 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: In, out, in, out; EU Referendum thread.
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
... if the vote is to leave then Cameron will probably stepdown, which leaves the way clear for Boris Johnson.
Yet another reason to vote Remain. The Fixed Term Parliament Act means that a majority for leave means four years with Johnson, Gove or Grayling as PM.
As a very meagre consolation, at least Duncan-Smith as a previously failed Conservative leader is presumably out of the running.
I am going to speak bluntly, to say what no one has had the guts to say publicly.
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating.
It's true that most people I know socially keep their opinions close to their chests. So there may be some secret leavers among them. But it annoys me that because the BBC is required by its charter to be even handed, every time there's any discussion of the referendum, they are obliged to wheel out yet another flat-earther to let them have their say.
Gracious, even Corbyn says remain. Need I say more.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Enoch: Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave.
I have (her arguments for leaving were rather daft, but it's someone whose opinions I generally respect).
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
... if the vote is to leave then Cameron will probably stepdown, which leaves the way clear for Boris Johnson.
Yet another reason to vote Remain. The Fixed Term Parliament Act means that a majority for leave means four years with Johnson, Gove or Grayling as PM.
As a very meagre consolation, at least Duncan-Smith as a previously failed Conservative leader is presumably out of the running.
I am going to speak bluntly, to say what no one has had the guts to say publicly.
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating.
It's true that most people I know socially keep their opinions close to their chests. So there may be some secret leavers among them. But it annoys me that because the BBC is required by its charter to be even handed, every time there's any discussion of the referendum, they are obliged to wheel out yet another flat-earther to let them have their say.
Gracious, even Corbyn says remain. Need I say more.
The EU is not a democratic institution and my franchise was purchased with the blood of those who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray by voting to remain in an institution which is a technocracy with at best democratic advisory overtones. What ever the possible consequences of a leave they will be democratic consequences and the principle of democratic power is not for me one that I am willing to abandon what ever the pragmatic and circumstantial benefits may or may not be.
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I am going to speak bluntly, to say what no one has had the guts to say publicly.
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating.
The EU is not a democratic institution. Our democratic franchise was purchased with blood and struggle by those, like my socialist ancestors, who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray. I can not in good conscience vote to remain in an institution which is a technocracy with at best democratic advisory overtones. Thus diminishing the overarching principle of governance and law by the consent of the governed. What ever the possible consequences of a leave they will be consequences which enhance our democratic power of self determination. The principle of democratic power is not for me one that I am willing to abandon. What ever the pragmatic and circumstantial economic or political benefits may or may not be, for me, personally, my adherence to the principle of democratic rather than technocratic power overrides such considerations. Where a truly democratic federal Europe on the table I may be persuaded to remain, despite some other concerns, however no such offer is on the table so I will be voting to leave.
If this makes me stupid or idealistic then so be it.
C Hill
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
sorry must have accidentally posted the first one half way through wring it please disregard. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
The EU is not a democratic institution?
The council of ministers (where all the important decisions are taken) is made up of elected heads of state from every member country.
The EU parliament (where such decisions are scrutinised) is made up of elected MEPs from every region of every member country.
Sounds pretty democratic to me.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The EU is not a democratic institution?
The council of ministers (where all the important decisions are taken) is made up of elected heads of state from every member country.
The EU parliament (where such decisions are scrutinised) is made up of elected MEPs from every region of every member country.
Sounds pretty democratic to me.
You forgot the European Commission. Appointed and mostly time-expired politicos plus its own civil service propose legislation. No elections for anyone who works there. Unable to get its accounts through its own auditors, let alone external ones. Less democratic, though similar to, the old Politburo.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Doc Tor: The EU parliament (where such decisions are scrutinised) is made up of elected MEPs from every region of every member country.
I often hear people say that the EP has rather little power, and that this makes the EU less democratic than it should be.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Yes, the Commission needs reform. But to assert the EU decision-making processes aren't democratic is demonstrably untrue.
National governments and the Council of Ministers adopt EC proposals. The EC can't enact anything of their own.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
It looks like Cameron has given the exit campaign a boost. I'm sure this will tilt some waverers to the exit vote.
If remaining in the EU is so beneficial to business, the City, and the rest, shouldn't they fund any "Stay in" campaign?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
The EU is not a democratic institution. Our democratic franchise was purchased with blood and struggle by those, like my socialist ancestors, who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray.
First past the post makes a mockery of democracy. The current government has the support of less than 1/4 of the electorate and only 1/3 of the votes cast. Yet it gets to govern as a majority. The head of state is hereditary, and though we've been blessed with a benevolent monarch for the whole of my life, this is far from guaranteed. And the second house is appointed along the same lines as the European Commission. I don't see that democracy comes into the decision.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Yes, the Commission needs reform. But to assert the EU decision-making processes aren't democratic is demonstrably untrue.
National governments and the Council of Ministers adopt EC proposals. The EC can't enact anything of their own.
It is demonstrably different to a federal constitutional democracy like for example the USA. A Council of ministers which amounts to bit of horse trading by various, admittedly, elected heads of state, dose not amount to a democracy in action.
For a start power and economic strength are as much a factor in their negotiations as the will of any given electorate. That democratically elected officials ultimately ratify law which they do not on the whole generate is for me less than satisfactory. It is only in a context of an elected legislature that I could in good conscience countenance the primacy of EU law, over national laws produced by elected officials.
If the laws were produced by democratic representatives i.e. the parliament this would begin to help me move towards pan-Europeanism. The issue of a democratically elected legislature seems to me central to the democratic legitimacy of law which governs our lives. I realise that international law and arbitration is also chipping away at this principle.
I do not in principle oppose a free democratic choice of treaty obligation. I see the necessity of this and the good it has done regarding for example human rights. I conversely, have misgivings about where it could lead us with regard to some aspects of international arbitration.
For me personally speaking the EU takes us too far down the road towards autocracy Technocracy. It tilts the balance past my good conscience. Even a benign Technocracy would on principal be something I would oppose. There are it seems to me two great threats to the democratic principal in our time, one is technocracy and the other is financial/corporate special interest. There is in practice something of a revolving door between the two.
As much as possible I wish to see power exercised under the protection of clear cut democratic accountability. It seems to me that the EU is even more lacking in this regard than the already woeful national state of affairs that pertains hear in the UK. To be clear I am referring to our own national and local government systems.
If you are comfortable by all means vote to stay in. For me something akin to a US style federalised constitutional democracy would be preferable. It seems to me, that this is the only way to preserve a meaningful notion of democracy. This is especially the case in such a vast geographical and demographical governance project like Europe. This is not close to being on the table. I shall vote to leave on the grounds that democratic franchise must be maintained to legitimise law and government as a first principal of legitimate governance.
Even where a truly democratic option on the table I would, in truth, have misgivings. Without such an offer I have little doubt regarding the need for me to vote to leave on these grounds.
I recognise that leaving would not win the battle for true democratic power but it may make such a battle winnable.
CHill
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
The EU is not a democratic institution. Our democratic franchise was purchased with blood and struggle by those, like my socialist ancestors, who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray.
First past the post makes a mockery of democracy. The current government has the support of less than 1/4 of the electorate and only 1/3 of the votes cast. Yet it gets to govern as a majority. The head of state is hereditary, and though we've been blessed with a benevolent monarch for the whole of my life, this is far from guaranteed. And the second house is appointed along the same lines as the European Commission. I don't see that democracy comes into the decision.
I agree with all of these critiques except to say that parliament and not the monarch wields political power in the UK. The monarch, benevolence notwithstanding, is to all intents and purposes a figure head. The rights and wrongs of a hereditary head of state are a distinct question.
With that small caveat I would agree with all you say and more regarding the flaws of the Westminster system. However I would argue that adding or preserving an even more broken and non-representative layer of government which overarches Westminster to me seem the least effective way to fix these problems.
Even if you contend that they are equally broken, I see little sense in preserving two broken systems rather than one. It seems to me, something of a stretch that they are equally broken. There are it seems to me even more fundamental problems with the EU model, it is to all intents and purposes a technocracy. Non-democratic legislative bodies make me deeply nervous. Our democracy is undoubtedly a broken one. It at least has the principal of law and governance by democratic consent even if it is very badly executed at times. I'm far from sure that such a principal is clearly enshrined in the EU as it stands now.
Purely in terms of logical principles I see no reason to preserve one evil because another exists. Despite all that is broken in our system I am not ready do give up on the principle of democracy enshrined within it. I concede that democracy is undermined greatly in our national political discourse and systems. I observed this myself in the very post to which you replied. The solution for me is not to surrender to the inevitable but to struggle; our democratic rights were only ever won by struggle and will only be retained and advanced by such struggle.
I strongly agree with much of your critique of our political system. The choice before me is not one regarding our electoral system sadly. When such a choice was offered the change to A.V. seemed to me was little better than the present system. I would like to see radical electoral and constitutional reform. Had I lived in Scotland during their referendum, I would have voted to leave the UK. I am English and have unionist sentiments having friends and family north of the boarder. Despite all this I would have voted to leave the UK. For exactly the same reasons I will vote to leave the EU. I would want to extricate myself from Westminster's broken and corrupt system and stand a chance however slim of building something more representative where I lived. In the same way I have the choice to vote to leave the EU. I wish to extricate myself from its corrupt and undemocratic systems. The same democratic principles I wish to preserve and advance domestically are undermined even further by the EU. Therefore I am personally committed to leaving.
Chill
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
The EU is not a democratic institution. Our democratic franchise was purchased with blood and struggle by those, like my socialist ancestors, who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray.
First past the post makes a mockery of democracy. The current government has the support of less than 1/4 of the electorate and only 1/3 of the votes cast. Yet it gets to govern as a majority. The head of state is hereditary, and though we've been blessed with a benevolent monarch for the whole of my life, this is far from guaranteed. And the second house is appointed along the same lines as the European Commission. I don't see that democracy comes into the decision.
The decision to stick with that method of electing MPs was made at a referendum. A resounding majority of those who voted chose to have first past the post. Of course, well under 50% did in fact vote - can you assume that the majority of potential electors did not care? Voting here in elections and referendums is compulsory, a point on which we've had interesting discussions over the years with US friends.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
The EU is not a democratic institution. Our democratic franchise was purchased with blood and struggle by those, like my socialist ancestors, who fought for it and as yet despite its relative debasement in our first past the post system this is not a legacy I am willing to betray.
First past the post makes a mockery of democracy. The current government has the support of less than 1/4 of the electorate and only 1/3 of the votes cast. Yet it gets to govern as a majority. The head of state is hereditary, and though we've been blessed with a benevolent monarch for the whole of my life, this is far from guaranteed. And the second house is appointed along the same lines as the European Commission. I don't see that democracy comes into the decision.
The decision to stick with that method of electing MPs was made at a referendum. A resounding majority of those who voted chose to have first past the post. Of course, well under 50% did in fact vote - can you assume that the majority of potential electors did not care? Voting here in elections and referendums is compulsory, a point on which we've had interesting discussions over the years with US friends.
The referendum did no such thing (my italics). It merely rejected he proposal to switch to the "Alternative Vote" system, which retains single-member constituencies but is still not proportional and remains open to gerrymandering. Proportional representation methods exist and one is used for the European Parliamentary elections but it is based on party lists rather than a true Single Transferable Vote method, which is my preference and had that been at stake, the outcome of the referendum might have been different.
btw, I believe Australia has it right insisting that everyone votes, even if it is an abstention, a write-in or "none of the above".
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Fair point about the actual question put to the electorate.
Compulsory voting is an essential element of a democracy, along with a secret ballot, and electorates drawn by an independent commission. The latter of course is subject to direction as to the manner in which electorates are to be drawn, as witness the situation in Queensland for many years. The directions to favour country electorates were originally given to boost Labor Party representation, but later continued to give the same result to a governing Country Party.
[ 08. April 2016, 08:55: Message edited by: Gee D ]
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
They have compulsory voting in Brazil also, but I'm not sure if I'm a big fan of it. I have the impression that what it does mostly is give rise to a lot of bureaucracy.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Chill, my apologies for taking so long to come back on your response. I have been very busy over the last 48 hours.
I could not disagree with you more. I recognise the (sort-of) rational basis for your statement "I see little sense in preserving two broken systems rather than one", but I evaluate things by results. As a citizen, most of us, and certainly me, have benefitted greatly from the restraints on the freedom of action of the broken, democratically deficient, House of Commons exercised by the undemocratic House of Lords, not very elected EU and outside the electoral system altogether, UK court system, European Court of Justice and European Court of Human Rights.
The fact that some other ideal system might be quite different and more democratic if it could but happen, to me is largely irrelevant. It isn't going to happen. What is more, if it did, it would undoubtedly turn out to have all sorts of unforeseen consequences which would almost certainly be detrimental. They alway are.
quote:
Originally posted by GeeD
Compulsory voting is an essential element of a democracy ...
Quite simply, no it isn't. Most democracies function very adequately without it. It would also be very possible, and I am sure there have been plenty of examples, for an undemocratic state to have compulsory voting.
If North Korea were to have elections, I do not doubt that voting would be compulsory, even if the results would demonstrate that more people had voted for the beloved leader than actually existed.
So don't use the word 'essential' unless you really mean it. It has the result that even if there is general substance in some of what you say, people like me who are picky about words can come back and blow you out of the water.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
The fact that some other ideal system might be quite different and more democratic if it could but happen, to me is largely irrelevant. It isn't going to happen. What is more, if it did, it would undoubtedly turn out to have all sorts of unforeseen consequences which would almost certainly be detrimental. They alway are.
Agreed. It would be interesting to know how many of the people who complain about the democratic deficit in Europe also complain about Britain giving up veto powers.
I've said upthread that the advantage of the current system is that it ensures every member state has a voice on the executive. If the European Parliament became a Westminster-style democracy, with the executive being whatever combination of ministers gets the support of a majority of MEPs, then the UK could easily end up with no voice at all - especially as Mr Cameron decided to move his MEPs into a group with no chance of ever holding a majority.
The alternative I suppose would be a kind of consociational system like in Northern Ireland, where the executive would be proposed by the Parliament and would need not only majority support but also representation from each country, which would probably lead to a permanent Belgian-style power vacuum. Or else you could give member states the right to veto legislation regardless of whether they're represented on the executive. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had a system whereby any noble could veto legislation he didn't like - this is sometimes claimed to have led to the collapse of the country.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
[qb]
The decision to stick with that method of electing MPs was made at a referendum.
Hi thanks for your response. Sioni Sais has expressed far more eloquently than I could my reservations regarding this matter.
Hi Enoch thanks for your response I found it very interesting and insightful. It made me think about how good outcomes often come from unexpected places. I also apologise for being tied up and busy and thus slow to respond…
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I recognise the (sort-of) rational basis for your statement "I see little sense in preserving two broken systems rather than one", but I evaluate things by results.
We may well be starting from different premises’ and thus arriving at different places. My ethical thinking tends to be deontological. (Although I must confess I am strongly personally influence by Aristotelian and Platonist virtue ethics as well.)
I find personally consequentialism and utilitarianism less compelling. I recognise this is country to the prevailing trend in political thinking.
In a chaotic world outcomes are often unforeseen and hard to predict. I tend to stick to what I consider right principles as my personal ground for political decision making. Of course I don’t think consequence is utterly irrelevant. It is just that where unpredictable consequence finds itself in opposition to what I hold to be right principle I am inclined to trust the principle. The consequence can and often does change. I also fear where consequence based ethics can lead us. John Stewart Mill on Humanitarian intervention makes for a chilling read if place in its historic context of imperialism.
quote:
As a citizen, most of us, and certainly me, have benefitted greatly from the restraints on the freedom of action of the broken, democratically deficient, House of Commons exercised by the undemocratic House of Lords, not very elected EU and outside the electoral system altogether, UK court system, European Court of Justice and European Court of Human Rights.
There a couple of points I would like to draw out here. One I firmly believe that the separation of the elected legislature from the independent Judiciary is central to a good democratic system. We agree on that but I do not see it as a conflict with my earlier observations. My compliant is that the power to enact(as opposed to enforce or rule upon) law can only be legitimately wielded by the people. Thus a democratic legislature is essential for that principle to remain intact. Power wielded with out consent of the governed is tyranny however benign it may be. I did make mention earlier that I was relatively comfortable with treaty based international law obligations as assented to by a democratic sovereign governments. So international law seems to me to be ok in the right circumstances. The one that really snags me up is the lords, you are indeed right that this unelected body has done much to preserve the liberties which I hold dear. It has also done much good in other areas well. The fact that its nature does not sit well with me does nothing to disqualify the truth of your assertion.
quote:
The fact that some other ideal system might be quite different and more democratic if it could but happen, to me is largely irrelevant. It isn't going to happen.
I think the fundematal principal that people can only be governed by concent is something we should never give up on. No matter how unrealistic it may seem. It seemed far more so to our ancestors who won us the liberty's we now enjoy. All hope of progress lies in the hands of unreasonable people who refuse to accept the status quo. We still have immense power. We should not surrender it to apathy and distraction. We live in a time where our liberties are being rolled back. Our democratic power undermined, often through the peddling of fear, while we stand like children distracted by the glittering lights of our consumer culture.
Men like Ghandi in India Showed what William Blake told us to be true that our Manacles are mind forged. That force is bounded by limits of viability and that our complicity is needed to enable our enslavement.
quote:
I wander thro' each charter'd street,
Near where the charter'd Thames does flow.
And mark in every face I meet
Marks of weakness, marks of woe.
In every cry of every man,
In every infants cry or fear,
In every voice in every pan,
The mind forged manacles I hear
I do not believe that such a principle as the consent of the governed can be sacrificed on the altar of expedience. Which is what I personally would feel I was doing where I to vote to remain.
quote:
What is more, if it did, it would undoubtedly turn out to have all sorts of unforeseen consequences which would almost certainly be detrimental.
I could make an equal case that staying in may be detrimental as well. I hope I have conveyed that this is not my main motivation. I would stay in and seek to preserve it, if I believed it was the moral course of action.
Anyway, here are some of my pragmatic concerns; The precarious state of the Euro Zone economy. There is a major on-going toxic debt crises in both southern and to an ever increasing extent northern Europe. This in both national debt and financial service industry terms, I foresee real potential for an economic collapse of catastrophic proportions. Either way this will be bad but it may well be worse for us if we are still in. Another crash is coming one can only kick the can so far down the road before you run out of road. My next concern is the growth of austerity, which means the impoverishment of the week. We have problems with this here in the UK but to nothing like the extent of what is happening in southern Europe. The suppression of left wing democratic voices, see for example, Greece’s externally imposed national capitulation in the latest bailout. I no longer think the EU is a useful vehicle for the pragmatic left to advance social justice beyond the national conversation. Conversely, the rise of the extreme right, in Europe is another potential source of difficulties, violence and extremism as well as political movements like the front National are on the rise. The ongoing migrant crises, the radicalisation of Islamic extremists and there growth and success in Europe are for me another great concern. The escalating tensions in Turkey and its potential over spill westwards. The ever growing tensions with Russia, see for example the Ukrainian conflict. These are all potential existential threats to the EU. All these could be construed as sensible pragmatic reasons to Leave. A pragmatist might wish to protect our interests in the face of such a volatile situation. I’m an Idealist but I’m far from sure that the pragmatist case is unambiguously pro remain. In short I think in pragmatic terms the EU’s impending collapse or disintegration is probably inevitable irrespective of whether we leave or remain. External pressures internal divisions economic decline and increasing social unrest do not make for a stable political union in my view. Don’t get me wrong I don’t think it will happen next week but I think that it is the direction of travel that we face.
CHill
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Wow, Chill. That's a long reply. I'm not sure where to start.
I think you're probably right about our "starting from different premises and thus arriving at different places". I regret I don't even know what 'deontological ethical thinking means'. I suspect that if we met, you would regard me as just another tawdry pragmatist. Certainly, I'm not an idealist, and am happy not to be accused of being one. What is more, I think that "unreasonable people who refuse to accept the status quo" have been the cause of far more of what is deeply unpleasant in the world than any 'hope of progress' that any of them might theoretically represent.
I am, though, profoundly puzzled by your introduction of a moral dimension in,
quote:
I would stay in and seek to preserve it, if I believed it was the moral course of action.
There could be a moral case for remaining on the grounds that most people would say that international co-operation is morally better than its absence. In what sense, though, can anyone argue that it is more 'moral' to leave than to remain?
Even the leave camp don't seem to be arguing that. They seem largely to be driven by expediency arguments that don't persuade me, nationalist sentiment, and a dislike of Johnny foreigner.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
deano
princess
# 12063
|
Posted
Sorry I've been away. Me and family have been in Rome. Brilliant place. St. Peters is just incredible. I've been educating my impressionable children why up candle is better than down candle and why the Roman Forum wasn't plastic ("because Americans didn't build it dear").
Anyway, I have a question or two...
If we leave the EU, will we have to be PC anymore?
Only I stuck two fingers up at a Roman woman in a Fiat 500 who, from her hand gestures, wanted me to stay on the pavement instead of walking across the zebra crossing like we do in England.
I also told an old eyetie git, in some sort of "uniform", who told me to stand up when I rested my wearly feet in some monstrosity of marble to one of their "kings" that he was responsible for me voting to leave the EU.
Do you think they understood? If not why not when English is the most spoken language on the planet?
--------------------
"The moral high ground is slowly being bombed to oblivion. " - Supermatelot
Posts: 2118 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
So, you have a story about behaving obnoxiously on holiday. And, you're point is?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
So, you have a story about behaving obnoxiously on holiday. And, you're point is?
His point is that holidays don't change him! He is all about consistency! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I thought he was satirising the state of mind of the typical leave voter. I really, really hope I wasn't wrong.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I thought he was satirising the state of mind of the typical leave voter. I really, really hope I wasn't wrong.
I thought the "Death of Satire" had been explained by it having become all too real.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chill
Shipmate
# 13643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I regret I don't even know what 'deontological ethical thinking means'. I suspect that if we met, you would regard me as just another tawdry pragmatist.
Not at all I Just mean that I find principles more compelling ethically than consequences. We all compromise to some extent. I notice your post script which is both funny and true. I am pro-liberty and only accept democracy under sufferance as the only justifiable operation of power over free autonomous beings. I have some sympathy with political/philosophical anarchism but do not believe it is sustainable in the real world. It is the principle of Liberty and democracy which in the most part guides my views on the European Union.
quote:
Certainly, I'm not an idealist, and am happy not to be accused of being one. What is more, I think that "unreasonable people who refuse to accept the status quo" have been the cause of far more of what is deeply unpleasant in the world than any 'hope of progress' that any of them might theoretically represent.
I absolutely agree with you here. Allow me to clarify. I acknowledge that there are many people who are unreasonably bad, which is why it is incumbent upon those of us who are committed to freedom and justice to aspire towards unreasonable good.
quote:
There could be a moral case for remaining on the grounds that most people would say that international co-operation is morally better than its absence.
On the whole I am inclined to agree but for me the loss of democratic self-determination out ways that. I do find it quite compelling however. I heard Yanis Varoufakis the former Greek finance minister, argue that we should stay in to help reform and democratise the EU. It is the pro-case I find most compelling and the closest to swaying me. Project fear, however, is not really wining me over.
quote:
In what sense, though, can anyone argue that it is more 'moral' to leave than to remain?
Because freedom and self-determination is the fundamental ground of all meaningful moral action.
I would wish to argue that democracy is the best practical option to secure that liberty. It has in it implicate consent for government and law. Consent to law is the only moral ground for the exercise of violent constraint which is in its purist form the ultimate threat of law. To vote to stay in even benign bondage is for me morally unacceptable.
quote:
Even the leave camp don't seem to be arguing that. They seem largely to be driven by expediency arguments that don't persuade me, nationalist sentiment, and a dislike of Johnny foreigner.
Many of them hold this stance, yes. I agree that many of them are also arguing from expediency. There is however an eclectic mix of opinion on both sides of this debate spanning left and right wing divides. I guess what I am trying to say is this. The debate has on the whole been conducted about what is good for business and our economy. This is something which is terrifically difficult to assess ether way. This is evidenced by the fact that many of those calling for remain on commercial grounds were strong advocates of the Euro. We now know with hind sight this would have been economically disastrous.
The truth is however clear that there is a democratic deficit in the structures of the EU. Whilst I do recognise the problems we have domestically with our democratic system I am not yet ready to abandon the principle. I am concerned about what is good for our liberty, freedom and franchise such as it is. I do not believe that the EU is good for that. To quote a better man than I...
quote:
:John Philpot Curran (1750-1817)
It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.
Chill
Posts: 343 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chill:
Because freedom and self-determination is the fundamental ground of all meaningful moral action.
I would wish to argue that democracy is the best practical option to secure that liberty. It has in it implicate consent for government and law. Consent to law is the only moral ground for the exercise of violent constraint which is in its purist form the ultimate threat of law. To vote to stay in even benign bondage is for me morally unacceptable.
Chill
I appreciate your idealism but don't you see that the efforts of all governments, even (especially?) in democratically elected Western model ones are hamstrung by business and economic interests. Our liberties are constantly under attack by these unelected interests. I suppose my point is "Whose law is it anyway?"
The really serious problems are way beyond trading blocs but I'd rather be associated with the mixed bag of countries in Europe, some of whom do put human interests rather more to the fore than Cameron, than rampant corporatism in America or the "kith and kin" dreams of many UKIPpers and old colonials.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Most of the advocates of Brexit hitherto have been right wing Poujardists. In the last 3-4 days, though, I've heard two left wing Brexiters being interviewed. I was intrigued, but not all that surprised, to find that they were as dense and unpersuasive as the more familiar reactionary Brexiters.
The limits of the arguments of one of them seemed to be, 'that way we can pull up the draw-bridge and go back to the dreary world view of a trade unionist in the 1950s'. The other was saying that only the EU came between Britain today and the prospect of achieving socialism in one country, his version of juche, a sort of British version of Enver Hoxha's Albania. He seemed to be oblivious to the thought that this would also be dependent on a degree of democratic illegitimacy against which his objections to the EU's undemocratic constitution would be as nothing.
So, for me, this confirms what I said on this thread on the 6th of April.
quote:
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
Enoch said quote:
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating
I feel the same, but I tend to feel this way about all sorts of things. Those where I don't, I suppose I change my mind, sooner or later.
I think the argument about sovereignty is the strongest one in favour of leaving, but I think it's illusory. We always have to pool, negotiate and share our self-determination, freedom and sovereignty. It's never just there as an absolute. Our voting system and corrupt politics are a far greater wound to our moral agency and sovereignty than membership of the EU is.
I think there's a real chance, if we leave, that the weakened EU will collapse with disastrous consequences.
Deano's post is uncannily like the opinions I hear, dressed up to make them fit to go out and about, from many Brexitters.
Do I have any positive reasons for voting to remain? I think politics needs massive reform. Neither leave nor remain offers this, but remaining and working to change the EU and, with its help, ourselves, seems the only possible way forwards.
In the end it's about learning to live together. Hard, but not a reason to look for a private cave.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
I had the misfortune to listen to Gove's 3 minute hate this morning.
I'm left wondering why a man who's objecting that the Remain campaign is treating people like children then goes on to treat them like gullible fools, by spouting one falsehood after another in a kind of Gish-gallop that would be amusing, save for the seriousness of the subject.
I know, lying politician lies, but this was pretty bare-faced, even by the usual standards.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
hatless: I think there's a real chance, if we leave, that the weakened EU will collapse with disastrous consequences.
Exactly. I'm not a big fan of the EU myself, and on many counts I'm neutral when it comes to a Brexit (even if it means that I would lose my current job).
But I do think that a Brexit would strengthen forces in other countries, including my own, that are rather nasty.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I know, lying politician lies, but this was pretty bare-faced, even by the usual standards.
And Gove is 'respectable' by Brexit standards, from there on it gets worse and worse.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
What Gove's arguments highlight for me is the complete lack, over and above purely economic issues, of any sense of belonging to a European Community.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I had the misfortune to listen to Gove's 3 minute hate this morning.
I'm left wondering why a man who's objecting that the Remain campaign is treating people like children then goes on to treat them like gullible fools…
My other half said 'Do you want to listen to this?" and to my emphatic "no" she switched it off.
I find it ironic that the Leave campaign should wave the 'Project Fear' label over the Remain campaign and then run their own 'Project Fear' over scares about immigration, loss of sovereignty, and being "hostages locked in the back of the car and driven headlong towards deeper EU integration".
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
So far, I have not heard any sensible argument from anyone that would persuade any rational person, yet alone me, to vote leave. Nor, as yet, have I heard anyone I know whose opinions I respect, say that they intend to vote leave. The only people I have heard advocating a leave vote are people who already had no intellectual credibility, a nil brain rating.
Have you heard Tony Benn speak on the matter yet?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
What Gove's arguments highlight for me is the complete lack, over and above purely economic issues, of any sense of belonging to a European Community.
He is far from alone in that. In fact, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a large majority of Brits who, barring economic issues, would have no sense of belonging to a European Community. Even the Remain Campaign is presenting all its arguments in economic terms.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
jacobsen
seeker
# 14998
|
Posted
Today began so badly it can only improve. Not only was I stuck in gridlocked traffic for over an hour, but the hate machine was doing its stuff on Radio 4. I don't like any politicians, but the Brexit lot seem marginally less savoury. On balance, I would vote to stay in the EU, more out of gut instinct than conviction from (spurious) economic arguments.
--------------------
But God, holding a candle, looks for all who wander, all who search. - Shifra Alon
Beauty fades, dumb is forever-Judge Judy
The man who made time, made plenty.
Posts: 8040 | From: Æbleskiver country | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Even the Remain Campaign is presenting all its arguments in economic terms.
And as I have said before, I think this difference in mindset is the biggest gulf between the UK and other European nations.
Realistically or not, here people seem to attach as much importance to some mystical notion of union as to economic issues, and talk in terms of the "European project" as a great collaborative undertaking, not about how much households will gain or lose by leaving/remaining.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
[QUOTE]
I think this difference in mindset is the biggest gulf between the UK and other European nations.
I think there is a certain something here - in that on a personal level doubtless more people in continental Europe are willing to see being in the EU as part of their identity, whereas in the UK this doesn't feature highly - if at all.
OTOH, I think in the aggregate sense there is less of a difference, see the popular German reaction to the debt crisis in southern Europe, or conversely the staunch defence of national interests whenever there is an economic effect of any Europe-wide bill.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
What Gove's arguments highlight for me is the complete lack, over and above purely economic issues, of any sense of belonging to a European Community.
He is far from alone in that. In fact, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a large majority of Brits who, barring economic issues, would have no sense of belonging to a European Community. Even the Remain Campaign is presenting all its arguments in economic terms.
And the solution that is being presented is to tear apart any sense of European identity - AND - and this is important - not just in Britain, where no doubt the sense of European identity is rather weak - BUT ALSO FOR THE REST OF EUROPE. Michael Gove has just acknowledged this in his speech - he has said that yes, there will be "contagion", but that this is a good thing.
Crikey.
He thinks that the collapse of the EU will bring a new democratic dawn to Europe.
I really don't think so.
I think the collapse of the EU will bring chaos and war to Europe.
I will give it 20 years.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
I think there is a certain something here - in that on a personal level doubtless more people in continental Europe are willing to see being in the EU as part of their identity, whereas in the UK this doesn't feature highly - if at all.
I realised this for the first time perhaps 25 years ago when I put it to a Brit that to the British, "Europeans" comprised everybody in the EU - apart from themselves.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Have you heard Tony Benn speak on the matter yet?
He cuts a fine figure, but I'm highly sceptical as to whether domestic UK politics is any freer of the influence of finance and industry, and indeed of technocrats, than the EU.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Have you heard Tony Benn speak on the matter yet?
I know I belong to a generation who is supposed to think that Tony Benn was wonderful, but he did not do it for me.I suppose it's very like how I've never been able to see why so many people my age still think Bob Dylan is special.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I realised this for the first time perhaps 25 years ago when I put it to a Brit that to the British, "Europeans" comprised everybody in the EU - apart from themselves.
Sure, and in the interim it hasn't changed - so I accept that part of your argument, as it is pretty obviously true.
OTOH, as I said, it doesn't actually affect aggregate behaviour much, so realistically the critique that the current Brexit debate hinges largely on economic consequences, has to acknowledge that national economic interests is pretty much the stock in trade of the EU as it current exists.
There are vanishingly few instances in which EU solidarity has managed to overcome national interests.
[ 19. April 2016, 11:58: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
I think there is a certain something here - in that on a personal level doubtless more people in continental Europe are willing to see being in the EU as part of their identity, whereas in the UK this doesn't feature highly - if at all.
I realised this for the first time perhaps 25 years ago when I put it to a Brit that to the British, "Europeans" comprised everybody in the EU - apart from themselves.
And, I know I'm an oddity. Because, I've never really identified as British (these days I'm more inclined to identify as Scottish, despite being born in England), but have for 30 odd years identified as European. Basically, because the points at which I identify with others in the UK are also the points that I share with others in Europe - Scandinavia in particular. And, I identify with other people as individuals, rather than with abstract concepts such as nations. Which is also probably why I identify more as Scottish than British, because I identify with a larger number of people in Scotland than in the rest of the UK.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
TurquoiseTastic: quote:
He thinks that the collapse of the EU will bring a new democratic dawn to Europe.
If he really believes that, then why isn't he campaigning for the other side? Oh wait - because he only approves of people being told what to do when he's in charge.
Michael Gove, champion of freedom and democracy? ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jacobsen:
Today began so badly it can only improve. Not only was I stuck in gridlocked traffic for over an hour, but the hate machine was doing its stuff on Radio 4. I don't like any politicians, but the Brexit lot seem marginally less savoury. On balance, I would vote to stay in the EU, more out of gut instinct than conviction from (spurious) economic arguments.
Any idea that's shared by the likes of Micheal Gove, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and George Galloway must be bad.
I found Gove's comments this morning unbelievable. He never misses an opportunity to talk down to anyone. Pots and kettles. I turned the radio off. For it's own safety. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Even the Remain Campaign is presenting all its arguments in economic terms.
And as I have said before, I think this difference in mindset is the biggest gulf between the UK and other European nations.
Realistically or not, here people seem to attach as much importance to some mystical notion of union as to economic issues, and talk in terms of the "European project" as a great collaborative undertaking, not about how much households will gain or lose by leaving/remaining.
That was my experience when I lived in France. I suppose the issues I have with the 'mystical union' approach are:
1. It leads to people treating the EU like devout Christians who will put up with any amount of crap from the Church because they believe it is the Ark of Salvation.
2. I am not convinced that the 'mystical union' view is shared by the more recent member states, especially the former Eastern Bloc. In the East ISTM the EU is more about getting away from the Russians.
3. Purely from an 'apologetics' POV, it leads to an annoying self-righteousness among supporters. I was told a number of times that the English are 'mauvais européens' (bad Europeans), and it is quite irritating.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
