Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scriver]

I guess that’s what happens when you think that a very slight majority is good reason for doing something unprecedented on a very short time limit.

Wouldn't you have said the opposite if the Scottoff referendum had been a Leave

[TD1]

Calm yourself.

And I disagree. It is traitorous. Ask for the terms of Brexit to be altered, ask for new people to negotiate it. I may not be in agreement, but I would understand trying to get the best deal for our combined peoples.

But to stop it is to render the democratic process moot. The people voted on in or out, not in; out; or maybe, we might change our minds later.

As for your YouGov figures, you ommit the 53 per cent who believe it should go ahead.

Edited out some unfortunate phrasing.

[Rowanas]

This whole absolute majority thing is complete bullshit. I'm not democratically minded at all though, because I think that we, the people, are too easily led and too ridiculously fucking dumb and shortsighted to be allowed to rule ourselves and I think we've proved that point very well of late.

Calling for a second referendum is not traitorous or treasonous because the entire Leave side of the argument was built on tonnes of ridiculous lies, which were only exposed as such to the majority -after- we were done voting.  A vote based on falsehoods cannot be binding.

[Il Palazzo]

Calm yourself.

'Chill out dude, I only called you a traitor.'

[Maximum Spin]

A vote based on falsehoods cannot be binding.

Why not?

No, really, think about it, why not? It legitimately does reflect the views of the electorate at the time of the vote, and who's to say what is truth and what is falsehood? It could just as easily be the case that the "debunking" is propaganda as that the original statements were. Most likely, both are.

[Dorsidwarf]

And I disagree. It is traitorous. Ask for the terms of Brexit to be altered, ask for new people to negotiate it. I may not be in agreement, but I would understand trying to get the best deal for our combined peoples.

It is by no standards whatsoever traitorous to believe that Brexit (or any momentous and deeply controversial act) is a mistake and to campaign against such, and only a madman or an imbecile could genuinely believe that. Labelling people you personally or politically disagree with as "traitorous" is a long-standing tradition in political discourse of those without any actual arguments.

or do you fantasize that everyone who thinks that it was a bad idea "doth compass or imagine the death of our lord the King, or of our lady his Queen or of their eldest son and heir"

[TD1]

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2018-03-29/Wells%20Brexit%201-01.jpg

Which 53%

And I'm pissed. Of course I'm going to be pissed. For 2 years I've been called traitorous scum for not immediately abandoning my views and getting 100% behind brexit, now I'm being told I should be imprisoned for it, and you agree with them. I'm sick to the gills of this shit. I'm actually becoming embarrassed to be British. Granted I never took pride in it, I'm not a person that takes pride in that kind of thing, but I was at least thankful to have been born here and not somewhere shittier. Now I'm actually beginning to wish I wasn't. Were I in the position to, I'd happily leave this island. Unfortunately I won't be until I finish university, which will be a couple of years after the Brexit shitstorm happens.

Nowhere did I say that you should be imprisoned. Just that  any action to undermine the nation's decision is traitorous. It is a betrayal of the democratic process to say "nope, we're going to try again and see if this time the results favour me".

It is by no standards whatsoever traitorous to believe that Brexit (or any momentous and deeply controversial act) is a mistake and to campaign against such, and only a madman or an imbecile could genuinely believe that

Then you have the pleasure of knowing a madman, for I am no imbecile.

If you believe Brexit is calamatous, by all means express that. Do not, however, undermine the democratic will of the people. That seems fairly obviously traitorous to me. Had remain won, I would have been disappointed. Heartily so. Would I have said "no. Do it again."? I think not.

I will not make windows into men's souls, but their actions... those will I observe and judge.

[ChairmanPoo]

Would I have said "no. Do it again."? I think not

...in all honesty, if you think Brexiters wouldnt have demanded a new referendum, I think you hold a less than realistic view about your politicians ... and human nature I guess 


For that matter it wouldnt even be wrong. People can and do change their minds. Situations evolve. And referendums are limited (that's why they are not the main legislative recourse in western nations). It's ok to have dissenting opinions

[TD1]

Tbf, I misspoke. I would not try again in this decade, and would be more likely to suggest it as time passed.

[helmacon]

Continuing to campaign for an issue after a verdict has been reached at one point is in no way traitorous. In fact, it's quintessentially democratic to champion your ideas for policy to the public.

By your reasoning, the U.S. should have dropped the civil rights campaign after the 3/5 compromise because " the people already made a decision on the issue". So fucking what? The people can change their mind and policy should reflect that if it's happened. If there is sufficient evidence that the public feels differently about this issue now then it's worth voting on again.

Immediately calling for recounts until your side wins is wrong, but so is refusing to revisit a relevent issue because your side won one already and you don't want to risk losing that victory.

[scriver]

I think there's an important distinction needs to be done here between normal citizens and people in official capacity of the state, such as government employees and public servants, and what the latter does as private citizens and in the field of administration.

[Loud Whispers]

Whatever your opinion on how deceitful the other side may be, knowing they hold the same reservations of their other half too, there is no need to go comparing remainers to jihadis. Until we see a Brussels brigade demanding we behead all those who insult Juncker there is just no unironic comparison to be made which isn't intentionally, fruitlessly poisoning dialogue. Also politicians really ought to stop with the twitter soundbites. It's not the appropriate medium for making meaningful announcements.

[hector13]

I guess that’s what happens when you think that a very slight majority is good reason for doing something unprecedented on a very short time limit.

Wouldn't you have said the opposite if the Scottoff referendum had been a Leave

I would have, yes, but that was a legally binding referendum, as opposed to the opinion poll that was the EU referendum.

Brexitus Maximumus Farage said that a 52-48 Remain result would mean unfinished business for Leave campaigners. Look how quickly he forgot that.

[Reelya]

It is a betrayal of the democratic process to say "nope, we're going to try again and see if this time the results favour me".

No it's not really. The referendum was not a legally-binding vote, it was a purely voluntary thing to gauge support for the idea.

51.9% support on a non-binding vote isn't a mandate to force literally anything through and call it "Brexit". It's a mandate to start planning and discussing the details, through consultation.

If they finalized the form Brexit would take, then such a plan should require a second referendum, because nobody got to decide on whether they support a particular form of Brexit. It's like if you took a vote on whether to get pizza or burgers, and the majority said "pizza", then you say "ok, pineapple/anchovy pizzas it is!" then when people object and say that in that case, they might have preferred burgers after all, you say that you're just respecting the original "pizza" vote.

A political party such as Labor could perfectly democratically campaign on a "we're not going to pursue Brexit" platform, and voters are free to support that without "betraying" anything. A key hallmark of democracy is the right of the public to change their minds. That's why you keep voting over and over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016

[SaberToothTiger]

Ah, democracy, where if you don't follow the Will of the Fuhrer Party People you are a traitor and deserve to die or rot for the rest of your life in the oubliette, the clearly superior method, the end of history

Good thing we're not in those evil dictatorships where if you don't follow the will of some crackpot dicator you will die or rot for the rest of your life in the oubliette

Luckily, the perfection of our system is unquestionable and anyone who says otherwise will be bombed, droned and waterboarded into learning to love the big brotherhood democracy gives us