View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. This poll is closed
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #481
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Changing your mind and having another vote after a) enough time passed, b) customs and morals in the country changed a considerable degree or c) new information has come to light that righteously affects the decision is acceptable.

    One year is not enough time.
    Then what amount of time is "enough"?


    Customs and morals in the country have not changed within that one year.
    No new information has come to light since the referendum. Quite the opposite, every politician in the EU predicted exactly what is going on now. Britain has been warned time and again about the outcome and that these negotiations would hurt. That Britains voting exit ignored these warnings makes them stupid, but it doesn't mean they get to revote.
    Why not? Who are you to say they don't get a second shot? Why? What's your reasoning around not allowing a country to rethink their vote and make a better decision?


    That's the thing about democracy. When they ask you for your vote, it's not a prank. You get that one vote. Better make it count, because a huge part of democracy is accepting the result, even if it doesn't suit you. That's the whole core idea of democracy. Doing revotes until "the right result" happens isn't democracy. It's also never going to work, because... who decides what "the right result" is? You? Me? The Government? The opposition? The Queen? Don't open Pandorra's box, is all I can say.
    This sounds beautiful for some poly-sci course but not for reality. Do you really believe that no country, ever, has changed their mind on a law? Are you seriously making that argument?

  2. #482
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    The thing about democracy is that it doesn't begin or end with a vote. ESPECIALLY when said vote has a massive flaw in it in which many who are legally entitled to vote in British elections were denied a vote in this referendum, and that the courts decided not to force the government to allow those barred from voting to be able to vote because in their own words "The vote was not binding in any way and therefore the government was under no obligation to allow anyone a vote." specifically calling the vote nothing more than a glorified opinion poll in which many were not asked if they wanted to remain or not.

    Also with the whole Democracy thing many who voted for the leave vote are now dropping dead due to their elderly status. While those who were just below voting age by mere days were not allowed to vote on this even though they have more of a stake in the election than those who basically are in God's waiting room.

    The whole referendum was designed from the ground up by Cameron to give the leave vote around 5-10% buff in the polls to appease his back benchers and keeping UKIP at bay. This has never been about the will of the people. This is a conservative power play at hand and the outright majority of us are being dragged along with something we did NOT vote for. 52-48 may have been the result on the night but if those who were denied the vote were given their lawful right to vote in this then remain would have won by around 5% (and then Dribbles, Floop and Farage would be screaming for neverendum)
    Yes, democracy begins and ends with the vote. That's exactly where it begins and ends. That the vote may have a flaw in it is unfortunate, but the question was decided upon by the democratically elected Government. There's more than just one piece of democracy responsible for this horridly stupid outcome. The vote stands, the decision to accept it as binding also stands. Either you're telling me that Britains are collectively stupid people that shouldn't be allowed to govern themselves on account of self inflicted harm being a real possibility, or you'll have to accept the fact that Britain absolutely did what it wanted to do. Fuck itself over. Nothing in democracy says you can't do that. In fact, the whole point about democracy is giving you the ability to fuck yourself over. That's the whole point. There is no limit and there is no "oh, be democratic about it as long as you're not stupid about it."

    Another thing about democracy... And this is a big one: You accept the decisions that you don't agree with. That includes previous decisions. Governments in properly democratic countries have a hard time with this. But you'd be surprised how often Governments carry over decisions made by the previous Governments. This goes towards your "they were too young to vote by only a few days". Well, tough luck. But if we had a revote everytime someone grew up or the Government changes, we'd have no institution able to govern anything.

    Democracy isn't perfect. And it's inefficient enough as it is. But it's the best thing we have right now, so we make do and accept the flaws of it. Including the one that people who voted for Brexit died the next day while another who wanted to remain had his birthday to 18 a day after. That's how the cookie crumbles. It's a cruel world, but it's better than anything else we've got in the ways of governing people.

    Oh, and lastly, Cameron being a stupid cock who kicked this whole thing off doesn't change that the decision was made. The political agenda is irrelevant. Heck, even the lies told during the campaign phase are irrelevant. People are absolutely allowed to be stupid and believe everything they want. There's no one more vehemently against Brexit than I was, but I'm also fundamentally a democratic person and as much as I rage about Brexit, you can't just go and ignore the referendum they had. If you do, you'd undermine all British democracy and hurt the actual concept of democracy. I'd rather see Britain burn to the ground than have people doubt democracy as a valid principle.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Then what amount of time is "enough"?

    Why not? Who are you to say they don't get a second shot? Why? What's your reasoning around not allowing a country to rethink their vote and make a better decision?

    This sounds beautiful for some poly-sci course but not for reality. Do you really believe that no country, ever, has changed their mind on a law? Are you seriously making that argument?
    Enough time is more than "we're still raving about the previous result". We're talking at least one election cycle here. I'm not disallowing them to rethink their vote. But I'm saying for now they're stuck with it. They'll have to make a serious attempt at Brexit and if it doesn't work out a few years down the road (we're looking at at least 5 years if not a decade, given how huge of an impact this will have), they can always reapply to the EU.

    I'm not saying that no country has ever changed their mind on laws. But the underlying principle of active Governments is not to throw out any legislation of the previous Government. Because that would lead to a cycle of Governments busy with erasing each other's work instead of constructively progressing the country forward.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  3. #483
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    The thing about democracy is that you have to accept the one vote you get. That people may not have taken it seriously doesn't mean that they can just get another vote and redo the whole thing. Otherwise, we'd have an endless call for votes on the same topics until the "desired" result happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Yes, democracy begins and ends with the vote. That's exactly where it begins and ends.
    That is not where democracy begins and ends. The thing about democracy is that you don't simply make constitutional changes based on simple majoritarianism. Democracy is the institutionalization of freedom, so having elections to elect your representatives is part of that, of course, as is independent courts, a free press, etc. But constitutional changes usually requires things like a super-majority (2/3) of the vote in the legislature(s) and/or having to vote for the change twice over the course of two ordinary parliamentary terms. Otherwise you get this weird shit like with this where 52% of the voters, 37% of the electorate, decides to repeal fundamental rights of 100% of the citizens by revoking their European citizenship. That's not democracy. Though, of course, the referendum was a consultative one, which is often forgotten, and since the Tories and Labour have both decided to act according to the consultation given by the voters, and since they command an overwhelming majority in Parliament that means that in the end democratic standards are met when they eventually vote on the final Brexit bill in 2019.

    That being said, I agree with you.

    While I was opposed to having the referendum, while I supported Remain, and while it is theoretically possible to have another referendum and to stop Brexit, I agree that they should not have it and they should not stop it. We're way past that, there's, sadly, only one path forward now and that has to be Brexit. The way the whole issue has been handled and framed over the last year and a half means it would simply not be feasible to stop it now. The animosity towards the EU in the UK from the 70's until today would pale in comparison to what would be the case if they continued on as members after all of this. There's no way forward but for the Leavers and, unfortunately, the rest of the British citizenry to go out the door and see if the grass is truly greener on the other side at this point. Personally, though, I do hope they will return to the single market in 10 years time, and as members in 25. In the meantime the rest of the EU can do a lot of the stuff that the UK always vetoed.

  4. #484
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post

    I do get your idea, however with our current economies and the strength of international corporations this sounds like a path to destruction every quarter century.
    It's a sword of Damocles, that's for sure. But this is not necessarily a bad thing when everyone knows it's coming, as opposed to letting the pot boil until it suddenly errupts... into an uncoordinated Brexit.
    I think of it as a motivation for everyone to make sure that no member draws the short end of the stick in this union, because the next referendum will come. Guaranteed, with the announcement coming 25 years in advance.

    Just one example I'm thinking of:
    During our elections this year (Germany) the topic of geriatic care came up every now and then. As everyone knows, Germany has a huge demographic problem, just like Europe in general. Some members more, some less. But it's a clear trend.
    So both candidates competing for chancellorship had to answer how they intend to fix that problem: Who cares for our old?
    Of course they professionally answered with mostly nebulous bullshit phrases like "more money for nursing staff" (not specifying how much) and "more nursing staff in general".

    But one of their answers blew my mind. I would have never imagined that they would outright say this: "We will get the nursing staff from east europe". They literally said that, I'm not making this up.
    They intend to cannibalize the workforce of other EU members. Which in itself is okay, the world is and will always be competing for people, the most precious resource. But here we are not talking about top senior managers, scientists or engineers. We are talking about primary healthcare staff needed for the provision of basic medical care - on a grand scale. From countries that are also bound to struggle in that area.

    I mean what kind of fucked vision of Europe is that? What's going to happen in 25 years when basic services aren't met anymore in some parts of East Europe? Act surprised when far right nutjobs are winning elections? More sudden exits?

    I don't know if my suggestion of auto-referendums every generation (25 years) would fix that, but at least I would assume that the leading figures would at least try to act more foresightful if they were in place. Or more likely, the economy doing their part when they can calculate and anticipate certain unpleasant events.


    Btw you don't have to reply to any of this, I'm just letting this out lol.

  5. #485
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Enough time is more than "we're still raving about the previous result". We're talking at least one election cycle here. I'm not disallowing them to rethink their vote. But I'm saying for now they're stuck with it. They'll have to make a serious attempt at Brexit and if it doesn't work out a few years down the road (we're looking at at least 5 years if not a decade, given how huge of an impact this will have), they can always reapply to the EU.
    You should read up on the United States' prohibition amendments.

    I'm also completely unaware of where you get to say how long it should be before they can change their minds. Up here it's 5 years, and that HAVE to withdraw first - which is ridiculous to begin with if it turns out Britain A) doesn't want to, and B) doesn't have to - both of which seem to be the case.

    Tell me why a country has to move forward with a reversible decision again if they don't want to? There is literally nothing prohibiting Britain from re-referendering (can I use that word?) tomorrow if they want. Especially if they can already see it was a bad idea.


    I'm not saying that no country has ever changed their mind on laws.
    But you are - or at least you are saying that governments shouldn't be allowed to change their minds until they've suffered. For . . . reasons?


    But the underlying principle of active Governments is not to throw out any legislation of the previous Government. Because that would lead to a cycle of Governments busy with erasing each other's work instead of constructively progressing the country forward.
    Again - why not? The whole point of a new government is make changes, right? How about we change the total fuck-ups of the last government? I'm still not sure where you come up with the idea that governments and societies can't move quickly to fix mistakes, up to and including, god forbid, changing their minds.

  6. #486
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarc View Post
    That is not where democracy begins and ends. The thing about democracy is that you don't simply make constitutional changes based on simple majoritarianism. [B]
    That's the thing about democracy. It doesn't have a rule that doesn't allow you to do constitutional change on simple majorititarianism by the general population. Each country, even Britain, has the sovereign authority to decide for themselves how they want to run the country, despite public belief.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  7. #487
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Either you're telling me that Britains are collectively stupid people that shouldn't be allowed to govern themselves on account of self inflicted harm being a real possibility.
    Honestly given how britain has been running the past few decades I think this line is true for this country populace.

    And no you should just "Accept the result." because in a democracr you could have a vote saying "Everyone should have their left foot shot for a laugh." and only allow a certain demographic voting who would push the yes vote up by a huge number. If that passes should I then smile jump cheer laugh all the way to the firing line. Or should I say "Fuck this stupidity." and do EVERYTHING to stop it knowing full well how stupid it is?

  8. #488
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Again - why not? The whole point of a new government is make changes, right? How about we change the total fuck-ups of the last government? I'm still not sure where you come up with the idea that governments and societies can't move quickly to fix mistakes, up to and including, god forbid, changing their minds.
    If every Government is busy reversing legislation from the previous Government, we'd get nothing done. Ever. That's the simple truth of it. You can accept it or not, but it's a practical application of democracy rather than what you think it is, an academic theory from pol classes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    Honestly given how britain has been running the past few decades I think this line is true for this country populace.

    And no you should just "Accept the result." because in a democracr you could have a vote saying "Everyone should have their left foot shot for a laugh." and only allow a certain demographic voting who would push the yes vote up by a huge number. If that passes should I then smile jump cheer laugh all the way to the firing line. Or should I say "Fuck this stupidity." and do EVERYTHING to stop it knowing full well how stupid it is?
    Britain may have done things in a funny way, but the country is far from being a failure. Historic accomplishments aside, they have a very modern democracy that somehow incorporates the monarchy in a somewhat archaic, yet mostly functional manner. British are not stupid. They've just acted stupid this time around. Shit happens, let's deal with it.

    And yes, if it is the democratic decision of a country to only let a certain populace decide whether or not you should shoot yourself in the left foot, then that is the democratic result. Albeit, it may conflict with constitutional limitations and thus be negated anyway. So you wouldn't even have to do anything about it. That is, in Germany at least. Not sure about the constitutional situation in the UK, as I believe they do not - strictly speaking - have a constitution but rather a set of laws that somehow explain how the country is working? I've never figured that one out. But I'm sure there's a bit in it that says harming another human being (indirectly with such a vote) is against the rules. Surely they have such provisions...
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  9. #489
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    That's the thing about democracy. It doesn't have a rule that doesn't allow you to do constitutional change on simple majorititarianism by the general population. Each country, even Britain, has the sovereign authority to decide for themselves how they want to run the country, despite public belief.
    It does have such a rule. Democracies have constitutions or fundamental laws that are harder to change by design, as in the United States where there is a two-step process, requiring two-thirds of Congress or State legislatures to start the process and three-fourths of State legislatures or conventions to approve of any constitutional amendment. Or in Sweden, where fundamental laws can only be changed if approved twice by Parliament with an election in between. Of course in the case of the UK they are a rare case of a democracy, perhaps the only one, that has an unwritten constitution so it is a bit more complex. But they do have things like parliamentary sovereignty, meaning that there can be no binding referendums because only Parliament can pass the law that does a constitutional change. Then of course you have the House of Lords that are involved in some matter, though I believe the House of Commons can abolish it if it voted against them, but that's a small blocker nonetheless.

    Noting that, of course, by democracy we're referring to Western democracy, also known as liberal democracy. Otherwise we specify, saying direct democracy like they had in ancient Athens or majoritarian democracy like they have in Turkey.
    Last edited by Zarc; 2017-10-24 at 10:37 PM.

  10. #490
    The Undying
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    34,524
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    If every Government is busy reversing legislation from the previous Government, we'd get nothing done. Ever. That's the simple truth of it. You can accept it or not, but it's a practical application of democracy rather than what you think it is, an academic theory from pol classes.
    But that's not what's happening. You're using infinities to describe one situation. That's the simple truth of it. You can accept it or not, but in reality, a government that decides it made a mistake and reverses it's decision is exactly what we all want to see happen.

    I'm not sure why you want it to be otherwise.

  11. #491
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    But that's not what's happening. You're using infinities to describe one situation. That's the simple truth of it. You can accept it or not, but in reality, a government that decides it made a mistake and reverses it's decision is exactly what we all want to see happen.

    I'm not sure why you want it to be otherwise.
    If the Tories turn around tomorrow and say "We're just not gonna Brexit", the Tories will lose the next election.

    Everyone knows we made a mistake, but the people in charge won't stop that mistake, because the only way they have even a chance of staying in charge is pandering to the people who voted to make this mistake.

  12. #492
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Malacrass View Post
    It's a sword of Damocles, that's for sure. But this is not necessarily a bad thing when everyone knows it's coming, as opposed to letting the pot boil until it suddenly errupts... into an uncoordinated Brexit.
    I think of it as a motivation for everyone to make sure that no member draws the short end of the stick in this union, because the next referendum will come. Guaranteed, with the announcement coming 25 years in advance.

    Just one example I'm thinking of:
    During our elections this year (Germany) the topic of geriatic care came up every now and then. As everyone knows, Germany has a huge demographic problem, just like Europe in general. Some members more, some less. But it's a clear trend.
    So both candidates competing for chancellorship had to answer how they intend to fix that problem: Who cares for our old?
    Of course they professionally answered with mostly nebulous bullshit phrases like "more money for nursing staff" (not specifying how much) and "more nursing staff in general".

    But one of their answers blew my mind. I would have never imagined that they would outright say this: "We will get the nursing staff from east europe". They literally said that, I'm not making this up.
    They intend to cannibalize the workforce of other EU members. Which in itself is okay, the world is and will always be competing for people, the most precious resource. But here we are not talking about top senior managers, scientists or engineers. We are talking about primary healthcare staff needed for the provision of basic medical care - on a grand scale. From countries that are also bound to struggle in that area.

    I mean what kind of fucked vision of Europe is that? What's going to happen in 25 years when basic services aren't met anymore in some parts of East Europe? Act surprised when far right nutjobs are winning elections? More sudden exits?

    I don't know if my suggestion of auto-referendums every generation (25 years) would fix that, but at least I would assume that the leading figures would at least try to act more foresightful if they were in place. Or more likely, the economy doing their part when they can calculate and anticipate certain unpleasant events.


    Btw you don't have to reply to any of this, I'm just letting this out lol.
    I just think this is wishful thinking at best. The governments right after a referendum would do whatever they want while the government right before a referendum needs to be careful about what they're doing because as it has been shown time and again, the general population doesn't remember what happened 10 years ago.

    Automatic referendums wouldn't help with any of these problems as the countries that would be deciding to leave would also be worse of as they would be losing access to a market of 500 mio people and unless their living standards are better, people would flee to neighboring countries to stay in the market or to just have better chances at life. So this really wouldn't help with anything.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Britain may have done things in a funny way, but the country is far from being a failure. Historic accomplishments aside, they have a very modern democracy that somehow incorporates the monarchy in a somewhat archaic, yet mostly functional manner. British are not stupid. They've just acted stupid this time around. Shit happens, let's deal with it.

    And yes, if it is the democratic decision of a country to only let a certain populace decide whether or not you should shoot yourself in the left foot, then that is the democratic result. Albeit, it may conflict with constitutional limitations and thus be negated anyway. So you wouldn't even have to do anything about it. That is, in Germany at least. Not sure about the constitutional situation in the UK, as I believe they do not - strictly speaking - have a constitution but rather a set of laws that somehow explain how the country is working? I've never figured that one out. But I'm sure there's a bit in it that says harming another human being (indirectly with such a vote) is against the rules. Surely they have such provisions...
    bolded part.. ???
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  13. #493
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    bolded part.. ???
    Maybe he meant it in the original sense of the word, nowadays there is a distinction between "modern times" and modernity, but originally "modern" meant "after the year 1500". (Look up "modernity".)

  14. #494
    Quote Originally Posted by Zarc View Post
    It does have such a rule. Democracies have constitutions or fundamental laws that are harder to change by design, as in the United States where there is a two-step process, requiring two-thirds of Congress or State legislatures to start the process and three-fourths of State legislatures or conventions to approve of any constitutional amendment. Or in Sweden, where fundamental laws can only be changed if approved twice by Parliament with an election in between. Of course in the case of the UK they are a rare case of a democracy, perhaps the only one, that has an unwritten constitution so it is a bit more complex. But they do have things like parliamentary sovereignty, meaning that there can be no binding referendums because only Parliament can pass the law that does a constitutional change. Then of course you have the House of Lords that are involved in some matter, though I believe the House of Commons can abolish it if it voted against them, but that's a small blocker nonetheless.

    Noting that, of course, by democracy we're referring to Western democracy, also known as liberal democracy. Otherwise we specify, saying direct democracy like they had in ancient Athens or majoritarian democracy like they have in Turkey.
    It actually does not. That constitutions are harder to change is by choice, not because "it would be undemocratic" if they weren't as hard to change.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    But that's not what's happening. You're using infinities to describe one situation. That's the simple truth of it. You can accept it or not, but in reality, a government that decides it made a mistake and reverses it's decision is exactly what we all want to see happen.

    I'm not sure why you want it to be otherwise.
    Exactly, that's not what's happening. Gee, wonder why... you've just confirmed what I'm saying. I really don't know why you still argue against me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    bolded part.. ???
    Perhaps not the best choice of words. But their democracy works just fine in these modern times, is what I'm saying.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  15. #495
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Perhaps not the best choice of words. But their democracy works just fine in these modern times, is what I'm saying.
    Well, in my opinion it's not working just fine because it's in no way a representation of the electorate, i mean it's not as fucked up a system as the US presidential election but still not fine.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  16. #496
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Well, in my opinion it's not working just fine because it's in no way a representation of the electorate, i mean it's not as fucked up a system as the US presidential election but still not fine.
    Well, yes. But honestly, you can't get much more baseline democratic than having a general referendum with a relatively simple yes/no question. However flawed the British system may be (and it is), it wouldn't have changed this referendum to lead to a stupid decision.

    The only thing that you can say about this is... Germans have learned why these general population decisions can be a bad idea. And now we've gotten proof for it, too. We're not the only ones that are too stupid to make these decisions collectively and need professionals to do it for us. It really tickles the pleasure zone in my brain to know that the British can be just as stupid as we are.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  17. #497
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Well, yes. But honestly, you can't get much more baseline democratic than having a general referendum with a relatively simple yes/no question. However flawed the British system may be (and it is), it wouldn't have changed this referendum to lead to a stupid decision.

    The only thing that you can say about this is... Germans have learned why these general population decisions can be a bad idea. And now we've gotten proof for it, too. We're not the only ones that are too stupid to make these decisions collectively and need professionals to do it for us. It really tickles the pleasure zone in my brain to know that the British can be just as stupid as we are.
    Ah, ok yes, they are capable of holding referenda, that's just not telling anything about their democracy in general, but sure.

    I'm also pretty happy as thanks to the british no party in austria wants an auxit anymore.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  18. #498
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Ah, ok yes, they are capable of holding referenda, that's just not telling anything about their democracy in general, but sure.

    I'm also pretty happy as thanks to the british no party in austria wants an auxit anymore.
    It was late, cut me some slack. I said it may not have been the best choice of words. But I wouldn't go as far as calling them a bad democracy of an unmodern nation. That's just not fair.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  19. #499
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    It was late, cut me some slack. I said it may not have been the best choice of words. But I wouldn't go as far as calling them a bad democracy of an unmodern nation. That's just not fair.
    I'm not taking them serious enough anyhow.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  20. #500
    lol what negotiations. Why are there any at all? Just tell the UK to go shove it and go alone if they want to. We all know that is where this will end up anyways.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •