Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 5

[Belz...]

I think people are trying to point out that the 'win' was based on people being lied to, extensively.

Let the record show that this seems to be the case from my end as well.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

And they won it (for certain degrees of "win") and now people are trying to make that not true.

No now we are examining the plan they have come up with to enact their masterplan and finding it as amazingly flawed as we suspected it always was and asking them if they have any clue as to how to make this work and all we are getting back is incoherent nonsense and sharp exits.

They won, were given the run of the place for two years and have been unable to come up with a way forward and now people are saying we can't just keep letting them play their silly games with real people's lives unless they can actually come up with something even remotely workable.

 

[Belz...]

No now we are examining the plan they have come up with to enact their masterplan and finding it as amazingly flawed as we suspected it always was and asking them if they have any clue as to how to make this work and all we are getting back is incoherent nonsense and sharp exits.

They won, were given the run of the place for two years and have been unable to come up with a way forward and now people are saying we can't just keep letting them play their silly games with real people's lives unless they can actually come up with something even remotely workable.

Are we talking about the Leave voters or the campaigners? The voters didn't have a plan, they just wanted out. Personally I have little idea how my government is going to implement the ideas I support. Sometimes I do, but often I don't, and sometimes it turns out a lot more difficult or harmful than expected.

 

[3point14]

Are we talking about the Leave voters or the campaigners? The voters didn't have a plan, they just wanted out. Personally I have little idea how my government is going to implement the ideas I support. Sometimes I do, but often I don't, and sometimes it turns out a lot more difficult or harmful than expected.

Or exactly as difficult as expected but such expectations are waved away (by individuals who stand to profit) as 'project fear'

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

You don't agree that it's a lot more likely to be achieved outside the EU?

Depends. Actually its probably more likely in some ways. It seems almost inevitable that at some point in the future we will be looking to rejoin the EU and that the EU we rejoin will have been shaped in our absence. Which if you take the line that the UK is one of the main forces against ever closer integration means we will be rejoining a closer union than the one we left.

Within the EU we would be able to object to and veto any changes that we did not approve of and therefore the close integration would only happen if we elected governments that supported that happening.

So within the EU we would have the choice of ever closer union or staying the same. Outside the EU we have no choice. So we lose something and gain nothing except that the Leavers get to burn the lifeboats of the ship they've drilled holes in by denying people future options.

 

[Belz...]

Depends. Actually its probably more likely in some ways. It seems almost inevitable that at some point in the future we will be looking to rejoin the EU and that the EU we rejoin will have been shaped in our absence. Which if you take the line that the UK is one of the main forces against ever closer integration means we will be rejoining a closer union than the one we left.

Within the EU we would be able to object to and veto any changes that we did not approve of and therefore the close integration would only happen if we elected governments that supported that happening.

So within the EU we would have the choice of ever closer union or staying the same. Outside the EU we have no choice. So we lose something and gain nothing except that the Leavers get to burn the lifeboats of the ship they've drilled holes in by denying people future options.

I'm not sure I understand your argument here but I don't think rejoining is inevitable at all. Let's just say I'm not optimistic about the few next decades.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Are we talking about the Leave voters or the campaigners? The voters didn't have a plan, they just wanted out. Personally I have little idea how my government is going to implement the ideas I support. Sometimes I do, but often I don't, and sometimes it turns out a lot more difficult or harmful than expected.

I'm talking about both.

The campaigners and leaders have the responsibility to come up with a coherent plan but those who back them have the responsibility to assess what they are seeing and realise the flaws in the execution.

Whether you frame that as 'I was wrong to support this stupid idea' or 'the idea was sound but its impossible to implement either because its simply too difficult or because the people in charge are not competent to deliver it' doesn't really matter too much.

So we have two groups in the wrong. Voters who voted to leave, see the fustercluck it has become and say 'let's charge ahead anyway' and those in charge who are delivering the fustercluck and insisting that this is what the people wanted while refusing to ask them in case they get an answer they don't like.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm not sure I understand your argument here but I don't think rejoining is inevitable at all. Let's just say I'm not optimistic about the few next decades.

Demographically its inevitable that a majority of people in the UK will want to be inside the EU. In fact that's probably already the case, hence why Leavers react with such venom to the idea of asking the people again.

Whether they get that opportunity is certainly open to question, but its highly unlikely they will be able to rejoin with the current benefits and the UK will have had no say on how the EU evolves during the time of its absence.

If this is too complex for you then simply fall back to the straightforward argument - the chance that the EU integrates or expands furthers against the will of the UK while the UK is a member is 0%. How much better is that when the UK is outside the EU.

What the Leavers are objecting to is that in future the UK may be in favour of further integration against THEIR wishes and they want to prevent that happening. Wonderful champions of democracy that they are.

The same wonderful champions of democracy who incidentally say they will deny Scotland the right to vote to leave the UK even though Scots elected a government with that as a key campaign pledge.

In other words those ********* are only interested in democracy when they can pervert it for their own ends.

 

[3point14]

I'm not sure I understand your argument here but I don't think rejoining is inevitable at all. Let's just say I'm not optimistic about the few next decades.

The only significant players on the world stage are either superpowers or are members of very close trading blocs.

Being outside one of these blocs is just an invitation to be bullied by superpowers or the blocs themselves.

Eventually (years, decades, centuries), we'll be desperate to rejoin. At that point, however, I suspect our economy won't meet the standards.

 

[Belz...]

The only significant players on the world stage are either superpowers or are members of very close trading blocs.

Being outside one of these blocs is just an invitation to be bullied by superpowers or the blocs themselves.

Eventually (years, decades, centuries), we'll be desperate to rejoin. At that point, however, I suspect our economy won't meet the standards.

What I meant is that I'm not optimistic that the world is going to remain as stable as it is now. I see quite a lot of breakage along the way.

 

[3point14]

What I meant is that I'm not optimistic that the world is going to remain as stable as it is now. I see quite a lot of breakage along the way.

Ah, yes. Fair point.

 

[ceptimus]

Those that are pro Brexit fall into two camps:

Those who already have a load of money for whom Brexit is not a threat to their lifestyle, Boris, Rees-Mogg, et al.

Those who have been fooled into thinking it's a good idea.

Your second category commits the logical fallacy of 'begging the question' (in the original meaning of the phrase). You're asserting that anyone who thinks it's a good idea has been fooled. This is a fact not in evidence. It's quite conceivable (and, what's more, actually true) that many people who think it's a good idea haven't been 'fooled into thinking that' - but have arrived at their conclusion by rational intelligent thinking.

I don't assert that everyone who thinks Remain is a good idea has 'been fooled into it' because: a) it's untrue, b) it's insulting, c) it would make me look stupid if I made such a stupid assertion.

I don't fall into either of your categories by the way. So you are wrong about that too.

 

[fagin]

If you haven't been fooled into thinking it's a good idea, you must have a sensible reason.

Please share...

 

[ceptimus]

If you haven't been fooled into thinking it's a good idea, you must have a sensible reason.

Please share...

I have many times in these threads already done that. And it's always been met with sneering disbelief by the remainophiles that infest these threads.

Perhaps you can explain your positive sensible reasons for supporting Remain. And I mean positive - not the usual (negative) Project Fear, "things will be terrible when we leave (if we believe the forecasts)", but actual positive reasons for remaining.

 

[GlennB]

So we have two groups in the wrong. Voters who voted to leave, see the fustercluck it has become and say 'let's charge ahead anyway' and those in charge who are delivering the fustercluck and insisting that this is what the people wanted while refusing to ask them in case they get an answer they don't like.

Bertrand Russell couldn't have put it better.

Belz, from where I sit you seem to be engaged in 'extreme reasonableness'. I think Carl Sagan had something to say about that.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I think people are trying to point out that the 'win' was based on people being lied to, extensively.

Oh cool you guys have a "Elections are voided if one side are lied to" law? We need to get one of those in America too.

 

[3point14]

Oh cool you guys have a "Elections are voided if one side are lied to" law? We need to get one of those in America too.

This wasn't an election though, was it?

It was a non-binding referrendum. Yes, I know I keep going on about that, but I think it's really, really important and that fact seems to be being disregarded.

There is literally no obligation to proceed with this course of action. That fact is laid out in the terms of the referrendum.

 

[GlennB]

Oh cool you guys have a "Elections are voided if one side are lied to" law? We need to get one of those in America too.

What election? If a party lies during an election campaign, and the outcome of those lies hurts in the long term, they can be voted out at a later date. Not so with this referendum, it seems.

Hell, Brits could vote in a referendum to reinstate capital punishment, but that could be reversed by parliament later. This referendum result is being treated as if it had been handed to Moses on stone tablets up on Mt. Thingy.

 

[fagin]

If you haven't been fooled into thinking it's a good idea, you must have a sensible reason.

Please share...

I have many times in these threads already done that. And it's always been met with sneering disbelief by the remainophiles that infest these threads.

Perhaps you can explain your positive sensible reasons for supporting Remain. And I mean positive - not the usual (negative) Project Fear, "things will be terrible when we leave (if we believe the forecasts)", but actual positive reasons for remaining.

Try

Free trade,
Open borders
Consistent laws
Representative democracy,
Economy of scale in administration
Easy air travel
Cheaper financial transaction fees
Free Calls from the EU on existing mobile plans
Easy to work abroad
Choice of passport colours
Visa free travel in the EU
No Irish border issues
Erasmus
Euratom
Ability to fly planes and land them in the EU
Galileo


Now your turn....

One sensible reason, please.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

It's quite conceivable (and, what's more, actually true) that many people who think it's a good idea haven't been 'fooled into thinking that' - but have arrived at their conclusion by rational intelligent thinking.

Its conceivable. up to the point when you ask them to provide it and they got nada. Then it's not conceivable. It's laughable.