BBO Discussion Forums: EU Brexit thread - BBO Discussion Forums

 onoway, on 2016-July-03, 15:35, said:

Gove is unlikely to be rewarded by the Conservative members, who are reportedly angry about his "betrayal" of BoJo. He is also unlikely to be rewarded by May, since they allegedly dislike each other. It may well be that his primary purpose in the leadership contest will be to bring down Leadsom so as to be able to position himself as the only credible Leave candidate. We are already seeing stories emerging about her, which is typical Gove strategy taken straight from the Urquhart playbook. If he succeeds in that then I think May is a shoe-in; if not and Leadsom comes up against May in a final vote, it might get interesting...

lol Nigel Farage is out too. Looking forward to the day when Corbyn is delivering his thunder speeches to an empty house of commons (yes, I know that NF was not an MP) because they have all killed each other.

We certainly are living through interesting times. Some legal firm has been engaged by a consortium of Bremainers to try to ensure that Article 50 cannot be invoked without first passing an Act of Parliament. Which would quite likely not pass, given that most politicians are Bremainers even if the electorate are not. Imagine the constitutional brouhaha if that gains traction.

On the other hand, maybe the SNP would vote in favour of Article 50 in such a Bill's passage, so that they can then press for a second Scottish independence referendum.

 1eyedjack, on 2016-July-04, 05:51, said:

I don't think so. SNP would try to prevent Brexit or at least pretend to. And most English MPs would vote for article 50 in order not to be seen as anti-democrats.

I suppose it could happen that we get a second referendum at some point and/or a snap election.

But yes, that times are interesting I can agree with. Who knows if the Labour party still exists at the time of the next election, if Scotland and/or NI will leave the UK, if EU (assuming that EU will still exist) will offer UK the option of staying in the EEA and if the UK government will want that.

A few things I am confident about:
- UK will not be a new Yugoslavia. At worst the pound will collapse and we will have to use Euros or maybe USD, but most likely even that won't happen. Scotland and NI might leave but I don't believe that London will.
- Whatever bad happens, The Sun will blame it on the Labour Party and EU, and most people will believe it. Arend, Zel and I will blame it on The Sun and the conservatives, of course.
- The conservatives will win the next election by a landslide.

 1eyedjack, on 2016-July-04, 05:51, said:

If I were to guess, it will go the other way.

All Tory and Labour MPs will vote in favour of such an Act of Parliament. SNP will definitely vote against it...

https://xkcd.com/1521/

 shyams, on 2016-July-04, 06:42, said:

Who knows what the SNP will do. Though on the face of it they look like the one British party with a stable leadership and political position (well perhaps two - the Lib Dems haven't disintegrated yet - though they seem to have become an irrelevance), they seem to me as the most illogical. As far as I can see they want independence from the rest of the UK for what amounts to similar reasons that the UK as a whole wants independence from the EU. Yet they want to stick with the EU! That I can't understand.

 NickRW, on 2016-July-04, 06:59, said:

Some of them might be happy with a UK that had the same power over Scotland as EU currently has.

Or they may feel that current EU policies are more aligned with Scottish policies than English policies are.

Or they may feel that it is better to be part of a union of many small countries than being a small country dominated by a big country. Yeah I know, Germany and France are not small countries, but at least no single country can dictate everything.

Or they may just have anti-English sentiments.

Probably they all have different motives. And probably a substantial number of SNP voters are against EU as well.

 NickRW, on 2016-July-04, 06:59, said:

Do you understand why the Czechs want to be in the EU but not ruled from Berlin as during the 1940s? Or the Poles? Or even the French? It is the same for the Scots with London and represents a perfectly logical and sensible position. Not everyone feels that obeying the rules of a club means giving up one's independence. If a bridge club banned a particular item of clothing of footwear, would you see it as a loss of personal freedom to play there? That is a rather different situation from being forcibly dragged to the table and told to play or be put in prison.

 Zelandakh, on 2016-July-04, 08:07, said:

If the English in reality were an occupying force, similar to the Germans in the 40s, I would see things that way. But I thought union between Scotland and England came about ~300 years ago basically because Scotland had bankrupted itself and needed to be bailed out. Modern Scots don't see it that way of course and I don't blame them, but the two things are hardly similar.

I'm not against Scottish independence. If I still lived there I would have voted in favour of it. But I don't see membership of the EU and abiding by it's rules as anything similar to being a member of a club. Indeed I see it as an abusive relationship and, as with all such things, the sooner you're shot of it the better even if it costs in the short term. So I can understand Scotland wanting out of the UK and I can see the UK wanting out of the EU. I don't really see the sense of the Scots jumping out of the pan and straight back into the fire.

 NickRW, on 2016-July-04, 08:57, said:

Perhaps if you had lived in the Highlands during the years after Culloden you might view the English rather differently from a friendly neighbour bailing your country out after a bad business venture. Given what was done at that time, it is very easy to see these things in a similar light.

 NickRW, on 2016-July-04, 08:57, said:

And here lies your issue in not understanding the point of view of more rational people.

The structure of the EU may be better suited to respect the views of individual (small) countries than the structure of the UK.

Rik

 Trinidad, on 2016-July-04, 10:22, said:

In time the UK may very well become a small country.

 mike777, on 2016-July-04, 10:35, said:

I have considered the UK a small country ever since owning a globe as a child. For its size it has also been an extremely successful country up to now. Hopefully that can continue into the future despite the current events.

yes, even tiny city states have a history of great success.

Monaco, Rome, Hong Kong, Singapore, Athens...etc

I note all of them rely on what today we would call globalization, ready access to trade routes that are protected from vandals and financial markets that provide payment options and credit.

 Zelandakh, on 2016-July-04, 10:00, said:

You have lost the argument and now resort to rudeness.

 NickRW, on 2016-July-05, 02:30, said:

Oh yes, I am sure everyone here now believes that membership of the EU constitutes an abusive relationship. Well done on "winning" this one.

 Zelandakh, on 2016-July-05, 07:26, said:

For every winner there has to be at least 1 loser (financially) and that is why extra levels of bureaucracy are created and end up "abusing" all of the participants. A zero sum game where the vampire squid organizations suck the life out of those involved at a fundamental level.
Point to Nick.

It is very clarifying to see it spelled out that some really think politics is a zero-sum game.

 Zelandakh, on 2016-July-05, 07:26, said:

In a small sense it is an abusive relationship.

Look at some of Juncker's pronouncements both during and after the referendum.

He seems to think it's most important to punish Britain for leaving even if it means doing more harm than is necessary to the rest of Europe.

I actually think Juncker's attitude is what persuaded some of the more educated Brexiteers that this was not a club Britain should belong to.