Brexit Begins

[RandBlade]

It's bigger than 26. Are you actually trying to compare the % for second referendum with the % no deal got in a totally different question?

Its bigger than 26% when that 26% is in with other leave-options that don't exist next week too.

Put Second Referendum in with other options that don't exist and see how it fairs.

Yeah, but assuming we don't no deal, then what? Were people saying revoke article 50 saying "just give up on Brexit entirely", or were they saying "Revoke Article 50 to buy time, then invoke it again when we've decided what we actually want to do".

They were saying to give up on Brexit entirely. Obviously.

Right, so the question you referenced is about the immediate next steps, the one I referenced is about finding the final outcome to Brexit.

With a limited and odd selection of options. And where Leave collectively beats the solitary Remain option provided.

The equivalence is if Remain was split into "Revoke immediately", "Second referendum and then revoke" and "General election and then revoke" and Leave was a unitary option that beat all 3 of those but revoke collectively beat Leave.

[Hazir]

God, just leave already.

[RandBlade]

Give us a good deal and we will.

[Unheard Of]

Perhaps we could try working out what we consider to be a good deal, and ask the rest of the EU for that.

Perhaps we should have done that before invoking article 50.

[RandBlade]

Perhaps we could try working out what we consider to be a good deal, and ask the rest of the EU for that.

Perhaps we should have done that before invoking article 50.

We have. No backstop.

We did. But the EU refused to negotiate before we invoked article 50 and this backstop nonsense only came about after we invoked article 50.

[gogobongopop]

We have. No backstop.

We did. But the EU refused to negotiate before we invoked article 50 and this backstop nonsense only came about after we invoked article 50.

No we haven't and no we didn't. The parliamentary debacle happening right now is evidence of that.

There was absolutely no effort to try and draw any kind of Tory or Parliamentary consensus of what Brexit looked like before Article 50 was triggered. May thought she had all the answers and could do it all on her own.

Stop trying to shift the blame on the EU. Stop whining. Accept the deal, implement whatever we're told is the easy "solution" to the border, and get your Brexit.

[RandBlade]

I agree that May has been incompetent but yes there was a consensus.

Brexit meant reclaiming controls over our laws, borders, customs and ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ. The EU insisted the 4 freedoms were indivisible and we couldn't have that and remain members of the Single Market. So we agreed we would leave the EU Single Market and Customs Union. Before Article 50 was invoked.

The solution to the border is to compromise. There's no need to compromise if one party gets all it wants if we don't compromise. Don't you understand that?

[gogobongopop]

I agree that May has been incompetent but yes there was a consensus.

Brexit meant reclaiming controls over our laws, borders, customs and ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ. The EU insisted the 4 freedoms were indivisible and we couldn't have that and remain members of the Single Market. So we agreed we would leave the EU Single Market and Customs Union. Before Article 50 was invoked.

You say there was a consensus; but I don't believe it. For example, Labour have always said they wanted to stay in a Customs Union; and so do many Conservatives.

The solution to the border is to compromise. There's no need to compromise if one party gets all it wants if we don't compromise. Don't you understand that?

No, I don't understand. You and other leavers have said it isn't an issue. You've all said it's nothing to worry about. You've all said it's easy to address. You've all said it won't impact the GFA. So we won't even need to invoke the backstop because you'll have removed the need to do so shortly after.

The backstop was our idea. The EU have compromised as far as they are willing to go without what they see as putting the GFA at risk. Our own Government clearly believes that too. That's a good thing, right? Or are you saying that they are wrong; or are you saying that peace between the UK and Ireland is worth jeopardising?

And stop using silly language like "Brexit meant reclaiming control of our laws", implying the EU ruled us entirely. The truth is that we always had control over our laws, and made some of our laws collaboratively with others.

[Hazir]

The red lines were not on the ballot and the backstop was a UK proposal. Just saying.

[RandBlade]

You say there was a consensus; but I don't believe it. For example, Labour have always said they wanted to stay in a Customs Union; and so do many Conservatives.

You said "Tory or Parliamentary consensus", there was a Tory consensus that we would leave the Customs Union. There was also a Parliamentary consensus to do so. From memory Parliament has voted against the Customs Union 6 or 7 times so far. Oh and Labour weren't always saying they wanted to stay in the Customs Union they stayed studiously ambiguous on the matter until well after May made her call and picked that as a line to oppose the Tories over.

No, I don't understand. You and other leavers have said it isn't an issue. You've all said it's nothing to worry about. You've all said it's easy to address. You've all said it won't impact the GFA. So we won't even need to invoke the backstop because you'll have removed the need to do so shortly after.

The backstop was our idea. The EU have compromised as far as they are willing to go without what they see as putting the GFA at risk. Our own Government clearly believes that too. That's a good thing, right? Or are you saying that they are wrong; or are you saying that peace between the UK and Ireland is worth jeopardising?

And stop using silly language like "Brexit meant reclaiming control of our laws", implying the EU ruled us entirely. The truth is that we always had control over our laws, and made some of our laws collaboratively with others.

It's not an issue and it was not our idea. Varadkar has repeatedly said there'd be no hard border in any circumstances, even a no deal Brexit, so the backstop is clearly not needed.

We don't have control over our laws since the laws made 'collaborative with others' are irreversible. A fundamental principle of our Parliamentary democracy is the principle that "no Parliament can bind its successor" and the EU drives a stake through its heart. Blair/Brown knew Lisbon was loathed in this country, knew we'd reject it given a chance, so denied us a say, had no mandate to agree it and agreed it anyway. Then we couldn't reverse it. We the people never approved Lisbon either directly or indirectly and it is undemocratic as a result. Under standard democratic principles if a government passes a bad law we get to elect a new government to reverse it. That's not possible with the EU.

[Khendraja'aro]

You absolutely adore the IRA/ULA bombing the shit out of people, then. Good to know.

Good thing those guys don't know who you are or they might be tempted to make an example of the likes of you.

[RandBlade]

I don't kowtow to terrorists thank you.

[Khendraja'aro]

You're enabling them with your "No Backstop" talk. In all this time, have you never stopped to think for even a nanosecond WHY this is such an important issue for Ireland?

Also: This kind of shit you're currently pulling will make a second peace initiative much harder. Because you've shown everyone that you cannot be trusted to stay committed to upholding the peace.

[RandBlade]

Just because something is important doesn't mean it can't be a bridge too far. We are not demanding they don't diverge from us.

[Khendraja'aro]

You guys are the one who are doing the leaving - unilaterally. Thus the onus is on you to discover how to maintain the agreement.

Also, you still haven't grasped how this all works in international law.

And of course it's "important". Again - your ilk would be directly responsible for making bombs explode again because you broke the treaty.

[Hazir]

The UK is not a trusted partner.

[Unheard Of]

And of course it's "important". Again - your ilk would be directly responsible for making bombs explode again because you broke the treaty.

I'm pro-remain but I am interested to know which part of the treaty the UK will break if we leave the EU.

[Hazir]

I'm pro-remain but I am interested to know which part of the treaty the UK will break if we leave the EU.

This is what you consider a serious question concerning an agreement that was entered into with the expressed intention of improving the relations on the island of Ireland and between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom?

You bloody have the gal to ask which part was violated of a trust building exercise? I think it would be pretty fucking obvious that the part that is being violated is where the UK commits to ending 7 decades of conflict using the fact that the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are facilitated to do so by their joint membership of the European Union.

That is the basis under the agreement you are kicking from under it. Conveniently having forgotten that in exchange for it the Republic of Ireland recognized your sovereign rights in Northern Ireland.

[Unheard Of]

Thank you for the histrionics, but I'm just trying to find out what K thinks. I do not think that breaching the spirit or the text of the GFA is a good idea.

[Timbuk2]

I don't think you'll find it was the natives that rebelled against King George.

I don't think you'll find British colonialism is remotely analogous to British membership of the EU.

[RandBlade]

You guys are the one who are doing the leaving - unilaterally. Thus the onus is on you to discover how to maintain the agreement.

Also, you still haven't grasped how this all works in international law.

And of course it's "important". Again - your ilk would be directly responsible for making bombs explode again because you broke the treaty.

Yes we are leaving. That is our democratic right. Doesn't mean anything you followed with.

Leaving does not violate the Treaty so that's moot. Furthermore we have a right to Leave as the Irish voters recognised when they ratified Article 50 in the Lisbon Treaty which was after the GFA was agreed.

Us exercising our rights does not put the onus on us. Find me one clause of the GFA we are violating or that says the onus is on us.

[Khendraja'aro]

I'm pro-remain but I am interested to know which part of the treaty the UK will break if we leave the EU.

This here sums it up pretty nicely: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

[Khendraja'aro]

Yes we are leaving. That is our democratic right. Doesn't mean anything you followed with.

Leaving does not violate the Treaty so that's moot. Furthermore we have a right to Leave as the Irish voters recognised when they ratified Article 50 in the Lisbon Treaty which was after the GFA was agreed.

Us exercising our rights does not put the onus on us. Find me one clause of the GFA we are violating or that says the onus is on us.

You really are a bloody moron. You only talk about what's your "right" and what you're allowed to do.

But you never, NEVER talk about the CONSEQUENCES, you piece of shit.

This is PRECISELY the attitude which kills people. This is precisely the shitty attitude the Irish are fucking sick and tired of because you still think you're their liege lords. After having raped them for centuries.

Fuck off already and let your country wither and die. We don't care anymore.

[RandBlade]

The consequences are for all parties to deal with, not one. We should co-operate to avoid any barriers just as we co-operate on a plethora of other areas where the Irish have diverged without any issues.

[Unheard Of]

This here sums it up pretty nicely: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-46988529

I think leaving the EU breaks the assumptions and spirit of the the GFA. A hard customs border would breach the spirit of the agreement, but not the text. A militarised border would breach the GFA. I've not seen anyone proposing to do this. Have you?

What we should do is step away from this madness. There's no sign that anyone in power will do this so I expect we'll leave the EU next week. I hope we don't.

Fuck off already and let your country wither and die. We don't care anymore.

I understand your frustration with Randy but he's not the only person in this country. The country is likely to wither economically, but wishing death on the lot of us seems a little harsh.

[Hazir]

You will probably not leave next week and I don't even know if you are going to be leaving at all.

[GGT]

I think I have to agree with RandBlade that the UK and EU simply were an extremely ill fit. What the Brits never got though was that if you're the odd one out in a group of 28 nations you can't expect all the others to adapt to you.

But they knew that going in, so what changed? Why the regrets and second-thoughts?
Timbuk might be right that immigration played a role (the timing fits at least).

Brexit meant reclaiming controls over our laws, borders, customs and ending the jurisdiction of the ECJ. The EU insisted the 4 freedoms were indivisible and we couldn't have that and remain members of the Single Market. So we agreed we would leave the EU Single Market and Customs Union. Before Article 50 was invoked.

But "leave" wasn't unanimous. Didn't a majority in Northern Ireland and Scotland vote to stay? (I don't recall the specifics, just that your constituencies didn't agree.)

We don't have control over our laws since the laws made 'collaborative with others' are irreversible. A fundamental principle of our Parliamentary democracy is the principle that "no Parliament can bind its successor" and the EU drives a stake through its heart. <snip> Under standard democratic principles if a government passes a bad law we get to elect a new government to reverse it. That's not possible with the EU.

Then you'd be okay with a unified Ireland, or Scotland or Wales wanting to be their own sovereign states, and leaving the UK? You just gave good reasons for all that to happen in the name of self-determination/self-rule. Especially if they want to stay in the EU but are prevented by UK's decisions. Slippery slope there, huh?

This is getting pretty deep in the weeds here with all the details of "the deals", but maybe you could go back to the beginning and explain how you got to Brexit in the first place. With something more specific than reclaiming laws, borders, customs and ECJ jurisdiction. Was immigration the tipping point?

[RandBlade]

But they knew that going in, so what changed? Why the regrets and second-thoughts?
Timbuk might be right that immigration played a role (the timing fits at least).

The EU and UK evolved in two diametrically different ways. When the UK joined the EEC it was a very socialist country and the 'sick man of Europe'. The EEC was a very economically liberal project that was breaking down barriers between nations and putting in restrictions against state subsidies and controls which is why it was vehemently-opposed by the far left [Foot etc] of which current Labour leader and lifelong Eurosceptic Jeremy Corbyn is a legacy of that. It was backed by business and the Tories.


Change began in the 80s with Thatcher transforming the UK from a sick socialist nation to a thriving capitalist one. So the UK moved from left to right. The completion of the Single Market was arguably one of Thatcher's major goals and achievements. But then came Jacques Delors who began transforming the EU from being a liberalising project to a social one. The "Social Chapter" etc that came with Maastricht was not part of the EEC we joined. The EU rather than lowering barriers started to more and more erect its own and Delors championed this to the Trade Union Conference which was berated by Thatcher. So whereas 40 years ago the right backed the EEC and the left opposed it, as the two had moved in opposite directions now the right opposed it and the left backed it. The EEC has changed since we joined it, as its name change reflects, but we've changed too.

But "leave" wasn't unanimous. Didn't a majority in Northern Ireland and Scotland vote to stay? (I don't recall the specifics, just that your constituencies didn't agree.)

It doesn't need to be unanimous, democracy is majority-rules not unanimity-rules. As for NI and Scotland their votes count equally to anyone else's but they're not a majority of the UK nor should they get a veto. They face the UK's decision same as anyone else.

Then you'd be okay with a unified Ireland, or Scotland or Wales wanting to be their own sovereign states, and leaving the UK? You just gave good reasons for all that to happen in the name of self-determination/self-rule. Especially if they want to stay in the EU but are prevented by UK's decisions. Slippery slope there, huh?

I support that yes.

This is getting pretty deep in the weeds here with all the details of "the deals", but maybe you could go back to the beginning and explain how you got to Brexit in the first place. With something more specific than reclaiming laws, borders, customs and ECJ jurisdiction. Was immigration the tipping point?

Not for me no but for others yes it was a tipping point.

The Lisbon Treaty was a major tipping point for a lot of people too.

Cameron's failed renegotiation was the tipping point for me.

[Hazir]

Yeah right. And whatever.

Guess we'll have to sit your tantrum out. Mama Merkel is not going to decide anything other than keep things as they are. And the rest will follow. Brexit is dead.

[RandBlade]

What tantrum? I answered some questions politely.