A Second Brexit Vote?

[LuisDantas]

Oh they know well enough it's just losing they can't deal with.

Frankly, I doubt it. Then again, I also doubt that we are talking about even roughly the same people.

 

[LuisDantas]

And this certainly isn't your only questionable judgement on the issue either.

Guess what? I don't care what you think of my judgment. You have not even attempted to deserve that level of consideration.

 

[Mock Turtle]

And this certainly isn't your only questionable judgement on the issue either.

So, in the words of the chief EU Brexit coordinator, Guy Verhofstadt, a Euro Federalist who wants an EU army capable of projecting its power around the world and a "United States of Europe":

‘The world of tomorrow is not a world order based on nation states or countries. It is a world order that is based on empires. China, is not a nation, it’s a civilisation. India… is not a nation… The US is also an empire, more than a nation… And then finally the Russian federation.

The world of tomorrow is a world of empires in which we Europeans, and you British, can only defend your interests, your way of life, by doing it together, in a European framework and in the European Union.’

Watch: Guy Verhofstadt on the world’s ‘empires’ | Coffee House

Also: The rise of China, the decline of the US under Trump & the danger posed by authoritarians like Putin mean the EU needs to be both a power project & a peace project. We will only have that power if we can agree to ambitiously reform our institutions & challenge the status quo.' [i.e. create a federal Europe]

If you want some scholarly sources:


while the existing literature on the normative power discourse treats the EU as a sui generis entity unknown in history, this paper treats the EU as a modern type of empire, sharing many common characteristics with its predecessors. Of course, the EU does not resemble the nineteenth century Britain or Russia. The Union neither has a clearly defined centre of authority nor sizable military forces. That said, the EU represents a vast territorial unit with the ability to influence (if not manipulate) the international agenda and shape the notion of legitimacy (if not normality) in various parts of the world, and especially in its neighborhood. These are all key characteristics of empires. The EU does what all historical empires have always done, namely it exercises control over diverse peripheral actors through formal annexations or various forms of informal domination.

https://www.dahrendorf-forum.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/DSP_Zielonka_The_Ideology_of_Empire.pdf

A whole book here:

Empire in Denial: The Politics of State-Building
DAVID CHANDLER

Empire in Denial: The Politics of State-Building on JSTOR



More general source? Another from the New Statesman, hardly a bastion of right wing populism:

This kind of thinking underlies many of the absurdities of politics at the present time, on left and right. When the European Parliament’s Brexit co-ordinator Guy Verhofstadt praised the EU as an emerging empire at the Liberal Democrat conference last month, the assembled delegates could hardly restrain their enthusiasm. The dream of a future European empire supplies an alternative patriotism for progressives who despise the nation-state. In practice the European project has itself become a variety of nationalism, though it celebrates a nation that does not exist. The reality throughout the continent is the onward march of nationalists of a more familiar kind. Like much of the rest of Europe, Verhofstadt’s native Belgium is rotten with far-right movements, which his hyper-federal project would only further empower. Preferring not to face these realities, the liberals who cheered him are possessed by a grand idea.

The closing of the conservative mind: Politics and the art of war

Or another:

The European Union is a liberal empire, and it is about to fall, warns Wolfgang Streeck (Max Planck Institut). The position of imperial hegemon belongs to Germany, which is finding it increasingly difficult to fulfil that role. When the UK decided to leave the EU, nobody considered invading the British Isles to keep them in “Europe”. Yet, from a German perspective, an amicable British departure might have undermined imperial discipline, as other countries unsatisfied with the imperial regime might have considered leaving as well. So the choice for Britain had to be between remaining without concessions and leaving at a very high cost to itself.

What is the European Union? The closest concept I can come up with is that of a liberal empire. An empire is a hierarchically structured block of states held together by a gradient of power from a centre to a periphery. At the centre of the EU is Germany, trying more or less successfully to hide inside a “Core Europe” (Kerneuropa) formed together with France. Germany doesn’t want to be seen as what the British used to call a Continental Unifier, even if in fact this is what it is. That it likes to hide behind France is a source of power for France vis-a-vis Germany.

Long read | The European Union is a liberal empire, and it is about to fall

Well he got one thing right probably:

As to the UK, to the extent that its decision to leave was driven by nationalist as distinguished from either pro- or anti-socialist concerns, it may amount to a historical mistake.

 

[Rival]

Guess what? I don't care what you think of my judgment. You have not even attempted to deserve that level of consideration.

But at least address his arguments?

 

[Augustus]

I'm not sure the desire for independence is driven by rationality.

While you are largely correct, decentralisation is certainly rational. Localism FTW! (although decentralisation within a Federal framework makes more sense for defence and foreign policy reasons).

 

[Rival]

Rationality rarely determines anything, let alone politics.

 

[England my lionheart]

I'm not sure the desire for independence is driven by rationality.

Well I hope it doesn't come to that but I agree.

 

[Augustus]

Guess what? I don't care what you think of my judgment. You have not even attempted to deserve that level of consideration.

Are you aware that you've spent half the thread belittling and insulting other people?

It's ok, that's your prerogative, but it's not a great look to pair it with being overly precious.

 

[Martin]

Roundheads v. Cavaliers?
I would rather have a helmet, ooerrr missus, ooeer!
Partner-beating Boris-devious-twat--wanker, v. drink-ladled arse-hole psuedo-toff Nigel, ooooeerr. Up with the toffs, and off with their heads!
Oooer! Arse! Girls! Feck!

 

[Augustus]

Key union boss in deluded xenophobic rant to far-right media outlet

He's against free movement and notes its negative effects in certain communities, which obviously means he's a massive racist who harks back to the days of Empire.

Also, despite supporting remain, notes: "The idea that we were happy with Europe is a joke. We clearly weren’t." We all know you have to be completely delusional to find fault with any aspect of the EU as it is objectively a paragon of globalistic virtue, fabulously democratic and perfectly attentive to the needs and want of every sector of European society.

He also notes that many Remainers haven't made much effort to try to understand why people voted leave. Who could possibly believe something as preposterous as that? I'm not sure any group in history has displayed such good faith and fair minds than those who support Remain.

Must have been manipulated by the lies of the Leavers

McCluskey tells Corbyn to defy calls to extend freedom of movement

Jeremy Corbyn’s key union supporter, Unite’s Len McCluskey, has told the Labour leader that victory in the general election means winning over the party’s traditional working-class supporters with a tough line on free movement of workers.

In a Guardian interview, the Unite general secretary said shadow cabinet members should not upset Labour’s carefully crafted Brexit position during the election and that he would oppose any attempts to extend free movement as voted for at the party’s annual conference in Brighton.

“We will have to see what’s in the manifesto but I don’t think [what conference voted for] is a sensible approach and I will be expressing that view,” McCluskey said, adding that he was keen to shore up the party’s support in marginal seats in the Midlands and north of England being targeted by Boris Johnson.

With the Conservatives seeking to make migration a key election issue, McCluskey said Labour needed to show how it was going to prevent pay and conditions from being undercut before it could consider relaxing its stance. “It’s wrong in my view to have any greater free movement of labour unless you get stricter labour market regulation.”

...

McCluskey said his union had campaigned on a platform of remain and reform in the 2016 referendum. “The reform part was important. The idea that we were happy with Europe is a joke. We clearly weren’t.”
...
McCluskey said:“We have to ask: why did so many people vote to leave?

“Too many of those who live in metropolitan political and media circles don’t really grasp why people voted the way they did.”

He said one reason for the leave vote was deindustrialisation, with people living in the “forgotten towns and cities” not just asking “what has Europe done for us” but also keen to give the political elite “a slap in the face”.

“The other reason was migrant labour coming to the UK from Europe. If you don’t understand those concerns you fail to grasp the divisions that exist. Migrant workers are to blame for absolutely nothing in this country. They are just trying to better their lives and the lives of their families. It’s the greedy bosses that are using them to undercut pay and conditions.

McCluskey tells Corbyn to defy calls to extend freedom of movement

 

[Shad]

I don't understand why there's any negotiations needed.
Just Leave already.

The economic and trade treaties. Have their cake and eat it too in one go so to speak. The UK would need to create new treaties with the EU itself or nations outside brexit if the UK just left with no deal. This would create more economic hardship than leaving with a deal would cause.

 

[Shad]

I think the non-Brits in this thread should turn their attention to the problems in their own nations before telling us how to run ours. I find it rather appalling that non-Brits are trying to tell us how to deal with our national affaires.

Your Queen first.

(Canadian)

 

[Rival]

Your Queen first.

(Canadian)

Being that the Queen has no real power and is only ceremonial these days, she's not even strictly allowed to interfere; so if HRH has been dabbling in Canadian politics she needs a right royal slap on the wrist.

 

[Shad]

Being that the Queen has no real power and is only ceremonial these days, she's not even strictly allowed to interfere; so if HRH has been dabbling in Canadian politics she needs a right royal slap on the wrist.

The Queen still has real power but declines to use it. All law must be signed off by the Governor General which is the Queens representative not elected by Canadians.

The royalty has been influencing politics by supporting certain stances in public in Canada during their little "vacations"

 

[Altfish]

The Queen still has real power but declines to use it. All law must be signed off by the Governor General which is the Queens representative not elected by Canadians.

The royalty has been influencing politics by supporting certain stances in public in Canada during their little "vacations"

If the Queen or her descendants used her 'power' that would be the end of the Royalty. She knows it, she is ceremonial, yes, they may have influence (as all rich people have)

 

[Shad]

If the Queen or her descendants used her 'power' that would be the end of the Royalty. She knows it, she is ceremonial, yes, they may have influence (as all rich people have)

Sure given the history of the monarchy and Parliament in the UK. Over the last 8 centuries Parliament has been gain power at the expense of the monarch's power. However do consider that if times become drastic a monarchist group lead by a royal completely unlike E2 could be a source of authoritarian leadership. There was a monarchist movement in Germany prior to WW2. Some form of it still exists today.

 

[Altfish]

Sure given the history of the monarchy and Parliament in the UK. Over the last 8 centuries Parliament has been gain power at the expense of the monarch's power. However do consider that if times become drastic a monarchist group lead by a royal completely unlike E2 could be a source of authoritarian leadership. There was a monarchist movement in Germany prior to WW2. Some form of it still exists today.

So you are talking about a coup or revolution - not a democratic thing?

 

[Shad]

So you are talking about a coup or revolution - not a democratic thing?

No. A population is completely capable of voting in authoritarians into office. Take a look at Germany's elections in July and Nov 1932. This was before Hitler took power. A monarchist party with enough public support could be voted into Parliament. That party could just ignore the use of the monarch's power instead of reducing it further.

Like I said in a drastic case. The UK is not close to such a situation.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The UK has a choice. It can face reality and operate with other nations as everyone does, or it can pose impressive and be oblivious to its own basic needs.

If one listens to Leaver talking points, the curiosity about what leads them to expect so much advantage becomes almost overwhelming.

The UK is hardly crucial for any particular goods or services. It has precious little leverage, and Brexit talk has consumed a sizeable part of what little there was.

When I hear those old men speak and rant about the EU and how they are going to "take back control", it sounds as if they think the UK still operates some global empire.

I also find that slogan of "taking back control" kind of ironic....
Because the way those same people go about it, apparantly prefering a no-deal brexit, it would literally put themselves in the worst possible negotiation position when the time comes to get new trade deals.

It would "take back control" from the EU and then hand it over to Trump, Putin and Xi Jinpin. So they can all get mortally obese by stuffing themselves with deep fried chlorine chickens - and pay themselves into bankrupcy on the health expenses that come with that.


It's so painfully obvious that that is the road ahead if they get their way, that i'm completely baffled and shocked that so little people apparantly realise that. The leavers just swallow up and repeat the slogans and mantra's as if no truer words have ever been spoken, while they are the biggest lies told by government officials since WW2

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Scots, a lot of the time, will do anything to **** on England. I wish they would have gained independence.

Don't worry. They'll gain independence faster then you think if the brexit fiasco continues.