Print

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

FUCK YES LET'S LEAVE GET HYPE YEY

Casual yes, let's leave and get independence done with

Meh, probably just scribble all over my vote ballot to spite tryhards

Casual no, let's remain and get integration done with

FUCK NO LET'S REMAIN GET CALM YEY

[scriver]

if you had a bunch of other countries willing to go to bat for you on the international stage (like the EU)

I'm just going to pick out this one sentence and, disregarding all the context and the rest of the post, say that the EU doesn't bat for members on the international stage when they need backup - just look at when Saudi Arabia threw a fit and threatened to cut all economic ties with Sweden because the Swedish government called them a dictatorship. Absolute silence from the EU as well as individual countries. "Willingness to go bat for you" needs solidarity, and there is no solidarity within the EU - only self interest.

[Sheb]

So, I had a nice dinner with two euractiv editors and a guardian journalist yesterday. Not surprisingly, the salt was flowing, but they had interesting info: Two camps are coalescing in the EU re:Brexit at the moment.

On the one side, you've got Schultz, Junckers, the Italians and the French who are puching for a fast Brexit, either out of the belief that it could spurt a growth of integration, or to stave off an Eurosceptic political challenger (Hello Le Pen).

A second group, including Cameron, the Germans, Dutch, Scandinavians and Vsegrad group favord a slow approach: wait and try to get Britain to keep as many of the bits and pieces. Maybe even keep it under in the EU if economic damage induce buyer's remorse in the UK in the next two years.

Now, for such issues, it's going to be member states deciding this, not the European institutions (which may explain why Schultz and Juncker have been so loud: they have nothing else but the bully pulpit). And of those two groups, one of them is much more powerful than the other (hint: it's the one that has more than two countries), so that's likely the way to go.

The German finance ministry 'leaked' a paper about their position toward Brexit, which outline a slow version. I've not had the time to read it though.

In other news, Wales and Cornwall try to get assurance they'll still get Euromoney.
The UK's commissioneer, in charge of financial service resigned. Yay financial regulation!
Oh, and Spain is voting today. It's going to be fun.

[Neonivek]

WOW Wales... no offense but your a whiny baby (ok, I am probably misinterpreting it)

"We don't want to be part of the European Union nope! but uhhh... can we still get the money?"

[Sheb]

To be faire, AFAIK the Welsh first minister was pro-remain.

[Azkul]

On the one side, you've got Schultz, Junckers, the Italians and the French who are puching for a fast Brexit, either out of the belief that it could spurt a growth of integration, or to stave off an Eurosceptic political challenger (Hello Le Pen).

Would you say for that group, and others such as Guy Verhofstadt, they see it as a choice between a divided EU containing Britain, or a united EU without Britain?
Many in the EU see the UK's generally eurosceptic stance as "holding back" the reforms they'd like to implement.

[Sheb]

That's part of it, yeah. But I think that hoping for a surge of integration is misguided. The French aren't much more europhiles than the Brits, the Poles are arguing for a "union of nation state", the Hungarians are being turds... There is simply no momentum for it at the moment. Sure, we got rid of one roadblock, but if we had to remove all the countries that do not want to integrate at the moment, Europe would be done to the great Belgium-German Commonwealth :p.

It's interesting to not that in the slow route, we could end up with some kind of intermediate status for Britain that could tempt other countries. We might end-up with a two-speed Europe, with a core that move toward a real federation and a periphery that would come some kind of weaker version of the EU.

I think I'd consider myself a "fast" too, if for slightly different reasons. First of all, the Brits voted out. Playing around with referendum results has done a world of hurt to the EU's democatic legitimacy. We need to give the Brits what they've voted for.

Second, the EU got problems to fix, the Euro and the refugee crisis. Britain has opt-out for the two anyway, but any council spent discussing Brexit is one council not spent addressing those issues.

[da_nang]

First of all, the Brits voted out. Playing around with referendum results has done a world of hurt to the EU's democatic legitimacy.

Not sure what you mean by that. The referendum wasn't binding so the British are free to ignore it, even if it's currently political suicide.

Heck, not even the economy is a good reason. The so called "panic" is caused by doomsayers and speculators. Until article 50 is invoked, the UK is de jure still a full EU member. It's the status quo. And when the article is invoked, then there'll still be a minimum two-year period for the market to adjust.

There's simply no need to panic. Yet.

[penguinofhonor]

I think Sheb's point is that the EU would also be hurt politically by trying to ignore the referendum (even if they could legally get away with it), as that would basically confirm in many people's minds that they don't care about member states' democratic processes.

[Starver]

There's simply no need to panic. Yet.

[Sonlirain]

“An estimated 36% of 18-24 year olds voted on Thursday. Just over half of 25-34 year olds. Don’t feel ‘betrayed’ by the older generation; we sowed the seeds of our own destruction,”

http://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-europe/news/brussels-brits-react-in-horror-to-brexit-what-the-hell-went-wrong/
If only those young slackers voted...

It's weird if you think about it. Voting remain would be a pretty important thing for the young demographic and not even because "Ok no the EU will collapse and the reapers will come to eat everyone" but because they were born in an UK that was already a member of the UK and brexit is admitedly a pretty damn drastic change with long lasting consequences that will mostly affect them.

[Leafsnail]

I always find it funny when people blame those who could have maybe voted against the terrible option instead of, you know, the people who actually voted for the terrible option.

Anyway, to anyone who made their Leave vote due to the issue of immigration: you were lied to, immigration will not go down at all. The Leave campaign is admitting it already.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/746466834610692096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[Sheb]

Leafsnail, the interweb if shock full of salty remainer blaming racists, old faggies and the uneducated for voting Brexit, don't worry. One more reason for me to favour mandatory voting I guess :p.

da_nang: The Irish votes thing has given the EU a reputation for just shitting on democracy. The hurt from ignoring this referendum would IMO cause more damage to the EU than the Brexit.

[Guardian G.I.]

"Elderly vote real democracy pigfucking neoliberal globalism responsibility"

Sadly, it doesn't have the same nice ring to it as "Worldwide Mad Deadly Communist Gangster Computer God" does.

[Sonlirain]

I always find it funny when people blame those who could have maybe voted against the terrible option instead of, you know, the people who actually voted for the terrible option.

Anyway, to anyone who made their Leave vote due to the issue of immigration: you were lied to, immigration will not go down at all. The Leave campaign is admitting it already.
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/746466834610692096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Well democracy kinda relies on having as many of its people vote as possible. The turnover was something around 75% meaning the 52% winning vote represented less than half of the people as the 25% that didn't vote sat at home either not caring (A rather stupid thing to do. Especially in this case) or assuming their option will win/lose and their vote won't change anything (Equally stupid).
People are allowed to have different opinions but stating you don't have any by not voting is pretty much the worst thing you can do in a democratic society unless the poll itself is pointless and stupid.
In that case people not even bothering to come is a sign that whatever government made the poll should be fucking ashamed of itself.

Weird. After they leave the EU that can basically go full on isolationist if they please.
And the EU can't fine them for not accepting Syrian refugees (and the "refugees" that tag along hoping to slip through the cracks) for example.
Not saying that would be good for the economy but the option is there.

[Sheb]

The EU already couldn't fine them for refugee or anything, as Britain had an opt-out on migration issues.