I see your point. However, again considered from one of the founding members of the EEC, the view is that no country has had the privileges and opt-outs that the UK has been offered. Yet, in spite of this privileged status, the UK has, frankly speaking, often behaved in a way that was justifiably seen as arrogant and entitled. And hearing now the hopelessly simplistic “arguments” and the hatred spewed by some Brexiters against the EU is grating, to say the least.
Perhaps it all boils down to a difference in appreciation of the EU’s goal. I think that for the founding members, it was as much an economic and political project as a higher ideal, with former seen as a means to approach the latter. The UK seems to have never really cared for this, perhaps even resented it. ‘Swallow the lot, and swallow it now’.
I’m not endorsing them, I’m pointing out that widely read newspapers are still claiming Brexit will be economically beneficial, and many people believe them.
I know the referendum was non-binding because Remainers started whining that the referendum was non-binding after they lost. And then I researched it and found out the reason - the referendum was non-binding by default because of the sovereignty of Parliament. There may have been some debate on whether to make the referendum binding or not. However, I’m not aware of any vote or any public statement declaring the referendum would be non-binding. I’d be quite happy for anyone to point out either of those occurrences.
By the way, here’s your words from post #1442: “We were told the referendum was non-binding.” Where and when?
And has been pointed out several times, the current government, and the opposition for that matter, campaigned on promises they would respect the Leave vote. After the election, the government enacted leaving the EU into law with the bill to invoke Article 50. So it’s pointless what weight you put on the promises of Cameron’s administration versus the legality that the referendum was non-binding. For that matter, Parliament has had opportunities since the invocation of Article 50 to vote for Article 50 revocation or a second referendum. Those votes have failed.
Bluntly you’ve been a bunch of cunts, the mods have done fuck all, and it got to me and I had a sleepless night. Life’s too short so carry on enjoy the death of democracy.
Yeah, the ‘higher ideal’ aspect has never been popular here, nor have our politicians ever tried to sell it to the public. The official Remain campaign was all about how terrible leaving would be economically, with much scaremongering and nothing positive or aspirational at all. I was sad but not surprised when Leave won.
Fundamentally, most Brits don’t agree with the direction the EU is going, and feel we will always be outvoted by the other members, and in particular France and Germany. Opt-outs make the ride easier to tolerate but aren’t the same as getting to go to your desired destination.
But yeah, Brexit has brought out all the worse of nonsensical arguments, lies and half-truths, and unreasonable demands. Some people wouldn’t be happy with any union they didn’t 100% control, compromise is a dirty word to them.
Quartz, that’s probably for the best, if all this is causing you actual sleepless nights. Relax, take a walk, have a cup of English penicillin - tea - and tell yourself “It’s just a debate with strangers on the internet. Not worth stressing out over.”
Though you probably will earn a warning for insults in GD.
When David Cameron wrote in his pamphlet “This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide.”, he was making a promise that was beyond the scope of his powers as Prime Minister.
Of course, history shows that the Referendum was viewed as being politically binding almost as soon as the results were declared. I personally wonder if this would have happened so quickly if Cameron had not included the quoted statement in the pamphlet.
And yet, the UK definitely had the clout and ability to play the role of co-engine of the EU along with France and Germany if only it had embraced the ideal. What could have been…
Indeed. Our PMs have rather consistently shown a lack of both imagination and ambition when it comes to the EU. The underwhelming changes negotiated by Cameron are a case in point.
If you want to know some specific Brexiter complaints, one was that the EU’s accounts haven’t been signed off in years, another is selective enforcement of the laws; for example, letting France and Germany break the rule on government deficits with no repercussions, but enforcing it on smaller countries like Portugal and Greece. They were also angry that Merkel broke the EU’s own rules on asylum seekers, with obvious repercussions for other members, without any kind of pushback from the EU.
Fourth week in October. And as much as I really don’t want a No-Deal Brexit, part of me really hopes the EU says “Enough of this fuckwittery. No. Screw you.” (To which I hope the response is a sincere apology and an immediate withdrawal of Article 50. And I’d like a pony.)
On balance I think that is still in the EU’s best interest to allow Britain to continue to make an absolute shambles of the attempt to leave. A No-Deal Brexit just restarts the Deal process from the beginning again, after all.
While I do not wish to be “junior modding”, may I politely note my viewpoint that there was a bit of “piling on” against Quartz? I am enthusiastically in favour of robust debates - it’s part of the entertainment. However, I would say that I’ve been considerably more contentious towards Remainers than Quartz, but have received far less opposition. I’m sure that’s due to my superior debating skills. Nevertheless, it’s a bit churlish to take a shot at someone after he’s exited the field.
So far, I’ve made one accurate prediction about Brexit, which is that May’s fourth withdrawal agreement vote would not go forward. Therefore, I agree with your prediction. I have no idea if I’m on a roll, or if I’ve just doomed your prediction.
I think that the next Tory leader has to do something different. I don’t think they’ll be able to go back to the EU for renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement, nor do I believe they’ll be able to continue the failure treadmill May was on. My guess at this point is that the next PM will be a no-deal Brexiter, get blocked from pursuing no-deal, lose a vote of no confidence, and then a general election will be called. It will then be a polarised election of no-deal versus second referendum, which second referendum will win. Followed of course, by an extension request for time to hold the second referendum, occurring at the date you’ve stated.
Bookies will smile at you if you bet based on my predictions.
I used to think I had a pretty decent grasp of how things would pan out politically, and was mostly right because things were pretty dull and obvious. These days though!? WTAF
Just to make a point that often gets overlooked :- the WA is as it is for two reasons :- British red lines and DUP insistence on no Irish Sea border checks (even though there already are some).
If those factors change, the EU will happily renegotiate the WA.
Having said that, it’s hard to see which of those factors a new Tory leader can change, given the HOC arithmetic. The DUP veto is especially frustrating, given that they in no sense speak for the people of Northern Ireland (which voted to remain and just elected 2 pro-remain MEPS out of 3).
Nevertheless, it’s a bit churlish to take a shot at someone after he’s exited the field.