UK Referendum Thread [Moderator Sanctioned]

[Ostroeuropa]

Though of course Brexit is likely to lead us to having to join the Schengen area. The irony.

How do you figure?

Because we'll probably join the EEA.

[Imperializt Russia]

Though of course Brexit is likely to lead us to having to join the Schengen area. The irony.

How do you figure?

EEAs have only been granted for Schengen before. The UK's exception to Schengen was unique.
And, forcing us to adopt Schengen for daring to walk out, that's the kind of delicious revenge I expect.

[Freefall11111]

How do you figure?

Because we'll probably join the EEA.

There are EEA members that aren't part of Schengen, and Schengen members that aren't part of EEA.

[Risottia]

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215
Petition has now breached three million signatures, and still a good 24 hours to go before it is actually considered for parliamentary debate.

No backsies, Britain. Try to be serious about it.

Get out and apply for membership again in some years, from scratch.

[Imperializt Russia]

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215
Petition has now breached three million signatures, and still a good 24 hours to go before it is actually considered for parliamentary debate.

No backsies, Britain. Try to be serious about it.

Get out and apply for membership again in some years, from scratch.

Make me.

[Neu Leonstein]

No backsies, Britain. Try to be serious about it.

Get out and apply for membership again in some years, from scratch.

It's not really about backsies. It's about sending a message to the people who are going to be running the negotiations to make sure they know what they should be working towards. And that is damage limitation - if the UK could get something even close to the deal Norway has it would be a major success, but if it's at all possible it's only possible if the UK's leaders are committed to achieving it. The petition is just a way to send them that message.

[Arkinesia]

At least Farage is finally being (partly) honest. But the UK wasn't “already on track to a recession,” nevertheless, I'll give him a pass on that.

[Neu Leonstein]

At least Farage is finally being (partly) honest. But the UK wasn't “already on track to a recession,” nevertheless, I'll give him a pass on that.

"Increased global opportunities"... like what? Goddammit, he's not being honest in the least. He should be talking about the negotiations Brussels wants to start on Tuesday, not about what camp he would like the next Prime Minister to be from. It's time to put domestic politics aside for a bit.

[The Alma Mater]

At least Farage is finally being (partly) honest. But the UK wasn't “already on track to a recession,” nevertheless, I'll give him a pass on that.

"Increased global opportunities"... like what?

Whole new opportunities to sign trade-agreements that are considerably less lucrative than they could have been, of course.

[Great Nepal]

"Increased global opportunities"... like what?

Whole new opportunities to sign trade-agreements that are considerably less lucrative than they could have been, of course.

With our army free trade negotiators whose aged 62 and up at minimum (if an 18 year old was hired in 1973)

[Vassenor]

52-48 Remain: "The issue isn't settled and we need a second referendum"

52-48 Leave: "The People have spoken and there's no turning back"

[Minzerland]

No, It wasn't xenophobic, it didn't express hate, prejudice, dislike or bigotry for foreigners. It is relevant to the EU, therefore it was relevant enough.

Of course it was xenophobic. It was designed to play on the fears, hates, prejudices and bigotry for foreigners - specifically, in the current climate, muslims fleeing the civil wars in the middle east - that already exist.

I disagree, it was designed to rile people up on the inaction of the EU, and how little they care about whom enters the continent; in other words make people dislike the EU. The play on prejudice, fears etc. is merely a side affect.

[Marcurix]

Of course it was xenophobic. It was designed to play on the fears, hates, prejudices and bigotry for foreigners - specifically, in the current climate, muslims fleeing the civil wars in the middle east - that already exist.

I disagree, it was designed to rile people up on the inaction of the EU, and how little they care about whom enters the continent; in other words make people dislike the EU. The play on prejudice, fears etc. is merely a side affect.

It was the whole intent and you damn well know it.

Grove knew it, you had an MP switch sides over it. The least you could do is own up to it and not try to sweep it under the rug, as Leave did so much else.

[Vassenor]

Video evidence emerges of Nigel Farage pledging EU millions for NHS weeks before Brexit vote

You know that thing Nigel never said? Turns out he did say it after all.

[Lesser Mackonia]

50%+1 referenda are not democratic, they're rubber-stamping exercises in which colossal issues are demeaned to a single word to be chanted.

Let's all quietly get over that fact.

WHY CAN'T YOU ALL JUST AGREE WITH ME!!!

Look, I've always been against democracy, but it is a staggering degree of hypocrisy to see those who sing its praises heavenwards daily suddenly remove the cloth from their eyes the moment it doesn't go their way. This is not a "rubber-stamping exercise", for that implies the consent is merely ceremonial for a pre-established decision. Which the decision to leave the EU was not. This was a closely fought campaign which resulted in an entirely legitimate result which accurately reflected public opinion. No matter how much the North London media are trying to paint it otherwise. Yes, this is a very narrow result, but it is still a majority, there is no more reason for us to just accept the status quo by the same grounds you'd critique adopting this result.

Oh and don't give me that "but teh lies of da leave campaign!" People are entirely able to research these things by themselves, turning the NHS and immigration into political footballs was smart politics. For the last time: "the Leave campaign" cannot make any domestic promises, the whole point of sovereignty is that it will lie with the UK government - the decision to cut immigration, allocate those funds to the NHS or join the EEA instead of EFTA or a separate trade deal all lie with the UK government. The Leave Campaign did not and could not make any promises on executing these policies, it merely said we would now have the control over them and the ability to do so if we should so choose. These criticisms are spurious.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

"Increased global opportunities"... like what?

Whole new opportunities to sign trade-agreements that are considerably less lucrative than they could have been, of course.

Atleast they will be British trade agreements instead of being forced upon them by Brussels.

[Marcurix]

Whole new opportunities to sign trade-agreements that are considerably less lucrative than they could have been, of course.

Atleast they will be British trade agreements instead of being forced upon them by Brussels.

Yea, it's not like our influence in those negotiations was influential or anything. Not something sought by nations like Canada or China to help craft a deal.

That would be silly now, wouldn't it?

[Imperializt Russia]

50%+1 referenda are not democratic, they're rubber-stamping exercises in which colossal issues are demeaned to a single word to be chanted.

Let's all quietly get over that fact.

WHY CAN'T YOU ALL JUST AGREE WITH ME!!!

Look, I've always been against democracy, but it is a staggering degree of hypocrisy to see those who sing its praises heavenwards daily suddenly remove the cloth from their eyes the moment it doesn't go their way. This is not a "rubber-stamping exercise", for that implies the consent is merely ceremonial for a pre-established decision. Which the decision to leave the EU was not. This was a closely fought campaign which resulted in an entirely legitimate result which accurately reflected public opinion. No matter how much the North London media are trying to paint it otherwise. Yes, this is a very narrow result, but it is still a majority, there is no more reason for us to just accept the status quo by the same grounds you'd critique adopting this result.

Oh and don't give me that "but teh lies of da leave campaign!" People are entirely able to research these things by themselves, turning the NHS and immigration into political footballs was smart politics. For the last time: "the Leave campaign" cannot make any domestic promises, the whole point of sovereignty is that it will lie with the UK government - the decision to cut immigration, allocate those funds to the NHS or join the EEA instead of EFTA or a separate trade deal all lie with the UK government. The Leave Campaign did not and could not make any promises on executing these policies, it merely said we would now have the control over them and the ability to do so if we should so choose. These criticisms are spurious.

The meaning of that whole "ban" thing sure slipped your mind, huh?

[Lesser Mackonia]

WHY CAN'T YOU ALL JUST AGREE WITH ME!!!

Look, I've always been against democracy, but it is a staggering degree of hypocrisy to see those who sing its praises heavenwards daily suddenly remove the cloth from their eyes the moment it doesn't go their way. This is not a "rubber-stamping exercise", for that implies the consent is merely ceremonial for a pre-established decision. Which the decision to leave the EU was not. This was a closely fought campaign which resulted in an entirely legitimate result which accurately reflected public opinion. No matter how much the North London media are trying to paint it otherwise. Yes, this is a very narrow result, but it is still a majority, there is no more reason for us to just accept the status quo by the same grounds you'd critique adopting this result.

Oh and don't give me that "but teh lies of da leave campaign!" People are entirely able to research these things by themselves, turning the NHS and immigration into political footballs was smart politics. For the last time: "the Leave campaign" cannot make any domestic promises, the whole point of sovereignty is that it will lie with the UK government - the decision to cut immigration, allocate those funds to the NHS or join the EEA instead of EFTA or a separate trade deal all lie with the UK government. The Leave Campaign did not and could not make any promises on executing these policies, it merely said we would now have the control over them and the ability to do so if we should so choose. These criticisms are spurious.

The meaning of that whole "ban" thing sure slipped your mind, huh?

No, if you had the slightest logical faculties you'd see how someone posting around the ban implies they've taken it into account.

[Imperializt Russia]

The meaning of that whole "ban" thing sure slipped your mind, huh?

No, if you had the slightest logical faculties you'd see how someone posting around the ban implies they've taken it into account.

It rather defeats the point of being "banned" to "post past ban".
Hence why it itself is a bannable offence.

[Frank Zipper]

Whole new opportunities to sign trade-agreements that are considerably less lucrative than they could have been, of course.

Atleast they will be British trade agreements instead of being forced upon them by Brussels.

Well not the one we will have to negotiate with Europe, because I can't think what leverage we will have.

[Minzerland]

It was the whole intent and you damn well know it.

No, I don't give two shits about what you want me to know.

Grove knew it, you had an MP switch sides over it. The least you could do is own up to it and not try to sweep it under the rug, as Leave did so much else.

"When I saw that poster, I shuddered. I thought it was the wrong thing to do."

Michael Gove thought it was the wrong thing to do, he didn't elaborate on why; this isn't conformation of 'xenophobia'.

I disagree with her.

[Lesser Mackonia]

No, if you had the slightest logical faculties you'd see how someone posting around the ban implies they've taken it into account.

It rather defeats the point of being "banned" to "post past ban".
Hence why it itself is a bannable offence.

Are you actually going to bother refuting my point or drown yourself in legalistic semantics?

[Minzerland]

Domino effect...

Nope. If UK become worser than within the EU it might be a domino effect.

Domino effect, as in more people are calling for a referendum.

[Neu Leonstein]

The Leave Campaign did not and could not make any promises on executing these policies, it merely said we would now have the control over them and the ability to do so if we should so choose. These criticisms are spurious.

This would be true if it wasn't so wrong. The reasons they presented were "we'll do this, and we'll do that" - though mostly it was just "you know everything that you don't like about the world? Turns out it's the EU's fault!". On immigration, on spending, on the NHS and so on. They did not campaign on "maybe we'll do this, or maybe we'll do that, but we'll figure it out later".

And worst of all is that apparently the Leave campaign leaders with designs on the PM job did not actually make plans for what they would do in the days after they won. It really seems like they just expected Cameron to sort all that out for them. It's gross incompetence, if you look at it charitably, and it runs exactly counter to the notion that now the UK can decide what to do. If the negotiations with the EU are handled poorly, the UK is deprived of a great many policy options.