Brexit Rambles

[Riedquat]

Like I said nothing's changed about the question.I've laid out my thoughts on the subject. The EU certainly hasn't done anything to change my opinions of it. I don't have an issue with disagreement with them but a bit more effort than simple statements along the lines "disaster", "screw up" and "shit sandwich" would be appreciated. Those are just ranting. Not that they're not conclusions I'd draw about the UK government's handling of things, but that isn't really what it's about. Governments come and go, we have general elections for that (not that this one stands much chance of lasting that long). The issue isn't about the (lack of) competence of Westminster, it's about the EU.

There's plenty to be said about the pros and cons of being in the EU. There's plenty to be said for taking a lot longer about it, for getting sensible people to sit down until they've hammered something out. But what do you do when no-one is prepared to do that? Just sit back and say "then you should accept the status quo"? That's sure as hell handing all the influence over to the side that doesn't want the change because it gives them the ability to scupper anything simply by trying their best to make a mess of it. To argue for being held hostage to that sort of behaviour is not one I'll ever agree with.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Racism and Xenophobia are valid to bring up if they are possible or present motivations for part of the brexit movement. Somebody can say "that seems kinda racist" or "this xenophobic group is pro-brexit" and you can argue the merits of whether it is xenophobic or racist or not. Saying that accusations of racism or xenophobia in the movement are somehow crying foul is assuming a level of purity above suspicion that you have no right to.

[unknownsample]

Like I said nothing's changed about the question.I've laid out my thoughts on the subject. The EU certainly hasn't done anything to change my opinions of it. I don't have an issue with disagreement with them but a bit more effort than simple statements along the lines "disaster", "screw up" and "shit sandwich" would be appreciated. Those are just ranting. Not that they're not conclusions I'd draw about the UK government's handling of things, but that isn't really what it's about. Governments come and go, we have general elections for that (not that this one stands much chance of lasting that long). The issue isn't about the (lack of) competence of Westminster, it's about the EU.

There's plenty to be said about the pros and cons of being in the EU. There's plenty to be said for taking a lot longer about it, for getting sensible people to sit down until they've hammered something out. But what do you do when no-one is prepared to do that? Just sit back and say "then you should accept the status quo"? That's sure as hell handing all the influence over to the side that doesn't want the change because it gives them the ability to scupper anything simply by trying their best to make a mess of it. To argue for being held hostage to that sort of behaviour is not one I'll ever agree with.

The people who you're talking about are the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG, not the EU.

[TGLS]

Honestly, all this talk about an omnipotent EU crushing the sovereignty of their member states makes me think about how Italy can basically stop CETA.

[Riedquat]

The people who you're talking about are the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG, not the EU.

There are huge issues with government within the UK too. This isn't a one side or the other issue.

[unknownsample]

The people who you're talking about are the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG, not the EU.

There are huge issues with government within the UK too. This isn't a one side or the other issue.

Stop playing the both sides line.

[Riedquat]

Racism and Xenophobia are valid to bring up if they are possible or present motivations for part of the brexit movement. Somebody can say "that seems kinda racist" or "this xenophobic group is pro-brexit" and you can argue the merits of whether it is xenophobic or racist or not. Saying that accusations of racism or xenophobia in the movement are somehow crying foul is assuming a level of purity above suspicion that you have no right to.

When they say that, yes. When there's an insistence that that's all there is to it, and when it's being used simply to tar someone, no. Imagine someone trying to call Chuck a racist and xenophobe just for pointing out that Neelix is a shithead.

[Riedquat]

The people who you're talking about are the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG, not the EU.

There are huge issues with government within the UK too. This isn't a one side or the other issue.

Stop playing the both sides line.

I beg your pardon? What playing both sides? It isn't Westminster on one side, the EU on the other, you have to support one or the other, and only one of them is responsible for everything.

[unknownsample]

The people who you're talking about are the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and the ERG, not the EU.

There are huge issues with government within the UK too. This isn't a one side or the other issue.

Stop playing the both sides line.

I beg your pardon? What playing both sides? It isn't Westminster on one side, the EU on the other, you have to support one or the other, and only one of them is responsible for everything.

Well when one side has David Davies.

[LittleRaven]

Youch. 12% support for May's White Paper.

For reference, taking children away from their parents and locking them in detention centers over twice as popular. And even Trump couldn't keep THAT up.

Can May really pass a plan with so little public support?