Topic: Show Me The Mané's Tedious Circular Argument Topic

[SP]

In heavily Brexit constituencies - which are the majority - its likely that more voters will turn out to punish Labour for trying to overturn the result of the referendum by blocking A50 as some are advocating which is why I think the most pragmatic response is to dead-bat this one.

Bullshit. Most seats were in the 60-40 split each way, so it is hardly heavily. Plus the Leave vote was bolstered by a significant number of people that do not usually vote. They probably won't vote at a General Election either.

[Show Me The Exit]

And if the option is shit, and the opinion polls move to denote that the public mood has swung, Parliament could cancel the results of a narrow advisory referendum. Or they could ask the people to choice between the options.

They could but at the moment the large majority of constituencies are in the Brexit camp so it wouldn't be a good idea to go down this road if the MPs want to keep their jobs.

Perhaps things will change in future if there is a huge outcry and a terrible deal is negotiated but I doubt this will happen - I can't see the politicians expending that much political capital on it.

[Show Me The Exit]

Bullshit. Most seats were in the 60-40 split each way, so it is hardly heavily. Plus the Leave vote was bolstered by a significant number of people that do not usually vote. They probably won't vote at a General Election either.

60-40 split seeems pretty heavy to me on a two-option vote! (one option being one a half times more frequent than the other).

And it's likely they would come out and vote if they felt that their sitting MP was trying to disenfranchise their referendum vote by attempting to ignore or overturn it. In fact I suspect there would be violent demonstrations.

[Danny Boys Dad]

60-40 split seeems pretty heavy to me on a two-option vote! (one option being one a half times more frequent than the other).

And it's likely they would come out and vote if they felt that their sitting MP was trying to disenfranchise their referendum vote by attempting to ignore or overturn it. In fact I suspect there would be violent demonstrations.

The threat of riots again, as put forward by some MP's. Disgraceful.

Given that most of the analysis of the vote shows leave voters to be old and a bit dim I don't think the rest of us have that much to worry about. They've hardly turned up in great numbers to anything else have they?

Can just imagine it:

What do we want??

ECONOMIC DISASTER!!!

When do we want it??

NOW!!!

[Show Me The Exit]

The threat of riots again, as put forward by some MP's. Disgraceful.

Given that most of the analysis of the vote shows leave voters to be old and a bit dim I don't think the rest of us have that much to worry about. They've hardly turned up in great numbers to anything else have they?

Its not a risk I see the majority of MPs taking when they have received a clear instruction from the electorate.

[Danny Boys Dad]

Its not a risk I see the majority of MPs taking when they have received a clear instruction from the electorate.

The electorate gave a clear instruction for a hard brexit did they? Remind me again where it said that on the ballot paper.

People voted for brexit because of bananas, I suppose that was completely clear

[filopastry]

60-40 split seeems pretty heavy to me on a two-option vote! (one option being one a half times more frequent than the other).

And it's likely they would come out and vote if they felt that their sitting MP was trying to disenfranchise their referendum vote by attempting to ignore or overturn it. In fact I suspect there would be violent demonstrations.

How do you think most Labour voters (heavily Remain leaning these days) are likely to vote if Brexit turns to shit and Labour aren't seen to have done much to oppose it.

If Labour were out there making a case for Soft Brexit in the country and parliament it would be one thing but they aren't in any meaningful way, they're about to be whipped into voting for a Hard Brexit.

[SP]

Its not a risk I see the majority of MPs taking when they have received a clear instruction from the electorate.

There is no fucking clear instruction other than to formulate a plan for Brexit. Anything more than that is supposition.

[SP]

They could but at the moment the large majority of constituencies are in the Brexit camp so it wouldn't be a good idea to go down this road if the MPs want to keep their jobs.

Perhaps things will change in future if there is a huge outcry and a terrible deal is negotiated but I doubt this will happen - I can't see the politicians expending that much political capital on it.

The arithmetic is not that clear cut. Especially for Labour MPs whose support is predominantly remain. If Brexit goes tits up, the current crop of MPs will be toast if they voted for it. We have a representative democracy where MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, not necessarily their views. Take Capital Punishment as the hackneyed example. 

[Danny Boys Dad]

The arithmetic is not that clear cut. Especially for Labour MPs whose support is predominantly remain. If Brexit goes tits up, the current crop of MPs will be toast if they voted for it. We have a representative democracy where MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, not necessarily their views. Take Capital Punishment as the hackneyed example.

It's a good example though. MP's would be extremely unlikely to back any referendum on bringing back capital punishment but if there was one and the public voted for it I can't see many of them arguing that it is the 'will of the people'.

[Show Me The Exit]

The electorate gave a clear instruction for a hard brexit did they? Remind me again where it said that on the ballot paper.

People voted for brexit because of bananas, I suppose that was completely clear

And remind me again where the popular support was to advance towards a european super-state?

[SP]

And remind me again where the popular support was to advance towards a european super-state?

The people spoke in 1974. We don't need to ask again, and it does not matter that they weren't told what would happen. It is the irrevocable will of the people and must be obeyed.

[SP]

And remind me again where the popular support was to advance towards a european super-state?

The UK has a veto over everything real that you are getting upset about. For the imaginary stuff, you really should stop reading the Mail/Express/Telegraph/Sun/Star (delete as appropriate).

[Show Me The Exit]

There is no fucking clear instruction other than to formulate a plan for Brexit. Anything more than that is supposition.

I think we agree on this... but now that the process has been triggered, Parliament has to decide on a way forward and that includes a plan about forming a hard Brexit which is based on supposition as much as a soft brexit / intermediate Brexit or any other type is.

At the end of the day Parliamentarians have to be entrusted with the details of the process - unless we set up more referendums to go through every possible deal - or we call a general election - to which we know the likely result would be an increased tory majority and therefore support for hard brexit.

[Danny Boys Dad]

And remind me again where the popular support was to advance towards a european super-state?

You're off your head. Is that the sort of thing you go round talking about? Even if a European super state was an option on the table it would have to be approved by the member states.

Even the EU went off the idea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/16/unnoticed-by-brexiteers-the-idea-of-an-eu-super-state-is-quietly/

Like any organisation things get proposed then left to gather dust.

That was another Leave scare story, like an EU army, or 75 million Turks all coming to live here.

[Show Me The Exit]

The people spoke in 1974. We don't need to ask again, and it does not matter that they weren't told what would happen. It is the irrevocable will of the people and must be obeyed.

It was - but as you rightly insinuate - the vote was for continued membership of a Common Market and not to subsume the nation's sovereignty into that of a larger european country.

And therefore just as you (correctly) point out there is no mandate for a hard exit there is (by the same token) no mandate for a hard remain either.

And the vote was taken with full knowledge of the direction of travel of the EU with our vetoes.

The EU itself is likely collapse if Italy, Holland or France vote to leave.

[Show Me The Exit]

You're off your head. Is that the sort of thing you go round talking about? Even if a European super state was an option on the table it would have to be approved by the member states.

Even the EU went off the idea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/16/unnoticed-by-brexiteers-the-idea-of-an-eu-super-state-is-quietly/

Like any organisation things get proposed then left to gather dust.

That was another Leave scare story, like an EU army, or 75 million Turks all coming to live here.

Well that's a journalist's opinion that the "mood" in the EU has "shifted" yet - according to others there never was a plan in the first place to create a super state - which is it?

And as for scare stories - you mean like the loss of 3 million jobs we were expecting? or the £4300 pounds each family was going to lose every year?

The vote has happened and - whichever way it went - it is always tempting to try and look back and say it should be repeated "but this time with the full facts" but that is an impossible goal.

[Danny Boys Dad]

Well that's a journalist's opinion that the "mood" in the EU has "shifted" yet - according to others there never was a plan in the first place to creat a super state - which is it?

I don't know, I've been too busy wondering how they faked the moon landings and how those lizard people manage to walk among us without us spotting their scaly tails

[Show Me The Exit]

The arithmetic is not that clear cut. Especially for Labour MPs whose support is predominantly remain. If Brexit goes tits up, the current crop of MPs will be toast if they voted for it. We have a representative democracy where MPs are supposed to represent the best interests of their constituents, not necessarily their views. Take Capital Punishment as the hackneyed example.

Of course - neither path is clear cut as we are in uncharted territory and it comes down to a matter of political judgement.

Having said that I think the evidence shows that Corbyn has made the right choice here for four main reasons:

1. the country has never given a mandate to join a european super state
2. the majority of voters and the large majority of constituencies voted Leave (therefore the constituents are being represented)
3. the data from the Guardian survey posted above shows that this is the correct strategy for retaining the widest (if not the deepest support) and
4. the EU itself is heading for a clash between its political and economic goals as we have sen in Greece and therefore it is likely that other countries will follow us out.

Nobody will know if we have made the correct decision or nor for years - perhaps centuries.

[Cliff Bastin]

A lot more Labour voters voted Remain. Why is he ignoring them by waiving article 50 through unconditionally?

Do you want Labour to win another election again? He needs those leave constituencies.

[Cliff Bastin]

Then at least the people would have had a say. The price of democracy is that you have to live with the idiocy of your peers. But they voted for something fairly idiotic, that the Tories have interpreted without a mandate as something completely and utterly idiotic. The people need to be allowed to prove how idiotic they are.

The people got a say on June 23rd. Anyone with any sense knew by voting leave we would be leaving the single market. The major remain supporters said so.

[Show Me The Exit]

The people got a say on June 23rd. Anyone with any sense knew by voting leave we would be leaving the single market. The major remain supporters said so.

Exactly so.

And, on a slightly different note, it's Corbyn's job to maximise the support for the Labour Party  - or i though thats what he was previously being criticised for not doing. Giving the people their say should be relatively low down on his list of priorities!

[Red-Soldier]

Of course - neither path is clear cut as we are in uncharted territory and it comes down to a matter of political judgement.

Having said that I think the evidence shows that Corbyn has made the right choice here for four main reasons:

1. the country has never given a mandate to join a european super state
2. the majority of voters and the large majority of constituencies voted Leave (therefore the constituents are being represented)
3. the data from the Guardian survey posted above shows that this is the correct strategy for retaining the widest (if not the deepest support) and
4. the EU itself is heading for a clash between its political and economic goals as we have sen in Greece and therefore it is likely that other countries will follow us out.

Nobody will know if we have made the correct decision or nor for years - perhaps centuries.

1. What the fuck are you talking about?

2. But what did they vote to leave?  Single market??? Customs Union?

3. See point 1.

[Show Me The Exit]

1. What the fuck are you talking about?

2. But what did they vote to leave?  Single market??? Customs Union?

3. See point 1.

They voted to leave the EU.

It appears the primary reason was to regain some control of the borders and which would be incompatible with the terms of the single market/customs union.

[Red-Soldier]

They voted to leave the EU.

It appears the primary reason was to regain some control of the borders and which would be incompatible with the terms of the single market/customs union.

Yes, that was the question on the ballot paper.  But what did that mean exactly??

Where is the data that shows what all the leave voters voted for?

How do you know what people voted for by just asking the question; Should the UK leave the EU?


I feel we are going over some familiar ground here............

[SP]

Yes it was sovereign to decide whether or not to be in the Single Market. As a member of the Single Market we signed up to free movement of people thereby removing the power to control immigration.

The UK has significant powers to curb immigration. For non-EU immigration which matches EU immigration, nothing is stopping the Government from curbing it (besides the collapse of the NHS and the social care system).

For EU immigration, the Government could have forced EU citizens to register, and removed them if they were jobless after 3 months. They do not enforce that at all. Free movement is free movement of workers, not of citizens who cannot support themselves. However, the government did not enforce this. They have been incompetent at planning and controlling migration whilst in the EU. They will be just as bloody hopeless outside the EU.

[thelinnen]

"European super state"

Everyone got their tinfoil hats ready with some popcorn ready for this one? 

[Red-Soldier]

Of course - neither path is clear cut as we are in uncharted territory and it comes down to a matter of political judgement.

Having said that I think the evidence shows that Corbyn has made the right choice here for four main reasons:

1. the country has never given a mandate to join a european super state
2. the majority of voters and the large majority of constituencies voted Leave (therefore the constituents are being represented)
3. the data from the Guardian survey posted above shows that this is the correct strategy for retaining the widest (if not the deepest support) and
4. the EU itself is heading for a clash between its political and economic goals as we have sen in Greece and therefore it is likely that other countries will follow us out.

Nobody will know if we have made the correct decision or nor for years - perhaps centuries.

I'm surprised you haven't used the words 'vanity project' yet.

[OneTouchFooty]

They voted to leave the EU.

It appears the primary reason was to regain some control of the borders and which would be incompatible with the terms of the single market/customs union.

*sigh* The government have quite alot of control over our borders, they decided against curbing immigration for a variety of reasons. The myth of 'open borders' of people 'flooding in' unvetted has been shown up numerous times for the nonsense it is. As usual, people completely missed the real cause of who is responsible for declining living standards and underfunded public services, which was staring them in the face all along. Funny enough they'll probably keep voting in their droves for these vindictive c*nts

The revisionism that the vote was all along a vote for a hard Brexit and leaving anything with the EU's name on is hilarious, just look at quotes from the Leave campaign, advertised as a "have your cake and eat it" style exit.

[Millie]

Of course - neither path is clear cut as we are in uncharted territory and it comes down to a matter of political judgement.

Having said that I think the evidence shows that Corbyn has made the right choice here for four main reasons:

1. the country has never given a mandate to join a european super state
2. the majority of voters and the large majority of constituencies voted Leave (therefore the constituents are being represented)
3. the data from the Guardian survey posted above shows that this is the correct strategy for retaining the widest (if not the deepest support) and
4. the EU itself is heading for a clash between its political and economic goals as we have sen in Greece and therefore it is likely that other countries will follow us out.

Nobody will know if we have made the correct decision or nor for years - perhaps centuries.

What the fuck are you going on about?

What European Super State?

It was a small majority of those who voted - you are making it sound like it was an enormous majority.

I live in Liverpool and my constituency (indeed the whole region) voted remain - so how the fuck are we being represented?  (For what it is worth my actual MP ignored Corbyn last week).

Once other EU countries see the shite deal we are going to get - what makes you think they will all want to leave?

Centuries? That's no use to all of us is it?

[Millie]

Well that's a journalist's opinion that the "mood" in the EU has "shifted" yet - according to others there never was a plan in the first place to create a super state - which is it?

And as for scare stories - you mean like the loss of 3 million jobs we were expecting? or the £4300 pounds each family was going to lose every year?

The vote has happened and - whichever way it went - it is always tempting to try and look back and say it should be repeated "but this time with the full facts" but that is an impossible goal.

We haven't left yet

[Millie]

LOL, you're the one who posted a link saying that the EU's mood had changed and that it now no longer wanted to be a superstate not me! 

Yes it was sovereign to decide whether or not to be in the Single Market. As a member of the Single Market we signed up to free movement of people thereby removing the power to control immigration.

We have immigration control - we can actually control freedom of movement - you can't just go and live in another EU state - you have to be exercising treaty rights.

[Show Me The Exit]

Yes, that was the question on the ballot paper.  But what did that mean exactly??

Where is the data that shows what all the leave voters voted for?

How do you know what people voted for by just asking the question; Should the UK leave the EU?


I feel we are going over some familiar ground here............

Great questions.

As mentioned before once the decision to leave had been made the rest of the answers to those questions will be reached by various parliamentarians. The system works by them exercising their judgement on these matters and being accountable to the electorate.

[Show Me The Exit]

What the fuck are you going on about?

What European Super State?

It was a small majority of those who voted - you are making it sound like it was an enormous majority.

I live in Liverpool and my constituency (indeed the whole region) voted remain - so how the fuck are we being represented?  (For what it is worth my actual MP ignored Corbyn last week).

Once other EU countries see the shite deal we are going to get - what makes you think they will all want to leave?

Centuries? That's no use to all of us is it?

I can see you are quite animated about this - there is plenty of information out there about the origins of the EU and its political ambitions. I can recommend a couple of sources regarding Jean Monnet which you might find helpful.

http://www.historiasiglo20.org/europe/monnet.htm

[oldfordie]

Great questions.

As mentioned before once the decision to leave had been made the rest of the answers to those questions will be reached by various parliamentarians. The system works by them exercising their judgement on these matters and being accountable to the electorate.

?
May has already said why the country voted to leave, the wishes of the people is a hard Brexit that takes us out the single market. that's not up for debate now.
Seems we all released this was true when May mentioned it months after the referendum result.

[SP]

I can see you are quite animated about this - there is plenty of information out there about the origins of the EU and its political ambitions. I can recommend a couple of sources regarding Jean Monnet which you might find helpful.

http://www.historiasiglo20.org/europe/monnet.htm

Don't be a condescending twat. Whatever politicians from the dim distant past thought, each nation has a veto over the creation of the parts of a super state. It is Daily Mail scare story territory.

[Show Me The Exit]

Don't be a condescending twat. Whatever politicians from the dim distant past thought, each nation has a veto over the creation of the parts of a super state. It is Daily Mail scare story territory.

Thats not my understanding - its been quite clear since the inception of the EU that the end goal was a superstate which is the direction in which the project has been heading.

The Five Presidents report reaffirms that consolidated European Monetary Union - and thereby a common monetary and fiscal policy is the end goal.

Along with a president, commision, legal structure through the ECJ and proposals for a European Army and foreign and defence policy there isnt really much more that is required in order to qualify as a federal state.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/08/jean-claude-juncker-calls-for-eu-army-european-commission-miltary

And of course this is borne out by the four freedoms of the single market which have been designed to characterise those of a single state.

There may be arguments for becoming part of such a body but i cant see how anyone could deny that is the goal. They havent been particularly secretive about it.

[zebenzui]

One link for all those assertions.

Seems legit.

[Zeb]

The Five Presidents report reaffirms that consolidated European Monetary Union - and thereby a common monetary and fiscal policy is the end goal.

Well, with a shared currency there are certain obvious and practical issues they need to resolve. Which is what that report was an attempt to start to do - with no guarantee that any of what is proposed will be taken up by the democratically elected governments of the EU. It was written in 2015, it's played little part in any major inter-government discussions since. Additionally, and what increases the amusement factor to me, we are not in the eurozone and our commissioner actually lobbied for some of the proposals as they are beneficial to Britain's service industries.

There are those in Europe who push for a single state. Yes, of course there are. The national veto meant it was never an issue for us to be sucked into any attempt to create one. Bonkers stuff.

[cloggypop]

It will probably come as a bit of a surprise to people who believe in this superstate nonsense but it's not just the British who don't really fancy it that much. I can't speak for everyone but pretty much all of the Dutch that I know actually like being Dutch. Some of them are as proud of being Dutch as people are of being British. Going from the music and that I would imagine it's a similar story in France and Germany as well. I reckon even some Belgians are the same. I always find the us and them logic a bit lacking.