|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
They just seem to have accepted that the UK must pay the price of Brexit otherwise the whole notion of an EU is dead.
and that's what really scares me about all of this. Populism is on the march across Europe. If you wanted to light the blue touch paper under proper separatist movements across the EU I can't think of a better way of doing it than making it clear that leaving is not an option that will be tolerated by the centre/the peoples' betters.
I'd always been dismissive of those who rant on the internet about the EU being the next Yugoslavia, but an iron determination to punish anyone that tries to leave, so as to encourage the others to stay, really feels like kicking the can a bit further down the road in the direction of Belgrade.
Scarily, we might be about to see the idiots mishandling the situation in London being matched by idiots mishandling the situation in Brussels.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Well, I suppose the problem is that it is hard to see what else they can do, betjemaniac.
If we imagine a scenario where the UK gets a great deal after Brexit, then the far right voices are going to be getting louder in many countries because the advantages of being in the EU are going to be shrinking.
If it is shown to be possible to restrict immigration whilst at the same time enjoying all the benefits of the common market and none of the annoying parts, then the far right will capitalise in many countries.
Just consider France. If the UK leaves and isn't painfully punished, France will be left as one of the few large contributors to the EU project. As Italy and Greece sink with the financial cost of trying to house desperate refugees and with reduced tourists from the north (due to reducing sterling and possibility of visas for Brits), France will have to take more of the strain.
The whole thing becomes an increasing burden and the benefits to France of remaining can increasingly easily be painted as rapidly decreasing. Add in a dose of xenophobia and economic fallout from Brexit and it isn't hard to see the National Front getting increasing support and taking it out on minorities.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Betjemaniac:
quote:
If you wanted to light the blue touch paper under proper separatist movements across the EU I can't think of a better way of doing it than making it clear that leaving is not an option that will be tolerated by the centre/the peoples' betters.
You say this without the slightest bit of irony. As if the Uk hasn't taken the first step in that march. But that aside, you're also claiming that Europe will punish the UK for leaving the EU and make it profoundly difficult for them by ensuring they don't get a good deal. The fact is the EU doesn't owe Britain any deal seeing it voted to leave all on its own. The notion that Britain should be afforded some kind of respect simply because it thinks of itself as important simply doesn't wash anymore. The notion that Britain should be afforded respect and be granted privileges just on the basis of who it is, is frankly deluded. You cannot vote to leave the club house, but take it and its contents with you when you leave; it really is that simple.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
whereas now it will be defined by the government and Parliament (the majority of whom campaigned for Remain, and excludes many prominent Leavers).
with a backward glance to their constituencies (many of which voted to leave) to think about how much they'd like to still be in Parliament after the next general election. Frankly I can't decide if that's better or worse... A hard Brexit enacted by Remainers would be the ultimate irony.
There's not much point hoping for very much from Parliament. The Tories have decided that the price of staying in the Single Market and Customs Union is civil war and decided to avoid it, Corbyn and McDonnell were never Remainers to start with and are, in any event, the most ineffectual Opposition Leader and Shadow Chancellor of my lifetime, the mainstream Labour Party anticipate an electoral apocalypse at the next election and are trying to limit the fall out by signalling to the constituencies that voted Leave that they are on their side. That leaves the SNP, the Lib Dems and a handful of mavericks like Blessed Ken Clarke (PBUH) to hold the government to account. We are headed for Hard Brexit and no-one and nothing can do anything to stop it.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Posted by Betjemaniac:
quote:
If you wanted to light the blue touch paper under proper separatist movements across the EU I can't think of a better way of doing it than making it clear that leaving is not an option that will be tolerated by the centre/the peoples' betters.
You say this without the slightest bit of irony. As if the Uk hasn't taken the first step in that march. But that aside, you're also claiming that Europe will punish the UK for leaving the EU and make it profoundly difficult for them by ensuring they don't get a good deal. The fact is the EU doesn't owe Britain any deal seeing it voted to leave all on its own. The notion that Britain should be afforded some kind of respect simply because it thinks of itself as important simply doesn't wash anymore. The notion that Britain should be afforded respect and be granted privileges just on the basis of who it is, is frankly deluded. You cannot vote to leave the club house, but take it and its contents with you when you leave; it really is that simple.
Who is you in this post? Me?
I voted remain.
Thanks for playing.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
The Tories have decided that the price of staying in the Single Market and Customs Union is civil war and decided to avoid it
Which sums up our mess. The Tories internal squabbles dragging the whole nation to God alone knows where. Cameron calling the referendum in the first place, and now May trying to develop a policy, being tossed around by a hundred thousand Tory party members. Were these people elected to Parliament and formed a government to represent their constituents and do the best for the nation, or only to hold the Tory party together?
quote:
Corbyn and McDonnell were never Remainers to start with
Well, I would say reluctant remainers. Probably close to the majority of the population. There are very few people 100% in favour of EU membership (and, for that matter 100% against). The vast majority see a range of benefits, a range of problems, and balance those out to be either on the Remain or Leave side of the line. At "7 out of 10", Corbyn was probably more in favour of EU membership than many people who voted Remain, and not that different from most who campaigned for Remain - he was just honest enough to admit he recognised some of the problems with EU membership. (For the record, I'd put myself somewhere around 9 out of 10).
quote:
That leaves the SNP, the Lib Dems and a handful of mavericks like Blessed Ken Clarke (PBUH) to hold the government to account. We are headed for Hard Brexit and no-one and nothing can do anything to stop it.
And, the fact that the majority of those who voted in June didn't vote for a hard Brexit (if only 10% of those who voted Leave voted for a soft Brexit then the majority voted for staying in the common market and customs union - with the maintenance of freedom of movement as part of that) is irrelevant as the nation is held to ransom by the minority who are members of the Tory party.
--------------------
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
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
'You' is Britain.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Fletcher Christian: quote:
The fact is the EU doesn't owe Britain any deal seeing it voted to leave all on its own accord. The notion that Britain should be afforded respect and be granted privileges just on the basis of who it is, is frankly deluded.
The EU owes itself and its peoples the best deal with the UK which protects the interests of the EU citizens to the maximum extent without undermining basic principles. And any country should be accorded respect on the basis of who it is.
I have some trust that good sense will prevail, although I agree with Callan that some variant of hard brexit is looking inevitable. I don't think "Brexit means brexit" is entirely devoid of meaning, and it genuinely would surprise me if the UK Government decides that remaining in the SM and CU is brexit. Norway doesn't even do that.
And much as I would prefer the North Flexcit approach, staying in the SM and swallowing what we have to, whilst exiting the CU, I tend to agree that this option will not be on offer.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
The EU owes itself and its peoples the best deal with the UK which protects the interests of the EU citizens to the maximum extent without undermining basic principles. And any country should be accorded respect on the basis of who it is.
Yes, but the real question is what exactly that means. Allowing the UK access to the bag of sweeties without the requirement for prior handwashing would obviously reduce the experience for everyone else.
quote:
I have some trust that good sense will prevail, although I agree with Callan that some variant of hard brexit is looking inevitable. I don't think "Brexit means brexit" is entirely devoid of meaning, and it genuinely would surprise me if the UK Government decides that remaining in the SM and CU is brexit. Norway doesn't even do that.
For the nth time, Norway is not Brexit. Norway is everything that the Brexiters don't want plus none of the things they do want.
quote:
And much as I would prefer the North Flexcit approach, staying in the SM and swallowing what we have to, whilst exiting the CU, I tend to agree that this option will not be on offer.
It seems to me that the EU countries are standing fairly firm: the EU means certain things. Being out of the EU means a loss of those things.
The UK government has to choose - either it wants the benefits of the EU and has to take the things it doesn't want; or it wants out of the EU entirely. The only other choice is to have Brussels dictate what you have to do, accept unlimited freedom of movement from the EU and all the costs and have no seat at the table.
Pretending that there is somehow a middle way where all these things are up for grabs appears to be a simple fantasy.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
For the nth time, Norway is not Brexit. Norway is everything that the Brexiters don't want plus none of the things they do want.
It's difficult to know what Brexiteers want, since they have failed to give us a description of what they want - and, some of what they have said ("£350m per week for the NHS", as an example) was complete bollocks, leaving us in the dark about what of the other things they said they wanted they actually want, and what they don't.
--------------------
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
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I think it is fairly clear that most of the most avid Brexiteers want immigration control plus full access to the EU market without the Europarliament, Strasbourg, etc.
What exactly the less avid Brexit voter wanted is less clear.
But either way, there is going to be trouble if there is an agreement which doesn't "halt" immigration.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
The EU owes itself and its peoples the best deal with the UK which protects the interests of the EU citizens to the maximum extent without undermining basic principles. And any country should be accorded respect on the basis of who it is.
Sure, but what do these principles actually map to in reality?
In terms of the existing EU, most countries realize that it is in their economic interest to stay within the EU, and so will resist moves to weaken the EU.
At the same time, a lot of the freedoms the UK may want (such as financial pass-porting, the single market in goods and services etc) are only possible because of the things that the UK doesn't want (common regulation, a customs union*, freedom of movement).
Then again there is the fact that all governments are dealing in finite resources - they only have a certain time in office, a fixed number of ministers available to negotiate, a fixed number of trade negotiators able to advise and so on. Understandably they want to achieve something, and may walk away from a potential trade partner that doesn't seem to know what it wants, and is determined to dither.
Most will act in their own best interest - and why not, after all the UK believes it has just done the same.
To collapse all of this down to "they are determined to punish Britain" is so much self-centered cant, and frankly fucking embarrassing.
[*] to a point.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Mr Cheesy: quote:
Norway s not brexit
ok, i think thats bs but you may be able to enlighten me.
Is it your view that Norway is a member of the EU? Those who voted to "leave the EU" voted to cease to be a member i.e. to become a non member. I do not deny that the majority of leavers did not want Norway, although that is not proven.
I just do not see how the Norway option would not fulfill the pledge to respect the referendom.
It might be a guarantee of Tory civil war, but thats not the point.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
ok, i think thats bs but you may be able to enlighten me.
Not a problem, a relative is a Brit who has lived in Norway for more than 20 years, so I'll do my best.
quote:
Is it your view that Norway is a member of the EU?
Nope. It isn't in the EU but is forced to pay as if it was and must have free movement of EU workers. This is how my relative works there.
quote:
Those who voted to "leave the EU" voted to cease to be a member i.e. to become a non member. I do not deny that the majority of leavers did not want Norway, although that is not proven.
OK yes, they voted to cease being a member, but they also voted to leave the shackles of Brussels, to stop being under the authority of the courts at Strasbourg, to prevent EU immigration and to stop paying high EU fees. That's not Norway.
quote:
I just do not see how the Norway option would not fulfill the pledge to respect the referendom.
It might be a guarantee of Tory civil war, but thats not the point.
Norways meets exactly none of the criteria the majority thought they were voting for. The exact opposite.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Norways meets exactly none of the criteria the majority thought they were voting for. The exact opposite.
I would agree that Norways meets exactly none of the criteria the majority of those who voted Leave thought they were voting for. I would also agree that those of us who voted Remain were fairly certain that Norway wasn't the preference of the Leave campaign. However, if a few percent of those voting Leave actually wanted a Norway-like solution, coupled to those of us who voted Remain (since our preference of staying in the EU is currently off the table, Norway-like is IMO the least worse option - whether everyone who voted Remain would agree with me is, of course, unclear), could make that a majority position in the UK electorate.
--------------------
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
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
Thought I'd copy this across from the post-truth thread.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62 in the post truth thread:
In the end, reality bites. More appropriate to the Brexit thread but I rather like this.
Wake up Boris! You really are talking bullshit. Time for sackcloth and ashes. Not just from you but the other Brexit ministers. Listen to Philip Hammond. You know it makes sense. Even if it is humiliating. But after all, humiliation is not so bad.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I would agree that Norways meets exactly none of the criteria the majority of those who voted Leave thought they were voting for. I would also agree that those of us who voted Remain were fairly certain that Norway wasn't the preference of the Leave campaign. However, if a few percent of those voting Leave actually wanted a Norway-like solution, coupled to those of us who voted Remain (since our preference of staying in the EU is currently off the table, Norway-like is IMO the least worse option - whether everyone who voted Remain would agree with me is, of course, unclear), could make that a majority position in the UK electorate.
I'd be surprised if those who voted Remain would be happy with a Norway option.
Least worse? Maybe, although the situation is quite different - for a start, Norway is sitting on a big pile of petro cash (wisely invested for the people).
I just can't see a solution which doesn't address the EU courts, the payment of monies to the EU, the borders etc as being an acceptable solution to a large number of Brexiteers, and I fear what would happen in that scenario.
I'm not saying we should pander to their warped ideas, but I don't see that offering a solution which is technically leaving the EU but in practice isn't significantly different is really going to wash.
Personally, as a Remainer, I'd not support a Norway solution. I think it is a bit of a toss-up whether we'd actually be better off.
To me the only choice is in or out. The other talk is just gravy.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anteater
Ship's pest-controller
# 11435
|
Posted
Mr Cheesy:
quote:
I just can't see a solution which doesn't address the EU courts, the payment of monies to the EU, the borders etc as being an acceptable solution to a large number of Brexiteers, and I fear what would happen in that scenario
OK and I can see your point, although I would prefer it (having voted to remain anyhow).
First, would you at least admit, that a person can in good conscience, lobby for a Norway option, and still be able to say, honestly, that they fulfilled the mandate?
Second, if we talk flexcit, instead of Norway, it was the official published policy of that wing of Brexiteria bankrolled by Aron Banks, and it is likely that quite a few leavers favoured it.
Third, with flexcit Norway is not intended as a final resting place. The flexciteers believe we can get to the position you described, but in ten or so years, not two or three. So Norway is an interim, and this is why we may find it hard to get agreement on it, since the EU members will see our cunning plot, and so link it with membership of the customs union. And I do agree that Norway + Customs Union would not be on.
Richard North believes he has his bases covered as to what to do to overcome this reluctance, and your support of flexcit does rather depend on how far he would be exposed to trying it, only to get "Non!" at the eleventh hour.
I'm pretty sure that's what Phil Hammond wants and may be what May wants. As I have said previously the Customs Union is the main issue, since once out of that, we can gradually move to a more independent position.
Of course, if we got a LibLab coalition at the next election it would also make it easier to get back in, and easier for the other members states to accept this, just as would accept Norway without much fuss.
--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.
Posts: 2538 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
The Norway option would take us back to the position the UK was in before it joined the EU. Which is what the Leavers wanted. ![[Biased]](wink.gif) Not seeing a problem. I saw a few articles in the run up and aftermath from people who were voting Leave to get EETA. While the government does have a mandate for Brexit, it doesn’t have a mandate for a specific kind of Brexit. The only person who appeared to do any kind of thinking about what leave would like was North.
One thing that all the Leavers did agree on what they wanted the NHS to have more money. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Betjemanic:
quote:
Populism is on the march across Europe. If you wanted to light the blue touch paper under proper separatist movements across the EU I can't think of a better way of doing it than making it clear that leaving is not an option that will be tolerated by the centre/the peoples' betters.
If people get the idea during the negotiation that their governments are more interested in protecting the EU project rather jobs and economies in country, it will feed into Le Pen and other’s narrative that the EU is no longer fit for purpose very nicely.
I can’t see the EU breaking up in the short term, but I can see it reaching gridlock with some countries wanting more Europe and others wanting less Europe and more emphasis on national governments. But in the long term, break up is inevitable. History shows that alliances aren’t forever.
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
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I can totally see the EU breaking up in the short-to-medium term. It's in that "unlikely but possible" area that both Brexit and Trump occupied.
France is key. The EU can survive without Britain but loses its original raison d'etre without France. A Le Pen victory next year (again, seems unlikely but possible) would raise the odds of EU break-up hugely.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Then what? Fascism and war? Oh frabjous joy.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
Why would you assume that the only alternative to the EU is war?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why would you assume that the only alternative to the EU is war?
I wasn't saying that really. I just think that people like Le Pen, Farage, and Trump are not themselves fascists, but could presage it. Fascism often leads to war.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Just consider France. If the UK leaves and isn't painfully punished, France will be left as one of the few large contributors to the EU project. As Italy and Greece sink with the financial cost of trying to house desperate refugees and with reduced tourists from the north (due to reducing sterling and possibility of visas for Brits), France will have to take more of the strain.
That's true anyway, right now. There are basically three countries (Germany, France, UK) who are taking the strain of propping up most of southern Europe. One of those countries has now said they've had enough of doing so. What a surprise.
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it. I love them because such arguments are a tacit confession that EU membership isn't in the best interests of those countries, and they would be better off standing alone.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Just consider France. If the UK leaves and isn't painfully punished, France will be left as one of the few large contributors to the EU project. As Italy and Greece sink with the financial cost of trying to house desperate refugees and with reduced tourists from the north (due to reducing sterling and possibility of visas for Brits), France will have to take more of the strain.
That's true anyway, right now. There are basically three countries (Germany, France, UK) who are taking the strain of propping up most of southern Europe. One of those countries has now said they've had enough of doing so. What a surprise.
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it. I love them because such arguments are a tacit confession that EU membership isn't in the best interests of those countries, and they would be better off standing alone.
It’s certainly an admission that the EU in its current form isn’t working. Given that it was set up in the 1950’s with six countries and has grown like Topsy and the world is now completely different, that isn’t a great surprise. But l don’t think anyone currently around the table has the imagination to come up with something better.
[ETA: The main problem is probably the Euro. To make it work you need full economic integration and nobody is going to agree to that. A lot of the Southern economies simply can't afford it. But, as it was designed to be permanent, there is no mechanism for getting out without significant damage].
Tubbs
[ 16. November 2016, 16:06: Message edited by: 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
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why would you assume that the only alternative to the EU is war?
History Marvin. If the EU breaks up there will be jostling for position as the member countries try to work out what the new rules of geopolitics are. There will also be lots of mistrust and bitterness about - this seems to be happening already. There seems also to be a lot of nationalist sentiment about - this has historically been a major driver of war in Europe. There is stirring of the pot from Russia and a willingness to infringe national boundaries - see Ukraine, and watch the Baltics. None of this helps the cause of peace IMO.
This doesn't mean that war is inevitable. But I do think it - well, let's say "quite possible". I originally wrote "fairly likely" but I don't want to be too pessimistic.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I also meant that the shift to the right, now seen in Europe and the US, might herald war. Right wing nationalism tends to jostle against other nationalisms, and this can lead to war. True, it's not inevitable.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it. I love them because such arguments are a tacit confession that EU membership isn't in the best interests of those countries, and they would be better off standing alone.
No it isn't, it is simply saying that Brexit gives more of a stick for those who want to make a case for break-up to use.
It is highly likely that it would be in the best interests of France to stay in the EU after Brexit, but that does nothing about issues on which the Front National are campaigning.
Incidentally, I think it is highly unlikely that a break-up of the EU would cause war between the members, but those at the edges of Europe would get increasingly squeezed out and possibly become an easy target for Russia.
If the Southern European states, left without funds and assistance from the North, were to feel that they had no choice but to close borders and expel refugees, I can see tensions increasing in North Africa causing a massive humanitarian crisis (and I don't mean the refugees in Europe as at present, I mean Sudan style carpet bombing of displaced refugees by goodness-knows-who), possibly spilling over into Europe.
Many things can be said about the EU and the immigration policy, but one outcome of the current impasse has been that the Southern states have not been left to fend totally for themselves and that the North has done much of the heavy lifting once the refugees land. If the EU folded and that form of solidarity was no longer available, the pressure on Italy, Spain etc is going to be huge.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it.
The 'punishment' line is bollocks - it can only be arrived at by assuming that anything less than exactly what the UK wants is punishment.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I also meant that the shift to the right, now seen in Europe and the US, might herald war. Right wing nationalism tends to jostle against other nationalisms, and this can lead to war. True, it's not inevitable.
It is pretty much the cause of World War One: tensions between European nations expressed as the end of Empire-building followed by an arms race ("We want eight and we won't wait!" etc) whereas this looks like economic selfishness and a backlash against anyone who doesn't conform to a racial/national/cultural stenotype.
It doesn't make war inevitable, but it's far more likely as a consequence of the UK leaving the EU. If the UK actually gets round to doing that.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Why would you assume that the only alternative to the EU is war?
History Marvin. If the EU breaks up there will be jostling for position as the member countries try to work out what the new rules of geopolitics are.
I think this is the longest period there has ever been without war waged in Western Europe. I think the previous record is the forty five years between the Franco-Prussian War and the First World War, which we've beaten by twenty five years.
There are other factors: the Cold War was certainly discouraging. But I think it sets a presumption in favour of not breaking anything.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
1815 battle of Waterloo finally stops Europe warring
1915 all major European Powers again locked in warfare.
2016 ..... mutterings.
What is it about Europe and 100 yr cycles? Or is it that Global tension comes to home in on Europe?
The US pulling out of NATO could see the apple cart tilted a few more precarious degrees. If not triggering Brexit guarantees Continental peace then most would raise their hand to that.
History has though seen such slides into self inflicted catastrophe before, also the powerlessness of Britain's gestures in preventing them. One does of course hope that nothing like that could ever again befall our European friends and neighbours.
< Dark bout of pessimism alert >
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Posted by Anteater:
quote:
The EU owes itself and its peoples the best deal with the UK which protects the interests of the EU citizens to the maximum extent without undermining basic principles.
Absolutely, I would whole-heartedly agree but neither can the EU be requested to pick up the mess of a country that of its own accord chooses to leave the group after decades of building distrust, dis-satisfaction and a heap of untruth to the extent that its own citizens no longer really know why they are a part of it. I've said it many times; it isn't in the interests of the EU to punish Britain, but at the end of the day Britain has (at least...it is...might...soon) made this decision of its own accord and the decision was to walk away, to leave, to exit. When Britain joined, it joined a scheme that provided certain benefits and privileges and now it seems to be moaning that it can't leave and take some of those special privileges with it. It is this aspect that is so utterly bewildering to so many in Europe. They understand that deals and negotiations will need to be worked out, but Britain seems to want all the best of what Europe provided for it with none of the responsibilities of being in Europe. It's like asking those in the EU to stump up the cash to grant Britain privileges after it leaves - it doesn't make any sense.
But there will unfortunately and undoubtedly be, the narrative of a continued EU interference, of an EU that desires to punish and make things tough and that won't play ball and won't give us what we want. It has already begun to an extent, but the reality is that nobody wants a failed state or an economic basket case on their doorstep. Even when Britain does leave, the EU will want it to work and continue to be successful.
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It is pretty much the cause of World War One
The main cause of WW1 was the ludicrously complicated network of treaties compelling various countries to go to war if their treaty partners had war declared on them. Without those treaties the whole Archduke Ferdinand thing would have been a minor skirmish between Austria-Hungary and Bosnia.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
But governments were only willing and able to follow through on those treaties because they and their populations were nationalistically geared up for confrontation. The German high command, for example, seems to have taken the view that war with Russia was inevitable, and should therefore be encouraged to happen sooner rather than later.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It is pretty much the cause of World War One
The main cause of WW1 was the ludicrously complicated network of treaties compelling various countries to go to war if their treaty partners had war declared on them. Without those treaties the whole Archduke Ferdinand thing would have been a minor skirmish between Austria-Hungary and Bosnia.
Without the empire building and the arms race that came with it, the treaties wouldn't have come into being and the War wouldn't have happened. The treaties and alliances were only the immediate cause.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110
|
Posted
It is also worth looking at the initial roots of the European Union.
Schuman Declaration
The initial aim of the first moves on unity was 'to make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible'. The dangers of nationalism were to be replaced by the benefits of interdependence and sharing.
I think both the neo-nationalists and the aggressive euro-federalists have lost sight of this. Interdependence must proceed at a pace which takes account of the fissiparous tendencies of nationalism. And it is increasingly clear in Europe that it is the pace of growing federalism which is out of step with remaining nationalist tendencies.
I think the whole EU long term mission to replace the historic warfare with peaceful interdependence is in danger of collapse for these reasons. And that is very bad for the future of the EU nation states.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
The thing that worries me is that we are heading to a repeat of the 30s. At the moment, the various economies are fairly robust, whereas in the 30s, some economies were anything but.
But we have a similar line-up, white nationalism, targeting of minorities (Jews/Muslims), economic nationalism.
I'm hopeful that people are too sensible, and the economy too strong, so here's hoping.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it.
The 'punishment' line is bollocks - it can only be arrived at by assuming that anything less than exactly what the UK wants is punishment.
I recently cancelled my Amazon Prime subscription. This allowed me to spend £174 on the NHS. I figured that they would continue to allow me to access the service on the grounds that they sell more to me than I send to them. Amazingly they are insisting on punishing me by sending my stuff by the Royal Mail, limiting my access to Amazon Music and not letting me watch 'Lucifer' unless I pay for it. How unreasonable can you get!
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Well other than that Amazon Prime costs £79 (£59 in some places at the moment) and you can't give money to the NHS..
... perfect analogue!
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Well if you mean that the part about giving money to the NHS was a lie then that really does perfect the analogy.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The thing that worries me is that we are heading to a repeat of the 30s. At the moment, the various economies are fairly robust, whereas in the 30s, some economies were anything but.
But we have a similar line-up, white nationalism, targeting of minorities (Jews/Muslims), economic nationalism.
I'm hopeful that people are too sensible, and the economy too strong, so here's hoping.
Hope. Yeah, because an unstable narcissist was not just elected leader of the most powerful country in the world on the premise that it was in pretty shit shape.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ronald Binge
Shipmate
# 9002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
1815 battle of Waterloo finally stops Europe warring
1915 all major European Powers again locked in warfare.
2016 ..... mutterings.
What is it about Europe and 100 yr cycles? Or is it that Global tension comes to home in on Europe?
The US pulling out of NATO could see the apple cart tilted a few more precarious degrees. If not triggering Brexit guarantees Continental peace then most would raise their hand to that.
History has though seen such slides into self inflicted catastrophe before, also the powerlessness of Britain's gestures in preventing them. One does of course hope that nothing like that could ever again befall our European friends and neighbours.
< Dark bout of pessimism alert >
100 year cycles? Those who had learned the lessons of past conflicts have died in the meantime.
--------------------
Older, bearded (but no wiser)
Posts: 477 | From: Brexit's frontline | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
The 100 year cycle theory leaves out the Crimean war as well as a host of other wars involving Prussia and Eastern Europe between 1815-1915.
And leaves out World War II following the War to End All Wars. There have been plenty of skirmishes in Eastern Europe and including Turkey and Greece throughout the 20th Century.
Ken would have reeled off paragraphs of prose describing the historical arc of conflict.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
And the war of German unification (1866-71), the Zulu wars, Vietnam, the series of conflicts in Malaya/Malayasia/Indonesia, the horrors of the Japanese invasion of China. The list goes on and tragically on. What was posited is a very simplistic approach to some much more complex history.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
I had hoped we could move on from bullshit numerology. Apparently not ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
And the war of German unification (1866-71), the Zulu wars, Vietnam, the series of conflicts in Malaya/Malayasia/Indonesia, the horrors of the Japanese invasion of China.
In fairness we were talking about Europe, but your substantive point is nevertheless correct.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I've got to say, though, that I love all the arguments that say Britain has to be severely punished for Brexit because otherwise other countries might want to emulate it.
The 'punishment' line is bollocks - it can only be arrived at by assuming that anything less than exactly what the UK wants is punishment.
It's worth pointing out, though, that the rhetoric of punishment isn't confined to Brexiteers:
quote:
From today's Grauniad
At a dinner in Paris attended by Jean-Claude Juncker, EU commission president, and the EU’s top Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, in October, Hollande said: “There must be a threat, there must be a risk, there must be a price. Otherwise we will be in a negotiation that cannot end well.”
'Threat', to my mind, goes a bit beyond merely not providing services when the customer has ceased to subscribe to those services.
(Granted, François Hollande is a twit.)
--------------------
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
|
|
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689
|
Posted
I may not be skilled at maths, but I make it an extra 33 billion pounds of borrowing over the next two years as a result of Brexit, according to Philip Hammond. Thats, um, 317 million pounds a week. That's not far off the supposed amount the NHS could do with an injection, according to our illustrious foreign secretary...
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
