Remainers, Is This Really What You Want To Be A Part Of?

[youngmafbog]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6618789/Merkel-boasts-Germany-France-taken-steps-European-ARMY-signing-pact.html#comments

[cassa333]

Softened only because they can see how duplicitous remain are being.

How utterly self serving and blatantly against the referendum.

[New Judge]

"The unelected officials were part of us being one of the most prosperous and respected trading nations in the world."

No they were not. They were the reason why this country had to abandon much of its trade with long standing partners outside Europe an instead had to tether itself to the (mainly European) declining markets we are still tied to today.

[jim360]

That argument might sound more plausible if it weren't for the fact that the UK economy generally did a lot better inside the EU than it was doing before. How much of that is a causal link is, of course, unclear, but what's certainly true is that overall the last few decades have been reasonably strong, on average, economically.

Cassa, I'm sorry you have that reaction but the simple fact is that democracy is always in flux and never settled. I have no doubt that there are cynical Remain-supporting politicians, but then you get Jacob Rees-Mogg going on about how the solution is to suspend Parliament so that nobody at all can have their say on either Brexit or how it's to be achieved.

There is something wrong with someone's understanding of democracy if it's held that denying Parliament and the people a chance to vote on an issue is seen as more democratic than granting Parliament and the people a chance to vote on an issue.

[naomi24]

Jim, //let's stop this nonsense about a result only being accepted if the opposition abandons its position, either. That is not, and never has been, how democracy works.//

Yes, let’s stop this nonsense. Most people here know how democracy works – they're familiar with the concept – and ignoring the result of a democratic vote isn’t how democracy works. You know that … we all know that.

//The only way a second referendum can overturn the first, ultimately, is if the electorate as a whole changes its mind//

The electorate can only change its mind if the same question is asked – but you know as well as I do that it won’t be. This is the most shamefully disingenuous episode in the history of British politics – and you are wholeheartedly in support of the lie that is it. Take a breath, Jim. You’re fooling no one.

[jim360]

I'm not trying to fool anyone. I'm offering my position honestly, and how I see it. Earlier you asked me how I personally would structure the referendum, and again let me remind you that I did propose that Leaving without a deal be on the final question -- but if it ultimately isn't, and here's one of those times where I'd far rather you'd claimed I didn't know, because I don't have a clue if it will be or not! -- then you should least give plausible consideration as to why it might not be. There are so many warnings from across the board, be it in trade, or business, or security, or science, or any other sector of UK life you'd care to mention, that a No Deal exit, particularly if it is sprung on the UK without proper preparation, will be massively harmful. If you don't take these warnings seriously -- and, presumably, you do not -- it seems at least worth outlining why not, and why you haven't so much as discussed them from what I've seen.

I disagree with you strongly. We've established that. We couldn't be further apart on this, I'm sure. But, once again, let me ask you to show at least some respect for me as a person. I am not lying to you or to anyone else, I am not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes, and I certainly do respect democracy.

[naomi24]

Jim, conveniently, someone has posted a link elsewhere to a thread active on the day after the referendum. Take a look at what you said then.

//…we established long ago that for some people even a long-term recession was totally worth it if it meant "escaping" the shackles of the EU...

Some shackles, by the way. "Hey, can we go?" "Yeah sure, if you want I guess." ...//

(^Haha! What a joke!)

//It's in the interests I suppose of Remainers to play up the negatives of yesterday and the coming weeks/ months -- and in the interests of Brexiters to completely ignore them.//

//I'm not so dogmatic about voting "no" to [Scottish] independence at the moment. I can't be the only person who's open to reconsidering in the wake of Thursday's [EU referendum] result.//

All of that (apart from my little chuckle) came from a time when you acknowledged the meaning of democracy – and fully expected it to be honoured.

[waterboatman]

What is the point of a European army?

That's what NATO is for!

[Kromovaracun]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

[jim360]

Yes, in the wake of the referendum I did say those things, and I don't regret them either. But then the last three years happened. What? Is it somehow forbidden to react to actual events and reconsider? I can hardly be blamed for not predicting what the intervening three years would bring, and for responding to that.

[jim360]

And, again, it comes down to a basic failure to appreciate the power of democracy: namely, that it is flexible, and not bound by the past. The vote of 2016 is significant, and I absolutely concede and agree that the government was bound to try and honour and respect that. But then came the 2017 election, and that is also a democratic exercise that saw Theresa May's -- at the time -- hardline approach to Brexit soundly rejected. The narrative changed. Theresa May seems to have ignored that, but, perhaps more significantly, so have the Hard Brexit supporters.

[cassa333]

The problem with the remain version of democracy is that it trying to use its own bastardised version of democracy to not enact a democratic vote that has already been made. They are trying to say it is democratic to have another vote BEFORE they have done anything.

ANY future vote should should it happen be simply, Mays deal or no deal. In no way shape or form should remain be on the ballot. Because that has been decided.

But the remainextremists will demand it is on so they can dilute the result to an extent so as to get the result they want.

[jim360]

Depends a great deal on how you evaluate no deal, doesn't it? That choice might then be seen as choosing political ruin or economic ruin. Not exactly an attractive one to make, for anyone.

Reversing course should always be an option: that is why laws can always be repealed, rather than merely amended.

[dannyk13]

Jacob Rees-Mogg has come up with an original solution. Get the Queen to suspend parliament until after 29th March.

[jim360]

Yes, because dragging the supposedly impartial monarchy into this crisis is exactly what we need right now.

[naomi24]

Jim, If responding to that is jumping on the bandwagon of the utter betrayal of democracy then, yes, that is what you’ve done – even to the extent of having once understood and accepted exactly what democracy means you now say some other definition applies. I’m not at all sure what that is – but democracy it ain’t! The ‘Not Me Guv’ doesn’t work, Jim, because it is you Guv, and everyone else who relishes the prospect of trampling into the mud the valid result of a lawful referendum.

[dannyk13]

Jim, it is Her Majesty's Government.She doesn't need to be impartial.

[jim360]

I reckon I've had a great deal of opportunity in the last few years to learn far more than I did before about our Constitution, our democracy, the various balances within it, and how democracy should actually work in practice. I make no apology, and have no reason to apologise, for spending time reading into this and using that research to inform and develop my opinion.

It is not about overturning the result of a referendum. The referendum result has already happened. The country has moved on. But now, it is -- and should be -- free to choose to move back, if it so wishes. If a democracy cannot change its mind, then it ceases to be a democracy, as David Davis said.

[naomi24]

Who's changed their minds, Jim?

[jim360]

It is a narrow and flawed understanding of democracy to hold that a vote, once made, can never be unmade. The reason is that will of the people is not fixed in time, nor should it be treated as such. No doubt your own will hasn't changed, but yours is not the only voice in this country.

Those philosophical points aside, I can hardly be forgiven for watching the last three years and revisiting my initial response to the vote. I had hoped that a better job could be made of it. It was not. To trap the country now into that course, refusing even to countenance the possibility of a delay to give the country the time it needs to prepare properly for Brexit -- let alone a reversal -- is the true betrayal of democracy.

That's the last word I have to say in this thread. I'm sorry we disagree, but I have nothing to apologise for nor be ashamed of, no more than anyone else who voted for Brexit. We both want the same thing, the best for this country, even though we fundamentally disagree on what that is.

[dannyk13]

Naomi, Jim is a dogmatic remainer who just keeps on banging the same drum.