Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're confusing democracy with populism and idiocy.
Gotta love how blatantly despising of the people you lot are.
At least we don't differentiate our hatred by race.
British Government loses Article 50 court fight
271–280 of 316 posts
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All I'm saying is that the EU referendum result must be respected. It is being respected. This might be news to you, but we don't live in a fascist dictatorship where dissent is forbidden. So, in your view, not a single thing any government has done (with the exception of joining the Common Market) has been agreed to by the population. Interesting.
Things such as the NHS, the minimum wage and same-sex marriage are things governments have achieved with overwhelming support from the people. But it's true that the people didn't have a direct say on these things. I don't see it as a problem though because, unlike the EU, the majority of people are perfectly happy with these things.
Nice assertions. I think this would be a good time for you to step back and examine the profound contradictions in your thought processes. And remember, in your future, no dissent is allowed.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bizarre. We did agree to be in the EU. In any case, I trust you'll never vote again or protest against any voting outcomes that you disagree with as you seem to think that once a vote has been held, the outcome can never be disagreed with.
I'm not sure how we agreed to be in the EU when we voted to leave on 23rd June. I don't expect everyone to be happy about the outcome of votes, but I do expect outcomes to be respected. I'm not opposed to decisions being overturned, but I don't think it's right to re-run a vote right after it has been carried out. We haven't even left the EU yet. At some point after we've left the EU, perhaps there will be grounds to…
Luckily you're not in charge of how our democracy works.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, for one, the EU has (understandably) choosen very anti-Brexit negotiators, hinting at hard and unfruitful negotiations. I guess the UK would have loved if the EU sent Faragne...
Do you mean the current UK government did not put anti-EU negotiators in charge of handling this issue?
Oh, they did. But they were surprised and angered the EU will send anti-Brexit negotiators nontheless.
It's something we have come to expect from the British: They get cranky once they find themselves on a Level playing field.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
The referendum is a poll. UK has representative, parliamentary democracy.
Exactly - so we should disregard the original referendum (a mere poll, as you put it) on the basis of which the British government signed up in 1975 to what was then the embryo EU - though only those experienced in deciphering subtexts in official documents really understood at that time that federation was the real goal not merely the establishment of a free trade area.
> the original referendum (a mere poll, as you put it) on the basis of which the British government signed up
You seem to be trying a reductio ad absurdum argument here and failing.
The UK joined the EEC in 1973, without a referendum but based on an act of Parliament. In 1975 they held an explicitly non-binding referendum that supported staying in the EEC. In other words, that referendum voted to maintain the status quo. You can "disregard" it if you wish, but that would also just mean maintaining the status quo.
The UK has never held a binding referendum on EEC/EU membership. According to the UK's crufty "constitution", this means Parliament gets to decide. If Parliament does nothing, the UK remains in the EU.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#276Isn't it a well known fact for everyone by now that leaving the EU would have dire consequences to England? Losing the shared market access, researchers not being allowed into shared EU projects, the European Stock Exchange moving from London OR London leaving the UK, Scotland leaving the UK, maybe even N. Ireland leaving as well to unify the island (erin go bragh by the way!). How would it be in the interest for any…
While I think it will overall be bad for the UK, on the specific point of researchers in shared EU projects, that is a bit less tied to EU membership. The EU research programme doesn't require EU membership to join, or even quasi-membership of the EFTA/EEA variety. In fact Turkey recently joined it (in 2014). It does still require mutual agreement that may or may not happen, but I think a specific "a la carte" agreem…
Factually wrong, it is already happening. It is tied to funding for these projects. Project management are afraid of losing key research members when the funding doesn't come through from the UK. So they exclude UK researchers altogether until things biol over. Problem is, these researches could be years/decades long, and joining in the middle of it is way harder than during planning phase.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/12/uk-scienti...
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
MP's are in a hard place because of this. The majority of them are pro-remain, having concluded that brexit is damaging and dangerous and cannot result in a better deal. ... but they will be whipped into line by government (Tory) and party leadership (Labour) insisting that they follow the settled will of the clear majority of the people ... but the will of the people is neither settled nor a clear majority.
I really wish they'd stop calling it a "clear majority". I'm not sure when 52-48 was ever such.
Exactly. It's not a penalty shoot out. The margin of the majority is tiny. Overall the electorate was broadly split among Leave, Remain and Shrug/Dunno. This is in no way whatsoever a clear mandate to leave given that X% of Leave votes were by voters' own admission a protest, and another Y% seem keen to change their vote having had a taste of the upheaval ahead - where X + Y is likely more than 2.
Personally I don't think it "disrespects" the original vote, or the democratic process, where margins are absolutely razor-thin to feel an "are you sure?" followup is warranted. 70/30 Leave? Sure: a clear consensus, can't really argue. 52/48? Different matter entirely.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could dismiss pretty much any election by multiplying the "yes" votes with voter turnout to get less than 50%. Not in Australia. Here we have compulsory voting, and referendums have to have a double majority in order to pass (so there's no question about whether the majority of the people actually wanted the change). So multiplying by voter turnout would not meaningfully change the results (voter turnout is >95…
How are voters compelled in practice?
In the Austrian case I suppose "not at all", but usually compulsory voting doesn't mean that you're dragged to the urn, but that you're paying a fine if you donÄt vote.
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#279For anyone else who likes primary sources on this sort of thing, here is the court's very readable 2-page summary: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/summ... (PDF)
And here's the actual ruling: https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/judg... (PDF)
Re: British Government loses Article 50 court fight
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I think it will overall be bad for the UK, on the specific point of researchers in shared EU projects, that is a bit less tied to EU membership. The EU research programme doesn't require EU membership to join, or even quasi-membership of the EFTA/EEA variety. In fact Turkey recently joined it (in 2014). It does still require mutual agreement that may or may not happen, but I think a specific "a la carte" agreem…
Factually wrong, it is already happening. It is tied to funding for these projects. Project management are afraid of losing key research members when the funding doesn't come through from the UK. So they exclude UK researchers altogether until things biol over. Problem is, these researches could be years/decades long, and joining in the middle of it is way harder than during planning phase. https://www.theguardian.co…
[deleted]