I think it would be seen more as actual leadership. Which seems in pretty short supply at the moment.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 06:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Customary is that the party leader that leaves their post also resigns as PM, and parliament elects a new one. The new party leader is the obvious choice. Technically I think the Queen asks someone to be her PM, and parliament has to confirm that choice, but in practice she will select someone who has the support of parliament.

Not sure how old you are, but Thatcher was forced out in the run-up to Desert Storm, I believe?
Definitely old enough to remember Thatcher, but this was pre-Internet, and we had local stuff going on.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 06:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
No, Cameron will step down in fall (September/October from what I understand). Country-wide elections are not necessary. Initially, it was widely expected that Johnson will be the most likely replacement — after all, he was the Tory's face of the Brexit campaign. But the way he is meandering now, it's no longer a foregone conclusion.
Okay. It was whether his stepping down was effective immediately was the part I was confused on.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 07:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
I'm not sure you could blame someone for enacting the democratic will of the people. I think it would be seen more as actual leadership. Which seems in pretty short supply at the moment.
Are you new to this whole politics thing? You can blame people for anything. He is already being blamed for calling the referendum in the first place.

I agree that leadership is sorely missing right now, but that leadership should come from Johnson and Gove. You don't usually expect the losing party to provide leadership after an election, that is up to the winner.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 07:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Definitely old enough to remember Thatcher, but this was pre-Internet, and we had local stuff going on.
Tony Blair stepped down as well.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 07:49 AM
 
Jesus... rub it in.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 08:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is Cameron the only person who can press the button? What's the protocol if you don't mind me asking.

If it's way complicated, no need to write an essay for me. I can look it up.
Actually it may not be as simple as the PM being able to invoke article 50. Thats the rule as far as the EU paperwork goes but there was an act of Parliament implemented in order to join the EU in the first place and a PM can't repeal an act of Parliament by himself which might I think needs to happen before anyone can press the button and invoke 50.
So a parliamentary vote might actually be required by UK law before we can leave, regardless of the referendum result.

Cameron is definitely catching blame for calling the referendum in the first place but he pretty much had to do it sooner or later and he is far from the only one who thought he'd win easily.
The leave campaign used all the same tricks as Trump used to win while the remain campaign were naive, complacent, disorganised, lazy and ultimately shambolic.

I'm starting to think the only leaver who actually wanted to leave was Farage. Gove and Johnson are playing a game of "No, after you." because like Cameron, neither wants their name on our actual exit in case it all goes as tits up as it looks like it will, and equally no-one wants to be the one with the balls to make the end run around the referendum result because of all the people who will moan about the lack of democracy involved.
No one wants to lead the country, no one wants to leave the EU, no one wants to stay either, no one wants to try to plan for the future either way. Its not a great situation.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 08:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Its not a great situation.
Understatement of the year.

Is there a way out of this that isn't too painful? Because as I see it, the tories only have one choice now: Select someone who doesn't splinter the party as the next leader, trigger article 50 this fall and take their chances with a terrible negotiating position.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 09:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is Cameron the only person who can press the button? What's the protocol if you don't mind me asking.

If it's way complicated, no need to write an essay for me. I can look it up.
The amount of misinformation from the salty Remain camp is hysterical. In the event the vote passed it was always going to be months before enacting Article 50, you don't just pull the plug on such a thing until you have other trade agreements and policies in place. However, that isn't stopping the BBC and other fear-mongers from lying to everyone and telling them otherwise. It's pitiful what's being done, they simply have no shame and are willing to do anything to stay with the Borg. Justicar's video on the subject, slapping the EU-loyalists with a reality check:

"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 09:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Where do you get that from?
Right now the EU is waiting for Britain's move, in fact they have to. The EU has asked Britain to proceed swiftly and invoke Article 50, but Britain's Brexiters are now pedaling back. So let's see whether Britain will even invoke Article 50 or whether they hope (somewhat naïvely) that the referendum gives them leverage to re-negotiate the terms of their membership. What specifically is the EU doing to punish Britain?
Deductive logic?

Does the "EU" want to make it easier or harder fr other member countries to leave?
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 09:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
In the event the vote passed it was always going to be months before enacting Article 50, you don't just pull the plug on such a thing until you have other trade agreements and policies in place.
Negotiating with the Americans would take years, maybe decades, not months, China may be quicker but only because we have so little leverage to negotiate with. The rest of the EU won't talk until we have enacted Article 50, as they are adamant that this is what the two year negotiations are for.

None of this was even remotely discussed in a referendum campaign that was shambolic on the remain side and wilfully disingenuous on the leave side.

Lets hope the twin leadership campaigns distract things until the early Autumn, when someone will have to grasp the bull by the horns.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 10:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Deductive logic?

Does the "EU" want to make it easier or harder fr other member countries to leave?
Coming over all dictatorial and hard line may well fan the flames of the far right in France and other countries. I would guess they want to come over as firm but fair and try to make the disadvantages of leaving firmly the fault o f the leaver not the EU.

The UK descending into political chaos about leaving will probably serve as a useful example. Not that LePenn would mind a spot of chaos of her own.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 10:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Coming over all dictatorial and hard line may well fan the flames of the far right in France and other countries. I would guess they want to come over as firm but fair and try to make the disadvantages of leaving firmly the fault o f the leaver not the EU.
The only “pressure” the EU has made was that Britain invokes Article 50 quickly and enters negotiations to leave the EU. I don't see them playing hard ball (that'll come later).
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Does the "EU" want to make it easier or harder fr other member countries to leave?
They want to get this over with quickly to avoid cracks forming in the EU. But apart from this, what concretely has the EU done in response to the referendum that supposedly makes an example of Britain?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2016, 05:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
The amount of misinformation from the salty Remain camp is hysterical. In the event the vote passed it was always going to be months before enacting Article 50, you don't just pull the plug on such a thing until you have other trade agreements and policies in place. However, that isn't stopping the BBC and other fear-mongers from lying to everyone and telling them otherwise. It's pitiful what's being done, they simply have no shame and are willing to do anything to stay with the Borg. Justicar's video on the subject, slapping the EU-loyalists with a reality check:
You live in a completely binary universe don't you? No shades of grey.


The leave campaign lied at every turn. They have withdrawn most of their key claims and promises since the result came in.
Meanwhile the remain campaign have had a number of their predictions born out already with more sure to follow. Did they engage in a few silly claims of their own? Yes, they did. But virtually nothing the leave campaign said was true to the point of gross irresponsibility.


Your one-sided assertions are as tedious to read as they are ridiculous to make.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 09:40 AM
 
Britain dodges European Union ‘superstate’ bullet with plans revealed days after Brexit vote (Interesting to say the least)


Why Brexit was a great thing
This article captures my sentiments on Brexit pretty darn accurately; astonishingly so.
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Jun 29, 2016 at 09:54 AM. )
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 10:48 AM
 
It would appear this "Leave" vote is nowhere near as straightforward as it was sold to its supporters.

Everyone agrees that the only way the U.K. can leave the EU is by triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, a set of rules EU members signed in 2007.

Pressing this imaginary button would begin a two-year countdown for Britain to negotiate its divorce with the EU and set out the terms of their future relationship.

Prime Minister David Cameron said during the campaign in February that the British public could "rightly expect" Article 50 to be triggered "straight away."

Except he hasn't done that.

The morning he lost the referendum, Cameron announced he would quit as leader and that Article 50 would be triggered by his successor, who likely won't be elected until September.

"That collides with two political difficulties," according to Professor Robert Hazell, an expert in constitutional law at University College London.

The first is that this delay has put the U.K. under increasingly pressure from the remaining 27 EU member states, "who want the negotiations to start asap in order to end the uncertainty," Hazell said.

The second is that many of the 17.4 million Brits who voted "Leave" did so because they wanted tighter controls on immigration.

However, since winning the vote, several leading "Leave" voices have admitted that Britain may be forced to keep its borders open to EU citizens if it wants access to the bloc's lucrative single market.

"It's an issue that [anti-EU leaders] did not want to expose during the campaign, but as soon as they got the vote, it's clear as day," according to Professor Steven Fielding at Nottingham University.

This might lead to a situation where the next leader of the ruling Conservative party — most likely former London mayor and pro-Brexit campaigner Boris Johnson — would be faced with triggering Article 50 but not giving millions of "Leave" voters the immigration controls they wanted.


Hardly an enviable position for a new leader.

Other Brexiteers — as anti-EU campaigners are known — have since said they would be able to retain border controls and still have access to the single market. However, it's not clear why the EU would agree to a deal that essentially rewards a member state for leaving the bloc.

Cameron met with EU leaders Tuesday and said Britain "will not and should not" turn its back on Europe — but acknowledged retaining trading ties without conceding border control would be a "huge challenge."

Immigration is just one of the promises that, according to "Remain" campaigners, have evaporated into thin air now the referendum is over.
Could Brexit Be Canceled? Here's How Vote Might Be Reversed - NBC News

OAW
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 11:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Looks like the same conspiracy story that elchupacabra posted above.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 11:22 AM
 
There is a whole host of options and potential options with variations for stopping the Brexit from happening. Its very difficult to say how likely any of them are, primarily because every politician involved seems to have been lying about their own position as well as many of the details and implications.

The one thing that looks certain is that once article 50 is invoked, it cannot be stopped. It might take two years or even longer, but it cannot be stopped. After you invoke, you have to get out then re-apply from scratch.

As for preventing the invocation, the government can ignore the referendum completely, they can call a vote as to whether or not to follow it, as mentioned they may have to do that in order to invoke, Scotland may be able to block it or something could happen to trigger a second referendum like a different deal with the EU or a massive change in public opinion. Plenty of options and possibilities.

The EU have very clearly stated that to stay in the single market, freedom of movement is a deal breaker. Perhaps they will allow some kind of cap, but it currently looks unlikely. They've also said they won't even discuss what they may or may not allow until 50 is invoked. I guess its hardball time.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 01:56 PM
 
What a poor excuse for a journalist.... completely emotion driven, and not willing to listen to facts.

This is what that side of politics looks like when it looses, and it is the opposite of rational.

     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 02:38 PM
 
After having watched that video, I feel like I can start to form my (unwanted and unasked for) American™ opinion.

I think free movement is a good thing, so I'm guessing I'd like that part of being in the EU.

I doubt arguments over immigration woes would move me.

As was pointed out, the U.K. is a well-off nation, so I wouldn't even begrudge helping out totally ****ed up neighbor countries.

Not being able to negotiate with China? That would torque me off.
     
Steve Wilkinson
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 02:46 PM
 
I'm looking at it from the outside... but IMO, it seems pretty simple (said, not having to live with the consequences). It's about sovereignty. While I think the EU was started with good intentions, they have become a VERY unhealthy bureaucracy with some really daft people making policy. Anyone stuck under that rule is going to have to start doing more and more insane things. So, while an exit might hurt in the short term (might help?), it has to be done.

(BTW, I think Adam Curry summed up the general media coverage on No Agenda Show the other day, "Smart people said stay, stupid people said leave. That's pretty much all I heard." Sadly, that's pretty much the stock liberal answer on any issue of disagreement these days. Kind of makes civil dialog difficult.)
------
Steve Wilkinson
Web designer | Christian apologist
cgWerks | TilledSoil.org
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 06:38 PM
 
Sovereignty is really the only issue this vote should have been about but if people were being honest it was little more than something to hide behind.

Immigration was a red herring. Its not likely to be reduced at all as a result of leaving the EU, the money spent is not going to be available for other projects either.

Sovereignty being eroded towards Brussels is a bad thing on paper but in practice it has done us far more good than bad. The EU has stopped our own government from doing all sorts of dreadful and immoral things in the not too distant past and has been a very important champion of rights and environmental protections.

Trade could have been a great driver but if they really cared about that they would have been negotiating deals with all these countries we aren't allowed to strike deals with ready to sign off when we left the EU. They did none of that. There is no plan beyond just leaving the EU. No appreciation for what that changes for us as a country. The whole idea of leaving was a short-sighted folly in political terms.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 08:05 PM
 
Wait... some rando can just start conducting foreign policy because they may win a... non-binding referendum? You don't have laws against that?

What dreadful and immoral things were stopped?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 09:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Sovereignty is really the only issue this vote should have been about but if people were being honest it was little more than something to hide behind.
In my view even sovereignty is a red herring: I understand why some people have this sentiment, but I feel it is largely misplaced. People pretend they haven't been asked, they pretend they don't have a say when in actuality they have and still do. The EU hasn't been forced upon them, their elected governments have agreed to enter into the EU. Countries can also leave the EU should they decide to. If you willingly enter into agreements with other countries, you don't give up your sovereignty, you decide to use it. What people actually want is the ability to influence the dealings with and of the EU.

So what about that? The oft-quoted EU's democracy deficits are a direct consequence of states not wanting to give up additional power, because each country wants to preserve its power to veto decisions. The most logical thing would be to give the European Parliament also the power to propose laws and force all other bodies of the EU to abide by its decisions. (I'm also not against introducing a second chamber to balance out the power.) But then Britain could be forced to implement certain EU laws just like South Carolina was forced to accept the Civil Rights Act. Most countries are not ready for this kind of arrangement, and that is ok. But I think it is a bit unfair to criticize this lack of democratic legitimation if you are unwilling to do what is necessary to fix it.
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Immigration was a red herring. Its not likely to be reduced at all as a result of leaving the EU, the money spent is not going to be available for other projects either.
Every agreement comes with trade-offs. If you are Romanian, you were ecstatic that you could now look for well-paid jobs in Germany and the UK (Romania has a large German speaking minority). Guess what, some share of the German population wasn't thrilled about it. Now that refugees are knocking their door the same freedom of movement comes with the disadvantage that you need a coordinated European policy towards the refugee crisis. Romania can no longer decide by itself what to do. However, you can't just cherry pick advantages and leave out all of the drawbacks.
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Trade could have been a great driver but if they really cared about that they would have been negotiating deals with all these countries we aren't allowed to strike deals with ready to sign off when we left the EU. They did none of that. There is no plan beyond just leaving the EU. No appreciation for what that changes for us as a country. The whole idea of leaving was a short-sighted folly in political terms.
Now everybody can see that the emperor has no clothes. The sudden implosion of the Brexit camp is fascinating to watch in a huge-accident-on-the-autobahn-kind of way, you can't take your eyes off it. That should be the biggest lesson to everyone: the Brexit vote was against something without having any clue what to do instead. You have all of the chicken hawks who hide behind technicalities and the “closeness of the vote” now, who renege on campaign promises — most notably to invoke Article 50.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 09:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a View Post
Originally Posted by P View Post
Looks like the same conspiracy story that elchupacabra posted above.
And the leader will be the Anti-Christ muhahahahahahaha.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2016, 11:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
In my view even sovereignty is a red herring: I understand why some people have this sentiment, but I feel it is largely misplaced. People pretend they haven't been asked, they pretend they don't have a say when in actuality they have and still do. The EU hasn't been forced upon them, their elected governments have agreed to enter into the EU. Countries can also leave the EU should they decide to. If you willingly enter into agreements with other countries, you don't give up your sovereignty, you decide to use it. What people actually want is the ability to influence the dealings with and of the EU.

So what about that? The oft-quoted EU's democracy deficits are a direct consequence of states not wanting to give up additional power, because each country wants to preserve its power to veto decisions. The most logical thing would be to give the European Parliament also the power to propose laws and force all other bodies of the EU to abide by its decisions. (I'm also not against introducing a second chamber to balance out the power.) But then Britain could be forced to implement certain EU laws just like South Carolina was forced to accept the Civil Rights Act. Most countries are not ready for this kind of arrangement, and that is ok. But I think it is a bit unfair to criticize this lack of democratic legitimation if you are unwilling to do what is necessary to fix it.
I agree, but as far as the greater war of semantics is concerned, I don't think I want to die on this hill.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 01:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I agree, but as far as the greater war of semantics is concerned, I don't think I want to die on this hill.
But is it only semantics, though? The problem here is how to translate the vote to policies, and for that you need to understand why people voted for a Brexit. If they claim they want “sovereignty”, what does that mean and how much are they willing to sacrifice? Let's say Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area) so that they are still part of the European market. Then they'd have to continue to agree to the free movement of goods and people, agree to European regulations on their goods, and of course pay for that privilege . But now they have less of a way of influencing them.

If Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area), they're still subject to a lot of the current rules (for instance, free movement of goods and people is still part and parcel of the EEA) but without a mean to influence them (Norway, for instance, has only non-voting participation in some of the EU's policies). And that'd imply that at least Scotland and perhaps also Northern Ireland would break away from the United Kingdom. So would that be an adequate translation of more sovereignty? Or perhaps did people really want something else?

So I don't think it's just semantics, unraveling this riddle is an important task for now. Being populist is easy when you're not elected.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 05:32 AM
 
This is the problem because its not just the politicians being dishonest in politics these days.

Sovereignty IS a red herring because in this vote it was there solely to give people something that sounded like a legitimate and noble reason to cite for leaving rather than the truth which is that they don't like all the foreigners coming in. The US has the same problem but even more transparent. All those Trump voters who say "I just like that he says what he means" we all know means "He's a racist just like I am" but they have been empowered with all the tools they need to be racist without being subject to shame or criticism for being such.

They all know the score, thats why when any leave voter was termed racist they feign upset and outrage and cry publicly about it because they know that their opponents will actually fight their battles for them. The remainers would actually turn on the accuser for not having concrete enough evidence of racism. All because they have sovereignty and 'taking the country back' to hide behind. They've all been given this little handbook 'How to be a racist ass and get away with it in the 21st century".

I say sovereignty should be the real argument because there is a nugget of relevance in there which is what makes it work as a screen. The democratic part of the EU has become more remote. The vote to join was ages ago and their powers have been increased a couple of times since then without further votes and its people picked by people you could have voted for but didn't who are making some of the rules. (Actually they are making rules they are told to make by people you did vote for for the most part). If you did make the setup more democratic, none of these people would bother to vote on it anyway. Most people don't even understand the structure of the lack of democracy they are moaning about, thats how you know its a smokescreen to hide what they really care about.

The other part of the handbook was the part that allowed them to disregard inconvenient truths. The currency and market drops, the credit rating downgrade, the rise of racist attacks and all the other joys we are yet to face as a result like peoples holidays costing more this year. Come October when all the families have come back from Europe having had to overspend to keep their kids quiet due to the value of Sterling we might see a significant shift in opinions back to remain.


The leave campaign plan if you can be so bold to call it a plan, was always to try to emulate someone like Norway who still pays for access to the single market, abides by regulations, freedom of movement and other conditions in order to trade. Assuming the EU was cool with this arrangement for us, we would be swapping our influence and veto on EU laws and regs for the right trade more freely with other countries and to ignore some EU laws if we choose to. We already do trade with these countries so its more a case of changing the prices and given the countries we talk about its going to be more about us buying their stuff than vice versa. Not as beneficial to our economy as is being made out.


Think on this though: By the end of the year we could have an American leader who's name is a British word for fart and a British leader who's name is an American word for penis. Its probably no worse than we deserve.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 08:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Think on this though: By the end of the year we could have an American leader who's name is a British word for fart and a British leader who's name is an American word for penis. Its probably no worse than we deserve.
Actually that won't happen, because Johnson has announced that he isn't running. Gove is going to try to gather those votes.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 08:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
But is it only semantics, though? The problem here is how to translate the vote to policies, and for that you need to understand why people voted for a Brexit. If they claim they want “sovereignty”, what does that mean and how much are they willing to sacrifice? Let's say Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area) so that they are still part of the European market. Then they'd have to continue to agree to the free movement of goods and people, agree to European regulations on their goods, and of course pay for that privilege . But now they have less of a way of influencing them.

If Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area), they're still subject to a lot of the current rules (for instance, free movement of goods and people is still part and parcel of the EEA) but without a mean to influence them (Norway, for instance, has only non-voting participation in some of the EU's policies). And that'd imply that at least Scotland and perhaps also Northern Ireland would break away from the United Kingdom. So would that be an adequate translation of more sovereignty? Or perhaps did people really want something else?

So I don't think it's just semantics, unraveling this riddle is an important task for now. Being populist is easy when you're not elected.
That is why the UK will need someone with real leadership, capable of "hope and change". That's what the people of the UK want. Someone who can fundamentally change the UK, and it's place in the world for the better.

Sound familiar?

Brexit is about sovereignty.
1 The people of the UK(or any country) should be able to make their own laws without the blessing of Brussels.
2 They should be able to control their own immigration policies and not be beholden to the whims and fancies of fascists on the mainland.
3 The UK should be free to forge trade(and other agreements) with the rest of the world

If the EU was purely about trade, the exchange of goods and services, i would support it. But it isnt.

Many countries today have free trade agreements, without requiring the free movement of peoples.

If the EU cannot reconcile that, the UK has the rest of the world to make those agreements with, and if that means severing ties with the only economic bloc in decline who do you think looses in the bargain?

PS>> I heard on some news program that(according to some polling) anti-EU sentiment is higher in France than it was in the UK before Brexit.
( Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Jun 30, 2016 at 08:45 AM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 10:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
But is it only semantics, though? The problem here is how to translate the vote to policies, and for that you need to understand why people voted for a Brexit. If they claim they want “sovereignty”, what does that mean and how much are they willing to sacrifice? Let's say Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area) so that they are still part of the European market. Then they'd have to continue to agree to the free movement of goods and people, agree to European regulations on their goods, and of course pay for that privilege . But now they have less of a way of influencing them.

If Britain leaves the EU but remains in the EEA (European Economic Area), they're still subject to a lot of the current rules (for instance, free movement of goods and people is still part and parcel of the EEA) but without a mean to influence them (Norway, for instance, has only non-voting participation in some of the EU's policies). And that'd imply that at least Scotland and perhaps also Northern Ireland would break away from the United Kingdom. So would that be an adequate translation of more sovereignty? Or perhaps did people really want something else?

So I don't think it's just semantics, unraveling this riddle is an important task for now. Being populist is easy when you're not elected.
I posit objecting to (or not objecting to) the term gets us no closer to answering these questions, therefore, what term gets used is semantics.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 11:52 AM
 
So Gove has gone all stabby stabby into Boris's back.

Looks like (courtesy of leaked email) that Boris was dodging on what kind of post to guarantee Gove after his election). Boris needed Gove to deliver the numbers to get though to the popular party vote , where he would have been a shoe in. Without Gove he knew he couldn't make it and now May looks the fave.

Political moral: Look after your friends.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 11:53 AM
 
Was Boris the guy who went all Orwell when he was mayor?
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 12:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Was Boris the guy who went all Orwell when he was mayor?
Not sure I follow. His mayorship was chiefly distinguished (if that's the right word) by taking credit for Ken Livingstone's City Bikes and saying yes to every single planning development for property speculators.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 12:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Do you believe anything that someone finds on a website that you've never heard of?
Obviously not, or I wouldn't have questioned whether it was real or not.


BTW, have a listen to Johnson's press conference. That guy is completely full of it: on the one hand he has no intention of invoking Article 50 (the provision that allows member states to leave the EU; keep in mind that only the member state may trigger Article 50). On the other, he reiterates all the promises he made during the campaign, some of which are impossible until you leave the EU.
Eh, I'm trying to limit my exposure to people that are completely full of it. I get enough already of that here in the 'NN (i kid, i kid)

Sounds an awful lot like a politician, doing what politicians do.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 12:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Not sure I follow. His mayorship was chiefly distinguished (if that's the right word) by taking credit for Ken Livingstone's City Bikes and saying yes to every single planning development for property speculators.
I'm thinking of the mayor distinguished by putting cameras everywhere.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 12:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm thinking of the mayor distinguished by putting cameras everywhere.
Well he didn't build London's extensive CCTV network, but I have found (just now) that he did sign a bill that allowed the police access to Transport for London's 1400 ANPR camera's previously used only for enforcing the congestion charge, so you may have meant that.

The silent increase in London's mass surveillance network, one year on... - No CCTV Blog
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 01:16 PM
 
"Brexit can't be about sovereignty. If it is, most of my arguments fall apart. So I'll keep repeating the Red Herring thing."
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
"Brexit can't be about sovereignty. If it is, most of my arguments fall apart. So I'll keep repeating the Red Herring thing."
It's not like the point is without merit.

Willingly entering into a contract you are also allowed to exit is not loss of sovereignty.

Sovereignty is generally won and lost through war. If the issue is going to be framed in that term the historical baggage associated with it is unavoidable.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 02:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Well he didn't build London's extensive CCTV network, but I have found (just now) that he did sign a bill that allowed the police access to Transport for London's 1400 ANPR camera's previously used only for enforcing the congestion charge, so you may have meant that.

The silent increase in London's mass surveillance network, one year on... - No CCTV Blog
Well, I wouldn't like him for that, but I was thinking more about the chucklehead who installed them.
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 02:37 PM
 
It is if remaining with that system slowly, irreversibly, subverts your own government's power with every passing year. The state of the EU is nothing like what it was when the contract was signed and if they didn't leave now it was likely they never could, then they'd be subject to the whims of an outside majority that has already shown it doesn't work for their best interests of the UK.

In the middle ages sovereignty was lost in war, but now we don't just strip countries of their land and governments when they lose a conflict. The only way countries are "lost" nowadays is when a larger fish swallows the smaller in the name of "progress", all the while professing that somehow unity and collectivism, at virtually any cost, are goals unto themselves. They aren't.

What's worse is we now have entire segments of Western society, and not just in the UK, working tirelessly to do an end-run around the democratic process itself. They think that subverting the system, and the spirit of it, is actually a good thing, that the ends justify the means, "a united Europe at all costs". It doesn't take a great historian to point out who else thought they knew what was best for everyone else.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 02:41 PM
 


It's time someone let some of the air out the EU ministers' egos.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 02:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post


It's time someone let some of the air out the EU ministers' egos.
If only the person delivering the "lecture" wasn't the most work shy member of the whole EU parliament.

Only one person in the EU Parliament has a worse voting record than Nigel Farage - Mirror Online

Ukip MEPs attend the fewest European Parliament votes of any party in the EU's 28 countries | UK Politics | News | The Independent

And yes you could say he's just not voting because he doesn't believe in it, but he's certainly been happy to take the salary.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 04:55 PM
 
Pretty sure that's not what he meant by "work" (he was talking about actual labor, not shining a parliament seat with his ass), but okay.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 05:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It is if remaining with that system slowly, irreversibly, subverts your own government's power with every passing year. The state of the EU is nothing like what it was when the contract was signed and if they didn't leave now it was likely they never could, then they'd be subject to the whims of an outside majority that has already shown it doesn't work for their best interests of the UK.
The EU is something very different from what it was when the UK joined the EEC, but every treaty change has been approved by the national parliaments. In the cases where that approval was withheld, because of referendums usually, the union was forced to step back and reconsider.

I would also like to point out that the article now under discussion, article 50 was added long after the UK joined. Back then, there was no exit procedure. In that sense, some sovereignty was restored.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
In the middle ages sovereignty was lost in war, but now we don't just strip countries of their land and governments when they lose a conflict. The only way countries are "lost" nowadays is when a larger fish swallows the smaller in the name of "progress", all the while professing that somehow unity and collectivism, at virtually any cost, are goals unto themselves. They aren't.
When the EEC was founded, Europe well remembered how sovereignty was lost to war - namely, all the nations that the Soviet Union occupied after WWII. Three of those countries are now members of the union. It was not that long ago, and it is something quite different from what the EU is doing.

The EU is pushing for closer cooperation. I don't like some of that, but at the end of the day, those politicians answer to the voters. It is very indirect, but there major treaty changes require very direct approval - by national parliaments at least, and referendums in a lot of countries.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
What's worse is we now have entire segments of Western society, and not just in the UK, working tirelessly to do an end-run around the democratic process itself. They think that subverting the system, and the spirit of it, is actually a good thing, that the ends justify the means, "a united Europe at all costs". It doesn't take a great historian to point out who else thought they knew what was best for everyone else.
Ah yes, Godwin's law - although I can point to any number of people who though that that was a great idea.

But I can agree that the world is full of people trying to subvert the democratic process. That is one part of the EU that is troubling me. It is not the worst thing, though - that would be the trade agreements that the US is pushing onto both the EU and onto its partners in Asia. Some of those rules are truly disturbing, and ones that could never pass the US Congress, much less European legislatures, unless bundled up in some obscure treaty that nobody reads - yet the US is pushing them.

And this is why I think that the EU is necessary - to make deals with the other major powers. I don't think the Chinese are any better than the US here, we just don't know what they're asking. This is why the UK are going to be in trouble. They're going to have to swallow a lot to get those trade deals they need.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 30, 2016, 05:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Well he didn't build London's extensive CCTV network, but I have found (just now) that he did sign a bill that allowed the police access to Transport for London's 1400 ANPR camera's previously used only for enforcing the congestion charge, so you may have meant that.

The silent increase in London's mass surveillance network, one year on... - No CCTV Blog
Lovely - but remember that Teresa May is the person pushing the Investigatory Powers bill, which is even more Orwellian than all those cameras.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2016, 06:21 AM
 
I guess I should have made this prediction before it came to pass, but it did occur to me there was a possibility either the market was overvalued in the first place or would make up the drop after people realized western democracy wasn't the end of the world.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2016, 10:59 AM
 
Or maybe the market is feeling like the Brexit will never actually happen. A lot of people seem to be feeling this way at the moment. Politicians are still saying they have to honour the referendum result but they'll be lynched if they don't and its likely that many are looking for an excuse to end run around it. The more time passes the less likely it becomes IMO.

Apparently the shift in regret is now just about sufficient to swing the vote the other way, but it will be interesting to see what public opinion looks like in September/October when a new PM is in place because a lot of Brits will have been on holiday and suffered from the devaluation of Sterling.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2016, 01:27 PM
 
Or they realize that tourism is up, and they're subsequently making more money from it, with a lower pound.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:43 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,