Brexit Rambles

[unknownsample]

Vote Leave broke the law.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44856992

Point not being discussed on here is the growing body of evidence that Brexit was won through dubious methods.

[unknownsample]

Ultimately the problem stems from Brexit being based on falsehoods. Nothing will satisfy the Leave camp because there's nothing to satisfy. As a modern post-industrial nation, if Great Britain wishes to have a standard of living comparable to what it has now, there's no choice but to engage with the EU. And since the EU is so much stronger than ANY of its members (or former members), GB will have to follow Europe's lead.

On the former, whilst the Remain camp might claim that there's nothing to satisfy with Leave they've failed to make a case for Remaining offering anything Leave is sufficiently interested in having - a default of "don't want to join in without very strong reasons to" is a perfectly valid position. On the latter, the existence of non-EU countries smaller than the UK with as good or better living standards rightly raises questions about that. It's telling that there's generally no pressing desire for even small countries to coalesce to even the level of the EU. There's an awful lot on both sides of failing to grasp just what people actually value, and people dismissing values that don't coincide with their own as meaningless, which quickly degenerates into insult-slinging.

Sure, I'm a Leaver, but I'd rather the EU reformed and we stayed. It's got too much authority and there aren't enough barriers to it taking more, and I strongly dislike the Commission being made up of appointed members who swear to represent the EU instead of their countries of origin, which is a serious lack of members' representation at its heart.

That's because the Leave camp don't want to confront the reality of Brexit.

[Riedquat]

That's because the Leave camp don't want to confront the reality of Brexit.

Always replies along that line "don't understand", "don't want to confront reality" as soon as you disagree rather than even consider that different people with different values and priorities can come to different conclusions?

[unknownsample]

That's because the Leave camp don't want to confront the reality of Brexit.

Always replies along that line "don't understand", "don't want to confront reality" as soon as you disagree rather than even consider that different people with different values and priorities can come to different conclusions?

I have considered it and it doesn't want to confront the reality of brexit, brexit is a disaster it's going to screw things up, I hope you don't work in a business that does a lot of business with the EU.

[Riedquat]

Words like "disaster" get thrown around all too often and unfortunately give the impression of not having thought things through. If someone is very keen on the concept of the EU then it's depressing and upsetting and maybe a disaster for their ideals (and I can sympathise with that), but fears of it having a serious effect on everyone on a day to day level are baseless.

[TGLS]

Honestly, I don't understand what Leave's endgame is supposed to look like. Barrier free trade with the European Union is key because the EU has a large economy and is very close to Britain. Britons and Europeans both benefit from right of abode. What does Leave want?

[LittleRaven]

Honestly, I don't understand what Leave's endgame is supposed to look like. Barrier free trade with the European Union is key because the EU has a large economy and is very close to Britain. Britons and Europeans both benefit from right of abode. What does Leave want?

Disclaimer - I am not a Leaver, hell, I'm not even British. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

More seriously, I've been listening to every Leaver I can find online, like Daniel Hannan. And if there's a unifying theme among the various disparate Leavers...it's sovereignty. Basically, they greatly resent Britain subjecting her citizens to the authority of people outside their ability to select.

And this is where the basic problem of the EU comes into play. Unlike Antiboyscout, I don't believe that the EU is in immediate danger of any kind of breakup, but I do think that the EU has a fundamental crack that will persist until a new understanding is reached. The EU was supposed to be an economic partnership that preserved political autonomy for its members. And that's great in theory, but in practice, it's virtually impossible. The two are just inextricably linked. And so the EU has gradually acquired many of the trappings of a nation-state - it has a Parliament, a Supreme Court, a currency, a flag, its own representative at the UN...the list goes on and on. And that's fine...heck, I can see how a 'nation called Europe' could offer many advantages to its citizens, and I'm sure lots of people would actively embrace that notion.

But that isn't what a lot of Leavers want. They want to stay British, and know that while they are in Britain, they are being governed by London, not Brussels.

[Riedquat]

Honestly, I don't understand what Leave's endgame is supposed to look like. Barrier free trade with the European Union is key because the EU has a large economy and is very close to Britain. Britons and Europeans both benefit from right of abode. What does Leave want?

If it only was barrier-free trade it wouldn't be a problem. But it's the amount of authority the EU is continually taking on, the feature-creep. That's why I strongly believe if there were signs of that backpeddling a bit Remain would've won the referendum easily; I certainly would've been supporting it at any rate. It would've probably won if it looked like staying put. When does a group of friendly nations working together start moving a bit too close to the line (even if it's still some way from it) of them being components of a higher controlling authority? The democratic checks on the EU being able to superimpose its rules on members and thus gain further power are too weak; the people that originate its policy are not elected, and serve the EU, not the member states they came from.

Right of abode is a contentious one due to it resulting in significant unbalanced population movements. Unfortunately there usually seems to be someone who starts throwing out accusations of racism and xenophobia as soon as it's mentioned, which stifles debate (and runs the danger of creating sympathy for the actual racists and xenophobes).

[Deledrius]

But that isn't what a lot of Leavers want. They want to stay British, and know that while they are in Britain, they are being governed by London, not Brussels.

This is the part that seems short-sighted to me. If that's what someone wants, then this is a short-term victory (you're no longer under the EU's banner) but in a way that sabotages the long-term prospects of success.

It's this sort of thinking that really frustrates me, and I seem to see it a lot. Instead of working on a solution that makes things better for everyone, a solution is latched onto that satisfies the immediate emotional need to feel like they've won. There are surely ways to maintain a stronger sovereignty for Britain inside the EU that benefits Britain much better than simply leaving (without any structured, itemized plan for doing so, no less).

I think it's a problem that comes along whenever people being single-issue voters so heavily that they'll vote to throw the baby out with the bathwater. At some point the water's dirtiness just becomes so intolerable that nothing else even registers as relevant anymore, and alternative solutions that achieve the same ends with less collateral damage just aren't satisfying enough.

[Riedquat]

But that isn't what a lot of Leavers want. They want to stay British, and know that while they are in Britain, they are being governed by London, not Brussels.

This is the part that seems short-sighted to me. If that's what someone wants, then this is a short-term victory (you're no longer under the EU's banner) but in a way that sabotages the long-term prospects of success.

It's this sort of thinking that really frustrates me, and I seem to see it a lot. Instead of working on a solution that makes things better for everyone, a solution is latched onto that satisfies the immediate emotional need to feel like they've won. There are surely ways to maintain a stronger sovereignty for Britain inside the EU that benefits Britain much better than simply leaving (without any structured, itemized plan for doing so, no less).

It's not a case of latching on to an "emotional" need (incidentally using emotional in a derogatory fashion in that sense frustrates me - once basic survival needs are out of the way the things that actually make life worth living are fundamentally emotional so it makes sense to seek them - what more meaningful definition of "better" is there than what makes you happier?). It's a case of this being the only chance to shift things at all. It brings me back to the point I've made several times already - if there was any sense that the EU could reform enough (or at all) to satisfy that then Remain would've won a landslide. There's nothing to be gained by clinging on to something that moves away from your ideal in the hope that the perfect solution will appear. And it certainly isn't about just saying "we've won." Claiming that is merely an attempt to rubbish and dismiss other peoples' motives.

Most of us would love to have seen some sort of sign that that sort of working towards a better solution could even being. It wasn't there. As for without a structured, itemised plan the setup seems (deliberately?) designed to make that impossible - no meaningful discussions could be held before the clock was set for leaving, with an unrealistically short timescale built in.