The Flat Earth Society

Other Discussion Boards => Philosophy, Religion & Society => Topic started by: Pete Svarrior on November 01, 2019, 02:27:15 PM

Title: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 01, 2019, 02:27:15 PM
Thork: Brexit Party vs BoJo's Tories?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 01, 2019, 10:52:12 PM
Brexit Party.


The 3 main parties are all remain options.


Lib dems: Revoke A50
Labour: 2nd referendum
Tories: May's Deal which is basically just renegotiated membership.

Only the Brexit party is actually advocating we leave the EU.


I will never ever vote for a main party again until we leave the EU properly. There is no point in voting Labour or Conservative if the EU is in charge. Once the EU is dismissed, then we can think about who we want to run the country. Otherwise it doesn't matter who gets in.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: markjo on November 01, 2019, 11:24:31 PM
(http://www.sarahmcculloch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/brexit-meme.png)
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 02, 2019, 01:09:02 AM
Corbyn ... A communist whose every manifesto pledge is a state sanctioned theft of private property.
Martin Lewis ... a guy that gives advice on TV about how to get good deals on Tesco vouchers.
Stephen Hawking ... dead, and also wrong about pretty much everything whilst he was alive.
Back of the queue Obama ... hahaha ... go fuck yourself. Back of the queue? You really don't understand the British at all.
Branson ... a CONVICTED and jailed tax evader who now describes himself as a 'tax exile' having moved all his money out of the country.


Yeah, I'll take the top row thanks.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 02, 2019, 09:30:41 AM
Thanks for your answer. I figured that would more or less be it, but most hard Brexiteers I ask don't really want to talk about it.

I take it you disagree with the people who would rather vote tactically for BoJo so that they can get *any* Brexit at all, and prevent a Labour government? A split Leave vote could lead to odd results thanks to FPTP
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 03, 2019, 09:09:46 PM
Thanks for your answer. I figured that would more or less be it, but most hard Brexiteers I ask don't really want to talk about it.

I take it you disagree with the people who would rather vote tactically for BoJo so that they can get *any* Brexit at all, and prevent a Labour government? A split Leave vote could lead to odd results thanks to FPTP

We won't get a labour government. Not until Corbyn is gone. Remainers fear communism more than leaving the EU. Labour have also been less than decisive on Brexit. I think even their own supporters know they don't give a shit about Brexit as long as they get into number 10 so they can start snatching private property and ushering in 5 year plans. If you are a hardcore remoaner, you'll go with the lying ilLiberal unDemocrats.

Below is a nice little video pretty much summing up why we shouldn't sign that god-awful 'deal'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5sm4eenNwk

You'll like Brexbox. It'll give you an insight into what it is like for me watching the BBC and the rest of the remainstream media in the UK. You'll hate every moment.

But in short, no, I won't be voting Conservative.
1) My local Conservative MP is the incompetent arch remoaner Theresa May.
2) My constituency is going to vote Conservative whether I like it or not. Its possibly the safest seat in the UK (hence the reason the former PM was there).
3) Boris' deal is just May's deal again ... which by his own admission was a 'vassalage' agreement.
4) Boris has betrayed Brexiteers with this deal. He'll get punished at the ballot boxes and it will be natural Conservatives like me that do that to him.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 04, 2019, 07:14:31 AM
Oh yeah, I forgot you're in May's constituency. I hope you succeed in kicking her out, unlikely as it may be

Thanks for the recommendation, I'll give Brexbox a try
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 04, 2019, 10:32:00 AM
Thanks for the recommendation, I'll give Brexbox a try
Eh, that was mediocre. It didn't make me rage, nor did it help me understand.

The lawyer guy was good, and took great care to avoid answering the questions that would make him look bad (while still giving the others an answer they thought agreed with them). The rest were boring. A standard political party broadcast, in which they kept saying that "since the deal says what it says, we can't let the EU do what it's doing" - the weasel words and lack of specificity means that it didn't tickle my autism in the right way.

But hey, it was a quick venture into a different echo chamber from my own, which is always fun.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 04, 2019, 09:20:29 PM
Well thanks for giving it a watch.

Normally when you post a link to something, no one ever clicks on it. That's why half the morans on this site still think the earth is round.



Also, whilst Alex Phillips would definitely be worth a poke, full disclosure ... she did work for Cambridge Analytica.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 06, 2019, 03:42:17 PM
Also, whilst Alex Phillips would definitely be worth a poke, full disclosure ... she did work for Cambridge Analytica.
You say that as if it was a bad thing ;)

Follow-up question. So, BoJo's deal is a reheated version of May's deal, which is not really Brexit. If you had no other choice, would you rather take that deal or cancel Brexit altogether? Or does it make no difference either way?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 06, 2019, 04:04:26 PM
Also, whilst Alex Phillips would definitely be worth a poke, full disclosure ... she did work for Cambridge Analytica.
You say that as if it was a bad thing ;)

Follow-up question. So, BoJo's deal is a reheated version of May's deal, which is not really Brexit. If you had no other choice, would you rather take that deal or cancel Brexit altogether? Or does it make no difference either way?


Would I like to stay in the EU, or stay in the EU? Remainers seem to think this is some kind of choice and that they are generous for such an offer. I can't wrap my head around it.

Obviously I don't want either. In both cases, we end up subjugated by the French and Germans.

If I had to choose ... I guess stay in the EU, because the deal will nail us to the floor and I can only see the EU making the deal worse and worse over time as they keep changing the T&Cs on us. The ratchet, as its known. It is difficult for them to single us out when they have to follow rules too in the EU, albeit rules tailored just for them. But this deal just allows them to be outright vindictive and I don't know why we'd would put ourselves in that position. Just tell the EU to fuck off.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 06, 2019, 06:04:21 PM
Would I like to stay in the EU, or stay in the EU? Remainers seem to think this is some kind of choice and that they are generous for such an offer. I can't wrap my head around it.
Oh, nah, I know it's a super shit choice from your perspective. I don't think it's generous by any stretch of the imagination, but it may yet come to a choice between those two options. From my limited understanding, a Brexiteer could make an argument for the deal, because it opens up trade deal possibilities a little bit, or an argument for remaining, because that way the UK retains not just its obligations, but also privileges within the EU. But that's just me trying to guess what someone else might think. I'd much rather hear it from the horse's mouth.

The only reason I'm asking these questions is to better understand the Leave side (or at least one faction of it). With the political situation being as shit as it is, most of the time me trying to talk to a Brexiteer just gets a response along the lines of "BLOODY REMOANER WE VOTED TO LEAVE GET OVER IT". I'm sure the sentiment is sincere, but it doesn't help bridge any gaps, y'know? Your answers are direct and passionate, but also informative - and I appreciate both aspects of that.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 06, 2019, 11:59:12 PM
Oh, nah, I know it's a super shit choice from your perspective. I don't think it's generous by any stretch of the imagination, but it may yet come to a choice between those two options.

Well that is kind of it. If you provide either of those two options, you haven't solved the problem. It will never ever go away until we leave the EU properly. Millions of people like me will just keep voting out and out and out in every election forever more. We don't move on until the vote is respected. We can't move on. Because our vote is just a democratic placebo if it isn't respected, and there isn't any point in voting for anything else ever if they choose what to respect and what to ignore. So we fuck up every other election from now until we die until they deliver the thing we voted for in 2016. I'll vote UKIP, Brexit party, Monster raving looney party, independent, whatever is tactical and hurts the main parties the most until Brexit is done. In local elections, European elections, general elections, referendums ...

We're not moving on. It needs delivering.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: xasop on November 07, 2019, 07:56:11 AM
Well that is kind of it. If you provide either of those two options, you haven't solved the problem. It will never ever go away until we leave the EU properly. Millions of people like me will just keep voting out and out and out in every election forever more. We don't move on until the vote is respected. We can't move on. Because our vote is just a democratic placebo if it isn't respected, and there isn't any point in voting for anything else ever if they choose what to respect and what to ignore. So we fuck up every other election from now until we die until they deliver the thing we voted for in 2016. I'll vote UKIP, Brexit party, Monster raving looney party, independent, whatever is tactical and hurts the main parties the most until Brexit is done. In local elections, European elections, general elections, referendums ...

We're not moving on. It needs delivering.

What happens if there's a second Brexit referendum and the result is Remain? Which referendum should be respected then?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 07, 2019, 10:18:17 AM
What happens if there's a second Brexit referendum and the result is Remain? Which referendum should be respected then?


That would pretty much be the BSOD for our democracy. I think at that point the head of the armed forces needs to march into Westminster and give our democracy a hard reset. I think back to 1653 the last time Parliament started doing whatever it wanted and Oliver Cromwell marched in and booted the lot of them out. The words he used on that day are more or less perfect for the problems we have today.

Quote from: Oliver Cromwell
(http://www.emersonkent.com/images/oliver_cromwell_speech.jpg)

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice.

Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government.

Ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?

Ye have no more religion than my horse. Gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?

Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance.

Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this House; and which by God's help, and the strength he has given me, I am now come to do.

I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place.

Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 11:42:06 AM
Just so I'm perfectly clear about my intentions here: I'm not trying to suggest that this would solve the problem, not at all. Telling you to just accept Remain or Remain Lite is just as shit as Leavers telling Remainers that "we voted to leave raaargh". "Just roll over and accept the supremacy of the other half of the country" will never work.

All I'm trying to do is understand the problem. I'm a spectator, I won't have a vote for at least another half a year if not much longer, but I'm still somewhat invested in how the country I've lived a third of my life in is run. Sure, there's a side that comes across to me as more reasonable, but they're also the only side that will normally talk to me. So now I'm talking to the other side. Not to convince them, not to mock them, but simply to understand.

I'm noticing a trend. The Brexiteers that will talk to me rather than just shout me out of the room tend to say two things: "We'll keep voting Leave until we leave" and "we will never vote again if our will is not respected" (I'm assuming the latter is at least slightly exaggerated). Isn't there an obvious threat looming there? It looks like if the Remain side manages to get its way, the Leave side might become so disheartened that they'll lose momentum. And that would be a shit outcome. At this stage, all possible outcomes are shit.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 07, 2019, 01:43:26 PM
I view it as an ideological battle. Who has sovereignty in the United Kingdom? Who is in charge? Its the most important thing you could fight for. If you aren't in charge and someone else is, now whatever they say goes. You have no say on anything else anyway. You'll be dictated to.


Now, we are led to believe, that the people of the UK are sovereign. Not the Queen. Not Parliament. The people. And once every 5 years they vote and place sovereignty in the hands of representatives to run the country for them. The law states that sovereignty must be returned in full to the electorate 5 years later so that they have the ability to choose who to represent them next. We have a Parliamentary democracy. This is important because our politicians have been giving away our sovereignty without our permission to the EU. They can't do that. Its against the law. Cameron rightly said ... well if the EU wants these extra powers, you have to ask the people for them, they aren't mine to give. The people said no. Parliament is trying to give away the people's sovereignty without their permission. Its not something parliament can do.

Quote from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/what-is-brexit-why-is-there-an-eu-referendum-a7042791.html
Ever since the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, which created the modern EU, there have been those calling for another vote to take into account how things have has changed, with Eurosceptics claiming that membership now represents an unacceptable transfer of powers from our Parliament to Brussels. It has been a running sore for the Conservative Party in particular, with many MPs and much of the membership never fully reconciled to our membership.

That's why we had a referendum in the first place. If we said yes, we want to be members, we would have consented as a people to giving Brussels power. That's why it was a matter of referendum and couldn't just be passed as a bill. MPs can't give away sovereignty, only the people can. Same for Scottish referendum. A transfer of sovereignty from Westminster to Holyrood. The Scots chose to leave sovereignty with Westminster.

Now, with that said, parliament therefore does not trump the will of the people. If the people vote out, parliament cannot and should not be able to stop that. Parliament are representatives, not dictators.

However, parliament has decided to ignore what the very people who placed them there want them to do. They have created a paradox. They claim "we are in charge because the people who are all knowing and all wise put us here" and also claim "the people have no power whatsoever and don't know what they are talking about and we'll ignore them and do what we want". Remainers are legally in the wrong. They are trying to transfer power without consent. To steal the soverignty of the British people.

So when you say "Sure, there's a side that comes across to me as more reasonable, but they're also the only side that will normally talk to me." ... how are they more reasonable? How is giving away sovereignty that is not yours to give reasonable? How is ignoring the will of the people in favour of a tyrannical parliament reasonable? How is ignoring a democratic instruction reasonable?

Something you must consider. We shouldn't have entered the EU without consent in the first place. They should have had a referendum in 1992 to ask if they can give away sovereignty. Its not a question of 'should we leave?'. They have no permission at all to have placed us in the EU. They have been caught acting against the interest of the people. If we'd voted remain ... it would have been all over forever. The EU would have the sovereignty of the British. But call it the wisdom of crowds or whatever you like ... the British said no fricking way. And that must be respected.

This is also why 'the deal' is unacceptable. You can have a deal swapping tarifs and access and whatever else. But you can't swap sovereignty. Its not your to give. No ECJ. No Customs Union. No Single Market.

And you see, this is the wicked and cynical thing about the EU. It is not a nation. It doesn't need anything. It doesn't need British fish or German cars. It acts as a middle man. It says "we'll swap access to British waters for lower tariff German cars ... and as middle men we'll take a little something from both of you ... power". That's all the EU wants. That's all it will trade for. It doesn't need to trade for anything because it is not a country with citizens. It is an entity that only desires power over Europe. Why is every deal about handing over powers? Why can't we just have trade deals? Answer: Because the EU doesn't need anything via trade. It only wants power over you. If you won't give it that, it won't trade.

*as an aside, when we have a perfectly good political forum, why would you choose complete nonsense as a place to debate such matters?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 01:59:15 PM
*as an aside, when we have a perfectly good political forum, why would you choose complete nonsense as a place to debate such matter?
I started with what was more or less a shitpost. I hadn't expected for the thread to evolve in this direction, though I'm glad it did. [EDIT: now renamed and moved to PR&S]

So when you say "Sure, there's a side that comes across to me as more reasonable, but they're also the only side that will normally talk to me." ... how are they more reasonable? How is giving away sovereignty that is not yours to give reasonable? How is ignoring the will of the people in favour of a tyrannical parliament reasonable? How is ignoring a democratic instruction reasonable?
Well, we're clearly in very different mindsets about this. You view it primarily as an issue of sovereignty (and I respect that, your explanation makes sense), whereas my primary concern is with maintaining a high quality of life. I'm also obviously much less tied to the nation than you are. Whether we live in an independent England, the United Kingdom, or the United States of Europe doesn't bother me too much. I'm sure it's a product of my upbringing, and I'm not claiming that my position is superior - it's just different. To me, it won't matter too much who is sovereign in a country where politicians feel the need to reassure us there will be "adequate food".

Now, don't get me wrong - I'm sure the prophecies of impending doom are greatly exaggerated by the Remain side. The country won't collapse if we leave the EU. But I also think that the Leave side is wrong in trying to completely dismissing the economic side of the debate. The poor will get poorer, and from where I'm sitting, that's a huge injustice.

Remainers are legally in the wrong.
Well, legally speaking, Parliament is sovereign (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty_in_the_United_Kingdom). There is a legitimate debate to be had about whether it should be sovereign, but currently it is. That's why they get to pass laws even when they speak against the result of the referendum (which, legally, was called with a clause of "it's advisory only and we reserve the right to tell you to shove it"). I actually agree with you that this shouldn't be how it is, but that's just one part of the broken British system.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 07, 2019, 02:14:11 PM
Well, we're clearly in very different mindsets about this. You view it primarily as an issue of sovereignty (and I respect that, your explanation makes sense), whereas my primary concern is with maintaining a high quality of life.

Its the same thing. How can you maintain a high quality of life when you are not free? When someone else makes your laws, taxes you and spends your money as they like? You no longer have your own destiny in your hands and must rely on the benevolence of foreign powers. And frankly if we are going to look at history, placing our future in the hands of the French and Germans isn't going to be good for us. They don't like us. They are very happy to have wars with us to get their own way. Imagine if they can do what they want and we just have to accept it without a shot fired?

The EU will vampire the wealth out of the UK as fast as it can once if gets its teeth into her juicy neck. And care for her and her people the we way it cares for the Greeks and the Italians. Its a German-Franco Empire. Nothing more. Anyone else is a vassal.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 02:25:09 PM
How can you maintain a high quality of life when you are not free? When someone else makes your laws, taxes you and spends your money as they like? You no longer have your own destiny in your hands and must rely on the benevolence of foreign powers.
But "someone else" makes my laws either way. Currently it's MPs and the EU - neither of them are me, or anyone I have real sway over. A UK citizen has the same amount of input into British politics (you get to elect an MP, will that MP do what you want? Probably not, as we've seen) as he does into EU politics.

The EU doesn't restrict your or my freedoms - it restricts the freedoms of MPs

Oh, but MEPs don't get to propose laws, they only vote for them. But neither do MPs. It's the government that brings laws forward. It's also the government (in part) who decides who represents us in the drafting of EU law.

The EU will vampire the wealth out of the UK as fast as it can once if gets its teeth into her juicy neck.
Again, UK governments are already doing that. If anything, the EU has at least imposed some means of redistribution. If the government had its way, all of the UK's wealth would get sucked into London/Panama. The EU forces them into spreading it at least a little bit. Perhaps if we had more trustworthy governments (n.b. I'm not just talking about Tories here, Labour were not better), I'd be more willing to accept that giving them more power is a good idea.

I sincerely worry that even if a hard Brexit happens, it won't yield any of the tangible benefits you're hoping for. It'll give the UK the ability to change things, but I reckon they'd be shafting us just as hard, if not harder than in the current arrangement.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 07, 2019, 03:01:32 PM
The EU doesn't restrict your or my freedoms - it restricts the freedoms of MPs

Again, UK governments are already doing that. If anything, the EU has at least imposed some means of redistribution. If the government had its way, all of the UK's wealth would get sucked into London/Panama. The EU forces them into spreading it at least a little bit. Perhaps if we had more trustworthy governments (n.b. I'm not just talking about Tories here, Labour were not better), I'd be more willing to accept that giving them more power is a good idea.

If the British don't like a government, they can vote them out. If we hate Boris, we can get rid of him. You can't vote out Verhofstadt, Tusk and Shultz. 


As for 'The EU protects you from your own government' that's the most ridiculous thing you have said so far. The EU wants to usurp London as a financial capital. They want to introduce all kinds of laws making London uncompetitive with the long term goal being to move the Financial Capital to Frankfurt. They want to take our wealth.

Europeans are not our friends. They are our rivals. They have been for thousands of years. They'll happily kill us over money. You think the smiling Nazis and polite Normans want us to be happy and wealthy? That we should trust the friendly Vikings, welcome the joyous Romans, open up our waters to Spanish fishing Armadas and our markets to Dutch East India Companies?

They are Europeans. They fucking hate us, and the only way we have ever been able to stop them coming here and taking everything we own is by being the biggest, nastiest, most frightening superpower on earth. Nothing else works. They haven't all just changed. It is so naive to think Europeans have our best interests at heart. They don't. And we should keep them at arms length as we always have done ... or better yet, at a swords length.

You don't let down your guard and give your enemies the keys to your kingdom. They'll ruin you.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 03:10:41 PM
If the British don't like a government, they can vote them out. If we hate Boris, we can get rid of him. You can't vote out Verhofstadt, Tusk and Shultz.
Neither of us can vote Boris out - you can vote May out, and you already pointed out how unlikely that is in reality. And neither of us voted Boris in. We elected a Parliament, and a government was formed within it (and then it collapsed, and a new government formed - no election needed!). A Tory vote means you can get BoJo, May, Cameron, Rees-Mogg, Letwin, Rory Stewart, or god-knows-who. The same vote can lead to drastically different outcomes. The same applies to the EU - we elect MEPs and national governments, they select the "benevolent overlords".

In my opinion, this is a terrible state of affairs on both fronts. I just don't see how UK politics is preferable. We get shafted either way.

The EU wants to usurp London as a financial capital. They want to introduce all kinds of laws making London uncompetitive with the long term goal being to move the Financial Capital to Frankfurt. They want to take our wealth.
Could you point me towards some of these bad laws? I've heard this claim before, but I wasn't able to get much detail.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on November 07, 2019, 03:28:30 PM
You are basically saying "Look Englishman, you should trust the French and Germans."

And I'm saying "Erm, they aren't usually nice to us. I'd rather not, if that's ok".

And you are saying "But they've changed and you are being mean not letting them be in charge of you"

And I'm saying "Being Polish, can you honestly say putting your faith in Germans is historically a good idea?"

And you are saying "But I need you to let the Germans rule you, so that I can work here as a foreigner"

And I'm saying "You're not really my biggest concern here. You can go live anywhere under German-Franco rule if you please. But its not for me".



... I think remainers are naive. I think they forget the lessons of history. Soon the EU wants an EU army, to control our troops, ever closer integration, to eventually control our money and make us use the Euro, our tax affairs, our trade, our economy. They want to run it all. And the more we give, the harder it is to ever reverse as they have all the power. If it goes to shit, there will be no way out.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 03:36:58 PM
You are basically saying "Look Englishman, you should trust the French and Germans."
No, that's not my intention. Personally, I see no reason to trust the French, Germans, the English, or the politicians of the mythical Svarriorland. I'm also not trying to convince you to change your mind, because I don't even think you're wrong.

And you are saying "But they've changed and you are being mean not letting them be in charge of you"
The UK's membership in the EU doesn't affect my right to work or live here in any way. You're trying to imply a vested interest, and you're completely mistaken about that. In addition to that, I don't think getting personal will help this discussion. It's been very civil until now - please let's try to keep it that way?

... I think remainers are naive. I think they forget the lessons of history. Soon the EU wants an EU army, to control our troops, ever closer integration, to eventually control our money and make us use the Euro, our tax affairs, our trade, our economy. They want to run it all. And the more we give, the harder it is to ever reverse as they have all the power. If it goes to shit, there will be no way out.
Perhaps. But do you think going our own way would make them any less powerful or scary? They're gonna be our biggest neighbour either way.

Finally, I'd like to repeat my request for you to show me some of those laws designed to make the UK uncompetitive. I really struggle to get an answer on that one from Brexit supporters, and having a few examples would really help.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on November 07, 2019, 04:36:46 PM
Wow. OK, there's a lot here but a few thoughts...

If you are a hardcore remoaner, you'll go with the lying ilLiberal unDemocrats.

One of my Remainer friends is planning to do just that.
Personally, I won't because although I'm a Remainer I don't agree with the Lib Dems' policy of revoking Article 50. The referendum result was what it was and no government should just ignore that. Legally they can - referendums are advisory - but there would be riots and it would lead to further disillusionment with our system.

So we fuck up every other election from now until we die until they deliver the thing we voted for in 2016. I'll vote UKIP, Brexit party, Monster raving looney party, independent, whatever is tactical and hurts the main parties the most until Brexit is done. In local elections, European elections, general elections, referendums ...

But you're not hurting the main parties, are you? Because none of those tiny parties are going to get any MPs, or not enough to make a difference. One of the main parties is still going to form a government and you'll have had no say in which.

That would pretty much be the BSOD for our democracy. I think at that point the head of the armed forces needs to march into Westminster and give our democracy a hard reset. I think back to 1653 the last time Parliament started doing whatever it wanted

Ah, the old "another referendum would be undemocratic" argument.
Just have a think about what you're saying. Another vote would be undemocratic.
Where in the democracy rulebook does it say that once a vote is taken the result stands for all time? You know it doesn't say that because you say elsewhere:

And once every 5 years they vote and place sovereignty in the hands of representatives to run the country for them.

Exactly. You don't just have an election and that party stays in power for perpetuity.
Public mood can change, so you have regular elections to reflect that.
Now, a fairly reasonable argument against what I've just said is that when the result of an election is known you don't immediately have another vote to check, the winning party forms a government. But the problem here is the length of time between the Referendum and the delivery of its outcome. A lot has happened in those 3 years, a lot more is known about the potential deal we might get with the EU. There are indications that we might well get a different result now. Is a narrow majority of a one off snapshot of public opinion 3 years ago really a sound basis for taking a long term course of action?
Before the referendum Farage said that a 52/48 split to Remain would be "unfinished business". That was the result to Leave and now it's "You lost, get over it".

However, parliament has decided to ignore what the very people who placed them there want them to do.

Except they haven't, have they? It's pretty much all they've been working on.
They triggered Article 50, they've been working on what our future relationship with the EU looks like. They even got an agreement with the EU about that despite all our red lines, and theirs, which seemed almost impossible to reconcile.
The problem is there is no concensus either in parliament - or amongst the population - about what Brexit looks like. The referendum wasn't voting for anything, it was voting against something. The analogy I always use is it was like voting to move house with no plan about where to move to. I'm guessing you want a hard Brexit. But the last poll I saw suggested that about two thirds of Leavers want that, about a third of people in total.
What Leave meant in detail was not articulated at the time of the referendum.

The only way I see out of this mess is another in/out referendum and a second question about if out is to win do you want No Deal or Boris's Deal (or whatever mess Corbyn comes up with, if he's elected, which he won't be).

Then just bloody get on with it.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr Van Nostrand on November 17, 2019, 02:19:19 PM
This "Thork" seems to know things and have many insights. If Boris Johnson loses power in the Brexit movement, it could create a vacuum that would allow him to rise to power. It could be a dangerous situation.

To an outsider, the architecture of the EU seemed flawed in a lot of fundamental ways. Not just for the (valid) sovereignty concerns or the cross contamination of cultural cooties, but sharing currency between such radically different economies was looking for trouble. It's like a bunch of people sharing one credit card.

Still, I do some business with the UK and it's already a hassle dealing with tariffs and customs and all the usual BS. If the hardcore crash out Brexit occurs, I have no idea how I'm supposed to handle it.

If Thork rises to power, perhaps he will grant the TFES community special import export rights.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on December 18, 2019, 08:59:01 PM
The video below is historian David Starky talking about Brexit and the election we just had.

It is a lengthy video, but I'm sharing because I feel it is that good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7Yzy6Rqrmc
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on December 18, 2019, 11:35:04 PM
Ha. He lost me at "wisdom of crowds".
Just because a lot of stupid people think the same way, that doesn't make it wise.
And yes, yes, not everyone who voted to Brexit is an idiot just like not everyone who voted to Remain is a clever clogs.
But look at the things which are popular. That video is from The Sun, one of the most popular papers in the UK.
Look at the TV Shows which are popular (Mrs Brown's Boys, anyone?!).
That doesn't shout to me that we have a well educated population who make careful decisions about how they vote on things based on extensive research into the matter at hand.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on December 19, 2019, 12:05:31 AM
Ha. He lost me at "wisdom of crowds".
Just because a lot of stupid people think the same way, that doesn't make it wise.
And yes, yes, not everyone who voted to Brexit is an idiot just like not everyone who voted to Remain is a clever clogs.
But look at the things which are popular. That video is from The Sun, one of the most popular papers in the UK.
Look at the TV Shows which are popular (Mrs Brown's Boys, anyone?!).
That doesn't shout to me that we have a well educated population who make careful decisions about how they vote on things based on extensive research into the matter at hand.

He actually goes on to say that Brexit was never about money and economics anyway. No one can see the future. It was an irrational decision and that's fine because people are irrational. It was a more a sense of feeling. Do we want to be independent? Do we value the nation state? Are we British or European? And only the British people can answer that ... and they did. And so that's the answer ... the correct answer. You just have to have faith in your fellow man. The instant you start thinking you're better than everyone else and you should make decisions for them for their own good, you become the kind of person who would burn other people for your convictions.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 06, 2020, 02:04:42 PM
Been meaning to reply to this for a while.
I pretty much agree, it was a feeling. The UK has always had a feeling that we are separate - even superior - to most other nations.
The British people did answer that but it's notable that it was close and you know what, in polls a few years before the Referendum this was not a subject which preoccupied people. It was only when certain high profile politicians and the media started whipping people up it suddenly became something people decided was important.
It's also notable that younger people generally do feel European, they've grown up in a multi-cultural society and they seem to mostly like it. Younger people overwhelmingly wanted to Remain.
It's not about thinking I'm "better" than anyone but it's obviously bollocks to pretend that everyone's opinion about things is equally valid.
If my car breaks I call a mechanic. If I'm ill I go to a doctor.
I don't start a FB poll and take whatever action wins, because most people don't have the expertise to know what's wrong and tell me what to do to fix it.

Anyway, it's done now. I doubt the sky will fall in. But I don't think it'll make us much positive difference as people like Johnson and Farge were pretending.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 06, 2020, 04:03:32 PM
It's not about thinking I'm "better" than anyone but it's obviously bollocks to pretend that everyone's opinion about things is equally valid.
I want to pick you up on this, because everyone's vote is equally valid and so are their opinions. That's why we all get one vote and those votes are all the same. I have the same right to feel safe as anyone else. My desire to not get stabbed isn't worth more than an uneducated person's desire not to be stabbed. So it they vote for knife crime policies because they are concerned about that, my wanting a cut in business rates doesn't trump that. The 'superior' left have to knock this idea of 'experts' and 'wisdom' out of democracy. Everyone's view is equally valid, we tally up those views and that's democracy. If you want to be ruled by scholars and elites, there are plenty of Islamic countries that run like that. Move there.

I pretty much agree, it was a feeling. The UK has always had a feeling that we are separate - even superior - to most other nations.
The British people did answer that but it's notable that it was close and you know what, in polls a few years before the Referendum this was not a subject which preoccupied people. It was only when certain high profile politicians and the media started whipping people up it suddenly became something people decided was important.
I'm going to let you into a secret. A 'Leaver' secret that I knew even before the referendum vote was in and that would deliver leave a victory. In fact, I thought leave would win by more even though every 'expert' said they wouldn't.

I have one simple theory. We speak English. And that language is going to dictate how you think about things. How the language is constructed, how we place the words in what order, what words mean and how we use them. There is an 'English' way of thinking that is different to that of say a 'French' way of thinking. This is well documented.
https://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/arts-culture/stories/does-the-language-you-speak-influence-how-you-think

Now there were two things I thought were going to smash the Remain vote.

1) No one ever remains at anything. I leave the house. But I stay at home. I don't remain at home. It is not a common word ... to remain. Or it wasn't before the election. Leaving sounds familiar ... remaining, a bit alien. If it had been Stay vs Abscond, I think you would have seen a few percentage points the other way. For fairness ... leave or stay. Whichever Etonian cockwomble picked 'remain' had clearly never had to endure a staycation ... there is no remaincation. Remain was a stupid as fuck choice of word for this.

2) Way more important. This is the one that for me told me that absolutely no one gives a shit about a number on the side of a bus. The elites kept making the argument that Brexit was an economic descision. They wheeled out Mark Carney, talked about fishing quotas and car exports and £39billion for this and £17billion for that. No one cares. These numbers are too big, they don't mean anything and no one cares. You don't go to a politician for a haircut. Why would you go to the nations hairdressers and ask them what trade policy we should follow?

The nation knew better. It knew this wasn't an economic argument, but a cultural argument. And that was only going to go one way.

If you are English, I know what your favourite story was when you were 3 years old. Its the one where mummy or daddy puff themselves up and bellow Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum ... and at this point if you are a 3 year old English child you are going to start giggling uncontrollably because you know what is coming next. "I smell the blood of an ENGLISHMAN!". At this point the average 3 year old will lose their shit because they will be thinking "the giant is going to get me because I'm an Englishman! I'm an Englishman. I'm an Englishman.

So consider the language. I can be European, I can be British, I can be English ... but I can only be an Englishman. I can't be a Britishman or a Europeanman. There is no such thing. We don't even have a word for it. So when the giant ... the establishment ... bellows out across the land to the people of England 'How do you identify?' ... "Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum?" ... the electorate starts giggling its arse off and votes that they are Englishmen.

We speak English. We're the Englishmen, North are the Scotsman, to the West are the Welshman and the Irishmen, over the water are the Frenchmen, the Dutchmen and the Germans ... and that's all she wrote. There are no Russianmen, or Spanishmen, or Americanmen or Indianmen or anything else*. Because when our language was forming, you'd never meet those far flung people's. We are the centre of our own little universe. The Englishmen ... and we were fucked if we were ever going to be Europeanmen instead.

*(we'll make an exception if you come and invade us because at that point we need a name for you ... enter stage right, the Normans and the Romans)

The instant David Cameron called the FeeFiFoFum-Referendum ... I was quite sure I knew what the result would be.

This theory was brought to you by Baby Thork and is available on a creative commons license for you to share with your friends. There are no sources or references ... these are the machinations of the English mind when it has fuck all to do on a Monday afternoon.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 06, 2020, 08:46:31 PM
Thork:
I want to pick you up on this, because everyone's vote is equally valid and so are their opinions.

Also Thork, in the same post
Quote
You don't go to a politician for a haircut. Why would you go to the nations hairdressers and ask them what trade policy we should follow?

Dude, you literally just explained my point while disagreeing with it.
Slow handclap for you.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 06, 2020, 09:44:11 PM
No. You missed my point.

The public is never ever ever wrong. It is infallible. That's the starting point of democracy. The instant you stray from that, you're fucked. You can't say "the public are stupid and can't be trusted to decide on Brexit" and also "the public are smart and chose me as a representative to tell you how stupid they are".

If you ask a stupid question however ... be prepared for a stupid answer.

Asking "are you European or British?" and expecting people to give you advice on macro-economic trade deals is your fault. Not the electorate's. I explained already ... you can never ask the public to decide on the economics of a thing like Brexit because they don't have all the info. So they will sensibly take the question to mean "how do you feel about Brexit culturally?". And they answered that. And tough shit if you got the right answer to the wrong question. Trade deals is not the problem of the public. You don't have to ask the public for advice on trade deals. You only have to ask them on issues of sovereignty ... and that is what they answered ... "Stay sovereign. I'm an Englishman.". The right answer.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 07, 2020, 09:04:04 AM
Your comment on the choice of words for "Leave" and "Remain" seems spot on to me. Which also outlines some of the flaws of direct democracy as currently implemented - if the wording of a question apparently affects the answer, then those writing the questions down have an unfair advantage (or a great opportunity to fuck themselves over).
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Lord Dave on January 07, 2020, 10:32:00 AM
I'm waiting for Thork to start ranting how expensive everything is, how he can't afford health insurance, and that its all someone else's fault.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 07, 2020, 11:36:03 AM
The public is never ever ever wrong. It is infallible. That's the starting point of democracy. The instant you stray from that, you're fucked. You can't say "the public are stupid and can't be trusted to decide on Brexit" and also "the public are smart and chose me as a representative to tell you how stupid they are".
Disagree.
The starting point for democracy is "One man, one vote" (or woman these days - political correctness gone mad, I tells ya).
So the premise is that everyone has a right to an opinion (true) and that everyone's opinion is equally valid (false - obviously false).
I shouldn't need to labour this point but if you're the sort of person who, say, thinks that were the earth a ball then the oceans would go flying off into space like water off a rapidly spinning tennis ball then your opinion about the shape of the earth is not as valid as someone who has a degree in physics and understands a bit about angular velocity.
People have different experience and knowledge. Of course everyone's opinion doesn't (or shouldn't) carry equal weight.

When it comes to a General Election then I'd suggest there's no "right" answer. Would I have preferred Corbyn to Johnson or Hillary Clinton to Trump? Probably, but in neither case was it clear that either of them were particularly good options. Increasingly it feels like we're choosing the "least bad" option.

When it comes to individual issues though...FFS don't ask "the people". We shouldn't decide to leave the EU because of a vague feeling that we are "British". I'd suggest we can be British and be in the EU anyway, the French certainly don't seem to have an identity crisis in terms of being French and they're in the EU. Nor do younger people in the UK. And, for balance, we shouldn't stay in the EU because some people think the sky will fall in.

The decision about this should be made based on careful analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of being in or out of the EU, not because John in Scunthorpe doesn't like the "bloody Frogs". You're right, it's not the electorate's fault they were asked, Cameron's at fault for that. He gambled on the Scottish Referendum, won that and went double or quits on this one. The dick.

I see you brought up sovereignty. To be honest, that was an argument that briefly swayed me. But then I realised something - we are sovereign. Any power we have ceded to the EU we have chosen to do so and we can take back if we choose to. How did we start the process of leaving the EU? Who did we have to go to war with? No-one, we just had to write a letter. The process of leaving is complicated but we didn't have to go to war because we are sovereign, being in the EU wasn't imposed on us. We chose to join, we can choose to leave. And we have. Is it the right decision? Time will tell. But if it is then it wasn't made for the right reasons and it wasn't made by the right people. People who know what they're talking about should be making these decisions. They might still bugger it up of course just like a doctor can misdiagnose people, but they've got a better chance of getting it right than hair-dressers.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 07, 2020, 12:23:40 PM
Your comment on the choice of words for "Leave" and "Remain" seems spot on to me. Which also outlines some of the flaws of direct democracy as currently implemented - if the wording of a question apparently affects the answer, then those writing the questions down have an unfair advantage (or a great opportunity to fuck themselves over).
Yeah, I have never seen anyone commentate on this in the public sphere despite all the moaning about numbers on the side of a bus and Russian interference and every other excuse. No one seems to have looked at what I would imagine is a very influential factor when played out on a macro scale.

The wording is essential and the electoral commission scored an own goal and of course ... when your enemy is making a mistake, you stay quiet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#Referendum_question

I'm waiting for Thork to start ranting how expensive everything is, how he can't afford health insurance, and that its all someone else's fault.
You are the archetypal remoaner in the UK. You still think it is an economic argument, despite the British public telling the establishment in 4 elections now that it isn't. You refuse to see that no one gives a shit about the trade implications. It is about identity and sovereignty. Not shareholders on the FTSE 100.

The starting point for democracy is "One man, one vote" (or woman these days - political correctness gone mad, I tells ya).
So the premise is that everyone has a right to an opinion (true) and that everyone's opinion is equally valid (false - obviously false).
I shouldn't need to labour this point but if you're the sort of person who, say, thinks that were the earth a ball then the oceans would go flying off into space like water off a rapidly spinning tennis ball then your opinion about the shape of the earth is not as valid as someone who has a degree in physics and understands a bit about angular velocity.
People have different experience and knowledge. Of course everyone's opinion doesn't (or shouldn't) carry equal weight.

And I will disagree. If I want to believe in a cloud fairy and have the government money spent on a mosque or church, I have that right and can vote for that. I can believe whatever I like and no matter how ridiculous YOU think it is, you can suck it. Your vote and opinion isn't worth more than mine. If enough people think the earth is flat and that makes them happy, you'll be sucking that up too. Democracy isn't about who can brow beat who into submission or make the prettiest pie-chart. It is about the most popular ideas prevailing.

When it comes to a General Election then I'd suggest there's no "right" answer. Would I have preferred Corbyn to Johnson or Hillary Clinton to Trump? Probably, but in neither case was it clear that either of them were particularly good options. Increasingly it feels like we're choosing the "least bad" option.
Actually both those were pretty easy. Do you value community or a love of self? If you love yourself above all else, join the hollywood celebs, virtue signallers and academics. Those who believe they are better than everyone else ... and vote left. There is a reason why entire industries like media are all left wing. Narcissists are drawn to those industries. Stand up comedians, singers, actors ... anyone who has a business and makes themselves the product ... those people will vote left. The young also tend to be very self-absorbed so they find the left alluring until they get a bit older. Everyone else votes conservative.

Its the age old battle ... the individual vs the collective. Individualism always brings rise to disaster as nations fall apart. Communism, Fascism, Puritanism. They are all sides of the same coin. A ruling class of people who know better than everyone else and will burn anyone else people for what they believe.  >o<

When it comes to individual issues though...FFS don't ask "the people". We shouldn't decide to leave the EU because of a vague feeling that we are "British".
Yes we should. You don't hand over the keys to the nation to a foreign power without permission. Are you sick?

I'd suggest we can be British and be in the EU anyway, the French certainly don't seem to have an identity crisis in terms of being French and they're in the EU. Nor do younger people in the UK. And, for balance, we shouldn't stay in the EU because some people think the sky will fall in.
We asked everyone's opinion, counted up those opinions and already decided. It is time to move on.

The decision about this should be made based on careful analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of being in or out of the EU, not because John in Scunthorpe doesn't like the "bloody Frogs". You're right, it's not the electorate's fault they were asked, Cameron's at fault for that. He gambled on the Scottish Referendum, won that and went double or quits on this one. The dick.
No. Cameron had to ask. The British government of the last 40 years is at fault. They had been doing trade deals and trading sovereignty for lower tariffs and access. But sovereignty wasn't their's to give away. That is why the Conservative party had these problems. Half the party knew this was wrong ... treacherous even. And they insisted ... you must ask the people. You can't sign us up to being a vassal state without asking. Go ask. And it is right they asked because it turns out people didn't like what they were doing.

I see you brought up sovereignty. To be honest, that was an argument that briefly swayed me. But then I realised something - we are sovereign. Any power we have ceded to the EU we have chosen to do so and we can take back if we choose to.
Well that's just it. We didn't choose to, did we? In fact when we were asked, we said no. And you don't get to take back control of anything once you cede it to the EU. That's it. Its gone. Its theirs once you give it away and they never ever give anything back.

How did we start the process of leaving the EU? Who did we have to go to war with?
The establishment.

No-one, we just had to write a letter. The process of leaving is complicated but we didn't have to go to war because we are sovereign, being in the EU wasn't imposed on us. We chose to join, we can choose to leave. And we have. Is it the right decision? Time will tell. But if it is then it wasn't made for the right reasons and it wasn't made by the right people. People who know what they're talking about should be making these decisions. They might still bugger it up of course just like a doctor can misdiagnose people, but they've got a better chance of getting it right than hair-dressers.
People who know what they are talking about can be biased, corrupt and wrong. You give a few people all the power like that to make massive decisions without any question ever ... and they'll be rolling around in cash-for-access money. Cash for Access is the cornerstone of the EU anyway. The EU needs to die. Its an awful idea. Our leaving speeds that process along.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 08, 2020, 02:54:43 PM
Your vote and opinion isn't worth more than mine.

My vote isn't, but my opinion is. Or maybe yours is. It depends what we're being asked and what our experience and knowledge are.
This is the exact problem with democracy. I'm not going to necessarily suggest a solution to that problem, but I see it - and our FPTP system - as problems.

Quote
It is about the most popular ideas prevailing.

It is. But that's a silly way of doing something. Ideas being popular doesn't make them right or sensible.
When people were asked to name a boat they went for "Boaty McBoatface", FFS.
People are idiots, on average. If they can't be trusted to name a boat they certainly can't be trusted to understand all the complexities around our membership of the EU and decide whether it's a good thing or not.
Witness the spike in people Googling questions about the EU after the result was known:

https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-the-eu-is-top-google-search-in-uk-after-brexit-2016-6?r=US&IR=T

This does not shout to me of a well informed electorate who understood all the relevant issues and came to an educated decision.
As you say, it was more of a feeling. A "feeling" is not a good way to make policies, things being popular isn't either.
And, worse, it was a one off snapshot of public opinion. Any vote is that of course, but in most cases if you ended up with the "wrong" government, or one which becomes deeply unpopular then you have another go in a few years. With this "the people" have decided on a matter the consequences of which will be felt for generations. And, as I said, maybe it was the right decision. But if it was then we didn't get to it for the right reasons.
Plenty of polls have suggested that were we to have another vote (my head spins when people say that another vote would be undemocractic) we'd get a different result. Farage himself said that a 52/48 result to Remain would be "unfinished business", that was the result to leave and suddenly it's "you lost, get over it" as though that a one off vote should end all further debate.

You say that Boris vs Corbyn and Trump vs Clinton were "easy", but a lot of people got it "wrong" then. Trump lost the popular vote. Boris didn't get over half the popular vote either.

Quote
Yes we should. You don't hand over the keys to the nation to a foreign power without permission.

Well, for a start that's not what membership of the EU is, and you know it.
And secondly, they have permission to do what they like by dint of the election result which put them into power. That gives them a mandate to do what they want.

Quote
No. Cameron had to ask.

No, he didn't. Why did he? 5 years ago almost no-one gave a shit about the EU or our membership of it. The issue came to prominence through people like the Daily Mail lying about "THEY WANT TO BAN PRAWN COCKTAIL CRISPS!!!" or "THEY WANT TO BAN BENDY BANANAS!!!", but a few years ago it was not thought to be an important issue facing the country:

(https://i.ibb.co/8nwr0tX/Brexit-Means-Brexit.jpg)

No sovereignty was given up - again, we had to write a letter to leave, not start a war. We ceded certain powers in exchange for membership of a club which gave us certain benefits. Whether that exchange was worthwhile is part of the debate around our membership, but we chose to do it, we can choose to reverse it. I've no idea why you said that was irreversible, what's the point of leaving then? "Take back control" was what Farage or Boris were shouting endlessly.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 10, 2020, 09:32:03 PM
but I see it - and our FPTP system - as problems.
FPTP isn't a problem. It is a godsend. If we had proportional representation we'd be still stuck in Brexit limbo forever. Many countries in Europe went PR and it ruined them. They couldn't get anything done. You just end up with coalitions and eventually a broken system.

Consider Northern Ireland. They run a form of PR called single transferable vote (STV). Sounds fair doesn't it? More representation for smaller parties. Until you consider the reality. No one can ever get a majority. And if the two major parties disagree ... your parliament shuts down. The Northern Irish Parliament has been shut down for almost 3 years now. Unable to function. Unable to govern.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-51068774

Imagine the British government shut down for 3 years, and I mean completely shut over Brexit. That would have been us. You gotta go with FPTP. At least then someone has a chance of getting a majority.

It is. But that's a silly way of doing something. Ideas being popular doesn't make them right or sensible.
When people were asked to name a boat they went for "Boaty McBoatface", FFS.
What a terrible example. The public named that boat perfectly. The stupid idiots running the show then over-ruled that wisdom. And now they have a boat no one cares about. It was supposed to be an Antarctic research vessel. It was supposed get kids interested in science and ecology. That's why they had a competition to get school kids making suggestions and get public interest in it. And then it happens. A gift into their laps. Boaty McBoatface. One of the world's most famous boats. Where people wait at the docks for it to dock and take pictures. Kids buying Boaty books like budgie the helicopter. Stuffed toys, a mobile game, merch, kids projects at schools ... a real life Thomas the Tank Engine ... and they threw it all away and called it the Sir David Attenborough and no one has given a fuck since. The public weren't the idiots. The public got that one bang on.

People are idiots, on average. If they can't be trusted to name a boat they certainly can't be trusted to understand all the complexities around our membership of the EU and decide whether it's a good thing or not.
People disagreeing with you doesn't make them idiots.

Witness the spike in people Googling questions about the EU after the result was known:
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-the-eu-is-top-google-search-in-uk-after-brexit-2016-6?r=US&IR=T
If people have absolutely no idea, they are as likely to vote remain as leave. So they just cancel each other out. You really should read about the wisdom of crowds.

This does not shout to me of a well informed electorate who understood all the relevant issues and came to an educated decision.
As you say, it was more of a feeling. A "feeling" is not a good way to make policies, things being popular isn't either.
And, worse, it was a one off snapshot of public opinion. Any vote is that of course, but in most cases if you ended up with the "wrong" government, or one which becomes deeply unpopular then you have another go in a few years. With this "the people" have decided on a matter the consequences of which will be felt for generations. And, as I said, maybe it was the right decision. But if it was then we didn't get to it for the right reasons.
Plenty of polls have suggested that were we to have another vote (my head spins when people say that another vote would be undemocractic) we'd get a different result. Farage himself said that a 52/48 result to Remain would be "unfinished business", that was the result to leave and suddenly it's "you lost, get over it" as though that a one off vote should end all further debate.
You need to get over it.
Quote from: Winston S. Churchill
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

You say that Boris vs Corbyn and Trump vs Clinton were "easy", but a lot of people got it "wrong" then. Trump lost the popular vote. Boris didn't get over half the popular vote either.
And if Clinto had got in, there would just have been an even harder push to the Republicans in this election as the electorate seeked to right that wrong. It'd even out.

Quote
No. Cameron had to ask.

No, he didn't. Why did he? 5 years ago almost no-one gave a shit about the EU or our membership of it. The issue came to prominence through people like the Daily Mail lying about "THEY WANT TO BAN PRAWN COCKTAIL CRISPS!!!" or "THEY WANT TO BAN BENDY BANANAS!!!", but a few years ago it was not thought to be an important issue facing the country:
I already told you, the ERG were concerned Britain was trading sovereignty without permission of the people. That is illegal. It came to a head when Cameron went to renegotiate our terms and the EU told him they wanted more powers.


No sovereignty was given up
When you must open your borders, accept laws from someone else and pay tax to someone else ... you're giving up sovereignty.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on January 11, 2020, 01:49:18 PM
Quote
And if Clinto had got in, there would just have been an even harder push to the Republicans in this election as the electorate seeked to right that wrong. It'd even out.

Right which wrong? On your view the electorate is infallible and their vote has spoken. The People can not make an incorrect choice.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 11, 2020, 02:03:17 PM
Quote
And if Clinto had got in, there would just have been an even harder push to the Republicans in this election as the electorate seeked to right that wrong. It'd even out.

Right which wrong? On your view the electorate is infallible and their vote has spoken. The People can not make an incorrect choice.

I don't think you understand what democracy is. It is an ideological BELIEF that the people of a nation will always vote in the best interests of the nation. If you won't BELIEVE that dogma, then you can't be a democracy. It doesn't work. And then you end up with an 'expert' like Hitler or and 'expert' like Joseph Stalin running the place.

Quote from: The Almighty Wikipedia, peace be on it
Papal infallibility is a dogma of the Catholic Church that states that, in virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error "when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church." Infallibility is, according to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, "more than a simple, de facto absence of error. It is a positive perfection, ruling out the possibility of error".
^ Its like this. Democratic infallibility. Sign up to it or go believe in the policies of Kim Jong-Un.

Whatever the people decide ... we all must accept it was the right decision and get on with it. The alternative is always worse. 
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on January 11, 2020, 08:35:00 PM
So Brexit can be a mistake in the same way that electing HRC could be. Got it.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 11, 2020, 09:40:23 PM
So Brexit can be a mistake in the same way that electing HRC could be. Got it.
Honouring Brexit isn't a mistake. That was the will of the people. Nothing else matters.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on January 12, 2020, 05:35:07 AM
So Brexit can be a mistake in the same way that electing HRC could be. Got it.
Honouring Brexit isn't a mistake. That was the will of the people. Nothing else matters.

Then why would HRC be a wrong that needs righting? She was the will of the people. I’m having trouble reconciling your positions.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rushy on January 12, 2020, 07:41:35 PM
So Brexit can be a mistake in the same way that electing HRC could be. Got it.
Honouring Brexit isn't a mistake. That was the will of the people. Nothing else matters.

Then why would HRC be a wrong that needs righting? She was the will of the people. I’m having trouble reconciling your positions.

In order to become elected, HRC required the majority of people to vote for her in the electoral college. You're making a false equivalency to the UK's referendum, as the UK does not have any such electoral college. The US federal government operates differently than the UK, because the US is fifty states, while the UK is only one. To say "HRC was the will of the people" makes no sense unless you're specifically referring to "the will of the people in California" or "the will of the people in New York".
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on January 12, 2020, 09:35:10 PM
I guess you missed the part where it was a hypothetical scenario.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rushy on January 12, 2020, 10:38:16 PM
I guess you missed the part where it was a hypothetical scenario.

A nonsensical hypothetical scenario is just as worthless as a nonsensical but actual scenario.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on January 12, 2020, 11:04:00 PM
I guess you missed the part where it was a hypothetical scenario.

A nonsensical hypothetical scenario is just as worthless as a nonsensical but actual scenario.

Thanks for your super valuable input.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 12, 2020, 11:09:41 PM
Democracy. You accept the result of a vote. It isn't complicated.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 13, 2020, 11:24:45 AM
FPTP isn't a problem. It is a godsend. If we had proportional representation we'd be still stuck in Brexit limbo forever. Many countries in Europe went PR and it ruined them. They couldn't get anything done. You just end up with coalitions and eventually a broken system.

PR has worked fine in Germany. Democracy should surely about "the people"s views being represented. So in one of the recent elections UKIP got 12% of the vote. 1 in 8 people voted for them and they got 1 in 650 MPs. That tells me it's not a great system. It might have produced strong governments but that's not the same as them being effective or good.

To respond to your other points...I'm going to concede the Boaty McBoatface one, it was a bad example.
The wisdom of crowds thing is something I've heard of but having looked into it two of the criteria for it to apply are:

"For crowds to be wise, they must be characterized by a diversity of opinion and each person's opinion should be independent of those around him or her."

I'd agree the first of those applies to an electorate, the first of those certainly does not. We are all influenced by each other, by the media, now by social media, and by the campaigns of both sides. So yeah, guessing the weight of a cow (an example given as demonstrating this effect) might give you a better result if you ask a lot of people. And that kinda makes sense, some will overestimate, others will underestimate. But as soon as they start discussing the matter and start influencing each other or see a load of headlines about how the EU is making cows fatter then it's going to affect the result.
People aren't idiots because they disagree with me, they're idiots simply because they are. You surely aren't arguing that the electorate are, on average, well educated and understand all the implications of us being an EU member or not being. You said it yourself, it was more of a feeling. Boris is popular because he's funny and likeable, whether a lot of the things he says are true doesn't seem to matter to people. People increasingly don't seem to care what is true.

Sovereignty is generally not something one gives up, it's something which is taken from you, often as the result of a war. Like how we took India's sovereignty and a bunch of other country's when we built our Empire, countries who now celebrate their independence from us since we gave it back or they took it back.
We chose to join the EU, we can choose to leave - because we are sovereign.

And even within the EU we didn't agree to everything, we opted out of being part of the Shengen agreement, for example.
We did sign up to freedom of movement, but the Daily Mail's myth of these immigrants "coming over here" and being given a free house and living it up on benefits are bollox. There are rules on what they can claim and EU rules allow us to deport citizens from other EU countries if they have become a burden on the welfare system. Immigration has been a good thing for us economically and in terms of filling skills gaps. Old people don't like it because of "all them foreigners coming over here", but as you say, that's just a feeling, it's not because of any facts.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 13, 2020, 12:06:51 PM
We chose to join the EU, we can choose to leave - because we are sovereign.
For now. Texas chose to join the USA, a loose federation of states, but it can't leave the USA, the nation.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on January 13, 2020, 12:27:42 PM
I'd agree the first of those applies to an electorate, the first of those certainly does not. We are all influenced by each other, by the media, now by social media, and by the campaigns of both sides. So yeah, guessing the weight of a cow (an example given as demonstrating this effect) might give you a better result if you ask a lot of people. And that kinda makes sense, some will overestimate, others will underestimate. But as soon as they start discussing the matter and start influencing each other or see a load of headlines about how the EU is making cows fatter then it's going to affect the result.
People aren't idiots because they disagree with me, they're idiots simply because they are. You surely aren't arguing that the electorate are, on average, well educated and understand all the implications of us being an EU member or not being. You said it yourself, it was more of a feeling. Boris is popular because he's funny and likeable, whether a lot of the things he says are true doesn't seem to matter to people. People increasingly don't seem to care what is true.
Well let's apply the wisdom of crowds to Brexit.
In the example of the weight of a cow you could ask me and I'm going to guess right now that a cow weighs about 450kg. Ok, now I'm going to google it ... one moment.

Google tells me dairy cows weigh anything from 453kg to 816kg. So I'm a little on the low side. But I'm not orders of magnitude out. I didn't guess 84kg, I didn't guess 56,000kg. Some people however, would. And that is because despite common consensus on this website ... I'm not an idiot. I thought ... mmm, I weigh about 70kg ... a cow is probably about 6 or 7 times as heavy as me and plucked out a number in the middle of that. I used my limited knowledge to get a ballpark figure. Now some people are incredibly stupid as you say. And they will just blurt out 56,000kg as an answer. They had no idea of how to estimate it, they don't know anything about cows, it wouldn't dawn on them to use their own weight as a starting point and they just go for a big number because cows are big. But they still had a vote ... and that vote carried the same weight as mine did in the guess the weight of the cow competition. And adding in their stupid guess with my more sensible guess through the magic of the wisdom of crowds meant we both got closer to the real answer. Maybe a farmer was also asked and he owns that type of cow and pings 653kg and is only 2kg out. Well his guess doesn't move the needle very far, does it?

And so Brexit. Maybe someone who knew absolutely nothing about Brexit voted to leave ... but by the same token, people with far more insight than either of us also voted to leave. And the same could be said of remain. And when we pool all those opinions from the most stupid of the stupid, to the better guesses of ourselves, to the absolute experts in the field ... we come out with the right result.


Sovereignty is generally not something one gives up, it's something which is taken from you, often as the result of a war. Like how we took India's sovereignty and a bunch of other country's when we built our Empire, countries who now celebrate their independence from us since we gave it back or they took it back.
We chose to join the EU, we can choose to leave - because we are sovereign.
We? No. We voted to become members of the EEC. Not part of the united States of Europe and it took 40 years for the British to be asked again if they were happy with the imposition.


Immigration has been a good thing for us economically and in terms of filling skills gaps.
Who is us? Shareholders that have seen the hourly wages of workers held down in the last 40 years as hundreds of thousands of eastern European immigrants continue to over supply the labour market? Sure. Has it been good for low skilled workers who want to feed their families? Nope.

Old people don't like it because of "all them foreigners coming over here", but as you say, that's just a feeling, it's not because of any facts.
Accusing people who don't agree with you of being racists ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0nIhL4v6bY

You won't learn, will you?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on January 13, 2020, 01:27:25 PM
Well let's apply the wisdom of crowds to Brexit.
I've just explained why you can't. It only applies in quite specific circumstances which are not met by an electorate voting in an election.

Quote
we come out with the right result.
In your opinion. But look at the polls over time and they're all over the place.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/

So had the vote come at a different time we'd have got a different result. Would have have been "right"?
A snapshot of public opinion on a day - especially if it's a pretty close result on a complex issue - is a flimsy basis for taking a course of action the effects of which will last generations.

Ultimately, I don't think things like this should be put to "the public". I remember mutterings back in the day about a vote on joining the Euro and I thought "Don't ask me, I failed economics!". I like to think I'm more intelligent than average (well, objective measures of such things tell me I am), but I wouldn't feel qualified to decide on something like that. If asked to I'd try and read up about it and form an opinion, but I'm not a subject matter expert.

Quote
We voted to become members of the EEC. Not part of the united States of Europe and it took 40 years for the British to be asked again if they were happy with the imposition.

A fairly reasonable point, but I've already showed that till a few years ago very few people felt it was an important issue.

Quote
Who is us?

Us as a country, I take the point about low skilled workers, there is some evidence that their wages have been depressed.

Quote
Accusing people who don't agree with you of being racists

And now you're just straw-manning. You are the one who said that Brexit was about a feeling. Immigration is a factor in that feeling.
I never said it was racist feeling, you've used that word.
People don't like change - younger people have grown up in a multi-cultural society and judging by the way they voted in the referendum they quite like it. It's generally older people who have seen the change who don't like it. Doesn't make them wrong, or racist, but it doesn't make them right either - as you get older you do tend to idealise the days of your youth.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr Van Nostrand on February 01, 2020, 02:50:56 PM
https://apnews.com/e48bf51838ced94e2d92adba189b4944

It's weird how this thread is so quiet right now. I was sure a gang of drunken soccer hooligans would have spray painted "IN YUR FACE REMOANERS!!!" all over it by now.


The plan actually works for now and the availability and export price of Curly Wurlys won't get too screwed up so I'm all good. They have a year to update the infrastructures and negotiate trade deals while the citizens get to breathe free and all. They did the easy part of the divorce, saying 'Talaq' three times.

But if it's like American politicians, they may struggle uselessly for a year then have to come up with some short term patch to fight off trade constipation.

All this talk of freedom and sovereignty is getting the Scotts all riled up about independence again. Do they call that Scexit or UKexit?



Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on February 01, 2020, 04:52:57 PM
All this talk of freedom and sovereignty is getting the Scotts all riled up about independence again. Do they call that Scexit or UKexit?
It is called indyref2. Yeah ... indyref2. Short for independence referendum number 2. Number 2 because they didn't like the result of independence referendum number 1 just 4 years ago, which was billed as a once in a generation referendum ... until the Scottish government lost.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asjbNXnD44w

But if it's like American politicians, they may struggle uselessly for a year then have to come up with some short term patch to fight off trade constipation.
Boris Johnson has a huge majority. Basically, he has no one to fight with. He can do as he likes.

It's weird how this thread is so quiet right now. I was sure a gang of drunken soccer hooligans would have spray painted "IN YUR FACE REMOANERS!!!" all over it by now.
Most people in the Uk are over Brexit. Ignore the vociferous squealing remoaners on Twitter and the mainstream media. They have a British form of Trump derangement syndrome called Brexit derangement syndrome. Look at this poor twat here. He's so invested in his stupid EU trade deal, (not because he needs a deal, he's a TV talking head), but because he thinks poor people need the deal ... and yet hopes that poor people who voted to leave deserve to be bankrupt. The man's a tosspot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOagvfIpD38


And these are the people left whinging. Everyone else moved on. Leavers shrugged, they have what they voted for. Remainers shrugged. Gonna happen now anyway. Even Tony Blair has got over it.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/01/tony-blair-remainers-must-accept-they-lost-and-now-be-constructive-over-brexit

Its all settled down now. We're over Brexit. Even my new Polish girlfriend has been letting me enjoy her European goods and services tariff free since we left, and we aren't going to deport her for at least 2 years, by which time I'll have moved on anyway.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on June 04, 2020, 08:51:06 PM
Seemed like the best place to post this, even if it’s a bit necro-y:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/boris-johnson-wants-eu-workers-to-return-ahead-of-brexit-1-6684193

Boris really seems to have had a change of heart.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: TomInAustin on June 24, 2020, 06:54:10 PM
So Brexit can be a mistake in the same way that electing HRC could be. Got it.
Honouring Brexit isn't a mistake. That was the will of the people. Nothing else matters.

Being American I don't pretend to understand British politics (unlike all the Europen experts in American politics).   The closest I can come to it aside from news stories is my neighbor and friend who is a British citizen, an engineer by trade,  and he claims to not really understand Brexit either.   His statement and I have no idea if it's correct, is that Brexit won the vote based on huge numbers of retired people that were concerned over non-brits taking jobs.   

True, false, maybe, maybe not?
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on June 27, 2020, 02:30:25 PM
It's certainly true that older people mostly voted for Brexit and younger people mostly voted to Remain.
Concern over non-Brits taking jobs was maybe a factor but I think the fact that the UK is changing to a more cosmopolitan, multi-cultural place was a bigger one.
Older people don't like change - even though they're not going to have to live with it that long. Younger people embrace it - many have grown up with it like this and actually like it.
The UK being a small island which used to punch well above its weight on the world stage makes us quite resistant to ceding power to any foreign power. And I did myself briefly buy into the sovereignty argument - that we needed to leave the EU to regain our sovereignty. But it doesn't really work as an argument. We are sovereign, any power we have ceded we have chosen to and can choose to take back. The process of doing so may be complex but to start it we simply had to write a letter, we didn't have to start a war.

(I certainly don't claim to be an expert on US politics by the way, but I have an...opinion on Trump and what the US does affects the whole world so non-Americans quite rightly pay attention to what goes on there)
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on June 28, 2020, 06:32:17 PM
We are sovereign, any power we have ceded we have chosen to and can choose to take back.
Untrue. The entire referendum started because David Cameron asked to renegotiate some of Britain's positions and the EU said no. Its not like we agreed. The EU used the ratchet system to slowly over decades add more and more laws and regulations we had to follow. Cameron asked for changes to reign some of this in ... he was told no.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1070490/brexit-news-uk-eu-david-cameron-theresa-may-deal-agreement-referendum-spt

You aren't sovereign when your laws are being dictated to you.

The process of doing so may be complex but to start it we simply had to write a letter, we didn't have to start a war.
That's like saying Scotland is sovereign or Catalonia is sovereign. They just need to get a people's vote and write a letter. You know this to be untrue.

(I certainly don't claim to be an expert on US politics by the way, but I have an...opinion on Trump and what the US does affects the whole world so non-Americans quite rightly pay attention to what goes on there)
Its none of our business who American's choose as their leader. We don't get a vote and we should respect their choice, even if its a dumb one.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: AATW on June 28, 2020, 10:26:25 PM
We are sovereign, any power we have ceded we have chosen to and can choose to take back.
Untrue.
Just saying "nuh-uh" isn't really a counter-argument.
Any sovereignty we ceded to the EU we chose to and we can - and have - choose to take back.

Your examples are not equivalent, Scotland need our permission to have a referendum for independence - permission which has been denied by Boris Johnson. Catalan tried to have one [the bastards, I was actually in Barcelona when that happened, had tickets for the Nou Camp and they played the sodding game behind closed doors because of anticipated trouble, what are the bleedin' chances?], it was declared illegal and the ring-leaders rounded up. The UK did not have to ask the EU if we could have one, Cameron has not been rounded up. We had a referendum and have started the process of leaving. Just saying "well other countries/regions can't do that" is not an argument. You're right, but so what? We could and we did.

Its none of our business who American's choose as their leader. We don't get a vote and we should respect their choice, even if its a dumb one.
It is our business because what goes on in the US affects the rest of the world because of their power and influence.
Nothing we can do about it of course but it's reasonable to have an opinion.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on June 29, 2020, 12:52:29 AM
we should respect their choice, even if its a dumb one.

What an idiotic position And you don’t even believe it. You regularly don’t respect people’s choices if they are left-leaning.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on June 29, 2020, 12:46:57 PM
Nothing we can do about it of course but it's reasonable to have an opinion.
I'm not saying don't have an opinion. I have an opinion on Nancy Pelosi, Hilary Clinton and all the other wicked arseholes in the democrat party. But if the AMerican people are stupid enough to choose that (they weren't), then I would respect the decision. I actually don't have a choice. But I don't think our media should be on the orange man bad train. They should respect the office and report on Trump with the same level of respect they showed Obama. Not doing their best to humiliate the President of the USA. I don't think that's a smart route to go down. Respect the office if not the man.

What an idiotic position And you don’t even believe it. You regularly don’t respect people’s choices if they are left-leaning.
I'm a lunatic with a keyboard. I'm not an official media outlet or a politician or a CEO of a major corporation or a public figure.

I didn't like Obama one bit. Forked-tongue warmonger who put children in cages (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-build-cages-immigrants/) that he was. But I didn't make it my business to make endless threads and tweets and facebook posts about black man bad. I had my opinions if asked, but it was America's choice to put such an appalling President in The White House. One the rest of the world just had to suck up.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on June 29, 2020, 01:36:02 PM
One the rest of the world just had to suck up.

Incorrect.  We can have conversations that will hopefully influence American voters.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on June 29, 2020, 01:46:46 PM
One the rest of the world just had to suck up.

Incorrect.  We can have conversations that will hopefully influence American voters.
Are you having conversations to influence Russian voters? What about Chinese voters or French voters or Italian voters or Indian voters? What is the obsession with American politics? The best answer I can come up with, is that it is in English so our lazy journalists can copy and paste it into their news sites. But I don't care about America nearly as much as British coverage of American news would suggest. I don't think most Brits do. Most Brits would struggle to name the Prime Minister of Australia or the main parties in New Zealand. And yet they know blow by blow every last insignificant and irrelevant detail of Trump's actions. Why does his healthcare policy get so much UK air time? It is domestic policy. British people don't know anything about Indian health policy or Japanese policy, we aren't told. But every last detail of US. The Muller investigation. Why would the British public care? But again excruciating detail and it is so irrelevant to us. And yet British people follow this and have full blown arguments WITH OTHER BRITISH PEOPLE about it!

One of my friends has Trump derangement syndrome. He gets incredibly worked up about Trump's latest endeavours. And it makes no difference to his life at all. We need less US politics in our news. It only imports US problems like black lives matter or antifa.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Rama Set on June 29, 2020, 03:30:12 PM
One the rest of the world just had to suck up.

Incorrect.  We can have conversations that will hopefully influence American voters.
Are you having conversations to influence Russian voters? What about Chinese voters or French voters or Italian voters or Indian voters? What is the obsession with American politics?

Well I happen to live right next to the USA and we do 70% of our commerce with the USA.  They also happen to be the largest economic power in the world.

Quote
The best answer I can come up with, is that it is in English so our lazy journalists can copy and paste it into their news sites. But I don't care about America nearly as much as British coverage of American news would suggest. I don't think most Brits do. Most Brits would struggle to name the Prime Minister of Australia or the main parties in New Zealand. And yet they know blow by blow every last insignificant and irrelevant detail of Trump's actions. Why does his healthcare policy get so much UK air time? It is domestic policy. British people don't know anything about Indian health policy or Japanese policy, we aren't told. But every last detail of US. The Muller investigation. Why would the British public care? But again excruciating detail and it is so irrelevant to us. And yet British people follow this and have full blown arguments WITH OTHER BRITISH PEOPLE about it!

Maybe because the actions the USA takes have an impact on the world?


Quote
One of my friends has Trump derangement syndrome. He gets incredibly worked up about Trump's latest endeavours. And it makes no difference to his life at all. We need less US politics in our news. It only imports US problems like black lives matter or antifa.

Cool story.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr Van Nostrand on July 03, 2020, 02:30:05 PM
Its none of our business who American's choose as their leader. We don't get a vote and we should respect their choice, even if its a dumb one.

When the world's most sophisticated and powerful nuclear arsenal falls into the hands of a rich, spoiled, corrupt, pussy grabbing, draft dodging, Hillary supporting, man-child, the whole planet should be concerned.  With a corrupt Attorney General and a majority in the legislators, the checks and balances have been removed.

Fortunately, he's an incompetent buffoon who hasn't really been able to accomplish anything more than a tax break for billionaires even with a majority in the house and the Senate.

And before the Junior Republican Incels start going on about how unfair the liberal media is to poor Donald, this pattern has gone on all his life. He is a half century of scandal, bankruptcy and bullshit.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on September 27, 2020, 05:06:43 AM
Should anyone care, today the Swiss go to the polls to vote on if they wish to retain free movement of people with the EU.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54269138

Thork's prediction: They are going to vote to vote leave, of course.

Now the Swiss have been told that they are not members of the EU, but they are signed up to many of the things EU membership requires and they have a form of membership even if everyone denies it. They've had the same creeping EU crap that Britain had where you sign up for a trade deal and 40 years later you find you are a vassal state.

Predictably the Swiss are being urged by their politicians not to vote out and are under the same media onslaught and subjected to the same lies about how it will rain frogs if they do. They will still vote out.

Hidden in the BBC article is the reason they will vote out.
Quote from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54269138
The population has risen by two million, from 6.6 million in 1990 to 8.6 million in 2020, and about 25% are non-Swiss and primarily from the EU.
You're at the point where the Swiss will start losing elections to the will of immigrants and if they don't act soon, will lose their country to foreign marauders forever.

I'm very much hoping to see another nail in the socialist machine ... we find out tomorrow.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Dr David Thork on September 27, 2020, 11:25:19 AM
(https://cnet3.cbsistatic.com/img/gw3zsHSUTpgK5oG4GdH5_UvpRxM=/109x127:1440x873/1092x614/2019/05/22/1b710a6b-5f4d-4987-a046-c23674b221a3/picard-meme-facepalm.jpg)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-54316316

Enjoy your crime and wage depression you stupid Swiss morans.
Title: Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
Post by: Pete Svarrior on September 27, 2020, 12:41:37 PM
Thork's prediction: They are going to vote to vote leave, of course.
lololol