Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mëtal Bikër said:
They won't. Especially when you see the likes of Wrong-Daily have gone full 'Principle Skinner' about why they lost.

“I was in a state of shock and it was as if everything I believed being ripped up before my very eyes, that everything we fought and we’re so proud of was suddenly invalidated, no-one wanted us, no-one wanted socialism.”

“And then I pushed that thought out of my head because I thought ‘that’s bollocks’,”

3nmz3y.jpg
Click to expand...


If you didn't believe the voters were wrong you'd never try and change an elected government, or a stupid electoral system that the voters voted not to change, or try and get them to vote again rather than plunge the country into (what you believed to be) economic folly, taking away their rights and the reality of beneficial trade deals in favour of new 50p pieces and promises of less beneficial trade deals (or none).

And it's Principal Skinner, not Principle Skinner.
 
Third hand from a friend of a relative...

"I sail overnight from a country in the EU on Friday to another country that's in the EU. I will arrive the following morning in an EU country, having left from a non-EU country."
 
Vic said:
Third hand from a friend of a relative...

"I sail overnight from a country in the EU on Friday to another country that's in the EU. I will arrive the following morning in an EU country, having left from a non-EU country."
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that Vic.
 
Len Rum said:
Except that the 'fiscal headroom' was a phrase used by the Tories to describe their money tree.
Do keep up.
Click to expand...
And "Utter fucking madness" was the term used to describe Labour's ludicrous spending plans. Perhaps you missed it? The electorate didn't.
 
Chippy_boy said:
You seem like this moving towards a superstate is some new revelation, like finally we know the truth or something? I find that surprising. The objective of the EU has been the creation of a European superstate, ever since 1957, and perhaps even before that - before it was formed. The loosely-coupled collection of states merely forming a trading bloc was a mere diversion, perhaps given legs by one Margaret Thatcher, especially with her desire to significantly broaden the membership and thereby making the necessary precursors to full union - fiscal, monetary and political alignment more difficult. But the end game was always the United States of Europe.

I fully recognised this and had no issues with it. Either we would continue maintain our opt outs, and perhaps encourage a two-speed approach to unification, or we wouldn't. The idea of Europe being one country is in many ways quite appealing. (And other ways not of course, but on balance not something I was losing any sleep over.)
Click to expand...
No surprise to me - indeed the opposite.

In that post I was just commenting on the content of Speeches from both the ideologues and the sceptics.

I have posted many times that it has been the intention of the architects of the EU to achieve the superstate - I have commented on that intent from Monnet onwards.

Go back 3 years and most of the pro-Remain posters were calling me a fantasist - yet you were aware of the truth of the intended direction - as I think also were some of those that were decrying what I posted as they were denying the opportunity to debate the inconvenient truths - as is their wont

But what has always been the intention of the ideologues was not what was committed to by the population of the UK in the initial referendum.

I became more and more outraged as we saw the herding strategy of the ideologues - intent to realise their dream incrementally, treaty by treaty, without letting something so crass as 'the will of the people' interfere or, if possible not even be tested.

Where referenda caused setbacks these were overturned through either 2nd votes being secured or the treaties being rebadged - Lisbon.

As generations ticked by this became more and more easy to achieve as 'local' governments became run by EU sycophants - we saw that clearly in the UK as politicians were duplicitous enough to win majorities on the strength of promises to hold a vote on key treaties only to then renege on such promises once in No. 10.

No - the lack of democracy at the heart of the EU has been clear to me for a very long time - you may have been OK with their destination - I most certainly was not
 
Chippy_boy said:
And "Utter fucking madness" was the term used to describe Labour's ludicrous spending plans. Perhaps you missed it? The electorate didn't.
Click to expand...
Except the subject of my post was the Tory reversal of their promise that austerity was over, not Labour's spending plans.
Instead of addressing that point you used your usual deflection and whataboutery technique to avoid addressing the issue.
Rien ne change.
 
mcfc1632 said:
No surprise to me - indeed the opposite.

In that post I was just commenting on the content of Speeches from both the ideologues and the sceptics.

I have posted many times that it has been the intention of the architects of the EU to achieve the superstate - I have commented on that intent from Monnet onwards.

Go back 3 years and most of the pro-Remain posters were calling me a fantasist - yet you were aware of the truth of the intended direction - as I think also were some of those that were decrying what I posted as they were denying the opportunity to debate the inconvenient truths - as is their wont

But what has always been the intention of the ideologues was not what was committed to by the population of the UK in the initial referendum.

I became more and more outraged as we saw the herding strategy of the ideologues - intent to realise their dream incrementally, treaty by treaty, without letting something so crass as 'the will of the people' interfere or, if possible not even be tested.

Where referenda caused setbacks these were overturned through either 2nd votes being secured or the treaties being rebadged - Lisbon.

As generations ticked by this became more and more easy to achieve as 'local' governments became run by EU sycophants - we saw that clearly in the UK as politicians were duplicitous enough to win majorities on the strength of promises to hold a vote on key treaties only to then renege on such promises once in No. 10.

No - the lack of democracy at the heart of the EU has been clear to me for a very long time - you may have been OK with their destination - I most certainly was not
Click to expand...

I’m fully on board with the EU superstate albeit I think it will be more of a loosely held together federated province than a State. Not sure what our status with them will be though. An uneasy one I guess. With lots of moaning about the EU and how it still won’t do what we want. How do you live next door to a ‘superstate’ that you have no influence or say over? Tricky one.
 
mcfc1632 said:
No - the lack of democracy at the heart of the EU has been clear to me for a very long time - you may have been OK with their destination - I most certainly was not
Click to expand...

As an aside, I don't buy this "lack of democracy" argument. The commission draws up proposals and the democratically elected parliament votes upon them. And parliament can ask the commission to bring forward proposals. It's not perfect, but it is not undemocratic.

But anyway, would you have been OK with a federal EU, if it was more democratic? Seems to me your objections go much further than disgruntlement with their form of democracy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top