Current Affairs EU In or Out

[joey_macmo]

joey,

Obfuscation again, mate. Problem for you is, I can see right through all of your attempts to confuse any issue. Quite easily, actually.

Let's go over things again, step by step.

You posted:
"...That's an incredibly simple and incorrect view of how democracy works. According to you no MP should ever vote against the sitting government on any bill ever.
Which is obviously insane..."
I've put the pertinent point in bold and underlined it.

This was my reply:
"...I think you are getting somewhat confused. In the democratic process, there is the opportunity to disagree with the views/opinions of others. There is also the opportunity to do one of three things when it comes to a vote: for/against/abstain. However, once the vote has been taken, and announced, the simple, correct, procedure is that the majority vote holds sway. It is no more complicated than that.
So, an MP can vote against the sitting Government (even an MP of the Government's party)..."
Mine follows, and contradicts, your point 100%.

Now, if you think that that is not a retort, then there is absolutely nothing I can do for you. It is a matter of following a logical premise, and if you can't, or won't, then there really is no point in trying to be involved in sensible debate with you. You see your own point, and nothing else. You will not concede a point, when that point does not coincide with your own. That is not the way to conduct a discussion...

Ok mate seeing how it's so obvious just point out in a succinct manner which point of my post you have refuted.

 

[joey_macmo]

Let's go over things again, step by step.

You posted:
"...That's an incredibly simple and incorrect view of how democracy works. According to you no MP should ever vote against the sitting government on any bill ever.
Which is obviously insane..."
I've put the pertinent point in bold and underlined it.


So, an MP can vote against the sitting Government (even an MP of the Government's party)..."
Mine follows, and contradicts, your point 100%.

Ok I think it's this bit.

What an MP can or cannot do though does not refute my point of what they should or should not do though.

In fact you're kind of backing up my original point to be honest.

 

[Old Blue 2]

No point, joey. Absolutely no point...

 

[joey_macmo]

No point, joey. Absolutely no point...

Just like the advisory referendum then

 

[TheFinnFan]

That seems democratic enough....17,400,000 want to Leave, but Esk says we must remain. Must be a Mod thing, 'Power corrupts, absolute Power corrupts absolutely'.....

Democracy is at stake here.
They cant push aside peoples will.

We are witnessing the same kind of phenomenom across the pond too. It's basically a coup. Or atleast a try.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

When we leave, we will do a simple agreement with WTO. Whatever we have already signed up for, we will just take that percentage and trade terms with us and the EU will then do exactly the same with their remaining percentage. From then on it is up to the UK,as a member of the WTO to agree any future terms with everybody else just as every other country does. The EU will be in exactly the same position.

The point is, we will almost certainly have the exact same agreements in place with the WTO as we do now (ie those we have as part of the EU). The EU will no doubt do likewise. Which is lovely, except we left with the motivation being not to do that. There's no reason at all for the EU to be unhappy with that as they negotiated with the WTO on exactly that, but we are voting to leave all of that, whilst it's staying exactly the same.

All of this division, the cost of leaving and so on, all to achieve bugger all.

 

[JonS]

This has now widened into a discussion on the democratic process in this country, and as such has shown that process for the sham it is.

The referendum itself was wrapped up in barbed wire. The narrative itself wasn't allowed to develop organically, questions from answers weren't allowed to be developed and the information provided was controlled and narrowed by the media to be 90% immigration and 10% economic and democratic/sovereignty, generally.

The quesgion asked was ridiculous given the complexity with no unequivocal margin for such a constitutional decision.
Yes/No just doesn't work when the methodology of the consequences of the vote were never discussed, presented or outlined for the public to digest.

That there are legal challenges, questions on process and binding, prior to the nonsense discussions on economic affects and trade, displays such a (deliberate imho) amateurish approach to the management of the referendum it is bordering on contempt not only for the public but for the sovereignty and democratic process of parliament itself. It has held our political class and system up to be as big a joke as possible and as detached from society as is possible.

The naive trust and faith placed into the political system to manage the referendum in a correct and proper manner, with the best interests of the British public at its core, was misplaced, our 'leaders' just aren't capable or interested enough in others to have bothered to conduct the referendum in a clear, precise and concse manner. They ballsed it up. Deliberately, in my opinion, out of disdain for the decision being made for them. Their egos won't allow joe public any credit for understanding and as such lay tripwires, mines, backdoors throughout the process.

It won't happen, but the only way of salvaging the situation is to scrap it and start again, giving more consequential information and a broader scope for decision. If we want the people to decide, unequivocally, then they must be given the correct procedure and tools to do so. Neither leave nor remain have any mandate as I see it, but neither does the existing prime minister or parliament for that matter. Our system is so far beyond redemption that it needs replacing, with erm, a more true democratic process, free from external influence of the media corporate machinery. Utopian perhaps but we are going down the plughole at this point in time.

Well written and argued post but it still seems to boil down to the opinion that the people are not intelligent enough and can't be trusted enough to make the correct decision and have to be overuled (or referendums rerun until the people learn to make the "right" choices)

Very very dangerous IMO and peoples feelings of disenfranchisement will continue and get stronger until the establishment gives up its desparate attempts to hang onto its status quo.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Ultimately, I'm just disappointed that the EU don't value the UK as an important member, and want to try and work with us to keep us as a member, but with some concessions.

I think the point is that they have. The thing is, the vast majority of people have no idea what the EU does or doesn't do and could probably not name their MEP, so how can they be expected to know what concessions we've been given over the years? It's much simpler to boil it down to straight bananas and dodgy Romanians.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Well written and argued post but it still seems to boil down to the opinion that the people are not intelligent enough and can't be trusted enough to make the correct decision and have to be overuled (or referendums rerun until the people learn to make the "right" choices)

Very very dangerous IMO and peoples feelings of disenfranchisement will continue and get stronger until the establishment gives up its desparate attempts to hang onto its status quo.

But they have a point with that. I mean turnout in EU elections is incredibly small. How many could even name their MEP, let alone have a decent grasp of what the EU does or doesn't do?

 

[The Cowboy]

I think the point is that they have. The thing is, the vast majority of people have no idea what the EU does or doesn't do and could probably not name their MEP, so how can they be expected to know what concessions we've been given over the years? It's much simpler to boil it down to straight bananas and dodgy Romanians.

I think you know what sort of concessions I'm talking about. Freedom of movement, centralisation of power.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I think you know what sort of concessions I'm talking about. Freedom of movement, centralisation of power.

Wholly unrealistic concessions then you mean? With the first, you're asking for something that is fundamental to the EU. I'm not sure what power has been centralised so can't comment on that bit.

 

[The Cowboy]

Wholly unrealistic concessions then you mean? With the first, you're asking for something that is fundamental to the EU. I'm not sure what power has been centralised so can't comment on that bit.

Yes, I appreciate freedom of movement fundamental to the EU...and is likely the reason why Leave won.

Perhaps it's time for the EU to examine some of its previous fundamentals before it falls apart completely.

 

[magicjuan]

Democracy is at stake here.
They cant push aside peoples will.

We are witnessing the same kind of phenomenom across the pond too. It's basically a coup. Or atleast a try.

It is more, it is about the mechanisms by which democracy is determined, how the 'will of the people' is managed and coerced or guided. The cogs of the political machinery are operated outside of their purpose and remit.

 

[magicjuan]

Well written and argued post but it still seems to boil down to the opinion that the people are not intelligent enough and can't be trusted enough to make the correct decision and have to be overuled (or referendums rerun until the people learn to make the "right" choices)

Very very dangerous IMO and peoples feelings of disenfranchisement will continue and get stronger until the establishment gives up its desparate attempts to hang onto its status quo.

Which is one of the points I was making. And again, I don't believe this was ineptitude or mismanagement. The real reason the referendum took place was for Cameron to appease the right wing in his party and the electorate to retain power, not for democracy to take its course. It was and is a sham and designed to be so to maintain the status quo. The patronisation of the electorate bit them all on the backside.

 

[JonS]

But they have a point with that. I mean turnout in EU elections is incredibly small. How many could even name their MEP, let alone have a decent grasp of what the EU does or doesn't do?

Aren't you just making my point Bruce that "the people are stupid and can't be trusted". It's very dangerous to believe that IMO.

And is it any different in a normal election? People vote without understanding economic intricacies and such like. But is their vote any less valid for that?

I would go further and say that I trust the opinion of the people who are voting based on their feelings, perceptions and extrapolations of those more than I do of those who profess to understand everything and which way the economy is going (which IMO they don't understand as much as they think they do)