Deeply Deeply Sad

[LuckyEddie]

A nice Churchill quote:
We hope to see a Europe where men of every country will think as much of being a European as ofbelonging to their native land, and that without losing any of their love and loyalty of their birthplace. Wehope wherever they go in this wide domain, to which we set no limits in the European Continent, they willtruly feel "Here I am at home. I am a citizen of this country too". Let us meet together. Let us work together.Let us do our utmost—all that is in us—for the good of all. How simple it would all be, how crowned withblessings for all of us if that could ever come, especially for the children and young men and women nowgrowing up in this tortured world. How proud we should all be if we had played any useful part in bringingthat great day to come. And here I invoke the interest of the broad, proletarian masses. We see before oureyes scores of millions of humble homes in Europe and in lands outside which have been afflicted by war.

Was this before or after the Yalta Treaty where he consigned Poland to years of Communist rule?

The issue is there are a lot of immigrants that do think like this - but there are a few that take advantage of this.
This is where I think that Europe took its eye off the ball to begin with - and we now have a major problem.

Also Britain is a welcoming country, but in being so welcoming and so liberal it's own identity is being easily diluted by those that seek to change it - not necessarily for the better.
Now all countries need to move forward and evolve or change - otherwise they stagnate.
I think we are now at the tipping point where we can either move forward (under our own governance rather than under the EU rule) or go back to the dark ages.

It is up to us to make a better life for those that live here - when ever they came here, be it last month or just after the last ice age!

One last thing, we obviously voted to get out of the EU, I can't remember being asked to vote to join the EU in the first place. Or was that the start of the dictatorship?

 

[stubear]

As I said to a mate the other night - Its not that 52% of this country is racist, its just that now the racists think 52% of the country agrees with them!

 

[Alantoo]

Alan, I do take your point about moving forward from where we are, even if it isn't where we wanted to be, but don't the reasons people made their choice matter too? Does it polarize us irredeemably, or help us to understand each other?
On the negative side, the winning Leavers are being accused of lies, racism, xenophobia, folly, irresponsibility, and any number of other vices, whilst the losing Remainers are being accused of scaremongering beforehand and being bad losers afterwards. Meanwhile, positive characterizations are patriotism, sovereignty, independence, freedom, genuine democracy and economic realism vs internationalism, cooperation, progressive reform and prudence. Are such characterizations actually baseless, or are they really -as you suggest- simply pointless at this stage?
Finally, I found this programme really interesting :BBC Radio 4 - The Human Zoo, Series 8, That Post-Referendum Feeling

As I said to a mate the other night - Its not that 52% of this country is racist, its just that now the racists think 52% of the country agrees with them!

The individual reasons for their vote choice obviously matters deeply to many people. But I say they are irrelevant to the on going debate because they are totally immeasurable. As Stubear says, people assume that people who voted the same way share their values and reason for voting that way, and that is patently not the case.

For instance, on here we have 80% of the SD members voting out, many of whom voted primarily against the bureaucracy of the EU that they apparently believed to be unelected, many believed our UK commissioners and MEP's had no say in EU policy, many held great store in a notion of Sovereignty, many voted in order to reduce the numbers of migrants whether from the EU or elsewhere. None of us can say how many voted for whichever reason.

We are not "polarised" except upon the issue of the referendum...IN or OUT. Migration and extra money for the NHS or anything else were not the issue on the paper any of us voted on. Nor can they be extrapolated from the result.

The Moral Maze on radio 4 last night was quite an interesting discussion as well, I will follow your link.

Alan

 

[Alantoo]

One last thing, we obviously voted to get out of the EU, I can't remember being asked to vote to join the EU in the first place. Or was that the start of the dictatorship?

Was that a rhetorical question?

If not, I am not a historian but I think Ted Heath took us in, having been elected with Membership of the Common Market as an election pledge. The first referendum, where I voted out, was organised by Harold Wilson's government also following an election pledge.

So we did ask to go in, because we elected a "representative government" who had said they would take us in if elected. And then we voted to stay in, when we were given the chance by referendum to withdraw.

No dictatorship involved.

Crucially we were given the important opportunity to choose whether to stay, having been given the actual terms of our membership.

Although I will be accused by some of whingeing, I agree with Nigel Farage, the recent referendum should have been based on a 60/40 result either way. And I think we should have another opportunity to vote either in an election or a referendum when we know exactly what terms of leaving have been negotiated.

Alan

 

[LuckyEddie]

Was that a rhetorical question?

If not, I am not a historian but I think Ted Heath took us in, having been elected with Membership of the Common Market as an election pledge. The first referendum, where I voted out, was organised by Harold Wilson's government also following an election pledge.

So we did ask to go in, because we elected a "representative government" who had said they would take us in if elected. And then we voted to stay in, when we were given the chance by referendum to withdraw.

No dictatorship involved.

Crucially we were given the important opportunity to choose whether to stay, having been given the actual terms of our membership.

Although I will be accused by some of whingeing, I agree with Nigel Farage, the recent referendum should have been based on a 60/40 result either way. And I think we should have another opportunity to vote either in an election or a referendum when we know exactly what terms of leaving have been negotiated.

Alan

I thought the Maastricht Treaty was the start of the EU?
Prior to this was it not the EEC?

You can't have it both ways.
Either you are in or out but you can't say "can we see what's on offer?"
The offer is only valid for that point in time.

Already there are talks about the EU armed forces and the EU is moving on irrespective of what we want/would like to see.
Who knows what direction the EU will take in the next 5 years or what direction the UK will take in the same time.
Would we be involved in a conflict that was started by Italy, by Germany?

So to SNP I would say be careful of what you want.
By all means keep dialogue open but don't jump just because you don't like what is behind you

 

[Hornet 6]

And I think we should have another opportunity to vote either in an election or a referendum when we know exactly what terms of leaving have been negotiated.

Alan

Really, well sorry but it doesn't and shouldn't work like that.
We had a referendum, we all had plenty of time to make our minds up before we voted.
Depending which way you voted your either 'won' or 'lost', now is the time to deal with it, or get used to it.
Another vote would neither be fair to those who have already voted, neither would it be democratic.

Neil.

 

[Pine Marten]

To my mind an excellent summary of the divisions that this has revealed, exacerbated and crystallised by Mark Mardell on the BBC:
Politics snagged on society's sharp divides - BBC News

 

[Druid]

As I said to a mate the other night - Its not that 52% of this country is racist, its just that now the racists think 52% of the country agrees with them!

Well put.

 

[Alantoo]

I thought the Maastricht Treaty was the start of the EU?
Prior to this was it not the EEC?

You can't have it both ways.
Either you are in or out but you can't say "can we see what's on offer?"
The offer is only valid for that point in time.

As I said I am not a political historian, but did we not vote in the UK Government and the UK MEP's who ratified the Maastricht Treaty?

I see no rule or reason that we are not allowed to see what's on offer before we choose. Quite the reverse. In other negotiations we have the opportunity to accept or reject the result.

As I pointed out above, the precedent of the seventy's was that we were offered a choice once the actual terms were agreed, why not this time?

Alan

 

[Alantoo]

snip
Another vote would neither be fair to those who have already voted, neither would it be democratic.

Neil.

I don't follow the logic. We would be voting based on real issues rather than the flummery of the campaigns.

Why would a vote once we have the terms of leaving on the table be unfair to those that have already voted, or indeed be any less democratic than the IN OUT vote?

Alan

p.s. Sorry I am not saying the vote should be on in or out again...I agree we have had that and decided. What I am talking about is a vote on the accepting the terms that are negotiated. Many of the leave campaign voted in order to regain a sense of control over our future, why should we not insist on that control over the terms? Why leave it up to our unelected civil service who as David Cameron has said are now busy drawing up the terms and unpicking the EU and UK legislation. Why shouldn't we get to have some say in it?

 

[Southern]

The Maastricht Treaty, which created the EU, set limits on government spending and debt as a percentage of GDP and economic growth. One reason the EU fell apart is that Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and others violated the agreement, killing their economies with taxes and inflation. Young people wanted to leave and go to London, Germany, or anywhere in the UK to find a career.

The other reason the EU fell apart is that those who ran it, from top dogs to the desk bureaucrats, tried to expand its power - and their power - beyond its charter, into a superstate answering to no citizens. These people have a mentality which does not really respect Constitutions and treaties. Those are obstacles to ignore or navigate around. They really believe in the rule of man, not the rule of law. And it is the rule of law which built the huge advances of Western Civilization in such a short period of time. You cannot have peace and prosperity under governments which treat people differently based on changing fashion or personal cronyism - and that is what the modern socialist pseudo-democracies are, a form of monarchy by committee.

 

[Kalahari]

One of the big problems about the divisions in society, and is not recognised by the BBC in particular, the media and the "metropolitan elite" as they see themselves is that on the last set of figures I was able to obtain central government allocates and extra £132 to every man woman and child who lives in major cities compared to those living in minor towns or the rural environment. I know PM goes stalking by public transport (and this isn't a dig at him) but I can't even go anywhere by public transport unless I undertake a two mile walk first and then there is one bus per day. People who live in cities appear to have no comprehension on how they appear to be feather bedded to many people who live and work outside these areas. Please don't advocate moving as many of them live there so your food arrives in the supermarket. It grieves me to see the arrogance of city dwellers who make comments about the stupid who voted out when they have no concept of some of the problems and inequalities.

David.

 

[LuckyEddie]

The Maastricht Treaty, which created the EU, set limits on government spending and debt as a percentage of GDP and economic growth. One reason the EU fell apart is that Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and others violated the agreement, killing their economies with taxes and inflation. Young people wanted to leave and go to London, Germany, or anywhere in the UK to find a career.

The other reason the EU fell apart is that those who ran it, from top dogs to the desk bureaucrats, tried to expand its power - and their power - beyond its charter, into a superstate answering to no citizens. These people have a mentality which does not really respect Constitutions and treaties. Those are obstacles to ignore or navigate around. They really believe in the rule of man, not the rule of law. And it is the rule of law which built the huge advances of Western Civilization in such a short period of time. You cannot have peace and prosperity under governments which treat people differently based on changing fashion or personal cronyism - and that is what the modern socialist pseudo-democracies are, a form of monarchy by committee.

Very well put that man.
I would have struggled to say that in twice the words!

 

[Bavarianbrit]

But the EU has not fallen apart it has just had a stroppy member walk out but there is still 96% left of EU membership. Or are my maths way off.

 

[enfieldspares]

I can't even go anywhere by public transport unless I undertake a two mile walk first and then there is one bus per day.

A two mile walk? One bus a day? Luxury! On Sunday we have no buses at all in my village!

 

[Kalahari]

A two mile walk? One bus a day? Luxury! On Sunday we have no buses at all in my village!

Three day week service, nothing at weekends!

David.

 

[TURNBOLT]

How many of the 96%left pay in ?Probably 5%. its bound to fall apart.

 

[kes]

One of the big problems about the divisions in society, and is not recognised by the BBC in particular, the media and the "metropolitan elite" as they see themselves is that on the last set of figures I was able to obtain central government allocates and extra £132 to every man woman and child who lives in major cities compared to those living in minor towns or the rural environment. I know PM goes stalking by public transport (and this isn't a dig at him) but I can't even go anywhere by public transport unless I undertake a two mile walk first and then there is one bus per day. People who live in cities appear to have no comprehension on how they appear to be feather bedded to many people who live and work outside these areas. Please don't advocate moving as many of them live there so your food arrives in the supermarket. It grieves me to see the arrogance of city dwellers who make comments about the stupid who voted out when they have no concept of some of the problems and inequalities.

David.

Lot of sense in this IMHO.

 

[enfieldspares]

Three day week service, nothing at weekends!

That is bad. How do people cope?

 

[Taff]

What's a bus