UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think you misunderstand somewhat - I don't mean the issue itself will dominate, I mean the divisions and cleavages that have been created by the issue will dominate. Even if Leave and Remain is not what is being argued, the two 'political camps' that have been created by the issue will be centre to whatever other issues are in the road ahead.

Those particular divisions, those particular political camps, existed before. And even if you put them together they don't add up to anything like a majority of the electorate. Political energy is an odd thing and other issues can (and at some point will) fire up other people. What is different, what will be different, though, is the fact that the 'Remain' camp will be more mobilised and prone to organisation than it was in the past; that is a significant shift, no doubt.

[Silent Hunter]

It depends on what the trade deal looks like. Many people felt little direct impact of the EU on their daily lives except that a load of people with 'funny' accents started moving in.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The UK should never under any circumstance rejoin the EU. Even if they elect a government that wants to, any sane European country must veto that request. If there's one thing we've learned from this debacle, it's that De Gaulle was right.

Now, I sincerely hope that y'all will eventually be able to work your way back into a Norway-style arrangement  in a way that doesn't alienate large swathes of the country. That would be the best outcome for everyone involved. But given the choices BoJo has made so far, the next few years will be rough.

(And Scotland of course is very welcome as soon as it leaves the sinking ship.)

Norway is a worse outcome than membership because Britain would just be a rule-taker in that scenario. They would have to pay into the EU budget and abide by EU regulations without having any say in them. Norway's option is more applicable to Norway than Britain because fishing is a much bigger issue and so Norway gets to stay out of the Common Fisheries Policy. Norway is the opposite of taking back control. EU membership is the best deal because Britain gets the benefits of membership and a role in setting them. This is probably off the table for 20 years or if polls start showing consistently 60% + support for rejoining (but even then, will Britain be able to get the same very generous terms from the EU? Probably not). A soft Brexit and in the long-term rejoining the customs union is definitely a good idea. Sadly, with this government and their idiotic promise to negotiate a full free trade deal in less than a year, it's going to probably be a pretty barebones deal that goes hard on the sovereignty in the sovereignty vs market access trade off, the British economy will suffer significantly as a result and trade deals with the US won't compensate (and could make things worse, yes the NHS is under threat).

The thing is, Britain doesn't deserve a say in European regulations. They have clearly demonstrated that they can't be trusted with that power. They would just undermine the EU from the inside, as they have been for 40 years.

[afleitch]

Worth noting that Scotland's largest union, UNISON have backed a second independence referendum. As a union man, there's a lot of movement at grassroots to begin disaffiliation from Labour. It's logistically difficult but I expect a few more moves like this.

[Silent Hunter]

If Scotland were to become independent and join the EU, you'd need customs posts on the border with England.

[Omega21]

If Scotland were to become independent and join the EU, you'd need customs posts on the border with England.

Which is why I doubt it would happen. They're an isolated nation, and the vast majority of their trade is still with England.

[Dereich]

If Scotland were to become independent and join the EU, you'd need customs posts on the border with England.

Which is why I doubt it would happen. They're an isolated nation, and the vast majority of their trade is still with England.

If the Brexit campaign showed anything, it is that people don't find that kind of economic argument compelling when compared to arguments about "taking back control."

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If the Brexit campaign showed anything, it is that people don't find that kind of economic argument compelling when compared to arguments about "taking back control."

Serious economic arguments were not made by the Remain campaign during the 2016 referendum. Trade, agricultural subsidies, food prices and so on (big issues, you'd have thought), were barely mentioned. Instead there was vague waffle about stability in an almost abstract sense and some incoherent rambling about house prices.

[Silent Hunter]

Remain's whole approach was awful and the current "you're racist, you're racist" approach done by many, which may be true, just has the effect of putting people's backs up.

The left in general needs to find a new approach.

[Intell]

Who could forget trying to convince the public immigration was good as part of the remain campaign.

[Omega21]

Who could forget trying to convince the public immigration was good as part of the remain campaign.

If the argument was "Let's continue taking EU immigrants instead of less-educated, harder to integrate Immigrants from other Continents (which we would need to do if we left)", they would've done better.

Obviously this is not always the case, but in most cases, it's usually easier to integrate a Pole as compared to someone from Pakistan for example.

[John Dule]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

[brucejoel99]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty.

[John Dule]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

[John Dule]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd.

Stopped reading here. Collectivist rhetoric isn't just logically wrong, it's boring and repetitive. You don't even know what you're saying; you're just puking up the BS leftist ideology you've been raised in.

[brucejoel99]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd.

Stopped reading here. Collectivist rhetoric isn't just logically wrong, it's boring and repetitive. You don't even know what you're saying; you're just puking up the BS leftist ideology you've been raised in.

Thank you John Dule, very cool!

[Antonio the Sixth]

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

[John Dule]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

Again, this isn't a violation of soveriegnty because sovereign states chose to join this instutituion, and can (foolishly) choose to leave. If a new treaty does away with Article 50 or just fully embraces a United States of europe, that doesn't violate national soverignity because sovereign nations choose to agree to it and legitimately cede their sovereignty to the European Union which itself becomes a sovereign state deriving its legitimacy from the will of the European people. By your logic, the USA has no sovereign democratic legitimacy because it was preceded by quasi-sovereign states governed by the Articles of Confederation.

[John Dule]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

Again, this isn't a violation of soveriegnty because sovereign states chose to join this instutituion, and can (foolishly) choose to leave. If a new treaty does away with Article 50 or just fully embraces a United States of europe, that doesn't violate national soverignity because sovereign nations choose to agree to it and legitimately cede their sovereignty to the European Union which itself becomes a sovereign state deriving its legitimacy from the will of the European people. By your logic, the USA has no sovereign democratic legitimacy because it was preceded by quasi-sovereign states governed by the Articles of Confederation.

No. You are wrong. The member nations did not hold votes on the Union as it exists today. They joined a common market that has since grown unchecked into a political union. EU elections see abysmal turnout and many of the major positions in the bureaucracy are unelected. To say that the people in the member nations "chose to join" this Union is frankly asinine and a complete misrepresentation of how the EU has expanded its power since its inception. And if the EU does become a United States of Europe (as it is slowly gravitating towards), I'd bet good money that the legitimate qualms of EU citizens will once again go ignored.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

Again, this isn't a violation of soveriegnty because sovereign states chose to join this instutituion, and can (foolishly) choose to leave. If a new treaty does away with Article 50 or just fully embraces a United States of europe, that doesn't violate national soverignity because sovereign nations choose to agree to it and legitimately cede their sovereignty to the European Union which itself becomes a sovereign state deriving its legitimacy from the will of the European people. By your logic, the USA has no sovereign democratic legitimacy because it was preceded by quasi-sovereign states governed by the Articles of Confederation.

No. You are wrong. The member nations did not hold votes on the Union as it exists today. They joined a common market that has since grown unchecked into a political union. EU elections see abysmal turnout and many of the major positions in the bureaucracy are unelected. To say that the people in the member nations "chose to join" this Union is frankly asinine and a complete misrepresentation of how the EU has expanded its power since its inception. And if the EU does become a United States of Europe (as it is slowly gravitating towards), I'd bet good money that the legitimate qualms of EU citizens will once again go ignored.

The common market grew with a series of treaties ratified by EU members which expanded the scope of the EU in a clearly defined way. In some cases it was put to referenda or else the governments of each country agreed to it, but regardless, describing the process as unchecked and undemocratic is completely false. Many major positions in every bureaucracy are unelected and low turnout doesn't mean the EU is democratically illegitimate. Legitimate qualms of some citizens everywhere go ignored and that isn't a compelling argument against a federal Europe. I'd turn this question around: under what circumstances do you consider countries integrating and/or unifying to be legitimate? After all, if what the EU doesn't meet your standard, then nothing will, and expecting the unanimous consent of every single person in the EU for integration--which seems to be your standard--goes against democratic norms and the very notion of the clasically liberal social contract which ostensibly is the basis for your ideology.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty & shove it.

The US has been a far better ally to the UK than the EU ever has so UK will benefit from a trade deal with the US.


Also Europe adopting US style nationalism(not the Trump style, the pre Trump style more like)>>> the EU easily

[OSR stands with Israel]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

We really do need a preemptive ban on Americans posting in the international boards. People who actually know their stuff like Brucejoel can subsequently be let back in, of course.

Does that include banning 51.4% of the British population as well?

Again, this isn't a violation of soveriegnty because sovereign states chose to join this instutituion, and can (foolishly) choose to leave. If a new treaty does away with Article 50 or just fully embraces a United States of europe, that doesn't violate national soverignity because sovereign nations choose to agree to it and legitimately cede their sovereignty to the European Union which itself becomes a sovereign state deriving its legitimacy from the will of the European people. By your logic, the USA has no sovereign democratic legitimacy because it was preceded by quasi-sovereign states governed by the Articles of Confederation.

No. You are wrong. The member nations did not hold votes on the Union as it exists today. They joined a common market that has since grown unchecked into a political union. EU elections see abysmal turnout and many of the major positions in the bureaucracy are unelected. To say that the people in the member nations "chose to join" this Union is frankly asinine and a complete misrepresentation of how the EU has expanded its power since its inception. And if the EU does become a United States of Europe (as it is slowly gravitating towards), I'd bet good money that the legitimate qualms of EU citizens will once again go ignored.

The common market grew with a series of treaties ratified by EU members which expanded the scope of the EU in a clearly defined way. In some cases it was put to referenda or else the governments of each country agreed to it, but regardless, describing the process as unchecked and undemocratic is completely false. Many major positions in every bureaucracy are unelected and low turnout doesn't mean the EU is democratically illegitimate. Legitimate qualms of some citizens everywhere go ignored and that isn't a compelling argument against a federal Europe. I'd turn this question around: under what circumstances do you consider countries integrating and/or unifying to be legitimate? After all, if what the EU doesn't meet your standard, then nothing will, and expecting the unanimous consent of every single person in the EU for integration--which seems to be your standard--goes against democratic norms and the very notion of the clasically liberal social contract which ostensibly is the basis for your ideology.

The EU became unpopular precisely because it tried to govern like it was a nation instead of a trade pact. All the rules and regulations it was implementing over the last 10 years and then expecting nations to follow those even when they violate their own rules and laws showed the utter hubris and failure of the EU.

Also, the EU is not some great institution which promoted free-market economics at all, it is far more socialist than the UK and the UK being out means it can implement far more neo-liberal reforms and make it self like the US than it could have under the EU.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty & shove it.

The US has been a far better ally to the UK than the EU ever has so UK will benefit from a trade deal with the US.

While I can understand why the UK would want and benefit from a trade deal with the US, why would the US want to give the UK a better deal than It would/has the EU?  All-in-all, the UK's main trade advantage with the US was as an English -speaking, common-law stepping stone to the EU. Thanks to Brexit, Ireland fulfills that role now. Dublin is more important to us than London.