Brexit Encore

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

More complicated than that - this was not a referendum on a single issue.

Nomen est omen. You are saying the party that won doesn't have a single, simple name: Brexit?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... the gnomes in Zurich ...

Forgive us, we are Americans

[Chris Kern]

The next leader of the Conservative Party and therefore the next Prime Minister . . .

Who, according to the press on this side of the Atlantic, might well be none other than Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.  Fortunately, the decision won't be made before President Trump attends the D-Day commemoration in Portsmouth next week.  Otherwise, assuming it ultimately is Boris, we would be looking forward to the ultimate bad-hair day.

[LesPalenik]

The problem with the pan-European parliament is that you have even less to say about how the gnomes in Zurich decide you should live in your own country.  Their rules often overrule the parliaments in your own country. 

Forget the gnomes in Zurich and blame the unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels.

[Alan Klein]

Forget the gnomes in Zurich and blame the unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels.

Them too! 😉

[jeremyrh]

Nomen est omen. You are saying the party that won doesn't have a single, simple name: Brexit?

Sure, but the other 70% voted for parties which  actually have policies on topics other than Brexit - for example, how do you interpret the massive vote for Scottish Nationalist Party?

[jeremyrh]

The problem with the pan-European parliament is that you have even less to say about how the gnomes in Zurich decide you should live in your own country.  Their rules often overrule the parliaments in your own country.  How's that democratic?  Citizens often feel the don;t have a stake.  They're so much chattel to the business interests that care less about national borders and their own people.

That's true, up to a point - it would be better for decisions to be taken locally. Unfortunately we British have shown ourselves to be incapable of doing that in such areas as environmental protection, workers rights and immigration, so it has become regrettably necessary to be part of a wiser organisation.

[Robert Roaldi]

I find the emotional arguments about sovereignty unconvincing. I suspect that all this talk of foreign bureaucrats making rules is hyperbole, that is, the rules they make aren't as onerous as the propaganda states. It sounds like someone is trying very hard to sell something.

I thought this column from Macleans is a good summary of the current situation, minus the distractions https://www.macleans.ca/politics/theresa-mays-hard-exit/.

[jeremyrh]

I find the emotional arguments about sovereignty unconvincing. I suspect that all this talk of foreign bureaucrats making rules is hyperbole, that is, the rules they make aren't as onerous as the propaganda states. It sounds like someone is trying very hard to sell something.

Indeed - and especially unconvincing when you realise that architect of Brexit Nigel Farage is the one who was AWOL from his position on the EU Fisheries commission when the decisions now complained about were being taken.

[Rhossydd]

I suspect that all this talk of foreign bureaucrats making rules is hyperbole, that is, the rules they make aren't as onerous as the propaganda states.

It's just plain wrong. Only a very tiny fraction of EU regulation has been opposed by the UK, the vast majority of it is to the UK's advantage or doesn't effect us anyway.
Ill-informed people still fail to understand what an enormously privileged and influential position the UK has/had within the EU.
Little mention is made of our ability to regulate other member states to our advantage via EU regulation that we make a major contribution to.

I thought this column from Macleans is a good summary of the current situation,

Interesting and generally good, but looks only at trading goods. What will hit the UK very hard is the reduction in trade in services to the EU and much of that damage is under way now as the financial industry steadily moves it's resources and trading bases away from the UK into the EU. Already the loss of tax revenue from the finance industry is greater than our EU contributions.

[Rob C]

There's a belief that one of the original driving forces of the raison d'être of the Union was to bind countries so close together that war, an endemic disease in Europe, might be rendered impossible.

Were it not for the African/mid-eastern problems of migration, I am sure non of this shit would have gone down. In the street, you can't tell a Brit from a Pole from a German (should the three be blondes) but the ones from outwith Europe are easy to spot. The UK problems started way before the Common Market was even a cold, wet dream down in somebody's pyjamas. It began with Empire, cats, just as in the US you had slavery. Son pays for Dad's mistakes. It's biblical and visibly true.

That becomes the most easy and convenient trigger to touch when you want to find something to advance your personal political ambitions. And boy, did some of those bastards lie! And worse, few of their followers seem to care, even though they probably know the inconvenient truth. The power of thought does not imply that folks also think.

[Rhossydd]

In the street, you can't tell a Brit from a Pole

Yes you can, especially so when you hear them speak.
Try getting out off your Med island bubble and visiting some of the eastern counties of England where there is a lot of eastern European immigration. Then you'll see and hear why so many people voted for brexit there.

Unfortunately far too many of those brexit voters aren't understanding the overall impact and benefits of freedom of movement and fail to see why remaining in the EU gives them a general benefit.

[Alan Klein]

That's true, up to a point - it would be better for decisions to be taken locally. Unfortunately we British have shown ourselves to be incapable of doing that in such areas as environmental protection, workers rights and immigration, so it has become regrettably necessary to be part of a wiser organisation.

So you're willing to give up your vote for some perceived advantage?

It was the American patriot Benjamin Franklin who said that "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."   

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Unfortunately far too many of those brexit voters aren't understanding the overall impact and benefits of freedom of movement and fail to see why remaining in the EU gives them a general benefit.

A vast majority of Brits do not move nor are interested in it. Nor are interested in suffering the consequences of indulging a few of their globalist compatriots.

[Alan Klein]

Yes you can, especially so when you hear them speak.
Try getting out off your Med island bubble and visiting some of the eastern counties of England where there is a lot of eastern European immigration. Then you'll see and hear why so many people voted for brexit there.

Unfortunately far too many of those brexit voters aren't understanding the overall impact and benefits of freedom of movement and fail to see why remaining in the EU gives them a general benefit.

I suspect they mainly understand what they may lose. But they don;t want Germans, Dutch,  and other foreigners deciding how they should live.  In any case, why not just eliminate the EU rules regarding things political?  Set it up, so that only trade and economic relations are implemented.  The political issues should be left to each of the member nations to decide in their own country.  It would be something like the North America trade agreement between Mexico, Canada and the US, formerly call NAFTA now called USMCA.  Just like there is no country called North America, there is no country called Europe.  Culture, language, history, customs, war, land, climate, etc separate one EU nation from the other.  Viva la difference. 

[jeremyrh]

A vast majority of Brits do not move nor are interested in it. Nor are interested in suffering the consequences of indulging a few of their globalist compatriots.

They aren't suffering - EU immigration has a positive economic effect. Unless you consider hearing foreign accents a negative consequence, of course?

[jeremyrh]

In any case, why not just eliminate the EU rules regarding things political?   

Can you give some examples?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

They aren't suffering - EU immigration has a positive economic effect. Unless you consider hearing foreign accents a negative consequence, of course?

Who’s to say they aren’t? That’s exactly the kind or elitist, patronizing, and condescending attitude that drives people to Brexit - telling them how they must feel. If they feel they are, they are, rightly or wrongly (in your or my opinion). Besides, it is the immigration from outside the E.U. that matters more today.

[32BT]

They aren't suffering - EU immigration has a positive economic effect.

For whom?

Lower prices have negative economical benefit if it coincides with losing your job. 

Like I said earlier: that benefit is only applicable if you have nine wealthy nations and add a tenth. Not if you add 25 countries of questionable economic and sociocultural ethos.

[jeremyrh]

Who’s to say they aren’t? That’s exactly the kind or elitist, patronizing, and condescending attitude that drives people to Brexit - telling them how they must feel. If they feel they are, they are, rightly or wrongly (in your or my opinion). Besides, it is the immigration from outside the E.U. that matters more today.

I specifically mentioned the economic impact - which is easier to measure than other effects. For me it's also positive that the many Eastern Europeans I come across in a personal and professional context are good people, even if their passport has weird spelling.

As for non-EU immigrants, your view are well-known here, but not really relevant to a discussion of Brexit.