Topic: Brexit Encore (Read 149954 times)

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #820 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:07:51 pm »

Quote from: jeremyrh on August 28, 2019, 01:05:29 pm

... Conservative MPs voted according to Party instructions rather than according to the good of the country...

Defined how? I thought the populus already voted 51/49 that "the good of the country" is to leave?

jeremyrh · « **Reply #821 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:11:40 pm »

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on August 28, 2019, 01:07:51 pm

Defined how? I thought the populus already voted 51/49 that "the good of the country" is to leave?

The good of the country as they saw it. Many MPs agreed that "no deal" would be a disaster for the country but they still enabled it.

A very small majority voted to leave but there was no statement on how.

James Clark · « **Reply #822 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:32:02 pm »

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on August 28, 2019, 12:39:28 pm

A populist is someone who does what populus (people) want. Seems like a definition of democracy to me, no?

No.

But Hamilton argues it as well as I could. Maybe even better.

. Read the whole thing.

"Nothing is more common than for a free people, in times of heat and violence, to gratify momentary passions, by letting into the government, principles and precedents which afterwards prove fatal to themselves."

RSL · « **Reply #823 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:34:02 pm »

Exactly. The history of the French Revolution says it all.

That principle is why the United States has a Constitutional Republic instead of a democracy.

Alan Klein · « **Reply #824 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:38:46 pm »

Quote from: Bart_van_der_Wolf on August 28, 2019, 12:56:53 pm

And that means for the minority, what?

Elections have consequences.

Alan Klein · « **Reply #825 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:40:19 pm »

Quote from: jeremyrh on August 28, 2019, 01:05:29 pm

You are partly correct. The reason Parliament didn't vote down Brexit, or didn't get a version of an agreement that they couid agree to, was that when the chips were down Conservative MPs voted according to Party instructions rather than according to the good of the country, so they gave May the excuse to carry N with her unworkable plan.

Wouldn't half a loaf be better than no loaf at all?

jeremyrh · « **Reply #826 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:45:07 pm »

Quote from: Alan Klein on August 28, 2019, 01:40:19 pm

Wouldn't half a loaf be better than no loaf at all?

Not sure what you're referring to :-)

Alan Klein · « **Reply #827 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:45:43 pm »

Quote from: RSL on August 28, 2019, 01:34:02 pm

Exactly. The history of the French Revolution says it all.

That principle is why the United States has a Constitutional Republic instead of a democracy.

It's why we have an electoral college electing the president and why the original Constitution Had State legislatures selecting the two senators from their state. It was only in the 20th century that senators were elected by popular vote do to a change in the Constitution.

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #828 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:47:11 pm »

Quote from: Bart_van_der_Wolf on August 28, 2019, 01:38:14 pm

... the majority voted against or didn't vote at all...

Haha... that is new definition of democracy. How did you come up with that? You "know" how those who didn't vote would have voted!? You better get a job as a political consultant for aspiring candidates, given your clairvoyant and mind-reading skills.

Use it or lose it.

Alan Klein · « **Reply #829 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:48:21 pm »

Quote from: jeremyrh on August 28, 2019, 01:45:07 pm

Not sure what you're referring to :-)

Neithet side got all of what they wanted in May's 2 agreements with the EU. If they had agreed thoughon one of them they would at least have gotten something of what they wanted. Now with a hard brexit they get nothing of anything.

jeremyrh · « **Reply #830 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:50:25 pm »

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on August 28, 2019, 01:47:11 pm

Haha... that is new definition of democracy. How did you come up with that? You "know" how those who didn't vote would have voted!? You better get a job as a political consultant for aspiring candidates, given your clairvoyant and mind-reading skills.

Use it or lose it.

That's not what he said, is it?

The majority of voters voted for Brexit, and to quote someone or other, we need to make sure they get it, good and hard. It's a minor consolation to me that a lot of the Brexit supporters will pay for it with their jobs.

RSL · « **Reply #831 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:51:24 pm »

Quote from: Bart_van_der_Wolf on August 28, 2019, 01:38:14 pm

And as a result, a minority of the populus dictates their will-of-the-day to the majority.

In the UK, it was a minority of the populus that does the same. Some voted for Brexit, and the majority voted against or didn't vote at all. And now the majority must "suck it up".

I'll have to see if I can run it down, Bart. There was an interesting post, I think on Facebook, about that, showing that if we had a straight democracy, New York and California would drive the whole country. Looking at where they've been driving themselves that would mean the end of the United States. You guys would be on your own. Heaven forfend.

jeremyrh · « **Reply #832 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:52:21 pm »

Quote from: Alan Klein on August 28, 2019, 01:48:21 pm

Neithet side got all of what they wanted in May's 2 agreements with the EU. If they had agreed thoughon one of them they would at least have gotten something of what they wanted. Now with a hard brexit they get nothing of anything.

Oh, I see, yes. Well, the right wing get what they wanted. They are now saying "the public voted for Brexit so we can't delay any more" - funny that they didn't seem to care about that when voting down May's WA.

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #833 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:52:42 pm »

Quote from: James Clark on August 28, 2019, 01:32:02 pm

No...

Where are we? In kindergarten? We are now debating the dawn of democracy, where the majority could potentially (or really) slaughter the minority after an election? Or are we talking about modern times where there are ample constitutional and legal protections for those who lose an election?

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #834 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:54:05 pm »

Quote from: Bart_van_der_Wolf on August 28, 2019, 01:50:59 pm

I don't pretend to know how they voted, but you apparently assume that 50% or more of the non-voters would have voted in favor of leaving ... Talk about clairvoyant skills.

I do not assume anything. Those who could, but didn't vote, do not matter. Use it or lose it.

Alan Klein · « **Reply #835 on:** August 28, 2019, 01:54:18 pm »

Quote from: James Clark on August 28, 2019, 01:32:02 pm

No.

But Hamilton argues it as well as I could. Maybe even better. . Read the whole thing.

"Nothing is more common than for a free people, in times of heat and violence, to gratify momentary passions, by letting into the government, principles and precedents which afterwards prove fatal to themselves."

The recent the whole Amazon is burning Fiasco is a perfect example of that. If the world could they would have strung up the president of Brazil. Yet most of it was a lot of hyperventilation and exaggeration. Whole Amazon wasn't on fire. The lungs of the world will not be destroyed. But it points out to an important principle that popular opinion can become hysterical. The founders knew this and why they Limited the Senate and the presidency to the Electoral College. Passions can become very dangerous. People are dangerous.