Brexit

[Jeremy Roussak]

Manoli,

What the petition is telling you is that there is an ever increasng groundswell of popular dissent against Brexit. The shadow cabinet is in disarray, the Tories are split probably 2/3 - 1/3, Scotland has clearly indicated it's desire to remain in the EU - and your response is 'so what?'

Yes, it is. The petition is telling us absolutely nothing, other than that rather less than a fifth of the people who voted to remain want to re-run the referendum because they lost. It's childish silliness. The motives of its originator (who had some vague idea, it seems, of using it in the event of a vote to remain) and his timing are irrelevant.

Whether you like it or not, Brexit is anything but a done deal, and it won't be until someone invokes Article 50. It was an advisory referendum , done and dusted, has no kegal validity but has given the Government of the day a democratic imperative, still very much subject to both informal and formal negotiations.

I thought I'd already made that clear. The referendum is not binding, and the "insight" of the writer of the article stamper referred to is simply a statement of the obvious.

A general election returning a party that undertakes to keep Britain part of Europe, would supersede the result of the referendum. And democracy would be none the worse for it.

Well, we could argue about that. However, what the commentators bleating about the need for a general election have failed to realise is that it's no longer as simple as the PM deciding that we'll have one. Section 2 of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, enacted as I recall at Nick Clegg's insistence, renders calling a premature general election really quite tricky. It couldn't be done with the cooperation of the Labour Party, or to be more accurate the members of the parliamentary Labour party. That really would involve turkeys voting for an early Christmas (to quote Jim Callaghan).

Anyway time for some levity - someone mentioned that according to the House of Lords EU committee report, apparently HM Gov can't revoke EU membership without the prior approval of the Scottish Parliament - now that would be amusing !

Amusing indeed, but not true. Leaving would require amendment of the Scotland Act insofar as it provides that EU law shall apply in Scotland. There is a convention (no more than that, and obviously a very recent one) that the UK government seeks the consent of Holyrood before passing legislation that affects matters with Holyrood's jurisdiction; but ultimately, Westminster's rule is supreme throughout the UK. Powers given can always be taken back anyway. Sturgeon has no power to do what she's threatening.

Jeremy

[Jeremy Roussak]

Comments from the Guardian newspaper

The Grauniad is, as ever, living in a dream world. I don't recall Cameron ever saying that he would give notice under Article 50 immediately; and I can't imagine that any politician who had campaigned for us to leave being remotely concerned about being the one to start the process, given the referendum result.

If this cursed break does go ahead, rapidly followed by another internal one, then I see two local winners: Ireland and Scotland.

Rob, I think you are wrong on both counts (although I agree entirely with your remarks about the banks).

I don't believe Sturgeon will rush to call a second referendum on independence, for the simple reason that there's far from certainty that she'd win it, and certainty, or near-certainty, would be mandatory before she did. The economic arguments for Scottish independence have vanished with the halving of the price of oil. An independent Scotland would not be a member of the EU; it would have to go through the full application process; and part of the price for admission would be adoption of the Euro (required of all new member states). It just ain't going to happen.

I think the idea of Northern Ireland deciding to forget the religious and political differences which led to so many recent years of bombs and bloodshed and unite with the Republic is, with respect, pure fantasy, at least before Catholics outnumber Protestants.

And in 20 years' time, when Ireland is united, an independent Scotland has adopted the Euro and there is a manned land border between it and England, I'll eat my (stale) words. If I'm still alive.

Jeremy

[Justinr]

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign

Comments from the Guardian newspaper

It's a total mess which will mean there will be a fudge and there won't be any border posts or customs controls or the German car industry cutting itself off from an important market, likewise the French and Spanish tourist industries and so on.

Relax people and bathe in the golden glow of democracy.

[Justinr]

The Grauniad is, as ever, living in a dream world. I don't recall Cameron ever saying that he would give notice under Article 50 immediately; and I can't imagine that any politician who had campaigned for us to leave being remotely concerned about being the one to start the process, given the referendum result.

Rob, I think you are wrong on both counts (although I agree entirely with your remarks about the banks).

I don't believe Sturgeon will rush to call a second referendum on independence, for the simple reason that there's far from certainty that she'd win it, and certainty, or near-certainty, would be mandatory before she did. The economic arguments for Scottish independence have vanished with the halving of the price of oil. An independent Scotland would not be a member of the EU; it would have to go through the full application process; and part of the price for admission would be adoption of the Euro (required of all new member states). It just ain't going to happen.

I think the idea of Northern Ireland deciding to forget the religious and political differences which led to so many recent years of bombs and bloodshed and unite with the Republic is, with respect, pure fantasy, at least before Catholics outnumber Protestants.

And in 20 years' time, when Ireland is united, an independent Scotland has adopted the Euro and there is a manned land border between it and England, I'll eat my (stale) words. If I'm still alive.

Jeremy

With reference to Ireland I don't think there is the appetite for any more violence and bloodshed and a united Ireland may not be as far fetched as you believe. If Britain had opted to remain it would have come about by default anyway as the role of national governments would have been gradually handed over to unelected commissioners in Brussels bringing them under the same rule.

[Justinr]

+2

BUT: stamper, if quoting all that is declaring his suppport for staying in, then he's right. I have never been a Scot Nat, but I have to admit that they seem more attractive this weekend.

If this cursed break does go ahead, rapidly followed by another internal one, then I see two local winners: Ireland and Scotland.

Both have engineering skills, and the attractions for Belfast to swallow its religious differences and vote to join the south makes a lot of economic sense. It would be a large gulp, but in the end, both would win.

Scotland, as anyone who knows it has to admit, has a vast heritage of engineering know-how and its attractions as an alternative for Nissan et al. seem fairly obvious: they still would have a footprint/base on the closest coast to Europe. Leith to Zeebrugge is already operable for large vessels... Ireland would be marginally more expensive from that aspect, but regardless, cheaper than shipping from Japan, and yes, Scotland and Ireland would be far less prone to labour problems than France! (I think they learned their lesson on that a few years ago.) And certainly no more expensive labour-wise than England.

As for the recent attack some make on banks, and the pleasure at the new problems they now face: how dumb; the money they hold is ours; we should be happy it's being jeopardized? Ditto the bail outs of 2008: yes, they kept their jobs, those rash gents, but our savings didn't become scraps of worthless balance sheet either, preventing which the primary intention of the bail outs. Amazing how hatred can blind the eyes of those who feel left behind, less capable.

Again, that bloody great lies go unchallenged, swallowed whole, is certainly the fault of those telling them; but is the populace blameless, can it escape the responsibilty of using common sense? Is it so stupid as to believe what it reads in the tabloids? If so, then I think that democracy-without-qualification and referenda are ever less worthy or reliable ways of running an organization as big as a country.

How to improve it? No idea that would stick.

Rob, the banks were not merely rash they were in fact a total bunch of greed driven crooks, shifting billions about between accounts about to make it look as if they were solvent, abandoning all pretense of responsible banking and throwing their own rule book out of the window. Jail is too good for them. 

Over here in Ireland we are picking up the tab for keeping the euro afloat -

The average banking crisis debt across the EU is €192 per person, and the figure of €9,000 for each Irish person does not take into account the €18bn put in from the National Pension Reserve Fund.

A little more understanding and gratitude for the burden we in Ireland are carrying to keep the Euro afloat would be appreciated.

[Telecaster]

It's always both amusing and sigh-inducing to see folks ridicule the source of a line of thinking when they'd rather not deal with its content. The Brexit referendum seemingly passed the buck re. the decision to pull out of the EU from British policy makers to the public. But it did so under the assumption that Article 50 would be invoked forthwith and the "leave" process would begin with the referendum result still fresh. Cameron has scuttled that both by choosing not to flip the switch and by staying on as PM into October. Thus there will be 3+ months for the decision to settle in, and possibly begin to fester, before a new PM is chosen and takes over. Who will that be and what sort of action mandate will they have? A lot can and surely will happen during that time. I'd recommend a strong dose of humility for anyone feeling confident about how it'll play out.

-Dave-

[Rob C]

It's always both amusing and sigh-inducing to see folks ridicule the source of a line of thinking when they'd rather not deal with its content. The Brexit referendum seemingly passed the buck re. the decision to pull out of the EU from British policy makers to the public. But it did so under the assumption that Article 50 would be invoked forthwith and the "leave" process would begin with the referendum result still fresh. Cameron has scuttled that both by choosing not to flip the switch and by staying on as PM into October. Thus there will be 3+ months for the decision to settle in, and possibly begin to fester, before a new PM is chosen and takes over. Who will that be and what sort of action mandate will they have? A lot can and surely will happen during that time. I'd recommend a strong dose of humility for anyone feeling confident about how it'll play out.

-Dave-

I'd offer a more useful solution: buy more Scotch, because the distillers appear concerned that changes will now make the product less attractive in the export market. Unfortunately, I never liked it much so can't, personally, help, quite apart from it being on the cardio's banned substances list for me.

However, the fears may be premature: I am starting to discover that the 'rules' allow for the Government to run this topic (not the LuLa one) through Parliament, and if they decide so to do, refuse to act, not press the button, and it goes away, and we remain in the club. For once, not a lot the rest of the membership could do about it except either to sigh with relief or to change their own general attitudes and try to avert other countries from talking similar paths... According to the reports I pick up on France24 (available online too, in English) several countries are now seeking to change the basic makeup of how the Union is run - ironically, more as the Brits would have liked.

Early days or last minutes.

Rob

[JV]

House of Cards pales in comparison...

[Rob C]

I really would like to know how the Americans see all of this stuff. The ramifications for NATO etc. are pretty significant. Which, of course, is one possible reason that St Jeremy was so sloooow to appear concerned about leaving. Nuclear bases count. Okay, perhaps a Scottish Indy would close one, but it would simply go somewhere else in Britain. If it gets bombed, it hardly matters where in the UK it really sits.

Imagine a self-disarmer in charge of a country within a NATO partnership!

The mind truly boggles - as must Mr Putin's at this precise moment.

This has got to be Britan's finest hour!

[Justinr]

It's always both amusing and sigh-inducing to see folks ridicule the source of a line of thinking when they'd rather not deal with its content. The Brexit referendum seemingly passed the buck re. the decision to pull out of the EU from British policy makers to the public. But it did so under the assumption that Article 50 would be invoked forthwith and the "leave" process would begin with the referendum result still fresh. Cameron has scuttled that both by choosing not to flip the switch and by staying on as PM into October. Thus there will be 3+ months for the decision to settle in, and possibly begin to fester, before a new PM is chosen and takes over. Who will that be and what sort of action mandate will they have? A lot can and surely will happen during that time. I'd recommend a strong dose of humility for anyone feeling confident about how it'll play out.

-Dave-

The festering is here and now and it is hopefully the healing that will emerge over the summer break as European politicians take in the situation and begin to appreciate that childish strops are in nobody's interest.

[Rob C]

The Grauniad is, as ever, living in a dream world. I don't recall Cameron ever saying that he would give notice under Article 50 immediately; and I can't imagine that any politician who had campaigned for us to leave being remotely concerned about being the one to start the process, given the referendum result.

Rob, I think you are wrong on both counts (although I agree entirely with your remarks about the banks).

I don't believe Sturgeon will rush to call a second referendum on independence, for the simple reason that there's far from certainty that she'd win it, and certainty, or near-certainty, would be mandatory before she did. The economic arguments for Scottish independence have vanished with the halving of the price of oil. An independent Scotland would not be a member of the EU; it would have to go through the full application process; and part of the price for admission would be adoption of the Euro (required of all new member states). It just ain't going to happen.

I think the idea of Northern Ireland deciding to forget the religious and political differences which led to so many recent years of bombs and bloodshed and unite with the Republic is, with respect, pure fantasy, at least before Catholics outnumber Protestants.

And in 20 years' time, when Ireland is united, an independent Scotland has adopted the Euro and there is a manned land border between it and England, I'll eat my (stale) words. If I'm still alive.

Jeremy

I have no idea if a second Scottish Ref will be called; all I'm thinking is that should they do it, get the result, then the game changes significantly for them vis-à-vis the EEC. And I don't think they would have great problems being members, because ¡n effect, they would have never left. Regarding accepting the Euro - would they still consider the quid great value? There isn't much in a name, it's all in the clout, however you tag it. And my savings and pension have just dropped at least 5%-10% in value overnight.

Another thing to consider is the rest of the anglophone world: Scotland and its very close love/hate relation across the other channel still have that huge advantage as linguistic gateways into Europe. I can see the attraction there for a lot of American people, many of whom are rooted in one or other of those two lands, not to mention some Canadians, Québec Libre apart! Some of the largest markets for Scotty Dog/Misty Glen and similar calendars are North America and Australia; yeah, let's not forget Australia.

Don't underestimate blood. (That's why you shouldn't screw with Italians, especially from the south.)

[RSL]

I really would like to know how the Americans see all of this stuff.

Hi Rob,

I certainly can't speak for my countrymen, but I can speak for myself as one American.

I was happy to see the economic gathering-together in cooperation of European nations and Britain in the early days of the EU. I was unhappy to see the Euro when it came along. It was obvious to anyone with even a tiny bit of economic comprehension that a single currency for nations as different as Germany and Greece wasn't going to work and was going to result in tight jaws all around. I was even more unhappy to see the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels deciding to create a nation, or something like a nation, out of many nations with separate identities, different languages, and very different lifestyles. Looked a lot like Dr. Frankenstein putting together his monster. It was the high-handed performance of those bureaucrats that brought all this to a head, though it's probable the next Greek financial fiasco, which is sure to come, would have resulted in the same outcome.

But I'm happy to see Britain standing on its own feet again. As far as NATO is concerned, I think it's outlived its usefulness. The Brits were about the only people contributing what had been agreed upon for defense. The US has been carrying the slackers for far too long. I'm damn tired of paying for that kind of thing, even though, after 26 years in the military I understand why we continue to keep troops in Germany and Japan. That kind of overseas tour keeps the troops and the generals entertained.

As far as the EU is concerned, it's on its deathbed. All the cackling in this thread about re-doing the brexit vote is a death rattle that misses the point entirely. The vote was like a pin stuck in a balloon. The air in the EU is escaping at a rapid rate. You can re-vote all you want but the damage has been done.

[Justinr]

The Telegraph is taking the line that the Euro politicians are going to mess Britain about just to teach the rest of the ungrateful plebs a lesson and quote Junckers, who, it must remembered, is an unelected* civil servant -


Jean-Claude Juncker said on Friday: “The repercussions of the British referendum could quickly put a stop to such crass rabble-rousing, as it should soon become clear that the UK was better off inside the EU.” Britain simply has to go, on bad terms, pour encourager les autres.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/

But as they stamp up and down puffing their little chests out they might find the great army of European unity they believe to be marching in lockstep behind them is somewhat more reluctant altogether and has yet to decide just which side they are on themselves -

Secondly, a wave of movements demanding referendums on the terms of membership, given a huge boost by Mr Cameron, is tearing across Europe – in France, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Italy, Hungary.  Marine Le Pen could will run rampant in French elections in the spring. 

We should take nothing for granted just yet.

[Justinr]

Hi Rob,

I certainly can't speak for my countrymen, but I can speak for myself as one American.

I was happy to see the economic gathering-together in cooperation of European nations and Britain in the early days of the EU. I was unhappy to see the Euro when it came along. It was obvious to anyone with even a tiny bit of economic comprehension that a single currency for nations as different as Germany and Greece wasn't going to work and was going to result in tight jaws all around. I was even more unhappy to see the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels deciding to create a nation, or something like a nation, out of many nations with separate identities, different languages, and very different lifestyles. Looked a lot like Dr. Frankenstein putting together his monster. It was the high-handed performance of those bureaucrats that brought all this to a head, though it's probable the next Greek financial fiasco, which is sure to come, would have resulted in the same outcome.

But I'm happy to see Britain standing on its own feet again. As far as NATO is concerned, I think it's outlived its usefulness. The Brits were about the only people contributing what had been agreed upon for defense. The US has been carrying the slackers for far too long. I'm damn tired of paying for that kind of thing, even though, after 26 years in the military I understand why we continue to keep troops in Germany and Japan. That kind of overseas tour keeps the troops and the generals entertained.

As far as the EU is concerned, it's on its deathbed. All the cackling in this thread about re-doing the brexit vote is a death rattle that misses the point entirely. The vote was like a pin stuck in a balloon. The air in the EU is escaping at a rapid rate. You can re-vote all you want but the damage has been done.

This may well account for the sense of panic that one can discern amongst the EU politicians and civil servants.

[JV]

The Telegraph is taking the line that the Euro politicians are going to mess Britain about just to teach the rest of the ungrateful plebs a lesson and quote Junckers, who, it must remembered, is an unelected civil servant -


Jean-Claude Juncker said on Friday: “The repercussions of the British referendum could quickly put a stop to such crass rabble-rousing, as it should soon become clear that the UK was better off inside the EU.” Britain simply has to go, on bad terms, pour encourager les autres.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/

But as they stamp up and down puffing their little chests out they might find the great army of European unity they believe to be marching in lockstep behind them is somewhat more reluctant altogether and has yet to decide just which side they are on themselves -

Secondly, a wave of movements demanding referendums on the terms of membership, given a huge boost by Mr Cameron, is tearing across Europe – in France, Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Italy, Hungary.  Marine Le Pen could will run rampant in French elections in the spring. 

We should take nothing for granted just yet.

That Hitler EU comparison of Boris Johnson might not have helped, just saying...

[mecrox]

Hi Rob,

I certainly can't speak for my countrymen, but I can speak for myself as one American.

I was happy to see the economic gathering-together in cooperation of European nations and Britain in the early days of the EU. I was unhappy to see the Euro when it came along. It was obvious to anyone with even a tiny bit of economic comprehension that a single currency for nations as different as Germany and Greece wasn't going to work and was going to result in tight jaws all around. I was even more unhappy to see the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels deciding to create a nation, or something like a nation, out of many nations with separate identities, different languages, and very different lifestyles. Looked a lot like Dr. Frankenstein putting together his monster. It was the high-handed performance of those bureaucrats that brought all this to a head, though it's probable the next Greek financial fiasco, which is sure to come, would have resulted in the same outcome.

But I'm happy to see Britain standing on its own feet again. As far as NATO is concerned, I think it's outlived its usefulness. The Brits were about the only people contributing what had been agreed upon for defense. The US has been carrying the slackers for far too long. I'm damn tired of paying for that kind of thing, even though, after 26 years in the military I understand why we continue to keep troops in Germany and Japan. That kind of overseas tour keeps the troops and the generals entertained.

As far as the EU is concerned, it's on its deathbed. All the cackling in this thread about re-doing the brexit vote is a death rattle that misses the point entirely. The vote was like a pin stuck in a balloon. The air in the EU is escaping at a rapid rate. You can re-vote all you want but the damage has been done.

Many thanks for this sensible post. There is chronic inequality and neglect here in Britain and when you add that people are fed up with very remote politicians pushing them around, not to mention bureaucrats in the EU who hold absolutely no elected office in the UK, the result of this referendum isn't very surprising. It's simply saying that a political process without democratic consent ain't gonna work. And this from one who voted to stay in the EU, on the grounds that helping them sort themselves out was preferable to walking away.

In addition, I think folks need to realize that this is essentially unravelling a bureaucratic/legal arrangement. Trade is always pragmatic and will continue to flow through and around political obstacles. The future in not in Europe, a very narrow focus, it is now global and with a huge pull towards Asia and Asia-Pacific. A country re-positioning itself towards this new reality and away from an obsession with "Europe" alone is no bad thing.

[Alan Klein]

Hi Rob,

I certainly can't speak for my countrymen, but I can speak for myself as one American.

I was happy to see the economic gathering-together in cooperation of European nations and Britain in the early days of the EU. I was unhappy to see the Euro when it came along. It was obvious to anyone with even a tiny bit of economic comprehension that a single currency for nations as different as Germany and Greece wasn't going to work and was going to result in tight jaws all around. I was even more unhappy to see the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels deciding to create a nation, or something like a nation, out of many nations with separate identities, different languages, and very different lifestyles. Looked a lot like Dr. Frankenstein putting together his monster. It was the high-handed performance of those bureaucrats that brought all this to a head, though it's probable the next Greek financial fiasco, which is sure to come, would have resulted in the same outcome.

But I'm happy to see Britain standing on its own feet again. As far as NATO is concerned, I think it's outlived its usefulness. The Brits were about the only people contributing what had been agreed upon for defense. The US has been carrying the slackers for far too long. I'm damn tired of paying for that kind of thing, even though, after 26 years in the military I understand why we continue to keep troops in Germany and Japan. That kind of overseas tour keeps the troops and the generals entertained.

As far as the EU is concerned, it's on its deathbed. All the cackling in this thread about re-doing the brexit vote is a death rattle that misses the point entirely. The vote was like a pin stuck in a balloon. The air in the EU is escaping at a rapid rate. You can re-vote all you want but the damage has been done.

As an American, I could have written Russ's comments.  He said exactly what I've thought and said for years.  The EU should have stopped at trade agreements like NAFTA as each country still keeps its sovereignty.  The EU is doomed even if Brexit is not accomplished now.  Nationalism and patriotism are too powerful a force as the major entertainments of the twentieth century had proven.  Not to say this must end in conflict.   Just that everyone is  happier flying their own flag.

[BernardLanguillier]

As an American, I could have written Russ's comments.  He said exactly what I've thought and said for years.  The EU should have stopped at trade agreements like NAFTA as each country still keeps its sovereignty.  The EU is doomed even if Brexit is not accomplished now.  Nationalism and patriotism are too powerful a force as the major entertainments of the twentieth century had proven.  Not to say this must end in conflict.   Just that everyone is  happier flying their own flag.

I don't agree with this view of things. In fact I think it is the exact opposite.

The over reliance of Europe on trade as the core integration factor is the very cause of the current failure of Europe to convince its citizens.

In case you have not realized this, education, when designed to do so, can change the way people see things accross generations. And it has in some countries. There is nothing intrisinc about people with different cultural backgrouds unable to live together. And this is exactly why I quoted "education" as a key failure factor under lying the Brexit.

In case you have not realized this either, a large majority of citizens in Europe consider that policy makers in Europe have built a Europe designed to help large corporations in which they recogize themselves less every day that passes by. The Europe of the citizen is in favor of free enterprise (this isn't about "socialism"), but it is strongly opposed to the influence of capital on state, and Europe is seen today as have enabled just that.

This also what people mean when they say that Europe isn't democratic. This isn't just about the lack of direct relationship between people and their EU level representatives, it is a lot more about the perceived focus on large scale lobbies and lack of support for small scale initiative.

Obviously, some extreme right parties, such as the Front National in France, are trying to turn this into a preference for one's own Nation, but they are far from representing the dominent thought process.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...  enough pro-Europe youngsters turned adults..

The trouble with that argument is that when youngsters turn adults, they typically become wiser, i.e., less idealistic and naive 

[Rajan Parrikar]

Derb on the Brexit -

http://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/rule-britannia-on-brexit-the-immigrant-and-geezer-votes-anddonald-j-trump/