Brexit - Art 50 on Mar 29th

[Deleted]

The EU has no need to intentionally "fuck the UK over", the UK did enough of that all on their own already.

Can't really argue that, I mean it's hard to top the most incredible feat of self sabotage since poll tax, but I mean, we live in some pretty weird times right, nothing to stop them trying.

[un_known]

Brexit is still fucking stupid, gets stupider by the day, and everyone who voted for it can DIAF.

you're welcome.

[Pann]

I mean, Theresa May is nothing if not unreasonable. And as far as the tories are concerned, it doesn't cost them anything either way. They can push for a completley unreasonable deal, if they get it it's all "Look us we're so great we got a good deal!" and if they don't get it, they can blame the EU rather than themselves, and fob it off as "Well, you guys asked for brexit after all! We're just carrying out the will of the people!"

I'm not sure I agree with that; the Tories are stuck between a rock and hard place (albeit this is entirely of their own making) unless they get a wonderful deal, which is not likely, they are going to make a great deal of the country unhappy.

The SNP are already making political hay of the situation and the longer the process goes on the braver the anti-Brexit contingent, within the Tories and other parties, will become. If Corbyn was not so utterly dreadful I would say that it would almost be certain that the Conservatives would be voted out at the next General Election. Two years is a long time in politics and a lot can change so one thing is for certain - there are interesting times ahead.

I do agree that "it is the will of the people" being repeated ad nauseam is an exercise in blame shifting.

[Deleted]

I'm not sure I agree with that; the Tories are stuck between a rock and hard place (albeit this is entirely of their own making) unless they get a wonderful deal, which is not likely, they are going to make a great deal of the country unhappy.

The SNP are already making political hay of the situation and the longer the process goes on the braver the anti-Brexit contingent, within the Tories and other parties, will become. If Corbyn was not so utterly dreadful I would say that it would almost be certain that the Conservatives would be voted out at the next General Election. Two years is a long time in politics and a lot can change so one thing is for certain - there are interesting times ahead.

I do agree that "it is the will of the people" being repeated ad nauseam is an exercise in blame shifting.

the anti brexit contingent is already pretty hefty though. I'd argue that's the main reason for May's stubborn refusal to allow any kind of voting about anything brexit related as far as she can get away with. Sure, that's going to get stronger over time, and especially if we get a bad deal, but it'll be far too easy for them to just fob it off as "It's not our fault, we tried to get a good deal but the EU was being stubborn and wanted to punish us". It'll make the eu look bad but not the tories. Either way, like you say, as long as Corbyn is around it doesn't much matter to them because he'll never be a real threat to them unfortunately.

[ranzino]

I'm curious how far they will come within those two years. "Oh we just need five more minutes ! *hopeless laughter*"

Per current definition UK got what is agreed upon until March 29 in 2019 and if the negotiations are a disaster of diametrial opinions, they are out without a deal or just a quarter of a deal.
It may be so they sit in Feb 2019 and need just more time, then EU can agree upon a longer period. But UK is better prepared to leave the table with just that what's negotiated already then.

[Tinch]

You are right, the British will not be punished. But the UK will get a fair deal. That means no more cherry picking.

The UK will no longer be able to opt into the best parts of Europe without the obligations that come with it.

The main part of the next 2 years of negotiations will be about the rights of EU workers in the UK and the rights of UK workers in the EU, thats it.

Then the real shit like trade deals, the irish question, the scottish question will all begin. (and take decades to work out).

An important thing to remember is that the deal reached in the next 2 years is just about how to leave, not anything else and that every single country in the EU has to agree to it, they all have vetos.

Personally I think its impossible. I also think that everyone who voted to leave, voted against the national interest. Hijacked my nationalism (by that I mean, we are fucking English, we never had to define what made us english because it went without saying, we were fucking cool. Englishness was about adaptiveness and inclusivity, it was completely fluid. We needed workers so we brought in the world that spanned our (evil) empire. We made Chicken Tikka Masala a national fucking dish. Adaptive, inclusive. Englishness was so self confident and successful we didnt have to define it rigidly.) Now Britian is weaker than it was before the referendum, it is. And everyone who voted leave isn't just a traitor to our interests, but a traitor to my generation. Small people who can't see the forest through the trees. Who would rather shrink than grow, retreat than advance. Who would have thought the greatest generation would give birth to such cowards., then again we all rebel against our parents right?

This sort of rhetoric around traitors is so pointless and adds nothing to the debate, no matter which side it comes from.

Not everyone who voted to leave the EU did so for the same reasons. Whilst I wouldn't deny that many leave voters do have the little England, pull up the drawbridge mentality, there are many others like me who are the complete opposite. I think we should be open to the world, why does your idea of openness and inclusivity end at the borders of Europe?

[Deleted]

I think Brexit is silly for one reason. There was no clear majority.

51.9% of voters voted to leave the EU. The overall turnout for the referendum was 72.2% of eligible voters.

That means only 37.4% of eligible voters voted to leave the EU.

Considering that not everyone of voting age is actually registered ... the number is probably closer to 33% (and that is being conservative with the numbers)

That to me, even with minimal amount of arm chair research (info pulled from the Electoral commission and statistical DB on overall population), is a clear indication that the brexit vote was not a majority.

Other arguments I have is the fact that the UK parliament will be in legislative hell for the next couple of years to deal with separating the UK from the EU, that will reduce the chance that the government will be able to focus and debate on domestic matters. Essentially everything is on hold for the next 2 years. Not a good idea if you need to govern the country ... like finances? education? etc?

Other is how the markets will fair. We haven't even left the EU, and people are already crying that our economy is strong (which it is to an extent) because of Brexit. Come back to me in 3 yrs. At least 4 quarters after we leave EU and ask if our economy is holding fair then. That will be the true indicator to me if the economy is strong.

The last important one for me is how the EU will treat the negotiations. Even in this thread no consensus is able to be achieved whether EU will dick the UK to send a message to other EU nations, or if they will act favorably .. and in which case, what sort of brexit will we get with a result of negotiations?

[ranzino]

If the EU was going to try and punish states that leave, why did they insert a process for member states to leave in the treaties?

Sort of logic. You cannot leave without some scratches and scars here and there; it is a painful divorce if a county was a member for so long. Article 50 was not invoked in decades, because anybody knows the consequences are very likely not pretty and disagreements were better discussed within the club than to smash the door from the outside.
To get a chance to leave was a natural choice.

[Tommi]

EU will dick the UK to send a message to other EU nations

See, this part is just stupidity on EU side if they do. Send a message saying "If you leave us, we'll fuck you over!"? Great union that. Doing that will actually most likely cause MORE countries to rebel to be honest. Would you want to be part of a union that threatens you if you don't do what the big boys want?

[Deleted]

This sort of rhetoric around traitors is so pointless and adds nothing to the debate, no matter which side it comes from.

Not everyone who voted to leave the EU did so for the same reasons. Whilst I wouldn't deny that many leave voters do have the little England, pull up the drawbridge mentality, there are many others like me who are the complete opposite. I think we should be open to the world, why does your idea of openness and inclusivity end at the borders of Europe?

You think we should be open and inclusive to the world by leaving the most comprehensive trade deal in human history. Ok.

My idea doesn't end at European borders. Europe is a tool that collectively allows smaller countries to project a larger influence in the world. It also allows countries to collectively agree on global issues, which is important since this little thing called globalisation happened, and tackle them. Since there are now issues ranging from climate change to terrorism its important that global issues are acted upon in a meaningful way ie through a collective with the power to agree on them and do something.

Edit : The reasons for voting for something don't change the outcomes.

[Mayhem]

It isn't good for the EU establishment to attempt to financially cripple a key military power in Europe, especially with how Russia is pushing its influence on the EU's eastern border. They also don't want to be labelled the bad guy when nationalism is on the rise in its member states. The EU won't be held together by force or bullying, it needs to prove itself as a positive force in the world that tempers heightening tensions between the US, China and Russia. That's not even taking into account trade/the economic reasons why a strong EU and UK is better than a weak UK and EU from taking chunks out of each other.

Yeah, because of all the people, natioanilsts are known to be highly in favour of playing nice and soft.

The EU are labeled as the bad guy by nationalists either way, so who the fuck cares?

[Deleted]

This sort of rhetoric around traitors is so pointless and adds nothing to the debate, no matter which side it comes from.

Not everyone who voted to leave the EU did so for the same reasons. Whilst I wouldn't deny that many leave voters do have the little England, pull up the drawbridge mentality, there are many others like me who are the complete opposite. I think we should be open to the world, why does your idea of openness and inclusivity end at the borders of Europe?

Not disagreeing with you, and like, of course most statements that begin with "All X..." are kind of stupid, but like... You hear this kind of "Not everyone who voted for X is Y" stuff a lot and it kind of bothers me because like... Suppose you have two candidates for prime minister or president or whatever. One of them says "we will puts tons of money into healthcare, and make homosexuality illegal" and the other says "We will put tons of money into education". You might want to vote for the first candidate because you really believe healthcare is more important than education (for example), and then people might call you a homophobe for voting that way, and you're like "No! I voted becasuse of the healthcare thing!" but you didn't, you voted for a parcel that includes some really severe homophobia, or you were like "well, the homophobia thing is lower on my priority list than the healthcare/education debate, so Ill vote on those grounds" which is kind of an issue, right?

It's like not all brexit voters, or trump voters are racist, but by voting for it, they've chosen to embolden and empower racism because they consider other things more important. And that's really tricky because like, it can suck to vote for something you disagree with on loads of points just because of one thing on the other side that causes problems, and like, maybe you really do believe that the economy or whatever is going to be better one way or the other and that's not super unreasonable, but it's also not super unreasonable to think that you're a racist (for example) for putting those things above the racism issue on your priority list.

[Pann]

the anti brexit contingent is already pretty hefty though. I'd argue that's the main reason for May's stubborn refusal to allow any kind of voting about anything brexit related as far as she can get away with. Sure, that's going to get stronger over time, and especially if we get a bad deal, but it'll be far too easy for them to just fob it off as "It's not our fault, we tried to get a good deal but the EU was being stubborn and wanted to punish us". It'll make the eu look bad but not the tories. Either way, like you say, as long as Corbyn is around it doesn't much matter to them because he'll never be a real threat to them unfortunately.

It is, but no party, apart from the Lib Dems (as they have nothing to lose), is willing to openly challenge "the will of the people" at the moment.

May's refusal to allow voting on the subject is little more than being seen to be doing something whilst doing very little, it is a delaying tactic. So I would not read too much into that.

[Mayhem]

See, this part is just stupidity on EU side if they do. Send a message saying "If you leave us, we'll fuck you over!"? Great union that. Doing that will actually most likely cause MORE countries to rebel to be honest. Would you want to be part of a union that threatens you if you don't do what the big boys want?

You are aware that the EU are those other countries? If they want to send this message out it´s in accordance with them not against them.

[Tommi]

It's like not all brexit voters, or trump voters are racist, but by voting for it, they've chosen to embolden and empower racism because they consider other things more important. And that's really tricky because like, it can suck to vote for something you disagree with on loads of points just because of one thing on the other side that causes problems, and like, maybe you really do believe that the economy or whatever is going to be better one way or the other and that's not super unreasonable, but it's also not super unreasonable to think that you're a racist (for example) for putting those things above the racism issue on your priority list.

There is always going to be good and bad points to any decision. Pros and cons. I have an extreme example for you.

1. End all world hunger, all wars etc, but you have to sacrifice 10 million black africans.
2. The world will end in 50 years but those africans live for 5 years.

What would you choose? Either way, you're being, in your eyes, racist to someone. The racism card is thrown around far too much these days. I got called racist for saying to my mother we should buy some cordon negro. A woman screamed at me in Tesco I was a racist fucker until I shoved the bottle of Cordon Negro into her face and told her to fuck off.

[barackohmama]

I still cant understand how the left cant handle peoples will.

But can the people handle the peoples will? Time will tell

[Tommi]

You are aware that the EU are those other countries? If they want to send this message out it´s in accordance with them not against them.

As we all know, every country in the EU is completely equal in all ways.....

[looorg]

I think Brexit is silly for one reason. There was no clear majority.

51.9% of voters voted to leave the EU. The overall turnout for the referendum was 72.2% of eligible voters.

That means only 37.4% of eligible voters voted to leave the EU.

Considering that not everyone of voting age is actually registered ... the number is probably closer to 33% (and that is being conservative with the numbers)

Would you have made the same argument if the other side won, ie staying?

[Pann]

Would you have made the same argument if the other side won, ie staying?

Nigel Farage did something similar before the results were even in.

[Deleted]

There is always going to be good and bad points to any decision. Pros and cons. I have an extreme example for you.

1. End all world hunger, all wars etc, but you have to sacrifice 10 million black africans.
2. The world will end in 50 years but those africans live for 5 years.

What would you choose? Either way, you're being, in your eyes, racist to someone. The racism card is thrown around far too much these days. I got called racist for saying to my mother we should buy some cordon negro. A woman screamed at me in Tesco I was a racist fucker until I shoved the bottle of Cordon Negro into her face and told her to fuck off.

I mean people are idiots right. I don't really agree with you, and while that's a tough choice to have to make, I don't think the brexit thing was anything comparable. It seemed pretty clear that a large part of the leave campaign was built around immigration stuff, and by extension, racism. Saying "there are good points and bad points to any discussion" is like how people were like "well both trump and clinton are kind of shits" prior to the US election. It's technically true, but it's also not really telling the whole truth.