Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-04-2019, 07:15 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,784
OK, so when May was ousted, it was presumed that Johnson now commanded the confidence of Parliament, which made him the Prime Minister. But now it turns out that, on the first test of his confidence, he failed. Does that mean that he was never actually Prime Minister at all? Does he go down in the historical rolls of Prime Ministers with an asterix next to his name? Was Parliament actually without a prime minister at all, this past while?
  #52  
Old 09-04-2019, 07:38 PM
Andy L is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,830
Per some fellow on Twitter

UPDATED: Government defeats by MPs for each Prime Minister
Thatcher - 4 in 11 years
Major - 6 in 7 years
Blair - 4 in 10 years
Brown - 3 in 3 years
Cameron - 10 in 6 years
May - 33 in 3 years
Johnson - 3 in 24 hours
  #53  
Old 09-04-2019, 07:39 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
... And that is just the right debate to be having at this late stage. Not discussions of various century-old precedents about when the Crown acted and didn't act. It's time for the politicians to do what they were elected to do, and make a decision. If not, time for the people to vote.
Suppose British politicians from throughout the Island joined a new Sorry-About-That-It-Was-All-a-Mistake Party whose plan is to walk to Brussels bare-chested and demand to be flogged. Is it too late even for that? Is the time-honoured English stubbornness so ingrained that the once-great Island will submit with no resistance to the kleptocrats and others who've sought Brexit for criminal purposes? That the 52% referendum vote is now an eternal law (even though that election was bought with lies); we can never question that coin-toss again? Proceed with Brexit however wrong-headed that choice might be?

If it were me, I'd say: Withdraw the Article-Whatever, continue the debate softly and soberly, scheduling a confirmational referendum in 2022, say. Kick the bucket down the road three years, and hope cooler thinking then prevails.

Beneficial policy: Weaken Tory, Labour, all Parties. How many MPs might join such a SATIWAM (Sorry-About-That-It-Was-All-a-Mistake) Party. Would any sitting Tories or Labourites, either here or in another place, join SATIWAM?

How many Members of Parliament believe, in their hearts, that Remain is the smarter choice, even now?
  #54  
Old 09-04-2019, 08:22 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
The question seems to be: Does the voice of the people matter in the UK?
  #55  
Old 09-04-2019, 08:38 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The question seems to be: Does the voice of the people matter in the UK?
Do you think the people want a no-deal Brexit?
  #56  
Old 09-04-2019, 08:38 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The question seems to be: Does the voice of the people matter in the UK?
Given that their leader was selected by a tiny minority of citizens, and he serves at the pleasure of a hereditary monarch, I think the answer is fuck no.
  #57  
Old 09-04-2019, 08:58 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 16,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Do you think the people want a no-deal Brexit?
I think that that's the key. Yes, the majority voted for Brexit; the referendum said nothing about the exact terms of a Brexit.

I suspect that many people who did vote for Brexit (at least, those who put any thought behind it) did so under the assumption that Parliament would conduct a Brexit with some manner of deal with the EU (or the other countries with whom Britain's only trade agreement is as an EU member).

This BBC article shows that, of those who voted Leave in 2016, only 73% support a no-deal Brexit. Overall, only 38% of British support a no-deal Brexit.
  #58  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:04 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,794
So there's significant lack of clarity about what the public actually wants. Am I right in thinking that "No Take Backs!" is not settled British law, and that if something is really unclear, it's both legal and ethical to seek clarity?

If only someone could propose a method for seeking that clarity without being compared to Stalin.
  #59  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:17 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Do you think the people want a no-deal Brexit?
52% of them wanted Brexit.
  #60  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:22 PM
Pork Rind's Avatar
Pork Rind is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 2,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
52% of them wanted Brexit.
Not the question that CarnalK asked.
  #61  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:24 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
52% of them wanted Brexit.
So, you're saying that you feel that if one side gets more votes than the other side in an election, the side that gets the most votes should win?

Interesting proposal.
  #62  
Old 09-04-2019, 09:38 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
This BBC article shows that, of those who voted Leave in 2016, only 73% support a no-deal Brexit. Overall, only 38% of British support a no-deal Brexit.
While a minority, that is a disturbingly high number.
  #63  
Old 09-04-2019, 10:03 PM
UDS is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
52% of them wanted Brexit.
Yes, but not necessarily on any terms, however awful. They mustn't be allowed to express a view about that, apparently. It would be antidemocratic, or something.

Which I think give you the answer to your earlier question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The question seems to be: Does the voice of the people matter in the UK?

Last edited by UDS; 09-04-2019 at 10:03 PM.
  #64  
Old 09-04-2019, 10:14 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
From BBC article on polling:
Quote:
So, why do the polls suggest more people oppose than support leaving without a deal?

The answer lies in the views of those who did not vote three years ago. Only about one in five (21%) of non-voters support leaving without a deal, while twice as many (43%) are opposed.
Also:
Quote:
Eight out of 10 Remain supporters claim that a no-deal Brexit would be a bad outcome. This is in line with the 76% who say they are against leaving the EU without a deal, when offered a straight choice between support and oppose.

However, a different story emerges among Leave voters.

The proportion who say that leaving without a deal would be a good outcome is 46%. This is well below the 73% who say they back leaving the EU without a deal, when offered a straight choice.

Why the difference?

About a quarter (27%) of Leave voters prefer to say a no-deal Brexit would be an "acceptable compromise", rather than a "good outcome".
  #65  
Old 09-04-2019, 10:29 PM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 30,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
Hey Septimus,

Listen to Northern Piper. He's got better answers to your hypotheticals than I do.

--Wrenching Spanners

SPOILER:

Harrumph! Damn Canadian. Can we change the subject to Westminster pubs? I'm fairly sure I know more about Westminster pubs than he does.
Hey just because you invented it doesn't keep the colonials from mastering it.

Sorta like the fact that Australia, India and the Windies have won more Cricket World Cups than England.

But I'm certainly open to learning more about Westminster pubs. Can I call on you next time
I'm in London ?
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."

Last edited by Northern Piper; 09-04-2019 at 10:30 PM.
  #66  
Old 09-04-2019, 10:46 PM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 30,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
OK, so when May was ousted, it was presumed that Johnson now commanded the confidence of Parliament, which made him the Prime Minister. But now it turns out that, on the first test of his confidence, he failed. Does that mean that he was never actually Prime Minister at all? Does he go down in the historical rolls of Prime Ministers with an asterix next to his name? Was Parliament actually without a prime minister at all, this past while?
No, he is the Prime Minister, no asterisk.

You become PM by being appointed by the monarch. HM appointed Boris as PM. That makes him PM for realsies.

The fact that it utens out Boris doesn't command a majority in the Commons doesn't undo that.

Heck, in Canada we had one chap who was PM twice, even though he was defeated in two general elections and never won a general.
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."
  #67  
Old 09-05-2019, 12:23 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
So, you're saying that you feel that if one side gets more votes than the other side in an election, the side that gets the most votes should win?

Interesting proposal.
In a referendum, sure. (I assume you're hinting at how the US picks our president, and I'm sure you already well know that it's not via a national popular vote).
  #68  
Old 09-05-2019, 12:54 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
In a referendum, sure.
I'm not sure if you know but the referendum was not legally binding. Government decided to be bound by it. But the manner of Brexit was not part of the referendum so there is no thwarting the will of the people by fighting for a better Brexit.
  #69  
Old 09-05-2019, 12:55 AM
ishamael69 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 144
Question 1: What happens if Boris Johnson resigns on Oct 19th rather than carry the message?

The way I understand it, the current coalition would have a chance to come up with a new PM. A majority of that coalition supports no deal Brexit, I believe. How long do they get to take deciding who the next PM is? Can they just dally from the 19th through the 31st?

Question 2: Can the EU (who I presume can see all this going on) grant an extension to Brexit to parliament without being asked by the PM?
  #70  
Old 09-05-2019, 02:12 AM
UDS is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by ishamael69 View Post
Question 1: What happens if Boris Johnson resigns on Oct 19th rather than carry the message?

The way I understand it, the current coalition would have a chance to come up with a new PM. A majority of that coalition supports no deal Brexit, I believe. How long do they get to take deciding who the next PM is? Can they just dally from the 19th through the 31st?
If Johnson wants to resign, he goes to the Queen and suggests who she might send for instead. Obviously, there is no point in suggesting somebody who is unwilling to discharge the legal duties of the office (which, in this scenario, include asking the EU for an extension). Regardless of who Johnson suggests, it is unlikely that the monarch would invite anyone to become PM without first enquiring as to his or her willingness to do the job.

So, whoever accepts appointment on Boris's resignation, even it it's just an interim or temporary PM, will be someone who has indicated a willingness to comply with the legal obligation to ask for an extension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishamael69 View Post
Question 2: Can the EU (who I presume can see all this going on) grant an extension to Brexit to parliament without being asked by the PM?
No. They can at most indicate a willingness to do so. Article 50 requires the unanimous consent of all Member States (including the UK) for any extension. So the UK has to agree, and under UK law it's the government which signifies agreement.

Last edited by UDS; 09-05-2019 at 02:13 AM.
  #71  
Old 09-05-2019, 02:39 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,533
If Royal Assent is refused, then the law Students no longer have 1708 as a trivia question.

(I believe George V witheld but did not resfuse assent to an Irish Home Rule bill).
  #72  
Old 09-05-2019, 11:12 AM
Wrenching Spanners is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 622
New trivia question: When was the last time a PM had a member of their family quit their cabinet? Jo Johnson just resigned as Minister of State for Universities.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49594793

The Evening Standard headline is: BLOW FOR BOJO AS BRO JO GO GOES

I wonder if it was meant to end GOES GO and the headline typist messed it up.
  #73  
Old 09-05-2019, 11:31 AM
Derleth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 21,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
52% of them wanted Brexit.
Do you want to go for dinner with me? Yes or no?

If you say yes, you're in no position to back out if I decide that dinner entails nailing your feet to the floor and force-feeding you rotten pork.
  #74  
Old 09-05-2019, 12:05 PM
Marvin the Martian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
52% of them wanted Brexit.
As frequently noted, in a non-binding referendum. It is still the responsibility of Parliament to decide if a particular Brexit scenario is in the best interest of the country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmund Burke
Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.
  #75  
Old 09-05-2019, 01:01 PM
Derleth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 21,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin the Martian View Post
As frequently noted, in a non-binding referendum. It is still the responsibility of Parliament to decide if a particular Brexit scenario is in the best interest of the country.
And just to be clear: Restarting the Troubles by building a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland would not be in the best interest of the country.
  #76  
Old 09-05-2019, 06:09 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,784
Nobody wanted Brexit. What a (slight) majority of Brits voted for was to retain all of the privileges and none of the responsibilities of EU membership. That was never actually a possible option, and it was dishonest to even ask the people if they wanted that. The honest course of action would be to hold a new referendum with the real options: Either none of the responsibilities nor privileges of EU membership, or staying in.
  #77  
Old 09-05-2019, 06:24 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners View Post
<snip>

The Evening Standard headline is: BLOW FOR BOJO AS BRO JO GO GOES

I wonder if it was meant to end GOES GO and the headline typist messed it up.
Oh. I thought it was a li'l reference to that old Wham! song, Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go.
  #78  
Old 09-05-2019, 06:37 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Nobody wanted Brexit. What a (slight) majority of Brits voted for was to retain all of the privileges and none of the responsibilities of EU membership. That was never actually a possible option, and it was dishonest to even ask the people if they wanted that. The honest course of action would be to hold a new referendum with the real options: Either none of the responsibilities nor privileges of EU membership, or staying in.
Yeah it sort of reminds me of all the American presidential candidates who have secret plans that are going to be the bestest plans for realsies.
  #79  
Old 09-05-2019, 07:18 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
It looks horrifyingly like a repudiation of representative (parliamentary) democracy.

Maybe that's not what it is. But I can tell you that a certain fellow named Donald, inspired by this, will be dreaming of suspending Congress.
And when he admits it out loud, once confronted with our outrage, will claim to have been joking.
  #80  
Old 09-05-2019, 07:28 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,784
As an aside, someone please tell me that Mr. Johnson's middle initial is 'S'.
  #81  
Old 09-05-2019, 07:29 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
If there were a vast majority in the Commons opposed to Brexit, he wouldn't be PM.

And the Parliament has done nothing to prevent the crash-out, except wring its hands over all of the options presented and say "I don't like that. Don't you have something better in the back room?"

The harsh political reality is that the Remainers and the Brexiters seem very evenly divided, and that indecision is reflected in the Commons. It's not the Queen's job to intervene in a highly divided political issue. It's the job of the elected politicians to come up with a clear choice. If they can't do that, they made their choice to crash out back when they gave May the statutory authority to invoke Aricle 50 without any parliamentary conditions.
I’m feeling that a better term for it would be Article 5150...
  #82  
Old 09-05-2019, 07:31 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
I’m feeling that a better term for it would be Article 5150...
<smirk>
  #83  
Old 09-05-2019, 07:59 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
OK, so when May was ousted, it was presumed that Johnson now commanded the confidence of Parliament, which made him the Prime Minister. But now it turns out that, on the first test of his confidence, he failed. Does that mean that he was never actually Prime Minister at all? Does he go down in the historical rolls of Prime Ministers with an asterix next to his name? Was Parliament actually without a prime minister at all, this past while?
I, for one, would be delighted to learn that tomorrow’s history books will, when presenting lists of Prime Ministers, include next to Johnson’s name, a little picture of a diminutive Gaul with the pigtails, the heroic mustachios, the Mjollnir-like hammer, and the take-no-shit-from-anybody demeanor.
  #84  
Old 09-05-2019, 08:07 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
I, for one, would be delighted to learn that tomorrow’s history books will, when presenting lists of Prime Ministers, include next to Johnson’s name, a little picture of a diminutive Gaul with the pigtails, the heroic mustachios, the Mjollnir-like hammer, and the take-no-shit-from-anybody demeanor.
Hammer?
  #85  
Old 09-05-2019, 08:11 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,373
Crap. Decidedly NON-Mjollnir-like short sword, then.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 09-05-2019 at 08:12 PM.
  #86  
Old 09-05-2019, 08:13 PM
UDS is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
As an aside, someone please tell me that Mr. Johnson's middle initial is 'S'.
Sadly not. He is Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson - "Al" within his family, apparently.
  #87  
Old 09-05-2019, 09:09 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 29,258
Dumb question from an American observing the Brexit mess from a distance; Boris Johnson wanted to be prime minister, as I understand it, because he's in favor of Brexit. So has he any plans for carrying it out while addressing the Irish border issue (the backstop, I think it's called) and how Britain will handle customs for goods going to and from the continent? (Along with many other issues, like what happens to the millions of Europeans living and working in the UK.)

Because it sounds a bit like the Republican opposition to the ACA (i.e., Obamacare); they hate the thing but have never managed to suggest a workable alternative.
  #88  
Old 09-05-2019, 09:55 PM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,533
Boris wanted to be PM...../ENDS
Everything else was secondary to and in pursuit of this goal. The guy who used to be a pro EU Mayor of London, decided that the Leave campaign in the referendum (which he expected to lose) was the best option for him politically.

Unfortunately, the dog caught the car.
  #89  
Old 09-05-2019, 11:09 PM
UDS is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 9,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
Boris wanted to be PM...../ENDS
Everything else was secondary to and in pursuit of this goal. The guy who used to be a pro EU Mayor of London, decided that the Leave campaign in the referendum (which he expected to lose) was the best option for him politically.

Unfortunately, the dog caught the car.
Yes. It would have been wise to supplement his strategy for attaining the office with a follow-on strategy for retaining it.
  #90  
Old 09-06-2019, 03:36 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,533
Again, see dog catch car.
  #91  
Old 09-06-2019, 05:58 AM
Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 3,103
The high court has ruled that the prorogation was lawful, and given leave to appeal. A Scottish court recently made a similar ruling in a case brought there.

This looks like a victory for Johnson, but it's really just a step in a formal dance. Everyone knows that a case of this magnitude is only going to be decided by the Supreme Court, but you can't just start there, you've got to work your way up. None of the lower courts are going to stick their neck out and rule against the government or the Crown, so everyone has to act out their part in the ritual before we get to the actual event. How the Supreme Court will actually rule I wouldn't like to say, mind, but nothing of great import will happen until it gets to them a week on Tuesday.
  #92  
Old 09-06-2019, 06:36 AM
Derleth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 21,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
NThe honest course of action would be to hold a new referendum with the real options: Either none of the responsibilities nor privileges of EU membership, or staying in.
And even this would be dishonest unless the Leavers come to the referendum with a single, specific plan for how they're going to handle everything Brexit would entail, including Ireland and trade deals and having enough food and medicine for the UK if it leaves the EU.

You can't, after all, ask people to vote for your plan unless and until you have a plan.
  #93  
Old 09-06-2019, 10:06 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,847
This may be a stupid question, but suppose Parliament said "we aren't going to figure out a solution to this Brexit situation. We're going to temporarily become an absolute monarchy and let Her Majesty decide everything and when it is settled, we go on to business as usual." Is that theoretically possible?
  #94  
Old 09-06-2019, 11:04 AM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,989
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Is that theoretically possible?
If Parliament really wanted to, they probably could. They'd have to pass a Bill that started something like "Notwithstanding the Bill of Rights (1689), the Act of Settlement (1701)...", which would be a courageous move.

Last edited by Baron Greenback; 09-06-2019 at 11:06 AM.
  #95  
Old 09-06-2019, 09:32 PM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 30,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
This may be a stupid question, but suppose Parliament said "we aren't going to figure out a solution to this Brexit situation. We're going to temporarily become an absolute monarchy and let Her Majesty decide everything and when it is settled, we go on to business as usual." Is that theoretically possible?
Why, oh why, do the American posters on this Board keep suggesting that the solution to this extremely difficult political crisis is to abandon democracy and the rule of law and revert to absolutism? Would you ever suggest that as a solution to political problems in the US?

And what makes you think that Grammie Lilibet can suddenly pull a solution out of her purse that no-one else, experienced politicians and public figures, could figure out? A 93 year old who has never stood for elected office, never run a public ministry, never had any training in economics and trade?

And what would you say if Absolute Monarch Lillibet says :

"Our loyal subjects, we declare that we have thought all along that Boris and Rees-Mogg were right. We therefore hereby declare that we, the British people, are leaving the EU on October 31."

"We further declare that it is Our Royal Pleasure that there shall be no protests in the streets, and no letters to the editor critical of Our decision. Nor shall there be any elections. "

"We further declare that it is Our Royal Pleasure that any newspaper editor, or tv program manager, or bloggers, who publishes anything critical of this decision is off to the Tower."

"And We further declare and enjoin our faithful subjects to govern themselves accordingly, and command our dutiful police and loyal military to enforce this, Our Royal Decree."

"Oh, and one more thing: Suck it up, buttercups!"

You'd still be okay with making her will be the law?

What really seems to be happening that these posters are projecting their own views of what is right and proper onto Her Majesty, and assuming that she would "do the right thing," i.e what they would do if they had the power.

But English and British history is a centuries long story of people realising that you can't rely on one all-powerful person to do the right thing. That's why there are elections, and laws, and courts, and a nice little granny with a purse who says non-political comforting things.

As one (fictional) American President said : "Democracy isn't easy. It's hard." But it's the best we've got.
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."
  #96  
Old 09-06-2019, 09:45 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
Why, oh why, do the American posters on this Board keep suggesting that the solution to this extremely difficult political crisis is to abandon democracy and the rule of law and revert to absolutism?
Cite?
  #97  
Old 09-07-2019, 02:23 AM
penultima thule is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,192
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
This may be a stupid question, but suppose Parliament said "we aren't going to figure out a solution to this Brexit situation. We're going to temporarily become an absolute monarchy and let Her Majesty decide everything and when it is settled, we go on to business as usual." Is that theoretically possible?
Well yes, it is theoretically possible to pose a question that stupid, indeed QED.

In terms of impossibly simplistic and saccharine sweet solutions to intractably complex real world problems, you wouldn’t find that scenario in the wildest dreams of Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm.
  #98  
Old 09-07-2019, 10:23 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Greenback View Post
If Parliament really wanted to, they probably could. They'd have to pass a Bill that started something like "Notwithstanding the Bill of Rights (1689), the Act of Settlement (1701)...", which would be a courageous move.
Despite the big smiley that may be the answer that begins to reduce the ignorance of those of us who do not know.

We are in America realizing that our checks and balances do not protect us from autocracy as much as we thought (no hijack intended). Johnson’s actions seem to some of us like an attempt to move to autocracy there. Asking how secure the institutions of democracy (representational or otherwise) are in the U.K. and how they are secure is no stupid question in these times. Not to those of us honest about our ignorance anyway.

Last edited by DSeid; 09-07-2019 at 10:24 AM.
  #99  
Old 09-07-2019, 10:30 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,847
I was merely asking a question if something was possible. Didn't need to get anyone's panties in a twist. If I was a British subject, I'd be perfectly happy if the Queen had the authority to say "The referendum is void, we're not leaving the EU".
  #100  
Old 09-07-2019, 10:40 AM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 30,064
Would you be equally content if the Queen said "The referendum was fair and we're leaving the EU" ?

But more to the point, why ask such a fundamentally anti-democratic question? What would your reaction be if a British person asked "Couldn't the problems the US faces be resolved if you made Trump dictator, like the Roman Republic used to do in a crisis?"
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."

Last edited by Northern Piper; 09-07-2019 at 10:44 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017