Cheers.On reflection I shouldn't have posted that and I'm happy to apologise.
Decent for one or the other, we as a country are split....good for one means bad for the other, workers rights and the nhs tories are set to trash both, so no possible reconciliation and thats just the tip of the iceberg, . Its a reprise of "we won you lost" get over it. Gloat gloat f'kin gloatCheers.
I hope we can all take a moment today to accept what has happened, as none of us can go back now, and then proceed in discussing in good faith how things should be handled moving forward to benefit everyone. We’re only going to get a decent outcome if the reasonable among both sides reconcile and work together.
I am not happy with Brexit, I wanted to remain, but what’s done is done (at least for the foreseeable future), and I don’t think what comes next *has* to be a zero sum game, though I am sure many from both sides will seek to make it that.Decent for one or the other, we as a country are split....good for one means bad for the other, workers rights and the nhs tories are set to trash both, so no possible reconciliation and thats just the tip of the iceberg, . Its a reprise of "we won you lost" get over it. Gloat gloat f'kin gloat
by the same keyboard warriors that think johnson is a suitable p.m. and that lie upon lie is acceptable. Because he's "their ****"
Correct.I agree there will be a deal just as there was a deal in phase one. I don’t see the point in rehashing the same old arguments about what we will or will not do given our experience of the last three years.
Johnson had a choice in phase 1 when the penny finally dropped that the EU were not going to throw Ireland under a bus. Our choice in phase 1 was binary. An Irish land border or an Irish sea border. Not Alternative Arrangments or a high tech invisible border or whatever. Not even ‘no deal’. We chose a sea border. And again in phase 2 we will agree to options that we don’t initially like.
Well condemn their comments then instead of looking the other way.
No it wouldn't!I’d never pm him. That would be like signing up to Monty Python’s Argument Clinic.
Beautifully written and hard to argue with. I have been a supporter of the EU since we voted in the 70s, but there has always been a conflict in my mind and this article illustrates that perfectly.
My mind has been changed by:
1. Working for three years across eight countries on the banking directives, where I found many arrogant, smug and dismissive people who were convinced they held the moral high ground. Not for nothing do their critics call them eurofanatics.
2. In order to save the Euro and protect the German banks, the EU threw southern states under a bus. Untold misery, poverty and unemployment were considered a price worth paying. Moral high ground? Don't make me laugh. It is a paradox that many on the left in Britain wholeheartedly condemn the austerity of the recent tory govs, bur are remainers with nothing to say about the EUs much more severe treatment of their own members.
3. The process of Brexit and the arguments around it. The process is a shambles and we are still only half way through it. On the EUs part, I think they believed they could stop it and caused much difficulty in that attempt. Theresa May hardly helped, being incapable of negotiation or much humanity. Then, of course, our own dear parliament wasted three years avoiding giving effect to the referendum result. Nothing was more telling than the Libdems, the Libdems mind you, going into a GE, promising to annul the referendum and cancel Brexit by fiat. (I have voted Liberal and its successors many times, but it will be a long time before I make that mistake again.)
I dont need to go over the arguments round Brexit; suffice it to say that those remainers (plenty on here) who threw around words like racist, stupid, little englanders, really ought to learn not to assume to know the motives of others, but rather enter into the argument. As a sceptical remainer, this was the most disappointing thing of all. They should remember that there are many right across Europe who are sceptical of the EU and fear its overarching arrogance. These critics are by no means confined to the right politically. Oh, and it really is about politics, not economics or trade.
So, enough from me, a sceptical remainer to a reluctant Brexiteer.
Indeed - really well written - I hope Remainers on here have made the effort to absorb it and learn from it.
This section had relevance for these threads:
".........It has been a particularly irritating habit of the British establishment, aligned with a nexus of vested interests, and their army of academic and media auxiliaries, to reduce Brexit to a matter of trade above all else. If that were the case, then one would wish to stay in the EU.
But Brexit is not about trade, and nor are the details of customs clearance or rules of origin as important as we keep being told. They are not trivial but they are second order issues.
The elemental question is who runs this country. Do we wish to be a self-governing democracy under our own courts, or a canton of a higher supra-national regime that keeps acquiring more powers – beyond its ability to exercise them competently – through the Monnet Method of treaty creep?"
I have tried reading that from several angles - but is does indeed seem to be that you are suggesting that people are not making it all about tradeI'm not sure if this is a wind up or not, but I don't think anyone ever claimed the EU was purely about trade.
Opt outsIndeed - really well written - I hope Remainers on here have made the effort to absorb it and learn from it.
This section had relevance for these threads:
".........It has been a particularly irritating habit of the British establishment, aligned with a nexus of vested interests, and their army of academic and media auxiliaries, to reduce Brexit to a matter of trade above all else. If that were the case, then one would wish to stay in the EU.
But Brexit is not about trade, and nor are the details of customs clearance or rules of origin as important as we keep being told. They are not trivial but they are second order issues.
The elemental question is who runs this country. Do we wish to be a self-governing democracy under our own courts, or a canton of a higher supra-national regime that keeps acquiring more powers – beyond its ability to exercise them competently – through the Monnet Method of treaty creep?"
Opt outs
Opt outs baby
Opt outs
Opt outs baby
AND
Call me Dave got agreement that we would be exempt from further integration in his his pre referendum negotiations.
Ever closer union was a founding principle. It's what we signed up to in 73. Don't pretend it's a surprise or something new.And that cuts straight through to the core concept of the EU. Federalism wanes for periods but then its proponents get confident enough to move closer to it. Terms like 'ever closer union' and 'a two speed Europe' start to be bandied about and more powers are lost by member states and are then centralised under collective voting.
Trade is merely a fig leaf for the creation eventually of a European super state.
Ever closer union was a founding principle. It's what we signed up to in 73. Don't pretend it's a surprise or something new.
Says the man who lives his life in this thread?!
Beyond irony.
Surely it would be @Ric!? ;-)I wonder who's the top poster on this thread.?
Got a feeling a couple of leavers are well clear.