How are we doing post-Brexit?

[Altfish]

Seems a bit childish to throw a sulk because something that was obviously not possible turned out not to be possible, but if it helps to pass the time that's up to you.

So, holding an elected Government to their promises is now called "Throwing a sulk" - if we had an opposition the likes of me wouldn't have to do this.

Multiple posts and peer-reviewed articles in this thread that explain the basic reasons why the EU lacks numerous basic features that are considered essential for a democracy to exist. You can read them if you don't understand what these are.

Britain lacks none of these features, even if they elected someone you don't like.

You may not consider democratic accountability particularly important and would prefer to have a fast track passport queue in an airport. That's up to you.

But that is my point Cummins and Morgan are NOT elected

After so many years of endless Brexit noise, you still don't get it. What do you actually expect?

You seem to be looking for some simplistic headline policy like: "Free lollipops and bunny rabbits for all "

The system of governance of a country is not "airy fairy", which is why humans have spent so much of their history arguing, and fighting, over methods of governance. I'm sure you accept the general principle that method of governance matters and has tangible consequences.

Preferring a decentralised system of governance over a centralised on is not "airy fairy" it relates to the idea that, on balance, and in the long run, a smaller decision making unit is better able to meet its needs than a larger, more complex one that is forced into uneasy compromises and lacks accountability.

It is not about one policy or position as these are unknown in the long run and subject to unpredictable variables. On balance, though the smaller unit is better able to respond and adapt to the inherent uncertainty of governance. Ideally, Britain will use this opportunity to further decentralise.

You can agree with this or you can disagree with the philosophy behind decentralisation, but it's not about some specific policy or the result of one single election or the fact they elected someone you don't like or that you might have to wait in an airport queue for 10 mins.

Governments come and go, there are good ones and bad ones. It is, however, perfectly acceptable to consider decentralisation and greater accountability are more likely to produce better governance in the long run than centralised and less accountable systems.

I accept the result of the referendum and the last election despite 52% voting for pro-Remain parties.
But I will continue to hold the government to account, and that includes the promises made by the Brexiteers.
40 deals ready on the day we leave.
Deal with EU over lunch
£350m/week for NHS

I'm sorry, but if you can't accept those are policies that won the vote, then I think it is you, not I, that doesn't understand democracy

 

[Augustus]

So, holding an elected Government to their promises is now called "Throwing a sulk" - if we had an opposition the likes of me wouldn't have to do this.

If a party said "the second we are elected things will get better", would you expect that they would literally start making things better the second the election is called, before they are even invited to form a government or have made any decisions?

Would you make posts every minute saying "where's the improvement I was promised, eh? That's 3 minutes already"?

But that is my point Cummins and Morgan are NOT elected

Politicians, including those in the EU, have had advisors since time immemorial.

That doesn't change the fact that the EU lacks certain features that have long been considered essential for a system to be considered democratic. This is an issue that has been known and discussed for decades, yet little to nothing has been done about it.

Democratic legitimacy might not be important for you, but I assume you can accept that others could have a legitimate reason for considering this more important than you do.

I accept the result of the referendum and the last election despite 52% voting for pro-Remain parties.
But I will continue to hold the government to account, and that includes the promises made by the Brexiteers.
40 deals ready on the day we leave.
Deal with EU over lunch
£350m/week for NHS

I'm sorry, but if you can't accept those are policies that won the vote, then I think it is you, not I, that doesn't understand democracy

Why are these more impactful than the Remain lies (as have been pointed out to you in other posts/threads)? Perhaps you have some evidence to support your baseless assumption made on ideological grounds?

Seems to be a very common refrain: "The only reason people could disagree with me on this [highly subjective issue laden with value judgements] is that they are stupid and ignorant and were fooled. No honest, rational person could possibly disagree with me."

However, none of this has anything to do with what I said.

You ask for reasons, then ignore them and go on about something completely different.

Do you accept that a preference for decentralised governance and a preference for greater democratic accountability are perfectly valid reasons to support Brexit, and are not stupid, irrational responses to being fooled by "The Right Wing Media"?

 

[Augustus]

An interesting quote on EU democracy:

In 1999, Luxembourg's prime minister JeanClaude Juncker, today the president of the European Commission, frankly explained the modus operandi of the Union's leaders: "We decide something, put it out there and wait for some time to see what happens. If there is no big brouhaha and no uprisings, because most people have not even understood what was decided, we'll continue-step by step, until there is no way back."

The EU's Democratic Deficit and the Public Sphere
Müller, Jan-Werner.

 

[Altfish]

If a party said "the second we are elected things will get better", would you expect that they would literally start making things better the second the election is called, before they are even invited to form a government or have made any decisions?

Would you make posts every minute saying "where's the improvement I was promised, eh? That's 3 minutes already"?

When Brexiteers say ...
Liam Fox promises to sign 40 free trade deals the 'second after' Brexit

Then, yes, I do expect things immediately.

You can't complain about Remainer lies (Not that many because much of Project Fear is becoming Project Reality) as they are not making decisions

 

[Augustus]

When Brexiteers say ...
Liam Fox promises to sign 40 free trade deals the 'second after' Brexit

Then, yes, I do expect things immediately.

In general, do you put in a great deal of stock in what politicians speculate about at fringe events at party conferences?

You can't complain about Remainer lies (Not that many because much of Project Fear is becoming Project Reality) as they are not making decisions

I'm not complaining. In general, I don't care what politicians said during the campaign as most of it was just speculative assumptions that aligned with ideology, cherry-picked and massaged stats or bombast and hyperbole. Neither side really addressed the issues I thought were most important.

Your point though was that "It was lies wot won it", and I was wondering if you had any evidence to support this, or you just made it up out of thin air?

You also didn't answer:

Do you accept that a preference for decentralised governance and a preference for greater democratic accountability are perfectly valid reasons to support Brexit, and are not stupid, irrational responses to being fooled by "The Right Wing Media"?

 

[Altfish]

In general, do you put in a great deal of stock in what politicians speculate about at fringe events at party conferences?



I'm not complaining. In general, I don't care what politicians said during the campaign as most of it was just speculative assumptions that aligned with ideology, cherry-picked and massaged stats or bombast and hyperbole. Neither side really addressed the issues I thought were most important.

Your point though was that "It was lies wot won it", and I was wondering if you had any evidence to support this, or you just made it up out of thin air?

You also didn't answer:

Do you accept that a preference for decentralised governance and a preference for greater democratic accountability are perfectly valid reasons to support Brexit, and are not stupid, irrational responses to being fooled by "The Right Wing Media"?

If I didn't answer, it is because of time. I'm not like most of the Brexiteers on here (Not you I hasten to say) I do try to answer questions.

The 'Lies wot won it' , doesn't sound like my phraseology but I accept the sentiment of the post.
The lies being the likes of ...

• Turkey and Albania joining the EU
• £350m/week for NHS
• Meaningless phrases like "Get our sovereignty back" - ask people who voted leave what it means and 98% haven't a clue
• No security checks on Irish border
• The free trade agreement we will have to do should be one of the easiest in human history,
• The day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want
• There will continue to be free trade and access to the single market
• Not a single job would be lost because of Brexit
• After we vote Leave, we would immediately be able to start negotiating new trade deals with emerging economies and the world’s biggest economies (the US, China and Japan, as well as Canada, Australia, South Korea, New Zealand and so on), which could enter into force immediately after the UK leaves the EU.
• Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market,
• If we vote to leave then I think the union will be stronger… I think when we vote to leave it will be clear that having voted to leave one union the last thing people in Scotland wanted to do is to break up another.

I could go on

 

[Augustus]

If I didn't answer, it is because of time. I'm not like most of the Brexiteers on here (Not you I hasten to say) I do try to answer questions.

Do you accept that a preference for decentralised governance and a preference for greater democratic accountability are perfectly valid reasons to support Brexit, and are not stupid, irrational responses to being fooled by "The Right Wing Media"?

 

[Altfish]

Do you accept that a preference for decentralised governance and a preference for greater democratic accountability are perfectly valid reasons to support Brexit, and are not stupid, irrational responses to being fooled by "The Right Wing Media"?

Yes, but I want that put into practice, not being controlled by Westminster.
I never felt 'controlled' by Brussels, but I do feel controlled by London and it is getting worse since Brexit

 

[Jedster]

Yes, but I want that put into practice, not being controlled by Westminster.
I never felt 'controlled' by Brussels, but I do feel controlled by London and it is getting worse since Brexit

It appears that Andrew Sabisky wants to do a whole lot of controlling.
It gives me the willies.

New No 10 aide said drug would be worth 'a dead kid once a year'

 

[Augustus]

I never felt 'controlled' by Brussels,

Things never become a problem until they do. For years the lack of democracy in the EU wasn't a problem as everyone was broadly on the same page. As such they took no substantial steps to develop it, yet issues became far more apparent during the financial crisis, and to a lesser extent the 'refugee crisis' where there were significant disagreements.

If you lived in Greece though you might have a very different view on feeling controlled by the EU

A democratically elected government having difficulty fulfilling electoral pledges due to the actions of Brussels (or more accurately Berlin) aimed at protecting the Euro and banking interests.

Greece has had a decade of depression, significantly because it hasn't been able to act in its own best interests: 'one size fits all'.

Compare that to a country like Iceland who thought about their citizens ahead of other countries and global financial elites and made a swift recovery.

As a member of the EU, what happened to Greece was done 'in your name', yet you have no way to hold decision makers to account.

The EU has steadily increased its powers, while making pretty much zero attempt at increasing its legitimacy and accountability which was a conscious choice as they thought "we know best". It is also worth noting that, whenever voters get a choice though (EU constitution, the Euro, Brexit, etc), they tend to be far less in favour of 'Big Europe' than politicians are.

Even when EU politicians pay lip-service to increasing democracy, they also understand that the EU they want, is not necessarily the EU the people would choose if given the chance.

but I do feel controlled by London

Of course, national governments have far more power.

I would love further decentralisation of government in the UK, but if you feel powerless in the face of a national government, why is the solution giving away more of that power to an organisation you have basically no ability to influence or hold to account?

Just because this organisation has made decisions you mostly agreed with in the past, doesn't mean that must continue into the future. Right wing populism is much more powerful on the continent than in the UK for example.

Personally, I don't much like having to take it on faith that politicians know what's best for me and that I must like it or lump it. at least people can vote a national government out of power, and for this reason it needs to pay some attention to popular opinion.

and it is getting worse since Brexit

What of substance do you think has changed?

 

[Altfish]

Things never become a problem until they do. For years the lack of democracy in the EU wasn't a problem as everyone was broadly on the same page. As such they took no substantial steps to develop it, yet issues became far more apparent during the financial crisis, and to a lesser extent the 'refugee crisis' where there were significant disagreements.

If you lived in Greece though you might have a very different view on feeling controlled by the EU

A democratically elected government having difficulty fulfilling electoral pledges due to the actions of Brussels (or more accurately Berlin) aimed at protecting the Euro and banking interests.

Greece has had a decade of depression, significantly because it hasn't been able to act in its own best interests: 'one size fits all'.

Compare that to a country like Iceland who thought about their citizens ahead of other countries and global financial elites and made a swift recovery.

As a member of the EU, what happened to Greece was done 'in your name', yet you have no way to hold decision makers to account.

The EU has steadily increased its powers, while making pretty much zero attempt at increasing its legitimacy and accountability which was a conscious choice as they thought "we know best". It is also worth noting that, whenever voters get a choice though (EU constitution, the Euro, Brexit, etc), they tend to be far less in favour of 'Big Europe' than politicians are.

Even when EU politicians pay lip-service to increasing democracy, they also understand that the EU they want, is not necessarily the EU the people would choose if given the chance.



Of course, national governments have far more power.

I would love further decentralisation of government in the UK, but if you feel powerless in the face of a national government, why is the solution giving away more of that power to an organisation you have basically no ability to influence or hold to account?

Just because this organisation has made decisions you mostly agreed with in the past, doesn't mean that must continue into the future. Right wing populism is much more powerful on the continent than in the UK for example.

Personally, I don't much like having to take it on faith that politicians know what's best for me and that I must like it or lump it. at least people can vote a national government out of power, and for this reason it needs to pay some attention to popular opinion.




What of substance do you think has changed?

A lot of comments there #Augustus and I've not time to address them all.

Regarding Greece - we are not in the EURO, so it couldn't happen to us.

I think the EU has far more democratic elections than the UK. My vote counted when I voted in the European Elections, my vote was pointless in December and always is in my constituency.

It has changed because we now have a super majority government out of all proportion to the votes cast - Johnson (controlled bu Cummins) is a loose canon and they are using Trump style tactics of diversion and confusion. Attacking the press/ the BBC, the NHS, etc.
Promising elaborate infrastructure schemes that will (on Johnson's previous record) probably not be delivered - or they will constantly be delayed.


As Martin Niemöller said ...

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Change that to include 'Democracy', 'Immigrants'. 'The Press' and 'Public Services' and that's how it seems to me.

Where is the Russia Report??

 

[Augustus]

Regarding Greece - we are not in the EURO, so it couldn't happen to us.

It's illustrative of an organisation that has vastly increased in power without aiming to increase its accountability. If you are appalled at this being carried out "in your name" what can you do about it?

This is the problem of having to simply trust leaders to 'do the right thing' because you can't really hold them to account in any way shape or form.

Many within the EU want much greater power for the EU (Verhofstadt's 'EU Empire'), so it is perfectly rational to be concerned about this.

I think the EU has far more democratic elections than the UK. My vote counted when I voted in the European Elections, my vote was pointless in December and always is in my constituency.

Simply having elections doesn't make a system democratic though, no matter how proportional they are. You can vote in North Korea, doesn't make it democratic.

A proportional result for something with minimal power, cannot meaningfully be said to be more democratic than the difference between 2 widely accepted democratic electoral methods. FPTP v PR is the icing on the cake, and if it seems like an important issue then you are doing pretty well. I live somewhere that is a democracy, but lacks many features that are taken for granted in Europe. In this situation, you become much more aware of the cake than the icing as changing the electoral method would have minimal impact on the structural problems.

As such, I think it myopic to only look at the method, rather than what is being voted for.

What do you actually vote for in the EU elections?

MEPs are the lowest of 3 levels of the EU executive and can't even propose legislation. There is no pan-European public sphere, European elections are generally subordinate to domestic politics rather than being elections on the direction of the EU (because they can't really affect it), few people really understands the EU as it is too distant from their lives, the EU has purposely chosen not to prioritise increasing its democratic legitimacy, and if you don't like what the EU is doing you can't vote anyone out of power or affect change in any meaningful way.

As Gary Younge put it in the Guardian:

I considered voting for Brexit. After the referendum was agreed, but before the campaigning had begun, I could have gone either way. My issue was democracy. I didn’t like the fact that the European parliament could not initiate legislation; that turnout for European parliamentary elections had fallen 30% since the first elections in 1979; the way countries that voted “the wrong way” on EU referendums were effectively instructed to vote again (Denmark 1992; Ireland 2001, 2008) and get it right; the fact that Greece’s resounding democratic rejection of the terms of its bailout (2015) was treated with such contempt.

It felt increasingly obvious that this institution had growing control over our lives even as it became less obvious how anyone beyond its ruling bodies could directly influence it. It’s never been obvious to me that the EU’s senior leadership could satisfactorily answer all of the late Tony Benn’s five essential questions for people of power, namely: What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you use it? To whom are you accountable? How do we get rid of you?

 

[Augustus]

Another interesting quote on the Eurogroup from the former Greek finance minister. When challenging a decision made by the group, he was told he had no recourse to complaint because the Eurogroup doesn't even officially exist given it was never set up via binding treaties:

“So,” [Yanis] Varoufakis said, “What we have is a non-existent group that has the greatest power to determine the lives of Europeans. It’s not answerable to anyone, given it doesn’t exist in law; no minutes are kept; and it’s confidential. No citizen ever knows what is said within . . . These are decisions of almost life and death, and no member has to answer to anybody.”

 

[Altfish]

Another interesting quote on the Eurogroup from the former Greek finance minister. When challenging a decision made by the group, he was told he had no recourse to complaint because the Eurogroup doesn't even officially exist given it was never set up via binding treaties:

“So,” [Yanis] Varoufakis said, “What we have is a non-existent group that has the greatest power to determine the lives of Europeans. It’s not answerable to anyone, given it doesn’t exist in law; no minutes are kept; and it’s confidential. No citizen ever knows what is said within . . . These are decisions of almost life and death, and no member has to answer to anybody.”

And because of that the UK leaves the EU but Greece stays in.
Makes sense.

By the way, I have read Adults in the Room - IIRC it was the IMF that really played hardball, Christine Lagarde and her people

 

[Augustus]

And because of that the UK leaves the EU but Greece stays in.
Makes sense.

Just another example of how the EU generally cares little about democratic accountability, and that those concerned about sovereignty are not simply dimwitted dupes fooled by The Sun and The Daily Mail as Remain folks insisted was the only explanation.

By the way, I have read Adults in the Room - IIRC it was the IMF that really played hardball, Christine Lagarde and her people

Was one of the troika with the ECB and European Council.

YV also said some of the staunchest opposition came from the leaders of countries who had been in a similar boat like Spain and Ireland. For them it was imperative that Greece didn't get a good deal as it would have made them look bad domestically and damaged their prospects for reelection.

This is a clear example of the problem caused by having no EU public sphere, and EU politics being purely subservient to the domestic political agenda in dozens of diverse countries.

 

[Estro Felino]

And because of that the UK leaves the EU but Greece stays in.

I don't understand why the Greeks should leave...since it is the criminal gangs in Brussels and Frankfurt who caused their financial problems in the first place...
They should leave. Not the Greeks who invented the word Europe.

 

[Altfish]

Do you think telling foreigners that we don't like them BUT if they earn plenty and are talented we like you will attract the rich talented ones?

It is a bit like a man saying "I don't like women but if you are Angelina Jolie I might date you"

 

[Altfish]

But I thought all the restrictive environmental laws came from the EU - what's this ...

House coal and wet wood to be phased out by 2023 to cut pollution

 

[Augustus]

But I thought all the restrictive environmental laws came from the EU - what's this ...

House coal and wet wood to be phased out by 2023 to cut pollution

You mean it isn't necessarily the case that, without the benevolent paternalism of the EU to save us, we're all guaranteed to end up grovelling in filth as British people can only make laws that facilitate untrammelled Dickensian exploitation of the masses and the environment?

 

[Altfish]

You mean it isn't necessarily the case that, without the benevolent paternalism of the EU to save us, we're all guaranteed to end up grovelling in filth as British people can only make laws that facilitate untrammelled Dickensian exploitation of the masses and the environment?

Well, that's what the Tories do, isn't it. Rees Mogg wants us to go back to Victorian times when people would doff their caps to him.