Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Strazdas

Strazdas wrote: »

I saw Diarmuid Ferriter say the other evening on the Tonight Show that he thinks a second referendum could spark off a civil war in England.

I don't see how there could be a "civil war" but I certainly accept that there could be riots and targetted attacks on prominent Brexiteers & Remainers if things don't get sorted out soon.

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see how there could be a "civil war" but I certainly accept that there could be riots and targetted attacks on prominent Brexiteers & Remainers if things don't get sorted out soon.

I suppose he fears that civil unrest could lead to rioting and then God knows what.

A full scale civil war in the way we understand one seems unlikely though, as nobody on either side is armed. Perhaps he simply means rioting in several cities.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

I suppose he fears that civil unrest could lead to rioting and then God knows what.

A full scale civil war in the way we understand one seems unlikely though, as nobody on either side is armed. Perhaps he simply means rioting in several cities.

Ulster says No. It will begin in Norn Iron.

Kermit.de.frog

The only way out of this is the deal on the table.

Trying to overturn the referendum will lead to serious trouble and probably violence, unfortunately. That's what happens when liberal elites tell the 'great unwashed' their opinion does not count and act on it.

The only sensible way forward is the deal.

The UK voted to leave, they have to leave. After leaving, the vote having been respected, then remainers can put forward a proper debate on rejoining.

The wishes of the electorate have to be carried out before anything else.

Capt'n Midnight

Strazdas wrote: »

Quite shocking poll results from the Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/24/majority-of-voters-think-violence-against-mps-is-price-worth-paying-for-brexit

It's obvious that their political system has completely broken down

Brexit is comedy gold.

Of leave voters 59% in Scotland believed the breakup of the UK would be worth it to take back control through delivering Brexit.

So they plan to take back control by creating the conditions which will drive Scotland to independence followed by rejoining the EU at the first opportunity.

Yip, that's pure Brexit.

Tell me how

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The only way out of this is the deal on the table.

Trying to overturn the referendum will lead to serious trouble and probably violence, unfortunately. That's what happens when liberal elites tell the great unwashed their opinion does not count and act on it.

The only sensible way forward is the deal.

The UK voted to leave, they have to leave. After leaving remainers can put forward a debate on rejoining.

The wishes of the electorate have to be carried out before anything else.

It is over 3 years since the electorate voted to leave.
An electorate influenced by proven illegality on the side of the Leave campaign.
3 years where now 2 governments, 2 Prime Ministers have tried to pass 2 Deals.

Why should the Leave side get so many opportunities to deliver what they tried to do while the remain side are told it is one and done when it comes to selecting a path to take.

Your flaming with the use of the term 'liberal elites' is laughable with the Eton and Oxbridge educated ministers and strategists trying to convince everyone now that people voted for a 6% drop in GDP.

I would buy the honouring the result of the referendum if the leave side hadn't tied repeatedly to get deals accepted after they had been rejected the first, or second time. How can you accept that and not countenance a second referendum is baffling.

Capt'n Midnight

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The wishes of the electorate have to be carried out before anything else.

May had a majority. The voters rejected it.

Kermit.de.frog

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

May had a majority. The voters rejected it.

Is that the argument you are going to use when England erupts? The remain side need to think long and hard about the consequences of overturning the referendum.

The situation will be very volatile.

Democracy only works if everyone believes their vote is equal and counted.

You are telling half the population - "your vote doesn't count". "Yes you voted leave, you won - but you don't understand the issues like we do so for your own good we are going to turn this around".

This is playing with fire and it will end in tears.

You know full well how people feel on both sides of this issue (not just the leave side). This is dangerous.

Hurrache

Tell me how wrote: »

Well, that's the thing, it's a subjective opinion. One which a huge number of people hold but I'm not sure you could say there is evidence that LK is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the government.

For someone to actually name her as such could be deemed to be detrimental to her impartiality as the mud has been thrown. The fact that it was on a C4 show and the two journalists named are ITV and BBC could be a coincidence but could also be seen to be biased and intentional.

Their names, amongst others, had been published in the article a few days earlier, I linked to it at the time. Their employers were also given the right to reply. Channel 4 have done nothing here other than give the guy a platform to speak about it.

Kermit.de.frog

LK slagging off Nicola Sturgeon in a tweet the other day should be at the very least grounds for censure in my opinion.

Also what story has she ever actually broken throughout Brexit?

I can't think of one. She's no journalist like Peter Foster or Tony Connelly. She just seems to be all about gossip rather than anything substantive.

Sam Russell

Tell me how wrote: »

Excuse my language, but I think it is fair to say that Peter Oborne has no f*cks left to give.

https://twitter.com/UKDemockery/status/1187167075820802048

Naming names is obviously very pointed. C4 will probably pick up slack for letting it happen even though it has been said in many places for a long time. Not least this thread.
Can't see Peston/Keunnsberg being successful in removing the accusation once it has been said in such a forthright manner.

Could this be deemed to be slanderous?

It is libel if it is untrue, but is more likely fair comment and personal opinion.

Would they take a case and risk getting 1p compo - thus valuing their status as journalist whose reputation is only worth 1p.

lawred2

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Brexit is comedy gold.

Of leave voters 59% in Scotland believed the breakup of the UK would be worth it to take back control through delivering Brexit.

So they plan to take back control by creating the conditions which will drive Scotland to independence followed by rejoining the EU at the first opportunity.

Yip, that's pure Brexit.

Yeah you know that means NI

GM228

Interesting Tweet from Andrew Duff on what the EU27 may offer tomorrow:-

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280720940716033?s=19

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280722177986560?s=19

It's not clear if that is just his opinion or an insight into what may be agreed by the EU27, however, the notion of an EU stipulation that a further extension past 30th November would be based on a GE taking place would be at odds with treaty law, I have invited David Allen Green to comment his thoughts if true.

Varta

Tell me how wrote: »

It is over 3 years since the electorate voted to leave.
An electorate influenced by proven illegality on the side of the Leave campaign.
3 years where now 2 governments, 2 Prime Ministers have tried to pass 2 Deals.

Why should the Leave side get so many opportunities to deliver what they tried to do while the remain side are told it is one and done when it comes to selecting a path to take.

Your flaming with the use of the term 'liberal elites' is laughable with the Eton and Oxbridge educated ministers and strategists trying to convince everyone now that people voted for a 6% drop in GDP.

I would buy the honouring the result of the referendum if the leave side hadn't tied repeatedly to get deals accepted after they had been rejected the first, or second time. How can you accept that and not countenance a second referendum is baffling.

Equally, why should remain get so many opportunities to frustrate Brexit?

devnull

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Democracy only works if everyone believes their vote is equal and counted.

Democracy doesn't work very well when in a referendum one side decides that they are above the law, breaks electoral rules which are there to ensure fairness, confidence and legitimacy at an electoral event.

That's before we get onto the lies that were told during the campaign and the many politicians involved who have backtracked on what they have stated and claimed they never said it and the fact that there were many different versions of leave.

What we've seen from many people is the end justifies the means. They have no problem with their own side breaking the law or being dishonest if it achieves what they want, but the same people would scream blue murder if others did.

SeaBreezes

GM228 wrote: »

Interesting Tweet from Andrew Duff on what the EU27 may offer tomorrow:-

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280720940716033?s=19

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280722177986560?s=19

It's not clear if that is just his opinion or an insight into what may be agreed by the EU27, however, the notion of an EU stipulation that a further extension past 30th November would be based on a GE taking place would be at odds with treaty law, I have invited David Allen Green to comment his thoughts if true.

I wonder if by election, he means referendum..

GM228

Most voters believe violence against MPs ‘is price worth paying’ over Brexit

Guardian wrote:

A majority of voters in England, Wales and Scotland believe that the possibility of some level of violence against MPs is a “price worth paying” in order to get their way on Brexit, an academic survey has found

Seriously? I mean why would that even be a question on a poll?

https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1709008-future-of-england-survey-reveals-public-attitudes-towards-brexit-and-the-union

Most Leave voters across all three countries think violence towards MPs is a ‘price worth paying’ for Brexit - 71% in England, 60% in Scotland and 70% in Wales. The majority of Remain voters across all three countries think violence towards MPs is a ‘price worth paying’ to Remain - 58% in England, 53% in Scotland and 56% in Wales.

A majority of Remain voters across all three countries think protests in which members of the public are badly injured are a ‘price worth paying’ to stop Brexit and remain in the EU - 57% in England, 56% in Scotland and 57% in Wales. Even larger majorities of Leave voters in all three countries think protests in which members of the public are badly injured are a ‘price worth paying’ to achieve Brexit - 69% in England, 62% in Scotland and 70% in Wales.

Majorities in England, Scotland and Wales think that violence towards MPs and violent protests in which people are badly injured is ‘likely to occur’ if Brexit takes place.

Sad times we live in when people believe violence and injury are worth it to achieve the goal.

Varta

Hurrache wrote: »

Their names, amongst others, had been published in the article a few days earlier, I linked to it at the time. Their employers were also given the right to reply. Channel 4 have done nothing here other than give the guy a platform to speak about it.

It's not organised bias - they aren"t capable of such organisation. Add Katya Adler to the list and you see it for what it is... Pure jingoism. "The EU is going to capitulate any day now to the great British parliament." Regardless of who is actually PM.

SeaBreezes

GM228 wrote: »

Most voters believe violence against MPs ‘is price worth paying’ over Brexit



Seriously? I mean why would that even be a question on a poll?

https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1709008-future-of-england-survey-reveals-public-attitudes-towards-brexit-and-the-union



Sad times we live in when people believe violence and injury are worth it to achieve the goal.

George Carlin, American comedian made a comment you get the politicians you 'deserve' his point, garbage education system elects the idiots. They don't come from no where.

That awful poll and it's awful results are indicative of a broken system. Heartbreaking for the people they drag with them into chaos.

Mr.Nice Guy

There were people on this thread only a few days ago rubbishing the idea that there might be unrest if Brexit doesn't happen.

Hopefully that poll opens some eyes. Many are seriously underestimating the strength of feeling that Brexit has stirred up. Said it before but if just 1% or even 0.5% of that 17.4 million are upset to the point of wanting to act on their frustrations, that's a recipe for mayhem.

devnull

GM228 wrote: »

Most voters believe violence against MPs ‘is price worth paying’ over Brexit

Seriously? I mean why would that even be a question on a poll?

https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1709008-future-of-england-survey-reveals-public-attitudes-towards-brexit-and-the-union

Sad times we live in when people believe violence and injury are worth it to achieve the goal.

A lot of surveys are compiled in order to generate headlines or PR - I suspect that this was nothing different.

Kermit.de.frog

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

There were people on this thread only a few days ago rubbishing the idea that there might be unrest if Brexit doesn't happen.

"Unrest" is putting it lightly. England will become a tinderbox. (Note I say England - this is an English nationalist project)

Remember this is seen a vote for independence (and in most ways it is) by a lot of the population over there.

Impossible to overestimate the strength of feeling if the result was overturned.

A lot of people would be very frustrated and angry.

ancapailldorcha

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The only way out of this is the deal on the table.

Trying to overturn the referendum will lead to serious trouble and probably violence, unfortunately. That's what happens when liberal elites tell the 'great unwashed' their opinion does not count and act on it.

The only sensible way forward is the deal.

The UK voted to leave, they have to leave. After leaving, the vote having been respected, then remainers can put forward a proper debate on rejoining.

The wishes of the electorate have to be carried out before anything else.

Why should we conduct our politics in such a manner as to appease thugs?

Irish Praetorian

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Is that the argument you are going to use when England erupts? The remain side need to think long and hard about the consequences of overturning the referendum.

The situation will be very volatile.

Democracy only works if everyone believes their vote is equal and counted.

You are telling half the population - "you're vote doesn't count". "Yes you voted leave, you won - but you don't understand the issues like we do so for your own good we are going to turn this around".

This is playing with fire and it will end in tears.

You know full well how people feel on both sides of this issue. This is dangerous.

I can understand the point you make about not wanting to obstruct 'the will of the people' in a broad sense because of the disruption that might arise, but what of the more dangerous precedent it sets. Specifically, the idea that groups can campaign on deliberately vague and contradictory policies, squeeze out a narrow victory margin and employ that purported victory as a mandate for an arrangement which slices away some of many of those same campaign promises. More than that, I can't help but see the entire Brexit and Euro-scepticism fiasco as little more than the culmination of a long running campaign by the gutter media and marginal figures to finger the EU for just about any and all maladies.

My go-to on this point is immigration; now anyone would think from the Brexit campaign that migration into the UK was down exclusively to some Brussels diktat of the much absurd terms. It seems to have escaped the notice of these institutions that since 1992 non-EU migration has made up three-quarters of all migration into the UK, which has been entirely under the UK's control. And even the migration it has seen from the EU, which can be of the temporary seasonal variety or even medium term with an eventual return him, might be more easily reconciled with UK attitudes towards migration than say a more permanent migrant from the other side of the planet.

Now despite these realities, somehow the usual suspects in the UK manage to castigate EU as the chief conductor behind the type of mass migration they bemoan, and to be fair this is hardly the only area where emotionally charged rhetoric runs counter to reality. The economic arguments I hear in regards the EU are perhaps nothing short of a Nigel Farage style 'baffling' - the idea that the EU is to blame for the decline in UK fishing rather than the mass sell-off of fishing rights as well as the loss of the Icelandic fishing waters, the idea that the EU is responsible for both a de-industrializing globalization as well as stifling economic protectionism, the idea that the UK is going to break free from foreign domination by leaving the protection of a bloc of like-minded countries - these are all spectacularly contradictory ideas which have been sold to the UK public by what might be most generously described as an incompetent media and slice of the political intelligentsia eager to profit from said changes.

Surrendering to this enormous mania or treating as anything other than a bad idea, riven with contradictions and problems, is nothing short of an abdication of the principled responsibility of every citizen to try and defend the democratic system they live under. Now I see by your argument that you are perfectly au fait with the idea of such a deal going through and then making the counter argument. I might be inclined to go along with that but I would go a step further and argue that the specific choice of Brexit arrangement should be put to the people, be it Deal, No-Deal or No-Brexit in a single transferable vote. I'm not sure just how oppressed and maligned 'the people' can claim to be if they are the ones deciding what step is to be taken next, nor can they really complain if their chosen outcome fails to garner a majority. The choices are now crystal clear, the population is now actually well informed, and the only real argument against putting it back to the populace is that the Brexiteer's bag of shadows and snake oil wouldn't work twice.

Strazdas

devnull wrote: »

Democracy doesn't work very well when in a referendum one side decides that they are above the law, breaks electoral rules which are there to ensure fairness, confidence and legitimacy at an electoral event.

That's before we get onto the lies that were told during the campaign and the many politicians involved who have backtracked on what they have stated and claimed they never said it and the fact that there were many different versions of leave.

What we've seen from many people is the end justifies the means. They have no problem with their own side breaking the law or being dishonest if it achieves what they want, but the same people would scream blue murder if others did.

One would have thought a decision can only be democratic if everyone who voted agrees a democratic process has taken place. The Brexiteer / Daily Telegraph / Spiked Online version of democracy appears to be "We won, you lost, the decision is final and you can never vote on this again, so suck it up, you losers".

Sam Russell

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

There were people on this thread only a few days ago rubbishing the idea that there might be unrest if Brexit doesn't happen.

Hopefully that poll opens some eyes. Many are seriously underestimating the strength of feeling that Brexit has stirred up. Said it before but if just 1% or even 0.5% of that 17.4 million are upset to the point of wanting to act on their frustrations, that's a recipe for mayhem.

It will not be the first example of such mayhem.

The miners strike had running battles between miners and mounted police - including cavalry charges. (1984-1985)

Poll taxes had violent street riots. (1990)

The London riots had looting and arson attacks with five deaths. (2011)

There may be more, but they had the three day week, the winter of discontent, etc.

So, I expect they will not change and will, once more, become the sick man of Europe. Pity, they are better than that - self inflicted hardship.

hotmail.com

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Unrest" is putting it lightly. England will become a tinderbox. (Note I say England - this is an English nationalist project)

Remember this is seen a vote for independence (and in most ways it is) by a lot of the population over there.

Impossible to overestimate the strength of feeling if the result was overturned.

A lot of people would be very frustrated and angry.

It seems that the strongest support for Brexit is among the middle aged and older people, so I really can't see unrest/violence coming from them.

devnull

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

"Unrest" is putting it lightly. England will become a tinderbox. (Note I say England - this is an English nationalist project)

Remember this is seen a vote for independence (and in most ways it is) by a lot of the population over there.

Impossible to underestimate the strength of feeling if the result was overturned.

A lot of people would be very frustrated and angry.

So what you are saying, is that if someone cheats at something and is found out to be cheating, then because of the fact that the cheats may be angry that they do not get their own way, we should just pretend that they never cheated?

You might think that kind of society is an acceptable one to be in, I certainly don't and would never want to be in a society in this country where cheats basically prosper. I don't want mob rule or to appease cheats who threaten to act like thugs.

The biggest hypocrite of the whole thing is Farage, saying a second referendum is undemocratic, despite the fact the very same person said if he lost by 52:48 then one should not be ruled out and it's a long way from being finished. That's before you even take into account the fact Leave cheated. 4% gap in a straight fight is a far bigger gap than 4% in a illegally manipulated one.

devnull

Strazdas wrote: »

One would have thought a decision can only be democratic if everyone who voted agrees a democratic process has taken place. The Brexiteer / Daily Telegraph / Spiked Online version of democracy appears to be "We won, you lost, the decision is final and you can never vote on this again, so suck it up, you losers".

Indeed, the biggest irony of all is the Tories now wanting to hold their second general election because they didn't like the voters verdict in a legitimate fight so they just cast it aside.

Meanwhile they won't allow people to have their say on Brexit even once in that time in what was a disgracefully illegally fought referendum which the result was influenced by cheating.

The Tories are just spoilt and too used to getting their own way. They're toxic and sentle of entitlement disgusts me and they really need to be taken down a peg or two, but the very same people that they hate and would love to screw over, such the poor and on benefits are now voting for them.

Hurrache

GM228 wrote: »

Interesting Tweet from Andrew Duff on what the EU27 may offer tomorrow:-

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280720940716033?s=19

https://twitter.com/AndrewDuffEU/status/1187280722177986560?s=19

It's not clear if that is just his opinion or an insight into what may be agreed by the EU27, however, the notion of an EU stipulation that a further extension past 30th November would be based on a GE taking place would be at odds with treaty law, I have invited David Allen Green to comment his thoughts if true.

Can't see that happening, the EU don't want to be seen as directing the UK what to do and giving preconditions based on those directions.