Another new Brexit thread

[BobKowalski]

Im no longer a leaver.

Im a leaver and stop remainers and revokers at all costs type of guy!

That’s going to make a shit hashtag

 

[blueinsa]

That’s going to make a shit hashtag

Luckily my aversion to all things twatter and hashtag means i dont care ;-)

 

[Blue Hefner]

Brexit has been a clusterfuck from the start and it's only got worse.

At last, Revocation is being talked about as policy and so, from now on, I'm no longer identifying as a "Remainer".

I'm a Revoker, and proud!

STOP BREXIT!

I was a Leaver, then a Remainer then a Revoker but now I'm a least-bader(I don't think that name will catch on). Revoking without another referendum would do all sorts of damage. go for the least bad, put it down to experience and fuck the hecklers off back to the fringes where they belong

 

[Rascal]

I still disagree that the UK is simply a nation state in the classical sense, it's even in the bloody name it's a Union!!! Sure, it's a union founded by monarchistic means mostly afaik, but the UK is distincly a more multicultural and multigovermental entity compared to say ... Japan.

People do tend to see the UK as a single entity which it is most not, it is a Union of nation states which have for hundreds of years had a single currency, FOM, a central Government, singular Armed Forces etc etc, it is in every sense operating as a singular nation state, despite it not being a singular nation state.

It could have been a template for how the EU should operate, but our reluctance to get involved and shape the EU in the UKs image was sadly never undertaken. We could have been huge influencers instead of being on the side lines sniping at others. I would have very much rather the UK be at the heart of the EU than be the ones who were the most sceptical about it, but as the scepticism grew as a nation we allowed others to lead and we became a follower, hence why I believe the status quo to be untenable. We missed our chance to be the great reformers and teach others about our experiences of how a Union can work and that missed opportunity means we now in my opinion have the only option left to us which is to leave.

We inhabit a strange country that lives in cloud cuckoo land a lot of the time and in time I think we will rue the opportunity missed, but we have chosen our path and that path must be tread.

 

[mcfc1632]

It seems odd that CARICOM, MERCOSUR, ASEAN, GCC and I'm sure many other blocs around the world have varying levels of freedom of movement for citizens of their member states, whether it's full FoM, FoM for skilled labour or other criteria, and they manage to do this without being labelled as discriminatory against non-members of their respective blocs.
A level of FoM around any regional grouping in the world is absolutely normal and attempts by some to use the supposed discriminatory nature of FoM as a stick to beat the EU with is fucking ridiculous. They need to learn about how the world works.

I suggest that you google the meaning of the word 'discriminate'.

If you did you would see that it is undeniably the case that the EU rules and policies on the movement of people discriminate against the citizens from non-EU nation states.

Now I have no problem people supporting that - I do not though understand why they try to argue against what is an utterly simple fact

There must be something about realising that they support policies that inherently discriminate that makes them uncomfortable

 

[1.618034]

Not seen this graphic before

That graphic is misleading. Based on the quoted figures, and if the bars were equal width, then the larger bar should be 19 times the height of the smaller one. When it's actually only 15 times as high. But the bars are actually different widths, meaning the graph isn't a bar chart, but a histogram. That means the area of the blocks should represent the totals. Therefore, the large bar should have an area that's 19 times as big. But, the area is only 16.5 times as big.

Underplaying it, as usual.

STOPBREXIT!

Im no longer a leaver.

Im a leaver and stop remainers and revokers at all costs type of guy!

"All costs"???

 

[BobKowalski]

I was a Leaver, then a Remainer then a Revoker but now I'm a least-bader(I don't think that name will catch on). Revoking without another referendum would do all sorts of damage. go for the least bad, put it down to experience and fuck the hecklers off back to the fringes where they belong

Splitter

 

[BobKowalski]

People do tend to see the UK as a single entity which it is most not, it is a Union of nation states which have for hundreds of years had a single currency, FOM, a central Government, singular Armed Forces etc etc, it is in every sense operating as a singular nation state, despite it not being a singular nation state.

It could have been a template for how the EU should operate, but our reluctance to get involved and shape the EU in the UKs image was sadly never undertaken. We could have been huge influencers instead of being on the side lines sniping at others. I would have very much rather the UK be at the heart of the EU than be the ones who were the most sceptical about it, but as the scepticism grew as a nation we allowed others to lead and we became a follower, hence why I believe the status quo to be untenable. We missed our chance to be the great reformers and teach others about our experiences of how a Union can work and that missed opportunity means we now in my opinion have the only option left to us which is to leave.

We inhabit a strange country that lives in cloud cuckoo land a lot of the time and in time I think we will rue the opportunity missed, but we have chosen our path and that path must be tread.

Possibly. But aren’t we back to this U.K. exceptionalism problem again? This idea we must be the leaders in all things? And if we are not leaders we cannot tolerate being followers and so we must burn everything down rather than accept a lesser role?

 

[1.618034]

I was a Leaver, then a Remainer then a Revoker but now I'm a least-bader(I don't think that name will catch on). Revoking without another referendum would do all sorts of damage. go for the least bad, put it down to experience and fuck the hecklers off back to the fringes where they belong

Another referendum campaign? No thanks.

We go back to the original issues.

What will the question be? You can't have 3 options!
Is it advisory?
What majority?
Do our nations have an equal voice?
It takes months to organise referenda, and that's once you've sorted out the above.
What if we voted leave again? It still might not pass Parliament ffs!

Revoke and then let the parties/MPs decide what their policies are going forward. If someone wins a majority promising Brexit, then good luck to them getting it through Parliament.

They won't.

STOP BREXIT!

 

[grunge]

You make my argument for me.

Yes - the US is the United States of America

Yes the EU ideologues aspire for the EU to be the United States of Europe - but it currently is not and there are a lot of citizens of the EU that do not wish that ambition to be realised as they are quite happy living in a sovereign state.

In the UK - which is where my interests lie - the majority were so adamant in their view that they voted to leave the EU.

It really is quite simple - you see the EU as a 'super nation state' and wish for that - it is not and many do not want it to be

And Yet one of the concessions Cameron got from the EU was that non Eurozone members dont have to partake in the "ever close political bonds". and as you say a lot of countries dont want it so its pretty much a non starter as it would just get vetoed to hell.

Its raises an interesting point though about how things were reported. Cameron asked for 4 concessions from the EU before calling the referendum, and technically got them all, yet it was heavily reported as a failure on DC's part and that the EU gave nothing.

 

[George Hannah]

..Point is, it is perfectly valid for nation states to voluntarily place immigration within a larger confederalist structure. One has to understand that the legal basis of nation states is SELF DETERMINATION, it doesnt make it really discrimiatory one the basis of technical govermental structures if from a self determinalistic pov all nationality's within the confederacy identify as of the same identity. At least, not less discriminatory as the way nation states typicly handle foreign immigration.

? A nation state can indeed pool its sovereignty in respect of migration policies as part of an international trade treaty such as Shengen. The EU can and does interpret its terms of reference to introduce overall immigration policies and controls which actually confict with both member and non-member states' border arrangements - such as in countries bordering the Mediterranean. If the UK eventually lands outside the EU we may well see the same situation obtain in Ireland.

 

[mcfc1632]

The other half of my reply explained in very basic terms how unions work and how the United Kingdom also works. You’re purposefully ignoring this fact as it rubbishes the argument.

The fact is, the EU have taken a step in the direction of internationalism, with FoM between members. It also allows those external to the EU, the ability to travel to 27 other countries if they can gain citizenship in an EU country, through a spouse or other means.

This wasn’t possible and non-EU born migrants have MORE rights than ever before.

Maybe I should just be ignoring this argument as others have said, it’s absolutely laughable but not a surprise you’ve made it.

Nope - you are utterly wrong

Simple question and stop the very obvious squirming and deflection - give a yes or no answer

Does a citizen of a non-EU nation enjoy the same opportunity to move to the UK as an EU citizen? or is there a level to which EU citizen is recognised and a distinction/differentiation is made?

Remember yes or no - I will consider any other answer to just be more deflection

After you can face the truth we can move on to other aspects of the policy

Also, you say:

"Maybe I should just be ignoring this argument as others have said....."

I agree that maybe you should. 'Winning' the point is not really important to me but when I read that post it was clear to me that I had won the point with that poster and, if you reply with more deflection rather than a yes or no, then it is clear to me that I have 'won' the point with you - because you will have been proven yourself not to be able to face up to the truth of matters.

Don't forget I am not talking about the support you may have for the policy - just making the truthful statement that the policy is inherently discriminatory.

 

[BobKowalski]

We want to negotiate but don’t want to attend meetings where you can gauge what other member states are thinking or discussing on a variety of subjects which may prove useful background knowledge or even a bit of leverage in our negotiations. Dumb.

 

[BobKowalski]

Nope - you are utterly wrong

Simple question and stop the very obvious squirming and deflection - give a yes or no answer

Practice what you preach brother. Practice what you preach.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

You miss my point, deliberately.

She says with a straight face that if more people vote for something then it should be done.

Then my point is that take that up with Cameron, May, BoJo. Politics moves on.

 

[mcfc1632]

What is "is structures that govern". The USA is a federation of states. Whatever the EU is (which seems food for discussion here) the reality is that FoM applies as agreed upon by all member states of the EU. So from a legalist perspective it boils down to "on the matter of immigration we all accept that we act as if one country" or even "we recognise that all Europeans are of equal identity in this regard", and this is justified under the fact that it took unanimous consent. It would thus be on the head of all these goverments that they enacted somethign that would be "discriminatory", perhaps so but it absolutly makes no difference whatsoever in terms of international politics to hold that view as many similar structures exist within a global reality where the interrests and choices of nation states are determinal. The legalist basis within the USA flows from the same "as individual states we recognise that we act as 1 country on these matters".

I knew that you would get there eventually.....

This will be the treaties that 2 PMs recognised that there was substantial resistance to by the citizens of the UK and therefore won majorities at elections by promising a referendum on them - only to then renege on those commitments. When the 3rd promise was made and surprisingly kept - we saw the extent to which there is resistance in the UK to the EU's direction of travel towards a federal superstate.

But we digress - as good your point is - the main thing being discussed (at least by me) is that the rules and policies of the EU are inherently discriminatory with regards immigration. So to keep it simple I will ask the same question to you:

Does a citizen of a non-EU nation enjoy the same opportunity to move to the UK as an EU citizen? or is there a level to which EU citizen is recognised and a distinction/differentiation is made?

Remember yes or no

 

[Blue Hefner]

Another referendum campaign? No thanks.

We go back to the original issues.

What will the question be? You can't have 3 options!
Is it advisory?
What majority?
Do our nations have an equal voice?
It takes months to organise referenda, and that's once you've sorted out the above.
What if we voted leave again? It still might not pass Parliament ffs!

Revoke and then let the parties/MPs decide what their policies are going forward. If someone wins a majority promising Brexit, then good luck to them getting it through Parliament.

They won't.

STOP BREXIT!

I don't fancy a second referendum. Not at all

But let's say we revoke tomorrow. What happens to all those MPs and members of the public that still think Brexit is a good idea? How would the EU treat us as they would know that within the next 4 years a Party will be campaigning on Leaving and we could be handing another letter in then round and round we go - we would look even more ridiculous, in my opinion

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Nope - you are utterly wrong.....

....just making the truthful statement that the policy is inherently discriminatory.

I flagged to you that this was nothing to do with the EU - it is a UK only political decision, as far as I am aware. Still waiting for you to prove otherwise?

Your truthful statements are based on a falsehood. Typical of the leave argument - at the core is misinformation and a warped comprehension of a complex topic.

 

[mcfc1632]

What was that about deflections?

Well spotted

BobK is quite clearly trying to deflect by quoting me as having said something that I most certainly have not

Like you, I am sure, I find that tactic a thoroughly obvious type of deflection

 

[mcfc1632]

Swinson claiming a liberal democrat government would have a democratic mandate to revoke as the electorate had voted for it.

Anyone want to point out the problem with her argument there and her own behaviour this last 3 years re a democratic mandate and vote?

You make an excellent point and I am sure there will be a flood of answers

I am just enjoying the potential for the Remain vote to be split by a very clear stance by the LibDems and a very muddy one by Labour.