EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[AlterEgo]

Well if you want to make that analogy closer to the EU, then you also have to say that the UK would have a veto that we could use against such a thing.

Also, I would certainly question what the UK was doing in such a union if that was the kind of law that it wanted to pass. But the EU isn't trying to pass laws like that. The EU are not trying to enforce laws on us that are "totally at odds with who we are".

Just because the EU is less outrageous than Africans banning homosexuality doesn’t make it necessarily in Britain’s interest to remain in it. I was using a hypothetical example.

And finally, I find it quite amusing that you are using an analogy of "you were outvoted. I’m afraid that’s democracy for you" because that is essentially what the leavers have been saying for the last almost 2 years in an attempt to get those of us who wanted to remain to shut up.

But that’s exactly the justification for what democracy is in the EU. “Look, there’s a Parliament, and we have a seat on the Council”. That’s not nearly a sufficient explanation of why the EU is democratic at all. That’s what I’m trying to illustrate.

Democracy is more than that. Be amused all you like, but the hypocrisy is equal on both sides. Leavers waving their arms saying “we won, democracy” and Remainers using exactly the same analogy in explaining why Leavers were wrong to vote the way they did.

A significant number of people feel the EU is alien and doesn’t legislate in the their interests. Who are we to tell them they’re wrong?

None of this changes the fact we were outvoted though! I find the whole debate astonishing, particularly the denial that nations exist for more than merely arbitrary reasons by several people. That’s basically Marxism, and I’m surprised. Though we’re all entitled to our own opinion.

 

[AlterEgo]

All democracy is conditional on agreement. When the Conservative party want to change legislation, Parliament and the monarch have to agree.

Therefore, we can say that as the British people didn’t agree for the EU to act in their interests, it is de facto undemocratic at least as far as Britain is concerned, can we not?

 

[AlterEgo]

Alright, an irrelevance would be taking it to far. Just all this shared values and experience is a load of guff to me. The Daily Mail was going on yesterday that (In this case) English values were a sense of humour, generosity and being welcoming or at least something along those lines. It was utter gibberish. I've encountered those things in people all over the world. I've heard it said that Poles are really blunt, well the ones I am friends with aren't and I know lots of English people who are.

I wouldn’t listen to the Mail about British values!

It’s a much less tangible thing than anyone realises. None of us are able to articulate exactly what it is that makes us British or English perhaps, and I think that’s one of the things that makes us a special nation.

 

[EM2]

It’s obvious what context I was using it in, as I was using it solely to speak about the common values binding a group of people into a nation. In any case, if you bothered to look beyond the first result on Google, you would see that there are rhetorical uses of the word, and some dictionaries define it rather differently.

I was looking for the Oxford Dictionaries definition and to find that I hade to wade through a few pages of links to demos (as in the plural of demo)

You could Google “EU demos” I suppose?

Let's do that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=EU+...B:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=&safe=active&gws_rd=ssl

From the summaries of the first few results:
'Principal theories about European democracy agree that there is no European demos' - note the use of 'theories'.

'The European Demos is not a priory a requirement of European democracy but rather a production of the on-going European Union history.'

'The European Union's alleged shortage of democratic legitimacy is said to be caused partly by the polity's lack of a demos' - again, 'alleged', 'said to be'.

Then we have an FT article about Macron and the idea of transnational European parliamentarians, and then a fifteen-year-old speech by Nick Clegg, and after a that a load of articles from a thinktank called Demos.

If these academic and political papers which demonstrate the lack of EU demos as a fact, rather than an opinion or theory are so plentiful, why are they not on the front page?

I haven’t argued that the UK has a sufficient demos to make it a viable prospect in the long term. The UK isn’t a nation. I’ve been careful to use the term “nation”. A nation is something not defined necessarily by lines on a map.

Elsewhere on this thread I have spoken of the significant democratic deficit within these islands, something else which has helped precipitate Brexit.

So the EU doesn't have a demos. The UK doesn't have a demos. Does England? Do the other UK nations?

 

[EM2]

Therefore, we can say that as the British people didn’t agree for the EU to act in their interests, it is de facto undemocratic at least as far as Britain is concerned, can we not?

No we can't.
I didn't agree for the Conservative party to act in my interests, that doesn't mean that it isn't democratic as far as I am concerned.

 

[fowler9]

I wouldn’t listen to the Mail about British values!

It’s a much less tangible thing than anyone realises. None of us are able to articulate exactly what it is that makes us British or English perhaps, and I think that’s one of the things that makes us a special nation.

No more special than any other nation. That is just exceptionalism. You know, people thinking they are better just because of where they were born. Guess we will have to agree to disagree mate.

 

[AlterEgo]

No we can't.
I didn't agree for the Conservative party to act in my interests, that doesn't mean that it isn't democratic as far as I am concerned.

You weren’t being asked the same question in that example. Not voting conservative and getting a conservative government means from your perspective you don’t believe the Tories act in your interest, not that the system used to elect them is the wrong one.

I was looking for the Oxford Dictionaries definition and to find that I hade to wade through a few pages of links to demos (as in the plural of demo)

Let's do that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=EU+...B:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=&safe=active&gws_rd=ssl

From the summaries of the first few results:
'Principal theories about European democracy agree that there is no European demos' - note the use of 'theories'.

'The European Demos is not a priory a requirement of European democracy but rather a production of the on-going European Union history.'

'The European Union's alleged shortage of democratic legitimacy is said to be caused partly by the polity's lack of a demos' - again, 'alleged', 'said to be'.

Then we have an FT article about Macron and the idea of transnational European parliamentarians, and then a fifteen-year-old speech by Nick Clegg, and after a that a load of articles from a thinktank called Demos.

If these academic and political papers which demonstrate the lack of EU demos as a fact, rather than an opinion or theory are so plentiful, why are they not on the front page?

I’ve never suggested the lack of a demos would be a “fact”? How could it ever be thus? It’s an opinion. I was pointing you to them so you could see how an English word might have other meanings during rhetorical discussion.

Are you having trouble reading my posts again? Almost every response is either something you’ve Googled which isn’t relevant or wilful misunderstanding.

So the EU doesn't have a demos. The UK doesn't have a demos. Does England? Do the other UK nations?

England I believe has a sufficient demos although the national identity has suffered immeasurably since WWII.

Northern Ireland’s people were actually asked to formally assent to their form of government in a method unlike any other nation (The people of Wales and Scotland were similarly asked but in a slightly different way). However NI doesn't have a meaningful demos while such a significant minority reject British influence. At the moment, it doesn’t have a government due to apparently irreconcilable differences.

Nobody has been able to demonstrate to me that the EU at its current scale, encompassing Eastern Europe, doesn’t have a problem with democratic deficit.

 

[AlterEgo]

No more special than any other nation. That is just exceptionalism. You know, people thinking they are better just because of where they were born. Guess we will have to agree to disagree mate.

Nobody I know thinks they are better because of where they were born or grew up. It does however make them different.

 

[whhistle]

The UK have veto on pretty much everything. That said not getting completely ripped off on data roaming on your phone was a bonus.

Quite so. We were having our cake and eating it before June 2016. It's gruel from now on.

Wasn't it the EU that stipulated cars have to have driving lights now?
And introduced flags to number plates?

So we didn't quite veto everything...

 

[EM2]

You weren’t being asked the same question in that example. Not voting conservative and getting a conservative government means from your perspective you don’t believe the Tories act in your interest, not that the system used to elect them is the wrong one.

All I have done is substitute 'I/me' for 'Britain' and 'Conservatives' for 'EU' in your example.

I’ve never suggested the lack of a demos would be a “fact”? How could it ever be thus? It’s an opinion. I was pointing you to them so you could see how an English word might have other meanings during rhetorical discussion.

Are you having trouble reading my posts again? Almost every response is either something you’ve Googled which isn’t relevant or wilful misunderstanding.

When I don't know what something means, I look it up. When I find the definition, I assume that is the definition that is being used. I have found no definition, in any online dictionary, that defines 'demos' in any other way.

 

[Bromley boy]

Also, I would certainly question what the UK was doing in such a union if that was the kind of law that it wanted to pass. But the EU isn't trying to pass laws like that. The EU are not trying to enforce laws on us that are "totally at odds with who we are".

But what business does the EU really have passing “laws” in the first place? You might agree with much of what the EU says at the moment but what about if it starts passing laws in future you don’t agree with and will have no real power to change?

I want all the laws that govern this country, and the society I participate in, to be made by parliament and as developed by common law. Whether I agree with them or not at a particular moment in time is irrelevant.

Fundamentally I don’t want the sovereignty of the U.K. parliament in any way limited by a faceless, undemocratic, supra-national body comprised of a disparate group of nations many of which have little in common with the U.K. and whose interests may be in direct opposition to our own.

 

[Bromley boy]

Wasn't it the EU that stipulated cars have to have driving lights now?
And introduced flags to number plates?

So we didn't quite veto everything...

My number plate has a Union Jack on it .

 

[Howardh]

My number plate has a Union Jack on it .

That's handy, if your car ends up upside-down we will know you're in trouble

Serious qusetion - it's years since I drove abroad - do British cars still have to have the GB sticker on??

 

[EM2]

Serious qusetion - it's years since I drove abroad - do British cars still have to have the GB sticker on??

If it doesn't have a GB marker on the registration plate, it still needs a sticker, and also if driving outside the EU.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...le-registration-numbers-and-number-plates.pdf

 

[EM2]

My number plate has a Union Jack on it .

Guess what? If travelling in the EU, you'll still need a GB sticker, because your plates don't display the EU symbol (se the above link)

 

[Bromley boy]

That's handy, if your car ends up upside-down we will know you're in trouble

Serious qusetion - it's years since I drove abroad - do British cars still have to have the GB sticker on??

Unlikely to happen. It was built, with Teutonic efficiency, by the Germans .

I believe the GB mark on number plates nowadays suffices for the sticker. I wonder if mine would still count with a Union Jack?

 

[AlterEgo]

All I have done is substitute 'I/me' for 'Britain' and 'Conservatives' for 'EU' in your example.

Yes, and I could substitute the words “him” and “apples” the sentence would have different meaning yet again. It’s very difficult to debate with you when you wilfully misunderstand and misrepresent. I’m having trouble understanding whether you’re on the wind-up or genuinely not able to tell the difference.

Someone voting in a referendum that they don’t want to be a part of the EU, wish to send no representatives and wish for no influence of that body over their everyday life is not equivalent to voting for a political candidate. A better analogy would be the Scottish independence referendum.

When I don't know what something means, I look it up. When I find the definition, I assume that is the definition that is being used. I have found no definition, in any online dictionary, that defines 'demos' in any other way.

You should not use the dictionary as a method of rebuttal when engaged in a rhetorical debate. The reasons why should be obvious, but clearly they are not to you.

In any case, there are quite a few definitions on the internet which define it as “the people of a nation”, or indicate its use as a rhetorical device rather than as a literal expression.

 

[fowler9]

Wasn't it the EU that stipulated cars have to have driving lights now?
And introduced flags to number plates?

So we didn't quite veto everything...

Is that really a massive problem? If you drive your car outside the EU I believe you need more than just a flag on your registration plate.

 

[Senex]

In any case, there are quite a few definitions on the internet which define it as “the people of a nation”, or indicate its use as a rhetorical device rather than as a literal expression.

But then we need to ask what constitutes a nation, and also, in our case, whether a "united kingdom" is an any sense a nation-state. Is "British" a nationality, or are the only nationalities English, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh (I avoid the temptation to ask about Wessex or Northumbria—or even just Yorkshire)?

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

But then we need to ask what constitutes a nation, and also, in our case, whether a "united kingdom" is an any sense a nation-state. Is "British" a nationality, or are the only nationalities English, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh (I avoid the temptation to ask about Wessex or Northumbria—or even just Yorkshire)?

What defines a nation state is extremely complicated as there is no universal agreement as to what one is, just like how there isn't any real definition of a continent. I don't think there are many, if any countries that we recognise that is recognised internationally. For example, we along with many western nationals recognise Israel as a country, but many middle eastern nations do not. The US, UK and France may secretly recognise the island of Taiwan as it's own country, but so long as China keeps vetoing the notion of it being it's own independent state it will not officially be one, since China recognises Taiwan as part of it's own. You know, that plus the fact China loves it's own imperialist attitude, but that's a whole different subject.

I think that we, as a country, see that the United Kingdom is the sovereign state with it's international border and seat in the United Nations, but which in turn is actually composed of the three devolved non-sovereign countries of England, Scotland and Wales, along with the devolved province of Northern Ireland. But even that last part in itself is disputed, and so therefore we cannot say there is a single universal definition of a country. British is the nationality of anyone from the UK, but then they are also free to recognise themselves as something else individually so long as it is within reason. For example, I personally regard myself as English, despite the fact I wasn't born in England but have lived here my whole life. I am British by any stretch of where I was born though cause I was technically born in Great Britain.

But even those born in Northern Ireland might regard themselves as British rather than Irish, for reasons again are part of a whole new subject. Ultimately, there's not much stopping other countries from recognising the EU as a country since it has a lot of traits of one such as an anthem, a flag, a President, a central bank, a currency, a justice system, a high court, a constitution, and very soon it's own military force just to name a few. So why is it not a country? Because we don't recognise it as one, and neither do many other nations if any. The EU itself is a very complicated system, and it is arguable as to whether or not it could be it's own nation state. The whole subject would warrant it's own discussion really, so let us not dwell too much on the whole thing while we are on this thread.

 

[EM2]

Someone voting in a referendum that they don’t want to be a part of the EU, wish to send no representatives and wish for no influence of that body over their everyday life is not equivalent to voting for a political candidate. A better analogy would be the Scottish independence referendum.

If you say so. A vote is a vote, whether it's a referendum, an election, or to choose the colour to paint a wall. Whichever option wins, whether that's one of a choice of two, three or forty-seven, wins. Those that don't vote for the winner have to live with the result until such time as there is another vote.

You should not use the dictionary as a method of rebuttal when engaged in a rhetorical debate.

How can I not? Not knowing what 'demos' meant, I had to look it up. When all that I can find tells me that it means 'populace', what else am I expected to conclude about its meaning?

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

So Jeremy Corbyn apparently made a joke at PMQs stating the government's handling of the Brexit negotiations has delivered more delays and cancellations than Northern Rail. For a bit of a loony left-winger, the man has a sense of humour, as well as some sense of reality. Of course Theresa May avoided the question and decided to make it all about the failings of the Labour Party, because that's obviously easier than just facing up to your own problems as Prime Minister. I use to have a saying of my own, which was: "The inevitable problem with democracy is when, eventually, it will always be someone else's fault".

Most of us know the problems of the Labour Party, but they're not in power, so if Theresa could just stop acting like David Cameron did and actually answer questions and act like a proper leader, then we might have gotten somewhere. Remember when she said that during EU negotiations Brussels would be dealing with a "bloody difficult woman"? Yeah well she wasn't lying, she is a bloody difficult woman. Honestly, if the leavers crowd in the Conservative Party weren't such a bunch of cowards and actually took on the hard job of what they campaigned for she'd not be in Number 10.

 

[fowler9]

So Jeremy Corbyn apparently made a joke at PMQs stating the government's handling of the Brexit negotiations has delivered more delays and cancellations than Northern Rail. For a bit of a loony left-winger, the man has a sense of humour, as well as some sense of reality. Of course Theresa May avoided the question and decided to make it all about the failings of the Labour Party, because that's obviously easier than just facing up to your own problems as Prime Minister. I use to have a saying of my own, which was: "The inevitable problem with democracy is when, eventually, it will always be someone else's fault".

Most of us know the problems of the Labour Party, but they're not in power, so if Theresa could just stop acting like David Cameron did and actually answer questions and act like a proper leader, then we might have gotten somewhere. Remember when she said that during EU negotiations Brussels would be dealing with a "bloody difficult woman"? Yeah well she wasn't lying, she is a bloody difficult woman. Honestly, if the leavers crowd in the Conservative Party weren't such a bunch of cowards and actually took on the hard job of what they campaigned for she'd not be in Number 10.

It's because the leavers in the Conservatives all know it is a massive sh*t show and they are doing it for their own self interest. It is a miracle they have convinced so many people that I am one of the liberal elite and Jacob Rees-Mogg, BoJo and Michael Gove are on the side of the average working man or woman.

 

[AlterEgo]

If you say so. A vote is a vote, whether it's a referendum, an election, or to choose the colour to paint a wall. Whichever option wins, whether that's one of a choice of two, three or forty-seven, wins. Those that don't vote for the winner have to live with the result until such time as there is another vote.

You misunderstand yet again. The original example I gave was that as Britain had rejected the EU, by plebiscite, this was evidence that Britain at least didn’t view the EU to be acting in its interests; crucial to that is the fact that the European demos doesn’t exist in any real sense and Britain doesn’t feel a common purpose with it.

That was my point. What you’re saying doesn’t even begin to address what I said.

How can I not? Not knowing what 'demos' meant, I had to look it up. When all that I can find tells me that it means 'populace', what else am I expected to conclude about its meaning?

This isn’t addressing why it’s bad to use it as form of rebuttal. As I said, I should have hoped this would be obvious.

I don’t want to engage further on this point as it’s both off-topic and I feel like I’ve been dragged down to the point of explaining to you how you should go about arguing against my own points within the format of a debate.

 

[AlterEgo]

But then we need to ask what constitutes a nation, and also, in our case, whether a "united kingdom" is an any sense a nation-state. Is "British" a nationality, or are the only nationalities English, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh (I avoid the temptation to ask about Wessex or Northumbria—or even just Yorkshire)?

The UK isn’t a nation state. It comprises several nations.

 

[EM2]

This isn’t addressing why it’s bad to use it as form of rebuttal. As I said, I should have hoped this would be obvious.

The thing is, I wasn't rebutting anything.
You posted 'No demos, no democracy'.
I thought to myself 'He keeps using that word. I don't really know what it means. I'd better look it up'.
So I did, and every definition I found said that it meant 'populace'.
And that's what I posted.
Nothing else.
Simply 'You keep saying this, but all 'demos' means is 'populace'.'
So where is there any rebuttal? Where is there any argument about what you said?
Nowhere.
All there was, was a statement that a word you used a number of times is defined as a certain thing.
Maybe I should have added a question mark.

 

[EM2]

That was my point. What you’re saying doesn’t even begin to address what I said.

Then maybe your point could have been made more clearly.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The original example I gave was that as Britain had rejected the EU, by plebiscite, this was evidence that Britain at least didn’t view the EU to be acting in its interests; crucial to that is the fact that the European demos doesn’t exist in any real sense and Britain doesn’t feel a common purpose with it.

Personally I don't think the 52% v 48% vote is evidence for any of that at all. Yes it means we rejected the EU. But it doesn't give any evidence that Britain doesn't view the EU to be acting in its interests. The vote was so close, and from what has been said was likely swayed by the campaigns (how crap the remain one was and the leave one basically lying, or at the very least deceiving voters), that I think the only thing the vote is evidence for is that a large number people were annoyed at the status quo for a fair number of reasons (indeed it is fairly well known now that a lot of the leave vote was a general protest vote rather than specifically against how the EU acts in terms of the UK).

 

[Howardh]

I know the freedom of movement rules have been tweaked a little recently, but it makes me wonder how much having freedom of movement (ie immigration) swayed people to vote leave; but if, in future, the EU relented to some degree and from that point those voters would then be happy to still be in?

So in other words, we have left something which, down the line, could become more acceptable to the majority by changing policies yet we are outside? The EU is a movable object and within it we had some say in that movement, when we are out will the door still be open to rejoin if the EU drifts towards our way of thinking?

 

[Senex]

I think that we, as a country, see that the United Kingdom is the sovereign state with it's international border and seat in the United Nations, but which in turn is actually composed of the three devolved non-sovereign countries of England, Scotland and Wales, along with the devolved province of Northern Ireland.

Scotland and Wales may be non-sovereign devolved countries, but England is a country and not devolved—it is the only one of the four territories under the direct rule of the imperial government (once NI gets its devolution working again). Exactly how the province of Northern Ireland fits in is fascinating. Territorially, part of a historic province of Ireland now governmentally attached to Great Britain, with some of its population claiming strongly to be Irish and others insisting they are British ...