Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain which unelected officials you are talking about specifically. How does the number of unelected officials differ from the national government of the UK? In both cases there is a parliament where you vote for someone to represent your area. You cannot vote for anyone outside your area. In the EU your area is a country and in the UK your area is a smaller part of the country. If you live in Scotland, nor…
> which unelected officials The European Commission. Remember, the Commission gets to propose legislation, the Parliament (which you elect) doesn't.
Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
141–150 of 173 posts
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
The case for Brexit that I've heard from the beginning has not changed, so if you honestly haven't heard it, it goes something like this: the primary goal is to retain sovereignty while Britain still can; to arrest the slow but inexorable yielding of power to unelected officials of the E.U.
No I mean now, today August 18 2019, now that we actually know what it means and, more importantly, what it will cost. Why on earth would we do this?
now that we actually know
[...] what it will cost
Why on earth would we do this?
To some euroskeptics, the cost is irrelevant.Before the referendum, I heard euroskeptics call the EU undemocratic citing the process where the 2005 EU Constitution / 2008 Treaty of Lisbon. They saw the constitution-to-treaty change as bypassing the rejection of the former by French and Dutch referendums; and the second Irish referendum as bypassing the rejection by the first Irish referendum.
They saw this as analogous to an election in a tinpot dictatorship, where the Glorious Leader winning is the only possible outcome. That the EU had no taste for hearing the the average citizen's voice, unless it was supportive.
If you honestly believe the big thing that's wrong with the EU is that votes are only allowed so long as the outcome is pro-EU, earnestly implementing the referendum result come what may is really the only option. Anything that stands in the way of doing that only serves to prove the importance of doing that.
And unfortunately, the Tory party has a lot of euroskeptics.
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#143Political opposition leaked a scare document? Welcome to politics.
No, this document was drafted by Boris Johnson's pro-Brexit government. E: Apparently it was his predecessor, but it's nevertheless not drafted by Labour.
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#144As bad as a hard Brexit would be for the UK, it it probably necessary at this point, if for no other reason than to give the hard-core Brexiteers exactly what they want The way that Hitler was defeated was that Berlin was pounded into rubble that put paid to the revival of stab-in-the-back theories that followed WW1. Japan was defeated by two nuclear bombs that replaced any hope of resistance with fear of obliteratio…
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. A recent poll was quoted on yesterday's "Any Questions?" show on BBC Radio 4 by a Brexiteer, which apparently asked the public "should MPs represent their own views or those of their constituents?". Some small number of voters - I forget, but it was around 7% - thought they should represent their own views and the rest thought those of their constituents. This was, in the Brexiteer's view, evidence that MPs d…
Questions such as "should we stay in the EU" can't be answered by experts. Economists could perhaps answer some small parts of it - like "will this be net plus for the economy over next 5 years", but even then I'd imagine there would be little consensus. Questions this huge are really the sort of thing that should be put to the unwashed masses. They know as much as anyone else - not much.
There's an interesting idea for a method of government based on the distinction between values and policy results.
> In "futarchy," we would vote on values, but bet on beliefs
https://mason.gmu.edu/~rhanson/futarchy.html
In my opinion 'should the UK stay in the EU' would very definitely be a question of policy not values. It would actually be pretty difficult to disentangle the brexit question into meaningful values.
You could say it's about 'sovereignty', but the UK parliament is as sovereign as it ever was - as the very fact that it's currently leaving demonstrates. In fact for the pure self-interested, short term version of sovereignty, the right thing to do is to plough your own furrow, taking advantage of the benefits and ignoring what you don't like until you are finally kicked out of the EU, which is something we might well see some other EU countries do. Any more nuanced understanding of sovereignty would realize that sovereignty is how we describe an entity that is able to enter into and keep agreements, and exercise infuence on other actors, not one that is unable to because it might restrict its freedom of action. Just as for humans, the end result of refusing all bonds is not freedom, it's extreme restriction. And that's not even considering the strain that leaving the EU puts on relationships with Scotland and Northern Ireland. It wouldn't surprise me at all if down the road brexit ends in break-up. Sovereignty takes on a bit more nuance when you're simultaneously denying it to your constituent members by leaving.
You could say it's about 'migration', but that's not a proper value either. I suspect that people who complain about migration have values to do with crime, economics, and needing to be around people 'like them'. The only thing about those values, is that for most of them, migration is exactly the wrong thing to be worried about. As 'experts' know, migrants are less likely to commit crime, and more likely to pay taxes than the native born.
I don't think the UK should be leaving the EU for policy reasons. I believe that it's in the interests of the UK, of Europe, of the world to resist the forces trying to disintegrate Europe (I've read enough history to know what happened last time). I think many of the disagreements I have with people who think it should leave are at the level of reality - things that could be established by fact.
Trying to claim that it's motivated by differences of values is part of what is making the issue less clear.
Of course this is all made extra difficult by the fact that the whole thing has been horrendously mishandled. The government has repeatedly and continually believed things for long periods of time about negotiating with Europe that are simply untrue. It was obvious from the start that this was going to be complicated, and pressing the button to start the ticking timebomb you're sat on top of, is not a great way to negotiate either. Whether you want Brexit or not, invoking article 50 before anyone knew what it meant was the height of idiocy.
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#146It's going to be really interesting to see what happens to the UK as it will influence the politics of other EU countries, and the future of the EU, a lot.
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Barely anyone in the public was qualified to give their judgement on the merits of continuing inside the EU versus the concept of being out of it. Sure, but this is true of all issues. It doesn't distinguish brexit in any way. The usual thought is that that's how things are supposed to be. If you withheld the franchise to people who were qualified to exercise it, almost nobody would be allowed to vote.
Or you could have a representative democracy like the UK, where you vote in a specialist to go and understand the detail for you. It is an amazing constitutional step to rip this up and start holding referendums!
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#148>and does not reflect the preparations spearheaded by Johnson that are now underway. All the more reason to be alarmed. The guy seems like a complete loose cannon - more likely to cause additional chaos that help. Really starting to wonder whether this isn't one big geopolitical campaign to short an entire country.
Ever read "The Shock Doctrine"? It lays out how the rich cause and exploit catastrophe to consolidate and strengthen their holdings. https://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitali...
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this document was drafted by Boris Johnson's pro-Brexit government. E: Apparently it was his predecessor, but it's nevertheless not drafted by Labour.
Totally false. And using fear in politics is nothing new. The US now has tariffs on Canada because of the "risk" Canada poses to national security. The idea that the UK crumbles (the document has things like cancer patients dying, folks with diabetes dying - its just an incredible list) seems far fetched. The UK operated prior to the EU without all these disasters.
Re: Leaked Brexit Document Predicts 'Catastrophic Collapse' of U.K. Infrastructure
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you could have a representative democracy like the UK, where you vote in a specialist to go and understand the detail for you. It is an amazing constitutional step to rip this up and start holding referendums!
Elected politicians are not specialists in the issues they vote on. They're specialists in winning elections.
Insofar as the things they vote on are laws and they are disproportionately professionals in law, that's not entirely true.