The EU's big guns are making it clear whatever rhetoric might be coming out of Number 10 May and co. have no leverage in the Brexit negotiations. Pretty much whatever deal they get some faction in the Conservative party is going to reject it and, if it hasn't happened beforehand, another general election is inevitable at that point.
- Status
The EU's big guns are making it clear whatever rhetoric might be coming out of Number 10 May and co. have no leverage in the Brexit negotiations. Pretty much whatever deal they get some faction in the Conservative party is going to reject it and, if it hasn't happened beforehand, another general election is inevitable at that point.
The problem UK faces on this front is the very real legal and financial reasoning behind it. The main reason why there are clearing houses in London and why they are so large is to avoid another crash such as the one in 2008. Given that it makes perfect sense for EU to desire having a say in how they're run. UK will be hard pressed to keep the clearing in London, at a minimum it will have to subject its financial system to EU rules and probably do more than that.
Macron would just love to have that extra 80 billion Euro business and 83 thousand jobs in Paris. Chances are Merkel will let him have it too, France is the sick man of Europe at the moment and this could be the penicillin shot the country needs to get well quickly. This is all before we consider other implications, such as keeping EU together and all.
McHrozni
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
Because a small majority of British voters believed wilful ignorance and blind prejudice were an adequate basis for making a decision which would drastically impact the future prosperity of their country.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
It isnt anout shoving and pushing, this is about this making sense. You do not want to have essential securities, financial institution, outside the eu and not under eu law. This is even addressed a few paragraph in, see after "justified the decision" note that it is only required to be in the euroblock and that is it.
Frankly i expect all sort of similar decision, to have private and public major/important entities to be required ti be in the euroblock and/or undr eu law and jurisdiction.
UK is leaving, remember ? You dont expect such major stuff vital to the EU to stay in UK out of reach of EU jurisdiction, right ?
Last edited:
That's certainly a part of it but IMO it was a lot more complex than that. IMO Brexit was the culmination of a 35 year exercise by parts of the UK press to undermine the EU - and they were enabled by politicians. Anything positive that successive governments did was claimed by those government, anything unpopular was blamed on the EU whether or not EU membership was a significant factor.
The upshot was that the UK population as a whole likely had an under-appreciation of the benefits of EU membership and an exaggerated view of the downsides (to them). The Brexiteers were sowing seed on fertile ground.
Then add in the aftereffects of the 2008 crash. It seems that a conventional response to a economic downturn is to blame recent arrivals for all society's ills. It's no coincidence that there were significant increases in support for British nationalist parties in the 1930s and 1970s when the UK economy was in recession. There may even be a 40 year cycle when the lessons of the last rise in nationalism have been forgotten.
Stick on a layer of globalisation where a lot of people have seen themselves falling behind socially and economically, especially those whose skills and abilities do not align well to the current UK economy. It's very difficult to earn a living as an unskilled or semi-skilled worker, in the past that may not have been the case.
Finally top it all off with a cherry of contrarianism. Some people (likely a small minority but in this case maybe a crucial one) simply wished to give "the establishment" a bloody nose. If you see nothing really improving in the future then maybe you are more inclined to do anything to change that future because it cannot be any worse.
The person I save the blame for is David Cameron who tried to pull a power move and hold a referendum, in order to secure his own position. There were steps he could have taken to strengthen his position like requiring a super-majority or by having the alternative to staying in the EU well defined (and disliked) but he was so confident of success, that he felt no need.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,123
That's certainly a part of it but IMO it was a lot more complex than that. IMO Brexit was the culmination of a 35 year exercise by parts of the UK press to undermine the EU - and they were enabled by politicians. Anything positive that successive governments did was claimed by those government, anything unpopular was blamed on the EU whether or not EU membership was a significant factor.
The upshot was that the UK population as a whole likely had an under-appreciation of the benefits of EU membership and an exaggerated view of the downsides (to them). The Brexiteers were sowing seed on fertile ground.
Then add in the aftereffects of the 2008 crash. It seems that a conventional response to a economic downturn is to blame recent arrivals for all society's ills. It's no coincidence that there were significant increases in support for British nationalist parties in the 1930s and 1970s when the UK economy was in recession. There may even be a 40 year cycle when the lessons of the last rise in nationalism have been forgotten.
Stick on a layer of globalisation where a lot of people have seen themselves falling behind socially and economically, especially those whose skills and abilities do not align well to the current UK economy. It's very difficult to earn a living as an unskilled or semi-skilled worker, in the past that may not have been the case.
Finally top it all off with a cherry of contrarianism. Some people (likely a small minority but in this case maybe a crucial one) simply wished to give "the establishment" a bloody nose. If you see nothing really improving in the future then maybe you are more inclined to do anything to change that future because it cannot be any worse.
The person I save the blame for is David Cameron who tried to pull a power move and hold a referendum, in order to secure his own position. There were steps he could have taken to strengthen his position like requiring a super-majority or by having the alternative to staying in the EU well defined (and disliked) but he was so confident of success, that he felt no need.
Well put.
Why are we still planning on doing this damn stupid thing? That's the bit that gets me - given the negative news outweighs the positive by a factor of infiniity (I've seen no positive move) I still don't understand why the narrative isn't "This damn silly thing is silly, why are we doing it?"
That's the discussion I want to have. I will continue to be disappointed.
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
That's exactly what I meant by wilful ignorance and blind prejudice. People have a responsibility to verify that the information they are basing such a momentous decision on is accurate. They did not. They swallowed all those press stories whole, because they pandered to their prejudices.
True, but IMO if we hadn't had the crash of 2008 or if globalisation hadn't hit some parts of the economy quite so hard or if people hadn't been quite so sick to the back teeth of politicians and their "focus group mentality" then the vote would have gone the other way.....
.....or if "Call me Dave" had designed the referendum "properly" (from a Remain perspective)
...because "The People Have Spoken"
The fact that quite a few were mumbling, and that others were saying blatantly contradictory things, we have to submit to the will of the people.
We've been telling politicians that they don't listen to us for years and that as a result people were feeling excluded from the democratic process (a factor in the success of the Leave vote IMO). Well here is an example of direct democracy coming to a conclusion (the wrong one IMO but that's by the by). If politicians ignored this one too then that could be perceived to be yet another slap in the face for democracy. What I don't understand personally is that a House of Commons whose members were predominantly Remain supporters suddenly becoming such ardent supporters of a hard Brexit.
You could say that they are merely reflecting the views of their constituents and as a result are being a good MP, then again you could say that it's cowardice, they are more interested in hanging onto their jobs* than they are about the welfare of the country.
* - though as the recent election showed, Brexit intentions weren't as big a swing factor as some people expected. Perhaps some people's views have changed w.r.t. Brexit, perhaps it was just one of a number of factors people took into account or perhaps for a lot of people, party loyalty transcends Brexit opinion.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
...because "The People Have Spoken"
The fact that quite a few were mumbling, and that others were saying blatantly contradictory things, we have to submit to the will of the people.
We've been telling politicians that they don't listen to us for years and that as a result people were feeling excluded from the democratic process (a factor in the success of the Leave vote IMO). Well here is an example of direct democracy coming to a conclusion (the wrong one IMO but that's by the by). If politicians ignored this one too then that could be perceived to be yet another slap in the face for democracy. What I don't understand personally is that a House of Commons whose members were predominantly Remain supporters suddenly becoming such ardent supporters of a hard Brexit.
You could say that they are merely reflecting the views of their constituents and as a result are being a good MP, then again you could say that it's cowardice, they are more interested in hanging onto their jobs* than they are about the welfare of the country.
* - though as the recent election showed, Brexit intentions weren't as big a swing factor as some people expected. Perhaps some people's views have changed w.r.t. Brexit, perhaps it was just one of a number of factors people took into account or perhaps for a lot of people, party loyalty transcends Brexit opinion.
I maintain that it is not the size of the support for Brexit that is the issue so much as the intensity. Hardly anybody on the Remain side sees at as the most important thing to worry about and gets sufficiently fired up about it to do very much. But the hardcore Brexiteers (whatever that number is even if its only 10%-20%) of the population are absolutely passionate about it and will make it top of their agenda.
The downside for insisting on Remain can be significant. The downside for backing Brexit (reluctantly if needs be) is almost zero. In fact even some remainers seem to have a negative view of any political party that continues to back remain as going against the will of the people and ignoring the referendum result.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,123
A referendum guided by utter mistruths all over the place.
I cannot comprehend that, after however long it's been and however many stories noting that, in many areas, it's a really bad idea and not a single story (that I have seen, I haven't seen them all) reporting an upside, I am flabbergasted that the debate apparently seems to be over and the idiots and liars have won.
As you say because the people had spoken, and because of the 2 party system, everyone was falling in line behind the party leaders.
Now the situation is far more complex, with no party having a majority, and people being prepared to talk about crossparty action. However as pointed out by an article in today's Times, no Brexit option (from No Brexit all the way through to No Deal Brexit) commands a majority in Parliament at the moment.
Before the election we had some idea what might happen, now everything is back on the table, and I have no idea what will happen next.
Oh not you too. This place is turning into a pit of a-sceptical thinking, where prejudice and caricature rule.
Just to pick one little bit of nonsense. How about backing this up.
Last edited:
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,123
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Pretty much the way of things. Initial outrage gives way to meek acceptance for whatever reasons.
Please don't put words into my mouth. My contention is that Pixel cannot back up the claim that I highlighted.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,123
So, just regular ignorance, not willful ignorance?
Oh, and it was a question. I didn't mean to try to put words in your mouth, just trying to discover what you think the difference is and if you think the electorate that voted were well informed, willfully or otherwise.
Neither willful nor "regular" ignorance had anything to do with Pixel's claim, and my response. Really, you could just go back and read a couple of lines.
How the hell does anyone know who checked on the factual basis of the information they were given before they voted? Pixel's claim that she does is self-evident nonsense, and all the more disappointing because it comes from a poster I usually admire. That's before we even begin to look at the question of what a voter's responsibilities are*, and the lies which were propagated on the Remain side.
*Stupid, gullible, ignorant, uneducated, feckless people are just as entitled to a vote as anyone else, unless you lot know otherwise.
How the hell does anyone know who checked on the factual basis of the information they were given before they voted? Pixel's claim that she does is self-evident nonsense, and all the more disappointing because it comes from a poster I usually admire. That's before we even begin to look at the question of what a voter's responsibilities are*, and the lies which were propagated on the Remain side.
*Stupid, gullible, ignorant, uneducated, feckless people are just as entitled to a vote as anyone else, unless you lot know otherwise.
Last edited:
It was a leading question. It gave me 2 choices, neither of which were anything like the point I was making. And just to put the lie to your claim it was just a question and that you weren't putting words in my mouth:
You went and did it again.
- Status