Ireland has a history of neutrality which im quite fond of but I agree, think its a much harder sell than cooperating elsewhere and I'm not as convinced but agree overall. Realistically if were invaded an army made of european nations are probably (hopefully) going to show up to protect us. We can contribute to that financially if nothing elsee.
It doesn't need to. Thats a lot of stuff we could cooperate on that I think is pretty hard to argue isn't in our mutual interest.
You mean the incompetence of Grayling, Davis, Johnson, Hunt, Raab, Gove, Rudd, Mordaunt and the list is endless is nothing to do with them?
How do you view your own national identity?
Yes and No.
When I said, on its way out, I meant next week out of the EU.
There is a massive difference between between cooperation as individual countries and a relentless drift to a Federal Europe.
It may not be but these things tend to have a direction of travel. A European superstate (the so called 'United States of Europe') is a legitimate aspiration of course. My primary problem with it is that it's led very much from the top down. In other words it's very inorganic, and this is usually a recipe for disaster. I also notice that those who most in favour of it tend to care more about the strength of their vision as opposed to its affects on real flesh and blood people.
I grew up here but had a family that incorporated both African and Caribbean culture into my life. So I would say I'm all 3 British African and Caribbean
There's no precedent so it wouldn't work? That makes no sense...
Thank you for the clarification. Nevertheless my comments on the UK future stand.
I think he's being sarcasticThere's no precedent so it wouldn't work? That makes no sense...
I don't know enough about it but that's not a solid arguement. No precedent just means we don't have a proof of concept.
I thought it was quite an obvious joke.There's no precedent so it wouldn't work? That makes no sense...
I don't know enough about it but that's not a solid arguement. No precedent just means we don't have a proof of concept.
I think he's being sarcastic
I've been in this thread too long. Can't tell when posters are joking or serious, whether we are staying or leaving, whether I'm coming or going....
Don't be too hard on yourself. Twas an obvious joke with an obvious flaw.
I'm sure the UK will be resilient but why put itself in this position. And for sure the people who are going to suffer the most are the people who voted for it (other than Mogg and co). I think there's a terrible shock to a lot of people coming.
Not really, you do not elect a minister into a specific ministry in the UK the PM is responsible for choosing the members of the government. Now in the EU, the head of states are responsible for choosing the members of the commission, they each pick one of their national, parliament vote them in and then the commission president appoint them, so in terms of transparency it's fairly easy to know who nominated who and who to blame if that's what you want. Some commissioners were MEPs others weren't, personally I don't have a problem with that but that's because it matches with french system. Also the commission is part of the EU civil service.
Think about the amount of british people that elected Theresa May as an MP and then the amount of MPs that elected her as the prime minister. That's not a lot of people that directly and indirectly made her head of state.
That’s a bad analogy in the context of British politics because plenty of people are dead against leaders with no democratic mandate, like May was initially and Brown was a few years back. It undermines them.
Who needs information and transparency when you alreafy have your opinion based on Tory/News Corp propoganda?
Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about
Not if you shut your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears whilst humming Rule Brittania to yourself.
The UK's in safe hands.
It's not a bad analogy when leavers use the UK as an example of proper democracy. By making that analogy, I'm just pointing to the fact that the system isn't that different, it's an indirect democracy where leaders with a popular mandate take decisions for us, now if I was totally honest I would say that the commissioner proposed by the french president has more legitimacy than the commissioner proposed by the UK PM since the french president is directly elected by the french electorate, in that sense we do have a problem.
So bitter
WTO! They're all experts.Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about
People can't even properly explain now why they think it's better for us to be out of the EU, it's bullshit to claim they knew before the referendum
None of that actually contradicts anything I said. Yes some people left because they are xenophobic. Yes some people decided to leave the EU because the leave campaign had some key messages that emotionally resonated with them, and had no substantive supporting evidence. What we're discussing is "the real reason people left". Implicit in that is the idea that this is the reason people voted for Brexit, not why some people voted for Brexit. The distinction is a pretty big one.Of course. So that's why we have leavers being interviewed saying they voted leave because they want to "take back control" and for us to regain our "sovereignty". But none of them can explain exactly how we're losing our sovereignty or what laws we're made to follow by the EU courts they disagree with. But these are entirely original thoughts they've had and not just something they've heard JRM or Gove or Farage talk about
People can't even properly explain now why they think it's better for us to be out of the EU, it's bullshit to claim they knew before the referendum
Well many of them are wrong and are simply too stubborn and bitter to admit or realise it.
Do leavers use the UK as an example of a ‘proper’ democracy though? My point was that most people in the UK are not happy with leaders taking office without a GE.It's not a bad analogy when leavers use the UK as an example of proper democracy. By making that analogy, I'm just pointing to the fact that the system isn't that different, it's an indirect democracy where leaders with a popular mandate take decisions for us, now if I was totally honest I would say that the commissioner proposed by the french president has more legitimacy than the commissioner proposed by the UK PM since the french president is directly elected by the french electorate, in that sense we do have a problem.
But seriously I don't think that your system is bad or non democratic, it's just not that direct and you don't have as much say as some pretend even when we are talking about your head of government.
I will be honest, I don't really understand you.
I think we are probably talking about different points because I’m lost too.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
