SteveS1
I heard that, pardon?
Exposing your slippery hypocrisy doesn't make anyone an extremist. Your obsession with "likes" being a case in point. You use them for the same purpose as anyone else, agreement with a comment.
Brexit: give me a positive effect... XIV
- Thread starter Tony L
- Start date
- Status
Exposing your slippery hypocrisy doesn't make anyone an extremist. Your obsession with "likes" being a case in point. You use them for the same purpose as anyone else, agreement with a comment.
Joe Hutch
Mate of the bloke
Unfortunately it's impossible. They just drag you down to their level and beat you on experience.
Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
Not obsessed at all, though in fact the referendum did follow a democratic process and does trump demands from a minority of remain supporters for it to be ignored as though it never happened. These people really should have accepted the result and then campaigned intelligently for a soft brexit. Instead, they decided it was better to call everyone else racist and thick. They are the obsessives here and they have caused huge damage despite their crying of denial.
A large majority of Parliament supported remain. There was plenty of opportunity.
Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
I wouldn't argue about the contingent who went about doing that (though there is a grain of truth in some of it), but you seem to be playing-off a lot of opposites. Saying that the referendum is somehow binding law (it wasn't and isn't), but that they could have altered the referendum's clear suggestion with a contrary approach. That the majority in parliament was remain, though we know the majority accepted some form of falling into line with the advisory referendum rather than focusing on the government's chosen response to it.
Personally I think a lot of remainers are blind to the serious economic negatives of the EU, but that their view of the situation around actual exit is circumstantially correct. Whereas the majority of leavers I spoke to over five years (and it was a lot) had very little idea of reality of how an independent UK could operate other than some vague, 18th century mercantilist claptrap about 'free trade deals'. This seems to be confirmed by their rejection of Labour under Corbyn in the last election - i.e. support of Johnson merely on a promise to 'leave means leave'.
There's no democratic nobility in pursuing a wrong-headed path.
Last edited:
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Jesus!
'Common people', eh!
'Common people', eh!
Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
I haven’t said the referendum was binding law, just love how people here can’t help themselves replying on something made up. What I have consistently said was the referendum followed a democratic process and every household was notified in advance by the PM the outcome would be carried out. That means people got off their arses and voted in the expectation their vote would count, it’s why the turnout was high and should not be ignored. Calling for the result to be ignored is spitting in the face of democracy.
What can you say about hard remainers. Look at Swinson for a start. A hard brexit maker if ever there was one, though LibDem fans can’t see it to this day. Nor can they see how their name-calling has been counter productive and infantile. They are still at it, it’s why there is never any genuine discussion in this thread. They crave 100% agreement, when they don’t get it you see the stupid accusations, the troll accusations and a tendency to ‘pile-on’.
That it turns out the tory govt has been incompetent is no surprise to me. The intransigence and determination of the EU to ensure the UK fails has come as a surprise but neither of those have any relevance to the referendum and how anybody voted.
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
Common is not a bad term. Think of 'common decency' and 'common sense'. It is derived from the idea of 'community'. Unfortunately though it is comprised of a broad variety of people, so tends to always contradict its own definition.
Maybe you're like me, from the north, and associate 'common' with being a bit tasteless, rude and uncouth?
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
You pretty much have suggested it was binding by implying that the government's foolish suggestion that it was makes it so. Instead the Cameron government erred in suggesting this because they were so eager to present a pro-EU stance. Let's remember that this was but the third referendum in UK history and the only one with significant turnout. The question of why the turnout was so high this time is worth pursuing. Not long after the government sent out their leaflet the backlash began and it seems to me a lot of people felt motivated to vote against what was seen as 'government bias'. Which is legitimate in its own right, but not a sensible or legitimate approach to what the referendum was for.
This is what really started the barrage of utter misinformation, which made the results of the referendum pretty much worthless. So that the non-legal acceptance of the result was politically motivated rather than an 'act of democracy'. Your persistence down this line of thought is tiresome and like those people who parrot that 'I defend to the death their right to free speech' misquote.
They are a small party and did not make up the majority of opposition. They did however poison the debate with a lot of falsehoods.
I don't think the Tory government needs any help in ballsing this up. I also don't think there is any evidence worthy of the name to show the EU hasn't just followed the basic rules in acknowledging the UK withdrawal. What in particular do you think they shold be doing/not doing?
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Common is not a bad term. Think of 'common decency' and 'common sense'. It is derived from the idea of 'community'. Unfortunately though it is comprised of a broad variety of people, so tends to always contradict its own definition.
Maybe you're like me, from the north, and associate 'common' with being a bit tasteless, rude and uncouth?
I think it possible that you are being slightly disingenuous, sir!
As the Duchess might have said, as she turned her eyes away and daintily pressed her kerchief to her nose "Such common people".
Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
No, I haven’t, so I’ll leave it there.
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
You have and if you can't coherently defend this charge you shouldn't be making it. To reframe it I think you are placing this 'principle' above the mandated responsibility of the government to serve the interests of the people in whose name they govern. While that's probably a very high expectation from governments it's a legitimate one.
Last edited:
Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
Nope, I have not.
What ‘charge’ is it you think I’m making? Not that I have anything to defend.
Not sure about that - a simple yes/no would have sufficed. Are we now to assume that you, like Arron, have a soft spot for Russia? It is a thing with Brexiteers.
Yes, common people. It's what "demos" means in Greek. Democracy = demos+cracy & you know the rest.
Let them have their cake, and eat it.
Le Baron
Unbiased advice at reasonable rates
The 'charge' is that you are saying people have not respected or don't want to respect what is in fact not a legally-binding outcome nor one that had to be implemented from that position of a lack of knowledge. The government sending out a leaflet making a claim doesn't alter the fact that the government, being sovereign, doesn't have to act upon a referendum. They pulled themselves into a bind which was more about getting elected than delivering policy. As if the concept of 'democracy' (even when it is not carried out in the spirit of informed consent) overrides a just outcome for an electorate.
It's not much different to you being sold an insurance policy under conditions of false information and then later being told: 'you must honour the contract', when you know the contract was made in bad faith. To go along with that is not only destructive, it's idiotic.
- Status