The last thread was full of abuse. This one is full of questions. I do think your flounce is probably a good idea, because I’m not sure you’re listening, and that never ends well.
On that basis alone, it is probably worth buggering off the thread. It would have been nice to hear what you thought was so gamechanging about Brexit - The Uncivil War.
I have no intention of letting this go down previous abusive paths, so the following is said in the spirit of hopefully encouraging a more mature discussion… but I think you are over simplifying what some folks are saying
A democratic vote was held on a specific question. A democratic decision was made to leave the EU. And that however we feel about it was that we should now leave the EU
BUT there are two very reasonable perhaps more philosophical questions that many feel are perfectly democratic to ask, namely:
Now we are leaving, the big question is HOW do we leave? Abruptly with no deal or staged with various deals, or soft compromising on some things? The British public has NOT yet been asked this question so it is perfectly democratic and honouring the referendum to ask this question now, especially as HOW we leave will have various level of impact. If we are saying we should TRUST MPs to decide this, then we should be very worried as IMHO, they are not thinking about a democratic process, but only about how to try and get enough votes to win a GE… without offering anything on what they would do differently…
We have not (especially brexiteers) been asked if we would be willing to accept a compromise that ensure we left the EU and regained aspects that were important to people in exchange for some concessions if it meant we still maintained some of the benefits… we could argue that in many respects that is a MUCH more important democratic question
This is not about the minority not accepting teh ref result, its about asking a DIFFERENT question, so forgive my if I dont…
Perhaps more difficult, and in truth in part where much of previous debate became derailed was about the question of whether democracy can ever actually be seen to served when decisions are made following such a shit fest of misinformation, lies, deceit and a huge amount of ignorance as to the implications of what was being voted for? This is open to discussion, as I am not sure its an easy question to answer (if folks are open to an intelligent discussion on it)… its a question that questions how we define democracy and how much importance we should or should not place on how informed the electorate should be before being asked to make a decision…
… IMHO, there were other factors in play at the time such as the lurch to more authoritarian and ‘anti-establishment’ POVs following 10 years of global austerity and IMHO this was not insignificant in how people reacted when given a chance to challenge existing power structures. This is obviously a broader question, but again, it boils down to whether we feel our definition of democracy is really served when the issues and influences are so complex, often outside of the question at hand (for example, those folks who felt leaving the EU would prevent more ‘‘mullahs’’ from outside the EU from entering the country… I use this as an example of impact of global politics and refugee problems (the Syrian refugee crisis was at its peak leading into the referendum) - One would have to be very naive indeed if one did not think this issue contributed to the ‘migrant’ issue - naturally fed upon by cunts like Farage and his posters of immigrants that had an obvious ‘middle-eastern’ look about them… when the only fair and reasonable migration question was about freedom of movement of WU nationals within the EU…
Its easy to suggest that this may only have effected a minority… we don’t know, but given how big an issue immigration was for many people, its not unreasonable to suggest that such mis-information did feed their fears and genuine concerns… this is what I meant by the perfect storm of opportunity for those seeking to split the Tories using this issue… and its worked. It was always calculated as even if Corbyn were now to win and election, he will inherit a shit of a mess that will be impossible to put right within even 2 terms… he won’t get that long with this electorate.
Ed Davey made me chuckle today with his bare faced hypocrisy, when asked about a 2nd referendum and if that was given why couldn’t a 3rd one be given afterwards his reply was it should be on the mp’s manifesto for that to be given in the next election ignoring the fact that so should the 2nd one as well.
These EU extremists will try anything to override, ignore and usurp democracy.
I can safely predict guys and gals that tomorrow will unify us all in it being an absolute shitshow.
The art of laying down wine, involves having sufficient quantities on wine on hand at any particular time so you are not tempted to get you snorkel into the ageing stuff. In practice that means 100 to 150 bottles kicking around the house.