Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[mancan92]

Every rational leave voter I know has stated they would like to see a return of ascendency to British Courts, where they can't be overruled by European Courts. Personally I think it's a fair argument; it's not an economic argument but fair all the same, in my opinion.

Honestly this argument falls apart as soon as you see what things the European courts actually get involved in. Things like human rights and the abuse of power are the only actual situations the European courts get involved. Its like the whole bananas argument. OK so we get rid of the EU great now we have the British government not held accountable to situations where they try to take advantage of the people.

I guess it always depends if you believe the EU is just trying to become a oppressive overlord. They haven't been shown to do that but you could argue they could randomly decide to take that path.

That's where any argument falls apart. You literally have to paint the EU as some kind of star wars empire. Has it ever done anything remotely like an empire? No Could it? Probably not but is there a tiny chance? Sure.

But you have to be logical about these things

 

[matherto]

UK exits EU with no deal due to leaky roof delays.

Their version of our fax machine not working for De Gea.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

UK exits EU with no deal due to leaky roof delays.

The UK leaves the EU with no deal because they still think it's the 19th century or the 1960s if you're Corbyn.

 

[Kinsella]

Honestly I have been waiting for 2 years, many conversations with leaver family members, heard every brexit politician. Yet not one has given me a genuine cohesive reason why leave would be beneficial without just straight out lying about things.

I'm Irish, I live in NI and I voted to Remain so it's not really my job to advocate for Leave. That said there are a number of things I'd highlight about the vote and people's attitudes towards it. I'll leave the larger more existential issues, that I believe lie at the core of the political changes we are witnessing across much of the so-called West right now, aside for the moment.

So...in respect of the vote itself, more complex truths lie behind the simple narratives that have been used to explain the result. Take immigration as an example. A near constant refrain since the referendum is that places where the population is more ethnically diverse, like London, delivered a vote for Remain, and vice versa for Leave, indicating some underlying prejudice in the latter. However, this doesn't provide the full picture. When you look at the statistics for rate of change; the places with higher rates of immigration corresponded with higher Leave votes which points to the problem resting more with the rate of change as opposed to with immigration itself. The following is just a general point about immigration and not directly related to the Brexit debate, but one thing I've noticed is that many people tend to talk about immigration solely in economic terms, as if everyone is some born again Thatcherite whose only interest is money. A person's contentment in society and in their community relies on more than that.

Anyway...the second thing I'd mention is the 'gammon' jibe in respect of the Leave vote. Whilst this may be true to a large extent, once again it doesn't tell the full story as one third of the votes cast from ethnic minority voters were for Leave. I'll have to reread the various analyses published in the wake of the result but I recall that one of the reasons cited from said voters was their problem with the freedom of movement afforded to Europeans, when they felt such preferential treatment should've been afforded to Commonwealth citizens instead.

Some of the above coalesces with the following anecdotal example. A close family friend of ours is a consultant at a hospital in the midlands. He's from Pakistan and has lived and worked in both England and Ireland for around 20 to 25 years now...and he voted to Leave. Shocked and asking why, he said simply - immigration. He explained that he conducts a weekly clinic where he sees around 17 to 19 patients. He said that of that number two thirds are, on average, immigrants. And of this up to half have to be turned away because there aren't enough interpreters available to facilitate the consultation. My father was speaking to him a week or so ago and Brexit came up in the conversation. He has now changed his mind, but the reasons for the vote remain.

So, what are you supposed to say to that? I'm sure the vast majority of people can appreciate that madness of such an experience if it is replicated on any significant scale. To me it just highlighted that there's more to the whole thing than meets the eye.

 

[Silva]

Anyway...the second thing I'd mention is the 'gammon' jibe in respect of the Leave vote. Whilst this may be true to a large extent, once again it doesn't tell the full story as one third of the votes cast from ethnic minority voters were for Leave. I'll have to reread the various analyses published in the wake of the result but I recall that one of the reasons cited from said voters was their problem with the freedom of movement afforded to Europeans, when they felt such preferential treatment should've been afforded to Commonwealth citizens instead.

the gammon thing was coined during the 2017 GE not the ref or about it, it was coined when a handful of red faced middled aged men were shouting at Corbyn to nuke some fecker, it's just a coincidence that this demographic is almost entirely leave

 

[Kentonio]

So, what are you supposed to say to that? I'm sure the vast majority of people can appreciate that madness of such an experience if it is replicated on any significant scale. To me it just highlighted that there's more to the whole thing than meets the eye.

There's a very simple answer. The problem was real but the proposed solution was nonsense. The reason for that situation (and housing issues/education issues and all the rest) were because the government didn't use some of the economic boost of immigration to ensure that adequate public services were available to mitigate the downsides of immigration. Instead they enacted their austerity programs, cut everything to the bone, and basically just used the EU as a scapegoat any time people complained about the issues that come with immigration. Instead of making the rational argument that its a positive but requires sensible planning and organization, they just made empty promises of cutting immigration that they never had any serious intention of carrying out.

Basically they wanted the benefits of immigration without having to pay the costs, and now we are where we are because of it.

 

[JPRouve]

Well for me specifically I mean the lack of transparency in the way the EU works and decides things, though I acknowledge that this also in part down to my ignorance when it comes to the European Parliament.

With regards to sovereignty, I was talking largely about the Courts, where the European Courts take precedence.

Everything is on the EU websites, every comments, debates, votes, written and oral questions are available.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/home.html

https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications_en

Every day the commission gives a press conference, here you have the daily news.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Just as well they knew why they were voting and what they were voting for.

 

[diarm]

This attitude is exactly part of why we have ended up in this situation. Instead of acknowledging and understanding people's (legitimate) issues with the EU, they are simply branded as bigoted racists and therefore their stance hardens even further and we end up in a situation where we are facing down the barrel of a no-deal Brexit because those who voted leave have been alienated enough by the losing side that they will argue this is what they wanted to begin with.

I'm not denying that immigration isn't one of the main factors; May's 'red lines' are there for a reason, because it will play well with the ERG and large parts of the leave voters. But there are genuine issues with the way the EU conducts itself and the amount of say it has in certain jurisdictions of member states' sovereignty and to deny that is wrong, even if they are misconceptions.

No it isn't.

The bigots, racists are the reason these situations are arising all over the world. The guilt tripping of good people into believing they are to blame for simply calling arseholes out for being arseholes is paralysing decent sense or thought and allowing these gobshites a legitimacy they don't deserve.

It's going on 3 years and nobody has managed to put forward a legitimate and coherent "issue with the EU" so how are decent people supposed to be understanding them?

 

[MikeUpNorth]

EU uneasy over Ireland’s Brexit no-deal readiness

https://amp.ft.com/content/f1d883ea-56b2-11e9-a3db-1fe89bedc16e

 

[VeevaVee]

This attitude is exactly part of why we have ended up in this situation. Instead of acknowledging and understanding people's (legitimate) issues with the EU, they are simply branded as bigoted racists and therefore their stance hardens even further and we end up in a situation where we are facing down the barrel of a no-deal Brexit because those who voted leave have been alienated enough by the losing side that they will argue this is what they wanted to begin with.

I'm not denying that immigration isn't one of the main factors; May's 'red lines' are there for a reason, because it will play well with the ERG and large parts of the leave voters. But there are genuine issues with the way the EU conducts itself and the amount of say it has in certain jurisdictions of member states' sovereignty and to deny that is wrong, even if they are misconceptions.

Barely anyone who voted leave had any issue with the EU. Ask everyone you know who voted that way why they did and most of them will struggle to answer. They especially would have if you asked them on the day. Some now will have cobbled together arguments that they've heard since, with stuff they wouldn't have given a shit about previously, but now they do because they want to try and add legitimacy to their stupidity.

 

[mancan92]

I'm Irish, I live in NI and I voted to Remain so it's not really my job to advocate for Leave. That said there are a number of things I'd highlight about the vote and people's attitudes to it. I'll leave the larger more existential issues, that I believe lie at the core of the political changes we are witnessing across much of the so-called West right now, aside for the moment.

So...in respect of the vote itself, more complex truths lie behind the simple narratives that have been used to explain the result. Take immigration as an example. A near constant refrain since the referendum is that places where the population is more ethnically diverse, like London, delivered a vote for Remain, and vice versa for Leave, indicating some underlying prejudice in the latter. However, this doesn't provide the full picture. When you look at the statistics for rate of change; the places with higher rates of immigration corresponded with higher Leave votes which points to the problem resting more with the rate of change as opposed to with immigration itself. The following is just a general point about immigration and not directly related to the Brexit debate, but one thing I've noticed is that many people tend to talk about immigration solely in economic terms, as if everyone is some born again Thatcherite whose only interest is money. A person's contentment in society and in their community relies on more than that.

Anyway...the second thing I'd mention is the 'gammon' jibe in respect of the Leave vote. Whilst this may be true to a large extent, once again it doesn't tell the full story as one third of the votes cast from ethnic minority voters were for Leave. I'll have to reread the various analyses published in the wake of the result but I recall that one of the reasons cited from said voters was their problem with the freedom of movement afforded to Europeans, when they felt such preferential treatment should've been afforded to Commonwealth citizens instead.

Some of the above coalesces with the following anecdotal example. A close family friend of ours is a consultant at a hospital in the midlands. He's from Pakistan and has lived and worked in both England and Ireland for around 20 to 25 years now...and he voted to Leave. Shocked and asking why, he said simply - immigration. He explained that he conducts a weekly clinic where he sees around 17 to 19 patients. He said that of that number two thirds are, on average, immigrants. And of this up to half have to be turned away because there aren't enough interpreters available to facilitate the consultation. My father was speaking to him a week or so ago and Brexit came up in the conversation. He has now changed his mind, but the reasons for the vote remain.

So, what are you supposed to say to that? I'm sure the vast majority of people can appreciate that madness of such an experience if it is replicated on any significant scale. To me it just highlighted that there's more to the whole thing than meets the eye.

Point 1
So essentially xenophobia not wanting different people in your community.

Point 2
As someone who's entire family is from the commonwealth from various places. I can tell you that there is a ridiculous level of brainwashing that has occurred. There is alot of romancisim around the British empire from people in the commonwealth so to me that's not really a surprise. But the truth is the British empire was oppressive and one of the worst atrocities in world history. People from the commonwealth often feel entitled and tend to constantly try to convince themselves that they are British.

Point 3
Another case of people blaming the EU for problems stemming from our government. The reason why there is a shortage of staff is the British government who have cut funding for the NHS continually for 10 years.

Finally yes there is more than meets the eye. There has been anti EU propaganda for the last 30 years that has constantly taken responsibility off the British government and wrongly put the blame on the EU. Its much easier for the government to say the reason you don't have a life is because of the EU than it is for them to take responsibility for horrible failures in domestic issues.

 

[17 Van der Gouw]

No it isn't.

The bigots, racists are the reason these situations are arising all over the world. The guilt tripping of good people into believing they are to blame for simply calling arseholes out for being arseholes is paralysing decent sense or thought and allowing these gobshites a legitimacy they don't deserve.

It's going on 3 years and nobody has managed to put forward a legitimate and coherent "issue with the EU" so how are decent people supposed to be understanding them?

That's ridiculous. He was simply rationalising that not everybody associated with leave is the bigoted xenophobe you insist they are. Euroscepticism existed long before the referendum, and there are a hundred fecking reasons for not wanting to be part of what will inevitably become a homogenised federation with centralised power. To many of us, it has nothing to do with bigotry or immigration, stop spouting buzzwords about 'gobshites' and open your mind to other people's opinions FFS. As for your second part about 'no coherent issues with the EU' - have you had your eyes shut for the past two decades? The reasons for it have been articulated over and over. Corbyn said of your own second referendum on the Euro that it's an undemocratic bloc that doesn't take no for an answer. Again, question, is he a racist xenophobe?

 

[afrocentricity]

Yeah. People often say the leave vote had its roots in immigration concerns, but I think sovereignty of courts, judiciaries and lawmaking had a good deal to do with it.

It's a shame that most of them go down the road of immigration then, tip toeing as they go. Which is probably why most assume this is the main reason....

 

[diarm]

That's ridiculous. He was simply rationalising that not everybody associated with leave is the bigoted xenophobe you insist they are. Euroscepticism existed long before the referendum, and there are a hundred fecking reasons for not wanting to be part of what will inevitably become a homogenised federation with centralised power. To many of us, it has nothing to do with bigotry or immigration, stop spouting buzzwords about 'gobshites' and open your mind to other people's opinions FFS. As for your second part about 'no coherent issues with the EU' - have you had your eyes shut for the past two decades? The reasons for it have been articulated over and over. Corbyn said of your own second referendum on the Euro that it's an undemocratic bloc that doesn't take no for an answer. Again, question, is he a racist xenophobe?

Corbyn is whatever he needs to be on any given day to serve his own interests.

British politicians have been blaming their blatant ineptitude on the EU for decades and millions of British people have been lapping it up without so much as a questioning glance at the idiots in charge at home. You can question elements or policies of the EU as a member but quit pretending that is what "Euroscepticism" is about - there has never been any attempt by Eurosceptics to try and reform from within a Union which they entered as a willing member - only to whisper bollocks about the big bad things the EU are doing (99.9% of which have been debunked "over and over" when art... actually articulated is far too strong a word for the grunts and utterings of most Leavers).

Brexit didn't pass because of the couple of hundred educated people who are smart enough not to hate immigrants but stupid enough to think British politicians can do a better job for Britain than the EU can. It passed because of the 17million odd idiots who read the Daily Mail and listened to Mogg, Johnson and Farage.

On a separate note, when did "gobshite" become a buzzword?

 

[Maticmaker]

As for your second part about 'no coherent issues with the EU' - have you had your eyes shut for the past two decades? The reasons for it have been articulated over and over.

This correct, unfortunately many people have convinced themselves of the concept of a bright and shining EU, using it as a 'comfort blanket', rather than appreciating that the reality is that the EU is incapable of changing itself, or realising that it has a history of corruption and incompetence, stretching back years (unaudited accounts etc.) and therefore they are understandably panicking when they think their blankets going to be removed.

I still think it will be better, at least for the foreseeable future for the UK to be part of the EU, but if we intend to remain longer term, then we have to be fully committed, that means committed as much to changing the EU itself, and participating fully, no opt outs, join the euro zone, lead the charge for majority voting and dump the veto. If we are still going to sit on the side-lines and grumble then they would be better off without us!

 

[Kinsella]

Point 1
So essentially xenophobia not wanting different people in your community.

Which part are you referring to specifically? If it's the general point of 'a person's contentment in society and in their community relying on more than...just economics' then I'm just highlighting a simple de facto reality. I appreciate that for many such things can go beyond simple words on a page but I can assure you there's no agenda on my part.

Point 2
As someone who's entire family is from the commonwealth from various places. I can tell you that there is a ridiculous level of brainwashing that has occurred. There is alot of romancisim around the British empire from people in the commonwealth so to me that's not really a surprise. But the truth is the British empire was oppressive and one of the worst atrocities in world history. People from the commonwealth often feel entitled and tend to constantly try to convince themselves that they are British.

That's interesting. Is this more in regards to people with 'commonwealth ancestry' in Britain, or to people living in commonwealth countries?

 

[mancan92]

Which part are you referring to specifically? If it's the general point of 'a person's contentment in society and in their community relying on more than...just economics' then I'm just highlighting a simple de facto reality. I appreciate that for many such things can go beyond simple words on a page but I can assure you there's no agenda on my part.



That's interesting. Is this more in regards to people with 'commonwealth ancestry' in Britain, or to people living in commonwealth countries?

Sorry if you felt I was attacking. Genuinely what you described is essentially xenophobia.

Both.

My grandma is from the Caribbean but has lived here for 30 years and her grandmother was a slave who was raped and forced to conceive a child to work on the fields. Her father was murdered for attempting to buy the former property of his father's slaver.

If you were to ask her what she identities as and her opinion of the British empire. She would tell you she was British and that the empire was a time of great joy and a time to look back fondly where life was.better.

 

[afrocentricity]

This correct, unfortunately many people have convinced themselves of the concept of a bright and shining EU, using it as a 'comfort blanket', rather than appreciating that the reality is that the EU is incapable of changing itself, or realising that it has a history of corruption and incompetence, stretching back years (unaudited accounts etc.) and therefore they are understandably panicking when they think their blankets going to be removed.

I still think it will be better, at least for the foreseeable future for the UK to be part of the EU, but if we intend to remain longer term, then we have to be fully committed, that means committed as much to changing the EU itself, and participating fully, no opt outs, join the euro zone, lead the charge for majority voting and dump the veto. If we are still going to sit on the side-lines and grumble then they would be better off without us!

Nonsense, babble.

The EU becoming the dark overlord that the Brexiters suggest it will, is about as likely as it becoming the utopian federacy that you claim the remainers are hoping for.

As with all things, the truth lies in the middle. It's more likely to trundle along in a similar fashion as (it's been pointed out numerous times) it takes a consensus to make changes...

And why do you suggest we have to give away our perks if we wish to remain? That makes no sense.... How about we just take it all seriously and stop trying to swindle our way through it all. I say swindle because it's becoming increasingly obvious that this is what a lot of our government are in this for.

Better to not capitulate and actually try and play a part, using the influence we undoubtedly had. This is the epitome of throwing your toys out of the pram.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

This correct, unfortunately many people have convinced themselves of the concept of a bright and shining EU, using it as a 'comfort blanket', rather than appreciating that the reality is that the EU is incapable of changing itself, or realising that it has a history of corruption and incompetence, stretching back years (unaudited accounts etc.) and therefore they are understandably panicking when they think their blankets going to be removed.

I still think it will be better, at least for the foreseeable future for the UK to be part of the EU, but if we intend to remain longer term, then we have to be fully committed, that means committed as much to changing the EU itself, and participating fully, no opt outs, join the euro zone, lead the charge for majority voting and dump the veto. If we are still going to sit on the side-lines and grumble then they would be better off without us!

Think the Uk is on its way out. Perhaps it should start reforming its own system first. Parliament is a joke.

 

[Untied]

Everything is on the EU websites, every comments, debates, votes, written and oral questions are available.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/home.html

https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications_en

Every day the commission gives a press conference, here you have the daily news.

The commission isn't transparent, and isn't particularly democratic which is very problematic as that is where policy comes from.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...on-on-tobacco-lobbyist-meetings-a6680911.html

 

[JPRouve]

This correct, unfortunately many people have convinced themselves of the concept of a bright and shining EU, using it as a 'comfort blanket', rather than appreciating that the reality is that the EU is incapable of changing itself, or realising that it has a history of corruption and incompetence, stretching back years (unaudited accounts etc.) and therefore they are understandably panicking when they think their blankets going to be removed.

I still think it will be better, at least for the foreseeable future for the UK to be part of the EU, but if we intend to remain longer term, then we have to be fully committed, that means committed as much to changing the EU itself, and participating fully, no opt outs, join the euro zone, lead the charge for majority voting and dump the veto. If we are still going to sit on the side-lines and grumble then they would be better off without us!

You guys need to make your mind up, one day the EU has changed too much since the 70s and now it's incapable of changing.

 

[JPRouve]

The commission isn't transparent, and isn't particularly democratic which is very problematic as that is where policy comes from.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...on-on-tobacco-lobbyist-meetings-a6680911.html

The commission is democratically nominated by the EU council and the commissioners are vetted by the EU parliament.

 

[diarm]

This correct, unfortunately many people have convinced themselves of the concept of a bright and shining EU, using it as a 'comfort blanket', rather than appreciating that the reality is that the EU is incapable of changing itself, or realising that it has a history of corruption and incompetence, stretching back years (unaudited accounts etc.) and therefore they are understandably panicking when they think their blankets going to be removed.

I still think it will be better, at least for the foreseeable future for the UK to be part of the EU, but if we intend to remain longer term, then we have to be fully committed, that means committed as much to changing the EU itself, and participating fully, no opt outs, join the euro zone, lead the charge for majority voting and dump the veto. If we are still going to sit on the side-lines and grumble then they would be better off without us!

It's this lack of self awareness which dumbfounds me the most.

This British sense of exceptionalism which allows them to think that 500 millions people in 27 countries are wrong but that they are right, even after it's become abundantly clear that the people who have been pedalling these lies for decades can't be trusted to tie their own shoelaces, let alone run a country or dictate to a continent how they should run theirs.

How many people and countries of the EU do you think will ever be looking to Britain to "lead the charge" on anything after the debacle of the last few years?

 

[Untied]

The commission is democratically nominated by the EU council and the commissioners are vetted by the EU parliament.

If you think the EU commission is democratic then I have a bridge to sell you

 

[Maticmaker]

Think the Uk is on its way out. Perhaps it should start reforming its own system first. Parliament is a joke.

Think you might be right!

Certainly the leaders of our country will need to get their act together, whether we stay in or leave. If its leave, especially with a no deal, it will be a cathartic experience, that might be just what is needed to get things moving politically economically and socially.

One of the few positives to come out of this whole mess is that many more people, even those fed up to the back teeth with it, will be much more aware of how they are governed and by who!

 

[Kinsella]

Sorry if you felt I was attacking. Genuinely what you described is essentially xenophobia.

No apologies necessary.

If the issue arises because of the rate of immigration then I don't agree that it's essentially xenophobic.

Both.

My grandma is from the Caribbean but has lived here for 30 years and her grandmother was a slave who was raped and forced to conceive a child to work on the fields. Her father was murdered for attempting to buy the former property of his father's slaver.

Christ, that's horrific.

If you were to ask her what she identities as and her opinion of the British empire. She would tell you she was British and that the empire was a time of great joy and a time to look back fondly where life was.better.

Yeah...identity can be a puzzling and complex thing, can't it? The typical Irish response to the latter point would be the polar opposite of your grandmother's for example.

How do you feel about her sentiments, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Eire Red United]

Quite.
Yes everyone should have a vote, do not dispute that.
What I don't agree with is that something so complex as Brexit is put to the people, where most people don't understand a tiny fraction of it and even people who have a greater knowledge don't know everything.

“Most people” as it turns out, includes all of our MP’s it would seem.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

“Most people” as it turns out, includes all of our MP’s it would seem.

They could be the worst.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Think you might be right!

Certainly the leaders of our country will need to get their act together, whether we stay in or leave. If its leave, especially with a no deal, it will be a cathartic experience, that might be just what is needed to get things moving politically economically and socially.

One of the few positives to come out of this whole mess is that many more people, even those fed up to the back teeth with it, will be much more aware of how they are governed and by who!

You would hope that it's at least a wake-up call to reality.

 

[17 Van der Gouw]

Nonsense, babble.

The EU becoming the dark overlord that the Brexiters suggest it will, is about as likely as it becoming the utopian federacy that you claim the remainers are hoping for.

There are plenty of officials and politicians within the EU who freely speak of a much grander project/federalisation, erosion of powers etc. It's actually why I can't fathom why the SNP are so keen on gaining independence from the UK, only to enrol in deep European integration. But that's for another thread I would suggest the EU superstate is basically inevitable with its current trajectory.

This British sense of exceptionalism which allows them to think that 500 millions people in 27 countries are wrong but that they are right, even after it's become abundantly clear that the people who have been pedalling these lies for decades can't be trusted to tie their own shoelaces, let alone run a country or dictate to a continent how they should run theirs.

Here's the thing: We don't. Maybe I don't qualify because I'm English, but of direct Dutch and Romanian descent. I don't for a moment think that half a billion people are all simultaneously 'wrong' - I think that in the main plenty of them are happy with further European integration, but I also think everybody should have the right to self determination. I do think there are a number of Eurosceptics on the continent too, I wonder if polls were held in every EU nation, if Britain would be alone in voting to leave. The EU itself on the other hand is a bureaucratic behemoth which has gone far beyond it's original reason for existence (as a trading bloc) and (often undemocratically) openly and consistently eroded powers from individual nation states.

Also, how are leavers dictating to the continent how they should run their affairs? What lies are you talking about?

 

[That'sHernandez]

No it isn't.

The bigots, racists are the reason these situations are arising all over the world. The guilt tripping of good people into believing they are to blame for simply calling arseholes out for being arseholes is paralysing decent sense or thought and allowing these gobshites a legitimacy they don't deserve.

It's going on 3 years and nobody has managed to put forward a legitimate and coherent "issue with the EU" so how are decent people supposed to be understanding them?

It really is, because instead of having their beliefs challenged by being asked why the think the way they do, they are instead being called wrong and having the riot act read to them. This in turn only further entrenches their views instead of changing them.

Barely anyone who voted leave had any issue with the EU. Ask everyone you know who voted that way why they did and most of them will struggle to answer. They especially would have if you asked them on the day. Some now will have cobbled together arguments that they've heard since, with stuff they wouldn't have given a shit about previously, but now they do because they want to try and add legitimacy to their stupidity.

See above. I don't really see how you can know why everyone voted the way they did.

 

[Brwned]

Did it balls

I love this retrospective changing of the reason people voted Brexit to try and justify it. Farage didn't stand in front of a poster showing concerns about the sovereignty of British courts.

People can make whatever excuses they like about the vote being about sovereignty/economic benefits/protest against the elites but when you look at the language being used before the vote and the general fear of immigrants/Muslims etc taking over the country then it's obvious what the real reason was.

There's not a lot of evidence to support fear of immigration being the main message that swayed people, never mind the only one:

"Pundits and MPs kept saying ‘why isn’t Leave arguing about the economy and living standards’. They did not realise that for millions of people, £350m/NHS was about the economy and living standards – that’s why it was so effective. It was clearly the most effective argument not only with the crucial swing fifth but with almost every demographic. Even with UKIP voters it was level-pegging with immigration. Would we have won without immigration? No. Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No. Would we have won by spending our time talking about trade and the Single Market? No way (see below).

NB. Unlike most of those on our side the IN campaign realised the effectiveness of this, as Cooper, Coetze and others said after 23 June. E.g. ‘The power of their £350 million a week can’t be overstated.’ Andrew Cooper, director of strategy for the IN campaign."

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/dominic-cummings-brexit-referendum-won/

It's just more palatable for you to believe it so.

And of course this is based on the premise that people make decisions because of what people on the TV tell them to do. Which is just a little bit of an exaggeration of the effect of political messaging. People actually have their own thoughts too.

 

[JPRouve]

If you think the EU commission is democratic then I have a bridge to sell you

I don't want the EU commission to be democratic, what I want is for people democratically elected to nominate people that are competent in specific domains which is the case for the commission. You and I don't elect the environment minister and there is a reason for that.

 

[mancan92]

No apologies necessary.

If the issue arises because of the rate of immigration then I don't agree that it's essentially xenophobic.



Christ, that's horrific.



Yeah...identity can be a puzzling and complex thing, can't it? The typical Irish response to the latter point would be the polar opposite of your grandmother's for example.

How do you feel about her sentiments, if you don't mind me asking?

It's sad but I understand it. These people were brainwashed for 200 years plus to believe the white British were the epidome of life and they were privileged to be in their presence. You will find that people of the Windrush generation who were essentially tricked into coming to the UK for extra cheap labour (ironically the same reason the British government encouraged great EU immigration to the UK) they are probably more nationalist than most people born here.

 

[That'sHernandez]

I don't want the EU commission to be democratic, what I want is for people democratically elected to nominate people that are competent in specific domains which is the case for the commission. You and I don't elect the environment minister and there is a reason for that.

Unfortunately, that is where you are wrong. Almost all of the members of the cabinet are elected members of parliament, therefore unless the environment minister is from the House of Lords, they are elected. That minister is then supported by the civil service, who largely are experts in their field but they do not direct policy.

This is probably part of why the transparency of the EU gets lost in translation in the UK.

 

[caid]

I dont really understand the fears of the european superstate. Cooperating on trade, standards, freedom of movement, security and infrastructure just seems an eminently sensible approach to me.

 

[afrocentricity]

I don't want the EU commission to be democratic, what I want is for people democratically elected to nominate people that are competent in specific domains which is the case for the commission. You and I don't elect the environment minister and there is a reason for that.

Imagine if we did though! You'd think people were observing and learning from this but no.

 

[Klopper76]

I dont really understand the fears of the european superstate. Cooperating on trade, standards, freedom of movement, security and infrastructure just seems an eminently sensible approach to me.

Same. The whole European army thing seems sensible as well.

 

[Kinsella]

I dont really understand the fears of the european superstate. Cooperating on trade, standards, freedom of movement, security and infrastructure just seems an eminently sensible approach to me.

I suppose because a European superstate would involve more than just the things you mention.