Print

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

[scriver]

(no it isn't)

[ChairmanPoo]

UK population decimated by Ibizan super gonorrhea
https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/03/12/inenglish/1552378666_939022.html

[Magistrum]

UK population decimated by Ibizan super gonorrhea
https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/03/12/inenglish/1552378666_939022.html

Super gonorrhea is a incredible adtion to our EU thread page 666.

[Il Palazzo]

(no it isn't)

Have it your way. The intent was serious, though. Maybe somebody else will chip in.
I see this lost sovereignty argument used in the local (i.e. Polish) discourse sometimes - since we do have a strong anti-EU sentiment here too - and I'd like somebody explain to me what it actually means for me, as a citizen of a country who supposedly has been deprived of sovereignty to a similar degree as the UK. Apart from some vague notions of national pride, that is.

[Frumple]

Yeah, far as I've been able to pick up UK's sovereignty was functionally untouched, barely impacted thanks to all the exceptions it had and often what little was left after that shit they would have been stupid not to do anyway. Most/all of the arguments put forth for brexit were based on ignorance at best, active misinformation and/or open (self-destructive) xenophobia at worst. Continuation of a long media history in the UK of shitting on the EU even (especially) when there was nothing to shit on, to a notable extent.

So far as personal, ground level effects it's going to be nothing but negatives for the majority of the population. It'll mean more nuisance, weaker economy, and so on. Depending on how bad it gets (particularly vis a vis medical supply) the "actual meaning" could go as far as "you get to die because your leadership fucked up the supply chains". Little guy gon' get fucked so the vulture capitalists can make bank and the xenophobes can have their day in the sun.

[ChairmanPoo]

If the poles left the EU they would become singular in Europe aka monopoles, and presumably some of those would be magnetic, or at least would become magnetic upon the application of electric currents. As everybody knows magnetic monopoles are useful in the construction of perpetual movement machines, which would turn Poland into a net energy exporter.  Furthermore, they could potentially be used for the construction of a space elevator and EM-drive propulsion, thus kickstarting a potential Polish poliferation through the Solar  (Polar?) System

[Il Palazzo]

If the poles left the EU they would become singular in Europe aka monopoles, and presumably some of those would be magnetic, or at least would become magnetic upon the application of electric currents. As everybody knows magnetic monopoles are useful in the construction of perpetual movement machines, which would turn Poland into a net energy exporter.  Furthermore, they could potentially be used for the construction of a space elevator and EM-drive propulsion, thus kickstarting a potential Polish poliferation through the Solar  (Polar?) System

This all nice and fun, but our coal lobby is stronk and would not have any of that, no sir.

[Loud Whispers]

There may be a bit of a culture clash involved, but 90% of it is definetly the same reactionary isolationism and right wing nationalism that we've been seeing on the rise in the US and in Europe and elsewhere.

Lmao no
That generalisation doesn't even work if you just applied it to the USA, even in the USA you have a smorgasbord of fault lines and clusterfucks going on.

In other Brexit related news (besides the impending vote today), when I saw this, my first thought was 'Whatever happened to the IRA laying down arms and making peace?', but it sounds like maybe it's a new group that has co-opted the IRA name.

As per my previous comment; you can't make a single general statement and expect it to be true in the British Isles, factions are abound within factions and factions, and they all want their own things and believe their own things

UK population decimated by Ibizan super gonorrhea
https://elpais.com/elpais/2019/03/12/inenglish/1552378666_939022.html

I knew some people in the UK who were doing research on things like HIV and super gonorrhea, I don't think it's fair to call it Ibizan super gonorrhea as we've had outbreaks of it spreading through Universities in the UK before this. Ibiza isn't special for having super gonorrhea, it's special for being a typical hotspot for horny British vacationers where they suspend regular sense and jump off buildings, have unprotected sex with anything that blinks, take every drug e.t.c.
It's like the dawn of syphilis all over again. English called it the Dutch disease, Dutch called it the French disease, French called it the Spanish disease... But everyone's screwed (everyone)

Yeah, far as I've been able to pick up UK's sovereignty was functionally untouched, barely impacted thanks to all the exceptions it had and often what little was left after that shit they would have been stupid not to do anyway. Most/all of the arguments put forth for brexit were based on ignorance at best, active misinformation and/or open (self-destructive) xenophobia at worst. Continuation of a long media history in the UK of shitting on the EU even (especially) when there was nothing to shit on, to a notable extent.

So am I ignorant, Russian or xenophobic? One such reason the Remain campaign failed was that it was led by people convinced they didn't have to make arguments at all. Their opponents were animals or villains not worthy of reason :[

Take for example sovereignty. Put yourselves in my shoes - I desire a sovereign United Kingdom, governed by the United Kingdom for the UK. I do not desire the European Union to take away any sovereignty from the UK, yet the EU only reforms in favour of centralisation, and even David Cameron's failed bid for a two-speed Europe would have ultimately resulted in the UK ceasing to be sovereign - just at a later date than France. Why would it make sense for me to wait until the UK ceases to be sovereign to deliver a referendum it couldn't deliver except while it remained disengaged from the EU project?

No one was given the choice to subject our country to the EU, and we have consistently opposed further centralisation, yet to no avail in the continent. The EU will never just be a free trade area, what sense does it make for me to wait until the UK can't pass its own laws, control its own currency, borders, foreign policy or budget? It would be doubtful such a referendum would be possible, and in the event of a leave win the actual effort required to leave the EU project would be much greater :>

[TD1]

Yeah, far as I've been able to pick up UK's sovereignty was functionally untouched, barely impacted thanks to all the exceptions it had and often what little was left after that shit they would have been stupid not to do anyway. Most/all of the arguments put forth for brexit were based on ignorance at best, active misinformation and/or open (self-destructive) xenophobia at worst. Continuation of a long media history in the UK of shitting on the EU even (especially) when there was nothing to shit on, to a notable extent.

So far as personal, ground level effects it's going to be nothing but negatives for the majority of the population. It'll mean more nuisance, weaker economy, and so on. Depending on how bad it gets (particularly vis a vis medical supply) the "actual meaning" could go as far as "you get to die because your leadership fucked up the supply chains". Little guy gon' get fucked so the vulture capitalists can make bank and the xenophobes can have their day in the sun.

I'm not sure whether you're misinformed or being deliberately provocative.

Even in terms of media, do you realise just how pro-Europe all major British outlets were over the Campaign? It was laughably one sided.

Edit: Looking back, the above seems a bit stand-offish. I'll justify that by drawing out your major themes.

People who voted Brexit were ignorant (read: stupid).
Some were xenophobes.
All were deluded by the anti-Europe (?????) media.

Mate, just because a vote doesn't go the way you want doesn't mean those voting didn't make decisions any less well-reasoned than those of the other side. There is such a thing as differing priorities.

[Il Palazzo]

The EU will never just be a free trade area, what sense does it make for me to wait until the UK can't pass its own laws, control its own currency, borders, foreign policy or budget?

But isn't that projecting? Shouldn't one make a decision to leave when such issues actually appear rather than on the basis of one's fear that they might?
I understand that by sovereignty you mean all those things mentioned here. Neither of those have so far happened, have they? Not to any extent different than what comes about with any voluntary international agreement.

As for it not being just a free trade area - I agree that it won't ever be just that, but then again that's the whole point of EU, isn't it? To make the politics and administrations of all member states so intertwined and integrated that another war in Europe would be all but impossible. As far as I'm concerned that's a goal worth sacrificing some political independence for.

And by the way, I absolutely agree that the discourse has been poisoned by bad faith generalisations, patronising language, and tribalism (or maybe it's always been like that?) - it's always the other side that's emotional and it's always the worst possible arguments that they must be espousing.

[smjjames]

@LW: I was mainly confused by the fact that they were reusing the same name.

[Kagus]

And by the way, I absolutely agree that the discourse has been poisoned by bad faith generalisations, patronising language, and tribalism (or maybe it's always been like that?) - it's always the other side that's emotional and it's always the worst possible arguments that they must be espousing.

Personally, I'd like to see more tribadism in modern political discourse.

[TD1]

But isn't that projecting? Shouldn't one make a decision to leave when such issues actually appear rather than on the basis of one's fear that they might?

You assume that when these issues became more aggressively apparent (there is no reason to wait for them to appear; they are already there) that we would have any form of say whatsoever in whether we could leave or not. The referendum on leaving Europe, so far as I can see, was at best once-in-a-generation. With that in mind, it would be foolhardy to look at Europe's trajectory towards what one sees as a sovereignty-guzzling machine and not act accordingly while one has the chance.

As for it not being just a free trade area - I agree that it won't ever be just that, but then again that's the whole point of EU, isn't it? To make the politics and administrations of all member states so intertwined and integrated that another war in Europe would be all but impossible. As far as I'm concerned that's a goal worth sacrificing some political independence for.

Is that the whole point of the EU? If so, it's strange that all the arguments for remaining that I heard revolved around economics. Perhaps it is better to say that it is the justification for Europe.

At what point did one have to become one's neighbour in order to avoid outright war?

[Il Palazzo]

But isn't that projecting? Shouldn't one make a decision to leave when such issues actually appear rather than on the basis of one's fear that they might?

You assume that when these issues became more aggressively apparent (there is no reason to wait for them to appear; they are already there)

Alright then, in what instances those issues did appear? In what ways has the UK (or Poland, I guess) has ceded the control over its currency, borders, foreign policy or budget to the EU?

[SaberToothTiger]

I believe the argument is that even if infringing upon member states' sovereignty has not yet become an everyday affair, it will become more common as the drive to centralisation of the EU speeds up.

On the other hand, some say that the EU should be weakened because it benefits mostly the plutocrats, the wealthy elite.