Brexit (merged threads)

[Davie P]

Why the UK cannot see that Brexit is utterly, utterly stupid

 

Spot on....

 

"The days when Leavers talked about the sunlit uplands are over. Liam Fox has not even managed to replicate the scores of trade deals the UK will lose when we leave the EU. As for independence, Leavers cannot name any laws imposed on the UK by the EU that they do not like. Since the referendum, even public attitudes to immigration have become much more favourable.

 

Instead there has emerged one justification for reducing real wages, for allowing our economy to lose over 2 per cent of its GDP, to allow firms to make and enact plans to leave the UK: the 2016 referendum. People voted for it, so it has to be done. It is described as the “will of the people”. Yet few bother to note that almost half the people voted the other way, with those that would be most affected not even having a vote ­– and that this victory was won by illegal means. All of that is brushed aside.

 

But what is really remarkable is the way that what this vote was originally for has gradually mutated over time. Just before the vote, the Leave campaign talked of many ways of leaving, with Norway (which is in the EEA) as one option. They did this for a simple reason: every time Leavers came up with a feasible way of leaving, other Leavers didn't like it. Yet within little more than a year Leavers were declaring that the vote was obviously to leave both the Customs Union and Single Market. During the referendum campaign the Leave side talked about the great deal they would get from the EU, but within two years, many of the same people were seriously pretending that voters really wanted no deal. A vote for the “easiest” deal in history has become a vote for no deal at all, apparently

 

Edited June 8, 2019 by Davie P

[George.]

^ i've always thought about all the euroboats that come around and strip our waters bare. Occasionally I notice a wee Spanish fishing boat a mile off shore -  with its nets out, when it should be how many miles out? Of course, Anthony Eden inflicted it upon us, starting in 1957. He did it very democratically of course, by doing no more than inflicting it upon us, regardless of what we thought or wanted. Very Westminstorean.

 

Go indy

[Wheelsup]

Our coastal waters are patrolled by the Scottish Fishing Protection Agency controlled from the Scottish Parliament. Not a good sign of things to come. Most of the “Spanish Boats” are British flagged as well. I would bet when we leave, some of our local boats will re-flag in Norway or Denmark so they can find a market for their fish.

 

Is the Tories who are driving this new era of “Nationalism” for their own benefit and they are pulling the rest of us Gullible mugs along with them.

[George.]

^I believe that you are quite correct. Coastal waters will be controlled by the Scottish parliament, using the Scottish Fishing Protection Agency. However, I personally would rather work under the Scottish Parliment than Westminster. After all, Shetland has been a part of Scotland for about 250 years longer than it has been with what the English chose to call "Britain."

 

And, at the end of the day, who cares what the Tories are saying or doing, or the vast majority of political parties down the south end. We need to look after ourselves - they wont, and they've never proved otherwise.

[Davie P]

George, you've mentioned several times in this thread that in 1957 Anthony Eden "inflicted" the "Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union upon us"

 

Could you expand on what you mean, as the UK/Great Britain was not one signatories of the 1957 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (they were Belgium, West Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands)?

[George.]

^ You're quite correct, Davy. In '57 Belgium, West Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, and possibly one or two more, were signatories regarding the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, also known as the Treaty of Rome. Whether there was anything democratic about it for them, I don't know. Having said that, Anthony Eden showed us, very clearly, just how much we are allowed to enjoy the democracy that Westminster made common man think he lives in. Westminster inflicted it upon us, without a single care what Joe Blogs thought. That's British democracy for you, and it shows another reason to despise......

 

Luckily though, I don't live in Britain, I live at home. As soon as I can get a Scottish passport I'll perhaps come out rather more socially.

Edited June 8, 2019 by George.

[Davie P]

I'm not sure what you're getting at with Anthony Eden, or what Westminster has "inflicted" on us given there was a referendum in 1975 with a 67% supermajority in favour of EEC membership?

 

Bearing in mind our Parliamentary democracy is the model for most other democracies, perhaps you could elaborate on what you think is wrong with it, and how it could be improved?

[George.]

^ The referendum in 1975 did not have the ability to cancel the problem that Eden had inflicted upon us in 1957 which brought the common market, the European Union, et al upon us.

 

I must also point out that they may well be your Parliamentary democracy, but they ain't mine. I could elaborate but I choose to remain polite.

Edited June 8, 2019 by George.

[Davie P]

Please be specific George as I don't understand the points you are trying to make.

 

^ The referendum in 1975 did not have the ability to cancel the problem that Eden had inflicted upon us in 1957 which brought the common market, the European Union, et al upon us.

 

So, Anthony Eden "inflicted" a referendum-proof "problem" on us in 1957 that resulted in us joining the EU 16 years later? What is this "problem" you're getting at?

 

 

I must also point out that they may well be your Parliamentary democracy, but they ain't mine. I could elaborate but I choose to remain polite.

 

That's irrelevant.

 

You regularly and non-specifically complain that UK democracy isn't democratic. My question was....

 

Bearing in mind our Parliamentary democracy is the model for most other democracies, perhaps you could elaborate on what you think is wrong with it, and how it could be improved?

Edited June 8, 2019 by Davie P

[Muckle Oxters]

I'm no been paying attention tae da news fur twaree weeks, but I'm assuming Farage is in noo in prison for some sort o 'financial irregularities', Bojo is da new judge on Britan's Got Talent and Corbyn is workin as a zookeeper.

 

Is dat right?

 

[JGHR]

 

 

Bearing in mind our Parliamentary democracy is the model for most other democracies, perhaps you could elaborate on what you think is wrong with it, and how it could be improved?

 

Apologies for butting in Davie P, I hope you don't mind if I lend George a hand and make a start because lately I've been feeling a bit disillusioned by the various democratic processes. I mean how can anyone feel enthusiastic about a system that delivers the presidency of the United States to someone who is as abjectly unsuitable as Donald Trump? I struggle with a system that has brought us to the brink of dismantling the very philosophy which has maintained prosperity and peace throughout Europe for the past 70 years and, in Australia where I live, I despair when I find multiple unashamed neo nazi parties on my voting card which only has one last place.

 

What can be done about it? Firstly abolish the first past the post voting system, it is manifestly undemocratic and forsakes half, or more, of the voters. Replace it with a representative voting system. Secondly introduce laws to hold politicians to account. If they mislead or misrepresent the truth - imprison them.  Companies are not allowed to misrepresent their products and if an individual lies and causes someone to suffer a loss they can take civil action and hold the liar to account. Why should politicians be allowed to arbitrarily lie and cause enormous loss to every single citizen in the country and then retire in comfort to a country mansion or lucrative speaking circuit position without any accountability whatsoever? Thirdly, maybe introduce compulsory voting, although I'm not entirely sold on the idea. I generally tend to be of the (admittedly uninformed) opinion that the population are generally decent sensible people and if everyone votes you should get decent sensible representation. The theory being with optional voting and low voter turnout the lunatic fringe are more easily rallied and so are more likely to vote than the average person, therefore you get more lunatic fringe representation.

   

The root of the problem, as I see it, is that reality no longer matters, the truth is no longer valued by politicians, and the malady is fast spreading to the population at large. Mark Twain noted how a lie can travel half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on, and he never saw facebook or twitter.  Our democratic system needs to adapt to deal with the world where misinformation is so easily published by liars and spread by the ignorant.  

[Davie P]

Excellent post JGHR. I completely agree.

 

Re: compulsory voting, or taking it back a step, the principle of democracy itself.....

 

'Modern' democracy is generally understood to mean 'one person one vote', but that is a relatively recent idea. In ancient Greece where democracy has its roots, there were many classes of people who were excluded from the franchise and tended to favour the 'educated' classes. And for much of history democracy was considered to be an undesirable form of government as people have a tendency to vote based on emotion and self interest rather than give consideration to the common good.

 

So, for a democracy to function properly, voters need to engage with reliable information on which to make their decision - I believe that is the fundamental challenge to modern democracy. Lies are now so routine that people knowingly accept them if they are in accord with their own prejudices, and people actively participate in the global spread of lies (e.g. sharing posts on Facebook without checking their validity). As you say JGHR, I believe it is time to introduce more robust legislation to hold people in public office to account who knowingly spread misinformation. And as members of a democracy, we as citizens should challenge people who are spreading misinformation and putting forward opinion as fact too.

 

Brexit has been an absolute sh*tstorm of misinformation, with a significant section of the public determined to engage in social and economic self harm to fulfil a promise of 'taking back control'. Facts are simply dismissed as 'project fear', and politicians, judges, economists and business leaders who scrutinise and challenge the rhetoric and misinformation are publicly branded 'traitors', 'remoaners' and 'undemocratic'. Well considered opinion and debate is rendered invalid because of 'the will of (a slim majority) of the people' who had been subject to a period of intense misinformation. We're not in a good place.

 

I don't think UK democracy is fundamentally flawed, but it needs to be reviewed to make sure it remains fit for purpose.

 

As Churchill is oft quoted: "Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Edited June 9, 2019 by admin

[George.]

^Churchill is also quoted regarding Europe. 

 

We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.

 

 

He said that in 1953. It is a great pity that was either ignored or forgotten.

Edited June 9, 2019 by George.

[Davie P]

Somewhat ironically, that's classic misinformation, George. The 'quote' you've used is a conflation of two separate Churchill quotes, made over 10 years apart, that Brexit supporters took out of context, joined together and have been misleadingly spreading on social media.

 

Edit: sources added

 

A revealing deception about Winston Churchill? "So, it’s clear that Eurosceptics have concocted this ‘Churchill quote’ by stitching together four sentences he wrote in 1930 with a remark he shouted in 1944, and then put them together to claim he said the whole lot in a speech to Parliament on 11 May 1953."

 

Churchill wrongly recruited for Brexit "The problem with this quote is that it’s a deception. Brexit supporters have fabricated it by ‘stitching’ together two different quotes by Churchill, said by him at different times and in different contexts."

Edited June 9, 2019 by Davie P

[George.]

^My apologies, Davy. It appears that you are quite correct, it was a bit of a stitch-up. However, he did state, and I agree with him wholeheartedly, "“If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea." Personally, I would prefer it if every country ditched the European Union - end of problem.