Brexit - the next steps

[Shaker]

A narrow majority. A majority that could easily have disappeared by now.

Narrow doesn't come into it. A majority is a majority. There's no second prize. It's not Bargain Hunt, where now there are no losers but runners-up; one side lost.

Do you honestly think the leavers would have given up if the difference had been 2% the other way?

Honestly? I don't care.

In my opinion, the wrong decision was made in the referendum

Yes, we know.

and I don't see why I have to pretend I'm OK with it.

I would say maturity, which entails being grown up enough to realise that things don't always go your way; to suck it up, swallow it down and get on with it, just as some of us have done with the Tory hegemony since 1979.

[Harrowby Hall]

Rough guess - you are American?

Now you are being insulting! No, I am a civilised, thoughtful, kind, loving and caring grandfather to four.

[Shaker]

Now you are being insulting! No, I am a civilised, thoughtful, kind, loving and caring grandfather to four.

And that's not remotely insulting at all.

[jeremyp]

Narrow doesn't come into it. A majority is a majority.

Well it does matter actually. Narrow majorities are much more easily reversed than wide ones/.

Honestly? I don't care.

You don't care because the answer is inconvenient for your point. Of course the Leavers would have continued to dissent and good for them.

Yes, we know.I would say maturity, which entails being grown up enough to realise that things don't always go your way; to suck it up, swallow it down and get on with, just as some of us have done with the Tory hegemony since 1979.

So you want to talk about immature? How immature is it not to acknowledge that there was a Labour government between 1997 and 2010?

And actually, no, I don't see Labour supporters "sucking it up". How immature is it that Labour lost the last election and yet, they seem to be claiming it as a triumph? How immature is it that Margaret Thatcher kept getting large majorities and the Labour party of the day didn't just roll over and accept the decision?

The mature thing to do in a democracy, if you believe the wrong decision has been made, is to continue to argue your case in the hope that the decision can be reversed.

[Shaker]

Well it does matter actually. Narrow majorities are much more easily reversed than wide ones.

Tell me why, in a democratic vote, the majority decision should be reversed, without pissing from a great height all over the concept of democracy itself, without explicitly or implicitly invoking "Waaaaagh I don't like it". I'm all ears.

So you want to talk about immature? How immature is it not to acknowledge that there was a Labour government between 1997 and 2010?

That's news to me. I must have dozed off and missed that.

How immature is it that Labour lost the last election and yet, they seem to be claiming it as a triumph?

Who does?

The mature thing to do in a democracy

... is to accept it and get on with it on those precious few and rare occasions that we're allowed to exercise it, because for the most part we aren't. Generally we appoint people that we think will do our bidding who either never believe in the first place or who quickly forget that they are the servants and we are the masters, not vice versa.

The colonials have an amusing thing about it, I think the youngsters call it a meme: http://tinyurl.com/y9qccjgh

[Rhiannon]

Just found out my local Polish store has closed. Sign that Poles are leaving. So sad.

[Shaker]

Just found out my local Polish store has closed. Sign that Poles are leaving. So sad.

Is that the reason?

[Rhiannon]

Is that the reason?

It's known they no longer feel welcome.

[Shaker]

It's known they no longer feel welcome.

Sad if true.

On the other hand, shitloads of businesses of all kinds everywhere close down constantly. Since the smoking ban years back thousands of pubs have closed and continue to close week after month after year*. I don't think anybody suggests that it's because landlords ought to pack up and piss off back to Landlordalia.

* http://tinyurl.com/5vk2jfg

[Rhiannon]

Well I guess if people had voted for me to have no rights of residency and who voted because they wanted me and mine to leave I wouldn't bother running a business here either.

The Leave campaign lied to Brexit voters and the government will lie and lie and lie. If I were from Europe I would head home. Why believe that they will have residency rights or be welcome in our communities any more?

[Shaker]

Well I guess if people had voted for me to have no rights of residency and who voted because they wanted me and mine to leave

Did they, though?

If I were from Europe

Surely spoken like a little Englander - presumably a true European would say that you already were/are.

[Rhiannon]

If you like. Words really don't matter so much as actions and I voted remain in part because I value my European neighbour's and want them to stay. They add life and colour to this place and I am ashamed of what my fucked up 'Little England' has done.

[jeremyp]

Tell me why, in a democratic vote, the majority decision should be reversed,

Because people change their minds.

without pissing from a great height all over the concept of democracy itself

Democracy is not having a vote and then being done with it.

without explicitly or implicitly invoking "Waaaaagh I don't like it".

So when the Tories win elections, the people who oppose them afterwards are invoking "Waaaagh I don't like it" are they?

I'm all ears.That's news to me. I must have dozed off and missed that.

If you are going to debate politics, you really need to be better informed about recent political history. Or is it just that that particular Labour government did things you don't like (and got re-elected twice while doing them) so you are saying "waaaaagh I don't like it".

Who does?

Many many Labour supporters did.

is to accept it and get on with it on those precious few and rare occasions that we're allowed to exercise it, because for the most part we aren't. Generally we appoint people that we think will do our bidding who either never believe in the first place or who quickly forget that they are the servants and we are the masters, not vice versa.

Democracy is not just voting once and then declaring it done. Democracy is - or should be - a continuous process. Nobody who voted in that referendum knew as much as we all know now.

The colonials have an amusing thing about it, I think the youngsters call it a meme: http://tinyurl.com/y9qccjgh

That's pretty immature isn't it - hurling insults at people exercising their democratic rights. People in a democracy who disagree with the majority decision have every right to voice their disagreement. If you don't allow that, you do not have a democracy, you have mob rule.

[jeremyp]

If you like. Words really don't matter so much as actions and I voted remain in part because I value my European neighbour's and want them to stay. They add life and colour to this place and I am ashamed of what my fucked up 'Little England' has done.

Applaud.

We now have 27 new enemies that were friends and allies before. Moreover we have shown ourselves to be insular small minded people who'd rather live in the 1950's than the 2020's.

[Shaker]

Because people change their minds.

Although the evidence of people having done so re: Brexit is at the very best confused and contradictory.

Democracy is not having a vote and then being done with it.

In this case it is. It's not the fucking hokey cokey.

So when the Tories win elections, the people who oppose them afterwards are invoking "Waaaagh I don't like it" are they?

Pretty much, yes.

If you are going to debate politics, you really need to be better informed about recent political history. Or is it just that that particular Labour government did things you don't like

Exactly. Starting with not being a Labour government worthy of the name.

Democracy is not just voting once and then declaring it done.

Well, yes it is. Otherwise - as happened in Ireland with the Treaty of Lisbon - people tend to form the opinion that the powers-that-be will simply keep re-running a vote until they get the result that they want and not the result that the people deliver. A tactic which isn't likely to inspire confidence if you have even a vague interest in convincing people of your democratic credentials.

That's pretty immature isn't it - hurling insults at people exercising their democratic rights.

Exercising their democratic rights is what people who voted Leave did in the referendum. Thank goodness no one has ever hurled insults at them, as that would have been the rankest hypocrisy.

People in a democracy who disagree with the majority decision have every right to voice their disagreement. If you don't allow that, you do not have a democracy, you have mob rule.

It is allowed. It's just that the right to be heard doesn't include the right to be taken seriously.

[Udayana]

As the people supposedly arranging the exit from the EU are clueless and have been unable to put forward any proposals that can be taken seriously by the UK population or the other countries, a rethink seems entirely in order. 

[Gordon]

Speaking from a part of the UK that didn't support Brexit I suspect that many, no matter how they voted or where they are, may be looking at the unplanned shambles that is now slowly emerging and wondering how we got ourselves into this mess in the first place.
 
The answer is of course the Tory party who took the risk of a referendum to appease their internal problems and pull the rug from under both their own euro-sceptic clique and the threat they saw from UKIP: they thought a 'remain' outcome would shut down these problem groups and it backfired on them - so we now have a hopeless PM, and it seems there was no plan made for the result they got and the reports today don't offer much in the way of reassurance.

For me the surprising thing is that I wasn't aware the EU was a major public talking point: it seemed to be mainly a sub-set of the Tories and UKIP, but for some reason the electorate in some parts of the UK jumped on the bandwagon in spite of the lack of clarity about what the exit actually plan was: in my view some fell for what was no more that rhetoric.

Should it be the case that negotiations with the EU don't go well, and it is looking that way, I'd have thought that a savvy government, on seeing which way the wind was blowing, might conclude that although the referendum gave a narrow majority in favour of the principle of Brexit it would be reasonable to place the reality of whatever the negotiated agreement is in front of the electorate: after all if our government are indeed getting the 'best deal' then surely getting an electoral mandate for the negotiated practical elements shouldn't be a problem!


 

[Aruntraveller]

Just found out my local Polish store has closed. Sign that Poles are leaving. So sad.

Rhi - I know that you didn't mean to - but did you have to use Trumpian phraseology? 

[floo]

In my opinion Britain will rue the day it leaves the EU if that does actually happen.

[jeremyp]

Although the evidence of people having done so re: Brexit is at the very best confused and contradictory.

You asked a generic question about a democratic vote and I answered it in a generic way. I agree the situation with respect to Brexit is very confused.

In this case it is. It's not the fucking hokey cokey.

No it isn't. It is entirely possible that the decision could be revealed to be incontrovertibly disastrous and people will be swayed towards remaining. In that situation, the democratic response would be to find a way of reversing the decision.

Pretty much, yes.

So to avoid misunderstanding, am I correct in assuming your position is that the losing side in a general election should do nothing to oppose the winning side? Because that is what it looks like.

Exactly. Starting with not being a Labour government worthy of the name.

But not a Tory hegemony and also re-elected twice.

Well, yes it is. Otherwise - as happened in Ireland with the Treaty of Lisbon - people tend to form the opinion that the powers-that-be will simply keep re-running a vote until they get the result that they want and not the result that the people deliver. A tactic which isn't likely to inspire confidence if you have even a vague interest in convincing people of your democratic credentials.

You do not understand what democracy really is.

It's just that the right to be heard doesn't include the right to be taken seriously.

Which is irrelevant to the point.

[Shaker]

You do not understand what democracy really is.

Pretty sure I do, and I'm pretty sure it looks like the result of the Brexit referendum where the majority decision carries the day.

But please, do tell me which bit of democracy I don't understand according to you. I'm sure you will.

[Sebastian Toe]

Pretty sure I do, and I'm pretty sure it looks like the result of the Brexit referendum where the majority decision carries the day.

Scotland 1979 referendum
Results

Yes 1,230,937    51.62% 
No  1,153,502      48.38%

Who won?

[jeremyp]

Pretty sure I do

No you don't. It's clear from your posts you think it is just having a vote.

[Shaker]

No you don't. It's clear from your posts you think it is just having a vote.

And pray tell what your definition is.

[Shaker]

Scotland 1979 referendum
Results

Yes 1,230,937    51.62%
No  1,153,502      48.38%

Who won?

No, but only because an amendment was introduced to the effect that 40% of the electoral turn out was required to pass any proposal. Actual turnout was 64% making 32.9% of the electorate so it was defeated.

Since there was no such clause or stipulation in the Brexit referendum and a simple majority - not a supermajority - was all that was required (and achieved) I'm not seeing what point you think you're making.