Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

briany

Probably one of the biggest Leave points was that the EU is an undemocratic institution in which unelected bureaucrats hand down edicts for the member countries to blindly follow. I suppose that this idea caught on so well because the average Brexit voter hasn't much knowledge on how the EU functions. Let's look at some EU institutions:-

The EU parliament - Consists of 751 MEPs. Each country elects a number of these. How many they get to elect is proportional to the percentage of the overall population that they constitute. Their main job is to discuss and vote upon proposed legislation.

The European Commission - Consists of 28 commissioners. Each member state gets to appoint one. The Commission has a president who is elected by the European Council. Their job is to meet and draft legislation that can be passed to the EU legislature so that it can be passed or rejected. A new sitting of the Commission must first be interviewed and approved by the EU parliament before that Commission can take office.

The European Council - Consists of each EU member's head of state. Their job is to set out the aims and future direction of the EU. They elect their own president by qualified majority.

The Council of the European Union - Consists of EU members' ministers and acts as an upper house to the EU parliament. Meets in 10 different configurations depending on the policy area being discussed, e.g. if agriculture were the issue at hand, it would be member states' agricultural ministers.

For legislation proposed by the Commission to become law, it must have a simple majority in the EU parliament as well as a double majority in the Council of the EU.

road_high

That labour guy was a wet blanket. Might as well not have been there for the Remain side and let Lucas do all the talking as she well able to do.

divillybit

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/my-marriage-is-over-because-i-voted-for-brexit-a4012066.html

With the Brexit deadline of the end of March fast approaching it seems that there wouldnt be enough time to organise such a vote.. I'm sure it would cost tens of millions to have such vote but why are Labour and the Tories are so opposed to it... probably because people would have changed their minds and vote to remain... better the devil you know as the last member of the audience said. It's sad to see the division it has caused and even relationships to fail like in the link above

J Mysterio

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

In fairness I heard an author of a book on Brexit mentioning a huge factor with the British is when though they won WW 2 they never actually felt they had as Germany, Italy and Japans economy boomed in the years after the war and Britain’s didn’t.

And that resentment is still there.

Peter Hitchens has released an Interesting book i intend to read: The Phoney Victory. He argues that Churchill has been overly glorified and his decisions have not seen much useful critical analysis. He argues that WWII cost Britain the Empire and is a 'phoney victory', a phyrric victory I guess.

I don't agree with everything he says, particularly RE Ireland, but he is intelligent and erudite in his own way.

prawnsambo

J Mysterio wrote: »

Peter Hitchens has released an Interesting book i intend to read: The Phoney Victory. He argues that Churchill has been overly glorified and his decisions have not seen much useful critical analysis. He argues that WWII cost Britain the Empire and is a 'phoney victory', a phyrric victory I guess.

I don't agree with everything he says, particularly RE Ireland, but he is intelligent and erudite in his own way.

What was the alternative? Capitulating to Germany? Either way, the empire was gone.

J Mysterio

prawnsambo wrote: »

What was the alternative? Capitulating to Germany? Either way, the empire was gone.

Well, I havent read it yet, but I think the point is that resources weren't always used effectively and the national consciousness/ psyche is too invested in WW2 as a great victory.

I just think that angle is interesting in the context of Brexit insofar as the EU is often referred to in alegoric terms with reference to the war and the Germans 'using the EU to take over again'.

Leroy42

Didn't get the chance to watch the C4 debate. What are peoples opinions of an outcome, if any?

From what I can gather from opinion polls and vox pops is that few people are changing their minds and if they haven't to date nothing anyone if saying, on either side, is really going to make a difference.

On a different point, I see the starting pistol on the race to replace TM has already started with each of Johnson, Raab and McVey clearly signaling their intent on the Sunday morning interviews.

It seems a long time ago now but at the early stages of this the tories were claiming that telling anyone about their plans, the effect on the economy, transport etc would be handing the initiative to the EU. Now it seems it is perfectly OK to let the EU know that whatever they agree with TM is worthless as she won't be around long enough.

Water John

That sub line up is fairly pathetic.

Captain Obvious

Water John wrote: »

That sub line up is fairly pathetic.

Well the opposition isn't up to much either.

Headshot

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Well the opposition isn't up to much either.

Yup while Corbyn is in charge the Labour party will always be in inept. Just amazing how this guy is head of Labour.

Folkstonian

I thought the whole debate was quite unedifying.

We know all the arguments at this stage; leave, remain, soft Brexit, hard Brexit.

Nobody is going to learn anything at this late stage. There’s nothing left that hasn’t been said.

I do think James Cleverley is an impressive politician though, not that it’s hard to stand out right now, lots of charisma and speaks well... even if I do completely disagree with him vehemently on May’s deal

dr.fuzzenstein

J Mysterio wrote: »

Well, I havent read it yet, but I think the point is that resources weren't always used effectively and the national consciousness/ psyche is too invested in WW2 as a great victory.

I just think that angle is interesting in the context of Brexit insofar as the EU is often referred to in alegoric terms with reference to the war and the Germans 'using the EU to take over again'.

Unfortunate attitude from the UK. It is a bit of a joke in Germany that the Brits can't see past WW2. Only a Brit would say "two world wars and one world cup" to a German. This goes right down to politics and their "we'll never bow down to Gerry!" attitude.
As another poster put it, "we'd rather die standing up than live on our knees". What absolute drivel and exactly the kind of unconstructive verbal diarrhea engaged in by the leave side. Inventing a conflict that just doesn't exist.
I want to make a few points. First, I am really, really glad that Germany lost the war. Secondly, according to the Brits, they singlehandedly defeated Germany, but it has to be said that, well, no.
But aside from that, look at Europe. Germany, Austria, Hungary, France, Sweden, Poland, well, pretty much every country has fought with every country in countless bloody and bitter wars over thousands of years. Europe is soaked in the blood of millions and millions of people. I'm sure you could cover all of it in several inches of bone dust.
You don't find Europeans talking to each other about whatever battles were fought several hundred years ago.
If every European country hung onto old grievances or former glories like the UK did, there would still be perpetual war here. A Brit would mention the war (pun intended), but Poles, French, Dutch, Norwegians, Belgians, well any surrounding country never would.
That's not because they feel intimidated by the evil German standing in front of them, but because it would never enter our heads to do so. We don't forget the past, but we don't dig it up every single time we meet someone we've had a beef with. We'd get nothing done.
And it's not just evil Germany, many other countries had designs on becoming world leaders. Spain, France, Italy, Sweden, to name but a few.
Brexit came about because the Brexiteers live in a glorious past that doesn't exist outside history books and old movies shown at Christmas time where they bloody well showed the Hun what for and make no mistake!
They should try inhabiting the 20th century first and then gradually work their way up to the 21st.
I love and admire the UK. I've been there, knew a lot of Brits in Ireland and who wouldn't love their culture and definitely their music. And no one does comedy better. They have helped shaped the world we know today.
What surprises me is that this regressive attitude hasn't always been there, but right now it seems to be very en vogue internationally to be right leaning and isolationist.

ThePanjandrum

Leroy42 wrote: »

Didn't get the chance to watch the C4 debate. What are peoples opinions of an outcome, if any?

I haven't watched it yet but I understand that most people thought that the two best "debaters" were Lucas and Rees-Mogg (depending on whether you are a Remainer or Leaver.

My money would be on Rees-Mogg from his previous performances but that reflects my own bias too.

An Ciarraioch

May Varadkar phone call this evening, also spoke to Tusk this morning.

funkey_monkey

Although I don't like his politics, I thought JRM, as I expected, spoke very well. Probably the best. Also Caroline Lucas spoke well, but was a bit too much on the sidelines at times. Got some good blows on too.

Conservative guy promoting TM was on a hiding to nothing and was overshadowed by all others. Never really got in any good bless on the others.

Labour guy was all over the place. Made some good points though.

However, I'm not sure that there will be a sufficient swing in a people's vote to put this matter to rest. I still believe that make constitutional issues like this and reunification should require a super majority to allow it to pass.
I did notice the audience seemed very vocal in support of the people's vote though. Not that that means anything.

God only knows where this mess if going to end up. It ain't going to be pretty.

Enzokk

Whoever Labour sent was in for a tough time. If your policy for Brexit is the same unicorns and cake that the Tories has been trying to sell then you will look like an idiot. There is no way they will get a better deal nor will they be able to negotiate it in time either.

The one person who may have stood a chance was one of their remainers like Keir Starmer, but seeing that Caroline Lucas was there already and she is more than capable herself they needed some deluded soul to step up.

FrancieBrady

Folkstonian wrote: »

Every country has opt outs in certain areas.

Every country votes in accordance with its own interests in the council and in the parliament.

Have you called out Germany for pushing extreme economic liberalism for the last few decades despite the deeply harmful impact this has had on many smaller, less wealthy member states?

Have you called out France for aggressively pursuing a protectionist economic policy despite a majority of member states publicly stating that this is not in their best interests?

If you are prepared to single out and vilify the U.K. whilst all other countries engage in the same activity, you are a xenophobe.

This is a thread about BREXIT the BR bit referring to Britain.
In this thread we are discussing the concept and realisation of Brexit. Having a huff every time Britain gets criticised is silly and pointless.
If you wish to discuss my or anybody else's opinion of France, Germany's or anybody elses contribution, open a thread on that subject.

hill16bhoy

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Unfortunate attitude from the UK. It is a bit of a joke in Germany that the Brits can't see past WW2. Only a Brit would say "two world wars and one world cup" to a German. This goes right down to politics and their "we'll never bow down to Gerry!" attitude.
As another poster put it, "we'd rather die standing up than live on our knees". What absolute drivel and exactly the kind of unconstructive verbal diarrhea engaged in by the leave side. Inventing a conflict that just doesn't exist.
I want to make a few points. First, I am really, really glad that Germany lost the war. Secondly, according to the Brits, they singlehandedly defeated Germany, but it has to be said that, well, no.
But aside from that, look at Europe. Germany, Austria, Hungary, France, Sweden, Poland, well, pretty much every country has fought with every country in countless bloody and bitter wars over thousands of years. Europe is soaked in the blood of millions and millions of people. I'm sure you could cover all of it in several inches of bone dust.
You don't find Europeans talking to each other about whatever battles were fought several hundred years ago.
If every European country hung onto old grievances or former glories like the UK did, there would still be perpetual war here. A Brit would mention the war (pun intended), but Poles, French, Dutch, Norwegians, Belgians, well any surrounding country never would.
That's not because they feel intimidated by the evil German standing in front of them, but because it would never enter our heads to do so. We don't forget the past, but we don't dig it up every single time we meet someone we've had a beef with. We'd get nothing done.
And it's not just evil Germany, many other countries had designs on becoming world leaders. Spain, France, Italy, Sweden, to name but a few.
Brexit came about because the Brexiteers live in a glorious past that doesn't exist outside history books and old movies shown at Christmas time where they bloody well showed the Hun what for and make no mistake!
They should try inhabiting the 20th century first and then gradually work their way up to the 21st.
I love and admire the UK. I've been there, knew a lot of Brits in Ireland and who wouldn't love their culture and definitely their music. And no one does comedy better. They have helped shaped the world we know today.
What surprises me is that this regressive attitude hasn't always been there, but right now it seems to be very en vogue internationally to be right leaning and isolationist.

The idea that a country or a people needs to be "great" is one of the most disastrous and appalling ideas in history.

"Greatness" implies glorious victories over others, that others will fear you and bow down to your demands, supremacy, an exalted status among peoples.

"Greatness" implies a perpetual state of war - if not actual war with weapons, a war of minds, a war of systems, a war for control.

That co-operation is an inherently bad thing and that geopolitics, humanity even, is a zero-sum game.

It's pathetic and we see the consequences today with Trump, Putin, Brexit and the far right all across Europe.

Instead of "Make Britain Great Again", it would be far more beneficial if the prevailing philosophy was to "Make Britain Good".

A good country is better than a "Great" country, or a country with notions of greatness.

Nowhere demonstrates that better than Germany.

ThePanjandrum

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

As another poster put it, "we'd rather die standing up than live on our knees". What absolute drivel and exactly the kind of unconstructive verbal diarrhea engaged in by the leave side.

It's a quote generally attributed to Zapata (although I suspect it went much further back) and I'm sure that it will have been used by Irish nationalists as it has been by people from many other countries.

There's nothing stupid about the quote at all, it merely expresses the conviction that some beliefs are worth standing up for at the cost of all else. I think that some beliefs are worth sacrificing everything for, don't you?

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

Didn't get the chance to watch the C4 debate. What are peoples opinions of an outcome, if any?

From what I can gather from opinion polls and vox pops is that few people are changing their minds and if they haven't to date nothing anyone if saying, on either side, is really going to make a difference.

On a different point, I see the starting pistol on the race to replace TM has already started with each of Johnson, Raab and McVey clearly signaling their intent on the Sunday morning interviews.

It seems a long time ago now but at the early stages of this the tories were claiming that telling anyone about their plans, the effect on the economy, transport etc would be handing the initiative to the EU. Now it seems it is perfectly OK to let the EU know that whatever they agree with TM is worthless as she won't be around long enough.

Barry Gardiner did his usual bout of spluttering and generally saying that Labour's Brexit will be everything to everyone. James Cleverly said very little of note. Lucas was impressive and I thought Mogg came in second though we've all heard this before.

The only thing illuminating is how Labour are still contorting themselves so as to avoid providing any opposition whatsoever to Brexit.

J Mysterio

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Nowhere demonstrates that better than Germany.

What does this mean?

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/carldinnen/status/1071893465104027651


Withdrawal agreement not going to change but they might be able to do something about the political declaration?

Enzokk

Seems like Theresa May has a plan B. Don't anyone ever say she was a remainer.

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1071892116815654912

Enzokk

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/carldinnen/status/1071893465104027651


Withdrawal agreement not going to change but they might be able to do something about the political declaration?

Sure, because the WA is what matters and the political declaration is what they aim to achieve. I aim to be a billionaire by end of next year is different to signing a contract that will guarantee me a billion dollars in December 2019, or something like that.:cool:

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

Didn't get the chance to watch the C4 debate. What are peoples opinions of an outcome, if any?

From what I can gather from opinion polls and vox pops is that few people are changing their minds and if they haven't to date nothing anyone if saying, on either side, is really going to make a difference.

On a different point, I see the starting pistol on the race to replace TM has already started with each of Johnson, Raab and McVey clearly signaling their intent on the Sunday morning interviews.

It seems a long time ago now but at the early stages of this the tories were claiming that telling anyone about their plans, the effect on the economy, transport etc would be handing the initiative to the EU. Now it seems it is perfectly OK to let the EU know that whatever they agree with TM is worthless as she won't be around long enough.

Caroline Lucas was the winner on the night. Very clear, articulate and passionate as she argued her case.....she put up a strong argument for a second referendum and landed blows on the other three panelists.

hill16bhoy

J Mysterio wrote: »

What does this mean?

From 1870 to 1945, German leaders encouraged the belief that Germany was "uber alles", that it had an exalted status among the peoples of the world, culminating in the belief in the "master race", the belief that others were sub-human, the Holocaust, and all the other horrors of World War II.

Post-World War II, West Germany and then Germany abandoned its notions of greatness and became a force for peace, stability and co-operation in Europe. It concentrated on being a good country, not a "Great" country, in other words.

A large section of British society has never fully come to terms with not being "Great". British governments, particularly Tory governments, never fully came to terms with it either.

Good is infinitely better than "Great".

ThePanjandrum

hill16bhoy wrote: »

From 1870 to 1945, German leaders encouraged the belief that Germany was "uber alles", that it had an exalted status among the peoples of the world, culminating in the belief in the "master race", the belief that others were sub-human, the Holocaust, and all the other horrors of World War II.

Post-World War II, West Germany and then Germany abandoned its notions of greatness and became a force for peace, stability and co-operation in Europe. It concentrated on being a good country, not a "Great" country, in other words.

A large section of British society has never fully come to terms with not being "Great". British governments, particularly Tory governments, never fully came to terms with it either.

Good is infinitely better than "Great".

"Great" is fine as an aspiration, "Deutschland über alles" was fine too as it referred to the incorporation of the small states of Germany into a single entity. Even the idea of "the white man's burden" is no problem when it bears the meaning of sacrificing your own interests for the benefit of others. But ignoring the welfare of your own citizens or subjugating others purely for your own country's benefit can be problematic, though not inevitably so.

Folkstonian

Great means big. Big Britain. As in, the biggest of the British isles.

road_high

Great was only ever a geographical term as in Greater/big to describe the island of Britain. It seems to have taken on a literal sense particularly with brexit going on. Ie Great Britain in a superior sense

Mr.Nice Guy

There's a very good documentary series made thirty years ago - An Ocean Apart it's called - which is presented by David Dimbleby, and it discusses the relationship between the UK and America from WW1 up to the Falklands conflict, and how difficult the British found the transition to go from their Empire to effectively relying on the US. It was produced by Adam Curtis, who has done a lot of acclaimed documentaries and who has contributed to Charlie Brooker's Newswipe programmes in the past.

All of the episodes are on Youtube. It's an interesting series to observe in light of the Brexit debate. I watched it earlier this year and one of the things I took away from it was that a lot of the humility that tends to come from an empire collapsing was absent in the British case, as a lot of the humiliating aspects of the changing relationship were kept out of the public's eyes.

While France and Germany had their moment of crashing down to earth in WW2, the British did not; on the contrary, WW2 inflated their idea of importance in the world despite the reality that it was America and Russia who became the true superpowers post WW2.

The Suez crisis probably should have been the moment when reality struck, but careful management of the narrative meant the delusions were allowed to continue. And despite EU membership in the 70s, the British continued to look westwards to America rather than eastwards, and via the Thatcher and Reagan relationship a sense that they were on a level playing field to the US was allowed to take hold. It is even claimed in the aforementioned series by the Secretary of the US Navy, "You would have been defeated without us."

I've heard other commentators make the point that one of the silver linings of Brexit will be that finally reality is going to hit home. The delusions of grandeur can no longer be perpetuated in this day and age. It would appear from listening to Labour's spokespersons that it's not just the Tories and DUP who subscribe to this Rule Britannia mythologizing. Pride comes before a fall, and this a fall taking place before the eyes of the world.