Seriously though, there seems an implication in what you are saying that either Brexit is a less intelligent option or that voting for it is somehow a harking back to bygone times rather than a looking forward.
Well it is possible that some people voted for it for those reasons and obviously the whole issue is a matter of opinion but I would refute it is about either of those things.
At its base it is a simple constitutional decision that will have us back in line with our history (Britain has spent longer as a separate country or union of the British countries than as part of a European federation, and , as empires build they surely die away again and that is IMO what is likely to happen with the EU over the next 10-15 years).
I think once the initial effects are over we will be better off and better admired out than in.
Bruce has already answered this. However, I'll try my best to add to it, from my perspective.
I obviously do think it's a 'less intelligent option', otherwise why are we debating it?
Without being too provocative, I'd also question the reasoning of 'some of' the people who voted for it e.g. an interviewee stating immigration as a reason for voting 'leave' but, then listing the 'European' countries that he didn't mind immigrants coming from!
"Back in line with our history", one of the issues you refuted.
I hope you're right.
Nice thoughtful post Bruce and I agree with you about the EU helping keep peace between it's countries (even though I am concerned about its likelihood of it - or the US if Hilary had been elected - starting wars with Russia or others).
I agree with your idea of us being citizens of the world and that's one reason I am not pro EU - I identify with being a citizen of the world rather than just being European.I believe the EU just focusses on Europe and that Britains will best be able to identify as citizens out of the world rather than in it.
On whether the EU will fail or not, I could be wrong (the US union of states jas survived) but I think that it has grown so large with increasingly disparate members that holding it together will be increasingly difficult.
EU big wigs (I use that term as I am not sure who they are or how they were appointed) talk about not giving Britain too good a deal in case other countries want to leave. Well, if the EU was so good surely countries wouldn't want to leave - if they had confidence in what the EU offered then they wouldn't have to try and did used people from leaving.
I'm not sure how Clinton being elected would've increased the chance of war with Russia?
Guessing you were typing on a mobile? Hard to decipher what you meant.
Probably, the same civil servant types, that write the answers for ministers in parliamentary questions. Also the same types that advise and write the legislation?
Fair point but.....if trade barriers are such a bad thing then why does the EU insist that all its members put up compulsory trade barriers (via the customs union) with all the non-EU countries in the world?
Is the EU a benevolent organisation or one that actually harms the rest of the world in order to preserve its own self interests (or as even that seems to he working less and less now, the self interests of Germany)?
I thought leaving the EU was to preserve Britain's self interests?
So, we can do it and the EU can't?
