EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[muddythefish]

Yes, and the vote to leave was basically just a big middle finger to all the smug elites who have been telling the white working class what’s good for them for 40 years.

.

The "smug elites" aren't in Brussels - they're in Westminister. Can Leavers explain why they blame the EU for what is essentially a London problem?

 

[muddythefish]

I don’t think it has ever been suggested that the EU “runs” the UK. However it is an undemocratic, self serving institution which casts an increasing shadow over the UK’s own affairs.

Leavers say all the time that "we're being run from Brussels" (which sums up their lack of knowledge).

Talking of undemocratic institutions, look no farther than the Commons and our outdated FPTP voting system and the unelected peers in the House of Lords

 

[fowler9]

Folks, I am sure you are wonderful people but I am not sure the way you are describing things makes you fundamentally British. I just spent the weekend with my Polish mate. My brother is coming up to Liverpool with his Colombian wife at the weekend. These are just the places they came from and don't define them as people. I am in no way ashamed of being British but it in no way defines me. I like the UK being part of the EU for trade purposes. I see no benefit in leaving and have heard no one provide details of any benefit in leaving other than the weird pride they take in the country they were born in by pure fate as if it imbues them with super powers.

 

[HSTEd]

If I win one general election in the UK (after Brexit) we can have public ownership of utilities and infrastructure and a new settlement that truly benefits the people.

The EU mandates continued Thatcherism/Majorite policies through the Electricity and Railway directives, and similar legislation (on topics like telecommunications unbundling and similar).
If I want to overturn said policies Brexit must go forward as the chances of the EU changing course are essentially zero.

 

[fowler9]

If I win one general election in the UK (after Brexit) we can have public ownership of utilities and infrastructure and a new settlement that truly benefits the people.

The EU mandates continued Thatcherism/Majorite policies through the Electricity and Railway directives, and similar legislation (on topics like telecommunications unbundling and similar).
If I want to overturn said policies Brexit must go forward as the chances of the EU changing course are essentially zero.

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

 

[muddythefish]

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.

 

[Bromley boy]

I

Folks, I am sure you are wonderful people but I am not sure the way you are describing things makes you fundamentally British. I just spent the weekend with my Polish mate. My brother is coming up to Liverpool with his Colombian wife at the weekend. These are just the places they came from and don't define them as people. I am in no way ashamed of being British but it in no way defines me. I like the UK being part of the EU for trade purposes. I see no benefit in leaving and have heard no one provide details of any benefit in leaving other than the weird pride they take in the country they were born in by pure fate as if it imbues them with super powers.

I don’t think anyone has said being British imbues them with superpowers.

But it is a fundamental part of who you are. Your mate is Polish, your brother’s wife is Colombian (I bet she’s properly fit ?): I’m sure they would say where they were born and raised is a fundamental part of who they are, and they probably (rightly) take a great deal of pride in that. Ask them - I bet their origins form a key part of their identity. I’m sure they would also intrinsically identity you as a British guy they get on well with.

By the same token, as a British bloke, surely you must accept that’s a fundamental part of who you are and how you are viewed by people from the rest of the world? Saying that is in no way making a negative judgement about other countries/cultures, on the contrary, it’s something to be appreciated and celebrated.

I would also like to be part of the EU “for trade purposes”, the reason I voted leave is that the EU’s ambitions are clearly some way beyond that.

 

[Bromley boy]

The "smug elites" aren't in Brussels - they're in Westminister. Can Leavers explain why they blame the EU for what is essentially a London problem?

Leavers say all the time that "we're being run from Brussels" (which sums up their lack of knowledge).

Talking of undemocratic institutions, look no farther than the Commons and our outdated FPTP voting system and the unelected peers in the House of Lords

I’m afraid childish comments like this only highlight your own lack of knowledge/meaningful insight into the topic being discussed.

Is there any chance you could develop the above silly, meaningless, soundbites into reasoned statements worthy of discussion?

 

[GusB]

I’m afraid childish comments like this only highlight your own shortage of knowledge and lack of insight into the topics being discussed.

Is there any chance you could develop the above silly, meaningless, soundbites into reasoned statements worthy of discussion?

There are smug elites everywhere, including Westminster. There are smug elites in our local councils, too. The expenses issue a few years ago highlighted that there was a culture of entitlement among some of our elected and appointed representatives, while at the same time some of them were vilifying the culture of entitlement of benefit claimants. It's not childish to question this.

 

[HSTEd]

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

A veto is no use against things the EU has already passed.

 

[EM2]

A veto is no use against things the EU has already passed.

Obviously. Because that means that we didn't veto them.

 

[AlterEgo]

The "smug elites" aren't in Brussels - they're in Westminister. Can Leavers explain why they blame the EU for what is essentially a London problem?

It was the only opportunity they had to stick two fingers up to them by voting against something a lot of them hold dear.

 

[AlterEgo]

That is not what I said. I find it insulting to think that the only option I have to be as a person is from where I was born. There is a lot more to me than people born in Britain.

You can be whoever you like - a monarchist, Republican, gay, straight, trans, a car lover, a steam enthusiast, an anarchist, a beater of women, a politician, a soldier, a vicar, a wine connoisseur, or whatever - but you’ll always be a British person.

Folks, I am sure you are wonderful people but I am not sure the way you are describing things makes you fundamentally British. I just spent the weekend with my Polish mate. My brother is coming up to Liverpool with his Colombian wife at the weekend. These are just the places they came from and don't define them as people. I am in no way ashamed of being British but it in no way defines me. I like the UK being part of the EU for trade purposes. I see no benefit in leaving and have heard no one provide details of any benefit in leaving other than the weird pride they take in the country they were born in by pure fate as if it imbues them with super powers.

It’s staggering that someone who’s travelled so much thinks that the country or nation someone’s from is an irrelevance.

Just because you can enjoy a beer with someone doesn’t mean you’re the same. It doesn’t mean you have a shared culture. It doesn’t mean that you place equal value on things in life.

Nations by and large are esoteric things - not necessarily lines on a map - a loose collection of people who broadly have shared values and culture etc. There are some countries which are not nations and there are some nations which are not countries.

The denial of the fact that nation states exist for the reasons of common values/culture/religion etc is the lowest form of intellectual dishonesty.

I’m not arguing that you must be proud to be British but for heaven’s sake, being born and raised here will define a great deal about you as a person. Everything else is personality and individual choice.

 

[AlterEgo]

And as I replied to Bromley boy saying, you could make that argument for any random area. Be it a village, a region, a country, a multi national area like the EU, whatever. It has nothing to do with nationality really, so I don't see how it backs up your point at all. Being from the Rhondda in South Wales has shaped who I am and has made me different from someone born in Westminster, just as being born in a part of the EU has made me different from someone born outside of the EU. Being born in a certain place certainly does shape who you are (well technically it is the ideas and culture you are surrounded with, which could be different from the actual area you live in!), but the idea that can only happen on a country level is simply absurd.

At no point have I said that only happens at a country level. My point is the nation state is the highest echelon at which democracy will work.

The EU is not a democracy because it doesn’t have a demos. It can never be a real democracy in its current form.

An outlandish and hypothetical example: If Britain decided on a whim to join the African Union and somehow the Union mandated that homosexuality became illegal in member nations...

This would be outrageous, of course. Totally at odds with who we are. But the African Union supporters could say “well hang on, you send representatives here and you were outvoted. I’m afraid that’s democracy for you”.

The fact is we don’t have a great deal in common with African nations and what works for them may not work for us. The same, to a lesser extent, applies to the EU. We are a very different nation to the others in the Union. In fact, a lot of nations are quite different indeed from one another.

No demos, no democracy.

 

[EM2]

No demos, no democracy.

You keep saying this, but all 'demos' means is 'populace'.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/demos

demos
noun
1 The common people of an ancient Greek state.

• 1.1 The populace of a democracy as a political unit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demos

Demos (UK: /ˈdɛmɒs/, US: /ˈdɛmoʊs/), the ancient Greek word for the ordinary citizens of a city-state, "the people," used in English as a rhetorical term, and also as an element in compound words, such as demo-cracy, "rule of the people"

 

[AlterEgo]

You keep saying this, but all 'demos' means is 'populace'.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/demos


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demos

Dictionary definitions are the last resort of someone losing an argument.

You can find a number of academic and political papers which explore what a demos means in the context I use it, so I welcome your peer-reviewed corrections on each of them citing the dictionary definition and telling them their paper is null and void.

PS: great to see we’re back to you pointlessly sticking a word or two into Google, and drawing out the first thing you see, and posting it as rebuttal.

 

[NSEFAN]

I’m afraid childish comments like this only highlight your own lack of knowledge/meaningful insight into the topic being discussed.

Is there any chance you could develop the above silly, meaningless, soundbites into reasoned statements worthy of discussion?

They have got a point though. If unelected politicians are unacceptable at the EU level then why is the House of Lords or the Cabinet acceptable? Purely because they're British and have the same shared culture/history? Alternstively, are they all unacceptable and leaving the EU is just one step on the way to increased democracy?

 

[EM2]

Dictionary definitions are the last resort of someone losing an argument.

Any discussion on the use of a term must surely start from the basic level of the definition of that word. If you wish to use it in a different context, you should surely define in what context you are using it?

You can find a number of academic and political papers which explore what a demos means in the context I use it, so I welcome your peer-reviewed corrections on each of them citing the dictionary definition and telling them their paper is null and void.

Without knowing what that context is (because you have not defined it), how can I know which papers these are?
I'm going to assume, because earlier in the thread you said:

The EU doesn’t have a demos because not all of the people are united by common culture, common purpose or even a common geography, such is its scale.

that this is the sense that you mean when you are using 'demos'.
When I discussed the UK in respect of this, you agreed and said that you support Scottish and Irish separatism and the breakup of the UK into its constituent nations. In that case, how can you argue that the UK has a demos, but that the EU does not?

 

[furnessvale]

Obviously. Because that means that we didn't veto them.

Very true, and unlike decisions made in the UK parliament, no matter which direction politics in the UK takes, left or right, we can never change them.

 

[EM2]

Very true, and unlike decisions made in the UK parliament, no matter which direction politics in the UK takes, left or right, we can never change them.

Of course we can. Firstly, we have a Commissioner who can propose changes to legislation, secondly we have MEPs who can vote against proposed legislation that they feel is not in our best interests, and thirdly our Prime Minister can try to negotiate the basis of our membership.

 

[fowler9]

I

I don’t think anyone has said being British imbues them with superpowers.

But it is a fundamental part of who you are. Your mate is Polish, your brother’s wife is Colombian (I bet she’s properly fit ?): I’m sure they would say where they were born and raised is a fundamental part of who they are, and they probably (rightly) take a great deal of pride in that. Ask them - I bet their origins form a key part of their identity. I’m sure they would also intrinsically identity you as a British guy they get on well with.

By the same token, as a British bloke, surely you must accept that’s a fundamental part of who you are and how you are viewed by people from the rest of the world? Saying that is in no way making a negative judgement about other countries/cultures, on the contrary, it’s something to be appreciated and celebrated.

I would also like to be part of the EU “for trade purposes”, the reason I voted leave is that the EU’s ambitions are clearly some way beyond that.

Ha ha, what can I say, my brothers wife is very attractive and has a lovely accent.

Yeah, I guess being British is part of who I am, I can't deny that and wouldn't want to. I'm not ashamed to be British. It's just the whole being proud thing is just not something I get. I love seeing British athletes doing well in the Olympics or Tour De France etc. do maybe I'm just lying to myself. Ha ha.

 

[fowler9]

You can be whoever you like - a monarchist, Republican, gay, straight, trans, a car lover, a steam enthusiast, an anarchist, a beater of women, a politician, a soldier, a vicar, a wine connoisseur, or whatever - but you’ll always be a British person.



It’s staggering that someone who’s travelled so much thinks that the country or nation someone’s from is an irrelevance.

Just because you can enjoy a beer with someone doesn’t mean you’re the same. It doesn’t mean you have a shared culture. It doesn’t mean that you place equal value on things in life.

Nations by and large are esoteric things - not necessarily lines on a map - a loose collection of people who broadly have shared values and culture etc. There are some countries which are not nations and there are some nations which are not countries.

The denial of the fact that nation states exist for the reasons of common values/culture/religion etc is the lowest form of intellectual dishonesty.

I’m not arguing that you must be proud to be British but for heaven’s sake, being born and raised here will define a great deal about you as a person. Everything else is personality and individual choice.

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.

 

[furnessvale]

Of course we can. Firstly, we have a Commissioner who can propose changes to legislation, secondly we have MEPs who can vote for proposed legislation that they feel is not in our best interests, and thirdly our Prime Minister can try to negotiate the basis of our membership.

All three of your proposals are conditional on EU agreement , so, no we can't.

 

[WelshBluebird]

My point is the nation state is the highest echelon at which democracy will work.

Why?? There has literally been no explanation about why you think that is the case, apart from the "shared history and values" stuff which can also apply to any area of any size.

An outlandish and hypothetical example: If Britain decided on a whim to join the African Union and somehow the Union mandated that homosexuality became illegal in member nations...

This would be outrageous, of course. Totally at odds with who we are. But the African Union supporters could say “well hang on, you send representatives here and you were outvoted. I’m afraid that’s democracy for you”.

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".

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.

 

[EM2]

All three of your proposals are conditional on EU agreement , so, no we can't.

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

 

[WelshBluebird]

It doesn’t mean you have a shared culture. It doesn’t mean that you place equal value on things in life.

And neither does being the same nationality as someone else though.
Just because you and I are British, it does not mean we have a shared culture shared and equal values.

Nations by and large are esoteric things - not necessarily lines on a map - a loose collection of people who broadly have shared values and culture etc. There are some countries which are not nations and there are some nations which are not countries.

But you could say "a loose collection of people who broadly have shared values and culture etc" about literally any area you draw lines around. Be that villages, towns, cities, counties, regions, countries, groups of countries etc. As I said earlier, to an extreme example you could say it about planets (if we were ever to discover intelligent life on other planets that we could communicate and interact with).

The denial of the fact that nation states exist for the reasons of common values/culture/religion etc is the lowest form of intellectual dishonesty.

Of course those are part of it (other reasons include the gain and control of resources etc etc), but to suggest they define a country is pretty naive and to then further suggest that everyone in a country is bounded by those common values etc is just absurd. And as I keep asking - if common values, culture, religion was to define a country? What would "British" be? Considering we are no longer a majority Christian country so common religion goes out the window. In terms of culture, South Wales is very different to Newcastle which is very different to Westminster. And in terms of values - well as I said earlier, I certainly don't share the same values as the chavs living down the road.

 

[HSTEd]

Of course we can. Firstly, we have a Commissioner who can propose changes to legislation, secondly we have MEPs who can vote against proposed legislation that they feel is not in our best interests, and thirdly our Prime Minister can try to negotiate the basis of our membership.

And we would lose those votes every time.
The direction of european politics is towards more Thatcherism, partially under pressure from the federalists who want all national level symbols of identity erased, and partially from the fact that right wingers are ascendent across Europe.

There is no chance that we can convince the majority of political establishments in EU states to let us have integrated public ownership of utilities and railways, and it is the height of arrogance to believe we can.

 

[AlterEgo]

Any discussion on the use of a term must surely start from the basic level of the definition of that word. If you wish to use it in a different context, you should surely define in what context you are using it?

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.

Without knowing what that context is (because you have not defined it), how can I know which papers these are?
I'm going to assume, because earlier in the thread you said:

You could Google “EU demos” I suppose?

that this is the sense that you mean when you are using 'demos'.
When I discussed the UK in respect of this, you agreed and said that you support Scottish and Irish separatism and the breakup of the UK into its constituent nations. In that case, how can you argue that the UK has a demos, but that the EU does not?

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.

 

[AlterEgo]

And neither does being the same nationality as someone else though.
Just because you and I are British, it does not mean we have a shared culture shared and equal values.

There you go comparing two individuals. You don’t get it. I’ve never argued two individuals from the same country will be exactly alike. Our nation comprises tens of millions of people.

But you could say "a loose collection of people who broadly have shared values and culture etc" about literally any area you draw lines around. Be that villages, towns, cities, counties, regions, countries, groups of countries etc. As I said earlier, to an extreme example you could say it about planets (if we were ever to discover intelligent life on other planets that we could communicate and interact with).

And I will repeat myself again, I’m not suggesting otherwise. I’m suggesting the EU is too vast a collection of dozens of different peoples to be democratic in any real sense.

Of course those are part of it (other reasons include the gain and control of resources etc etc), but to suggest they define a country is pretty naive and to then further suggest that everyone in a country is bounded by those common values etc is just absurd.

Didn’t say “everyone” in a literal context, but carry on anyway.

And as I keep asking - if common values, culture, religion was to define a country? What would "British" be? Considering we are no longer a majority Christian country so common religion goes out the window. In terms of culture, South Wales is very different to Newcastle which is very different to Westminster. And in terms of values - well as I said earlier, I certainly don't share the same values as the chavs living down the road.

Of course, class can be as significant a divider as nationality.

Nonetheless, the religious history and state religion of Britain are utterly crucial to understanding the British psyche. For a start, the Christian heritage of this country and its basis in the formulation of common law enshrine the sovereignty of the individual. That’s just one effect of the country’s heritage.

I agree that cities can be very very different, but this doesn’t detract from my point.

 

[furnessvale]

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

All within the UK, not subject to the whims of foreign states.