Brexit in a nutshell

Funny Brexit summary I just read in a magazine:

UK: We want a unicorn!
EU: Unicorns do not exist. Instead, you can have a pony.
UK: We vote against your pony.
EU: We already discussed this in detail: it's a pony or nothing.
UK: We vote against your pony.
EU: Alright, then you get nothing.
UK: We vote against your nothing.
EU: ... you really don't get it, do you?
UK: We need more time to think about it.
EU: About the pony or about nothing?
UK: We want a unicorn.




It's a joke, but as an analogy, it seems spot on.

UK= We are not interested in remaining in this EU any more, since when we joined in, it was still a trade community and not a supranational entity.

Deutschland= We will impose you a deal, UK, and we will do anything to make you change your mind and remain.

France= Let them exit, Germany. They will face the negative consequences of their decision.

Italia= Germans and French, you 2 are to blame. This EU needs to be changed radically, or else UK has the right to exit.

Estro Felino said:

UK= We are not interested in remaining in this EU any more, since when we joined in, it was still a trade community and not a supranational entity.

Deutschland= We will impose you a deal, UK, and we will do anything to make you change your mind and remain.

France= Let them exit, Germany. They will face the negative consequences of their decision.

Italia= Germans and French, you 2 are to blame. This EU needs to be changed radically, or else UK has the right to exit.

Click to expand...

The UK has every right to exit.
It just would be stupid to do that.

Estro Felino said:

UK= We are not interested in remaining in this EU any more, since when we joined in, it was still a trade community and not a supranational entity.

Deutschland= We will impose you a deal, UK, and we will do anything to make you change your mind and remain.

France= Let them exit, Germany. They will face the negative consequences of their decision.

Italia= Germans and French, you 2 are to blame. This EU needs to be changed radically, or else UK has the right to exit.

Click to expand...

We (the less-than-educated) blame the EU for all our problems, fear others (xenophobia), still yearn for the days when Britannia ruled the waves (and a vast area of land), can't abide a club where we don't appear as top-dogs (even if social progress is quite likely), will probably do so because we are an island and less likely to want to learn other languages, and no doubt will find many other reasons also. Shooting ourselves in the foot is passed off as 'a hunting accident'.

Brexit in a nutshell is just yet another iteraction of nationalism unleashed, attached to lies and darned lies. We have seen this tragicomedy before, many times, and paid blood tribute to it each time. For no good purpose.

It has brought a few good things: a renewed appreciation of the marvel that is the EU, of the importance of Parlamentarism and of the independence of powers, and of how we should not take political union for granted. A particularly necessary lesson when one considers how costly it was to dissuade the Troubles in Ireland and how likely Scotland is to renew its separatist efforts when faced with this insanity.

There is also the reminder of the importance of proper discussion of major changes before a decision is pursued. The capital flaw of Brexit was David Cameron's 2016 referendum, which was done without any seriousness and amidst a lot of lying and misinformation, which plagues Britannia to this day. Brexit would have a lot of very serious consequences, and it requires a lot of serious technical analysis before it is even contemplated. That has been specifically avoided by the whole Leave contingent, and that is no wonder; Brexit makes no logical sense.

One key reason why May's Withdrawal Agreement has been repudiated so often is because it is actually a careful attempt at making sense of it, therefore exposing its inherent contradictions. Each and every "red line" makes it that much more harmful to the UK.

Brexit also reminds one of the importance of being aware of manipulators with no shame in our political systems. Looking at you, Steve Bannon, Nigel Farage, Ress-Mogg and Boris Johnson. Farage in particular is quite the despicable liar. He could give lessons to Donald Trump. One gets the sense that Farage would choke to death if he had to try and tell a truth.

Then there is the contemplation of when a political party should allow itself to break up in dignity. That was the main mistake of Theresa May; she tried way too hard to keep the Tories together after being infiltrated and corrupted by the ERG. And from all indications, that ended up being a costly and useless effort.

Last but not least, of how important it is to vote and to call political bluffs on the face and by the proper names. Sometimes what looks like naive arrogance is indeed naive arrogance, what looks like delusions of exceptionalism is indeed deluded exceptionalism.

TagliatelliMonster said:

Funny Brexit summary I just read in a magazine:

UK: We want a unicorn!
EU: Unicorns do not exist. Instead, you can have a pony.
UK: We vote against your pony.
EU: We already discussed this in detail: it's a pony or nothing.
UK: We vote against your pony.
EU: Alright, then you get nothing.
UK: We vote against your nothing.
EU: ... you really don't get it, do you?
UK: We need more time to think about it.
EU: About the pony or about nothing?
UK: We want a unicorn.




It's a joke, but as an analogy, it seems spot on.

Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Augustus said:

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Click to expand...

Exactly

Augustus said:

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Click to expand...

The most mutually beneficial deal is called "membership of the EU" - the unicorn was having all the benefits without any of the obligations.

ratiocinator said:

The most mutually beneficial deal is called "membership of the EU" - the unicorn was having all the benefits without any of the obligations.

Click to expand...

There are plenty of obligations, the alt right does not like to discuss them

Augustus said:

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Click to expand...

That is true.

It is also quite orthogonal to Brexit, which is all about destroying such a deal for the benefit of venomous, misinformed, immature, misguided pride.

Augustus said:

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Click to expand...

Because "I am leaving this group, but I want to end up with a deal better than what every single member has." is unrealistic.

Augustus said:

Why is it a 'unicorn' to think countries could agree to a mutually beneficial deal?

Mutually beneficial deals exist in reality.

Click to expand...

Mutually beneficial deals exist, yes.

ratiocinator said:

The most mutually beneficial deal is called "membership of the EU" - the unicorn was having all the benefits without any of the obligations.

Click to expand...

To begin with, the EU is a union of unequals. There are big contributors (UK) , modest contributors ( Italy) , and recipients ( Slavic countries)

Secondly many EU countries do not have the Euro, which practically makes the Eurozone a Union inside the EU

Estro Felino said:

To begin with, the EU is a union of unequals. There are big contributors (UK) , modest contributors ( Italy) , and recipients ( Slavic countries)

Click to expand...

The same is true within any state entity, be it a union of states or provinces or regions or what-have-you.

For example, in Belgium all regions contribute to the federal budget. That budget is then in turn spend on the regions.

Flanders is richer then wallonie, so flanders contributes more then wallonie.
Within flanders, Antwerp is richer then Kortrijk, so Antwerp contributes more then Kortrijk.
Within Antwerp, Brasschaat is richer then Hove, so Brasschaat contributes more then Hove.

I'm sure it is like that within the UK as well. I'm sure London procentually contributes more then it gets then some village in the middle of nowhere with no industry and a bar and a supermarket as only economic activity.
Or however such relationships are between England / Scottland / etc.

The US again isn't any different either. I'm sure there are states there as well that contribute more to federal reserves then they get as opposed to other states.

So really, this isn't an argument at all.
If it were, then perhaps London should hold a referendum as well and become independent also. Imagine how rich they would be!!

Secondly many EU countries do not have the Euro, which practically makes the Eurozone a Union inside the EU

Click to expand...

And many do have the euro.

How any of this is related to the point you are replying to, is also kind of a mystery to me.

Koldo said:

Because "I am leaving this group, but I want to end up with a deal better than what every single member has." is unrealistic.

Click to expand...

This is a big part of what I don't understand about Brexit.

If EU needs UK more than UK needs EU, then UK could press for a better and more favorable agreement. The UK wouldn't have to leave with no deal. They just demand terms that they consider more fair. The EU wouldn't be in a position to refuse.

But this doesn't seem to be the case. The EU seems to remain united, it's UK that is fracturing into warring parties.

What's with that?
Tom

columbus said:

This is a big part of what I don't understand about Brexit.

If EU needs UK more than UK needs EU, then UK could press for a better and more favorable agreement. The UK wouldn't have to leave with no deal. They just demand terms that they consider more fair. The EU wouldn't be in a position to refuse.

But this doesn't seem to be the case. The EU seems to remain united, it's UK that is fracturing into warring parties.

What's with that?
Tom

Click to expand...

What's with that, is exactly what you aluded to.

While a divorce will hurt both, it is true that, at least without a deal, it will hit the UK a hell of a lot more.

TagliatelliMonster said:

The same is true within any state entity, be it a union of states or provinces or regions or what-have-you.

For example, in Belgium all regions contribute to the federal budget. That budget is then in turn spend on the regions.

Flanders is richer then wallonie, so flanders contributes more then wallonie.
Within flanders, Antwerp is richer then Kortrijk, so Antwerp contributes more then Kortrijk.
Within Antwerp, Brasschaat is richer then Hove, so Brasschaat contributes more then Hove.

I'm sure it is like that within the UK as well. I'm sure London procentually contributes more then it gets then some village in the middle of nowhere with no industry and a bar and a supermarket as only economic activity.
Or however such relationships are between England / Scottland / etc.

The US again isn't any different either. I'm sure there are states there as well that contribute more to federal reserves then they get as opposed to other states.

So really, this isn't an argument at all.
If it were, then perhaps London should hold a referendum as well and become independent also. Imagine how rich they would be!!





And many do have the euro.

How any of this is related to the point you are replying to, is also kind of a mystery to me.

Click to expand...

Italy has nothing against Belgians (our last queen was Belgian) but most Italians hate all that the EU represents, and think Brussels is the headquarters of a obscure Financial Technocratic-Freemasonic power.

In fact the person chosen to be the Italian Commissioner by Von der Leyen is Gentiloni, a Freemason.

TagliatelliMonster said:

If it were, then perhaps London should hold a referendum as well and become independent also. Imagine how rich they would be!!

Click to expand...

You would be surprised at how much many English, especially Northerners, would actually favour this. There was a small but honest-to-G-d movement to include the North if Scotland left the Union and the North would go with them. London is a drain on this whole country.

columbus said:

This is a big part of what I don't understand about Brexit.

If EU needs UK more than UK needs EU, then UK could press for a better and more favorable agreement. The UK wouldn't have to leave with no deal. They just demand terms that they consider more fair. The EU wouldn't be in a position to refuse.

But this doesn't seem to be the case. The EU seems to remain united, it's UK that is fracturing into warring parties.

What's with that?
Tom

Click to expand...

Because what the Brussels Powers want and what the single European countries want are two different things.
In fact Italians could not care less whether UK stays or leaves (they don't even have the euro). If they leave, our relations with them will remain unchanged, since we have many British citizens living here.

The Brussels powers do care because they are banking powers, and without Britain their interests will be in jeopardy.