The Brexit aftermath thread

[AeneasBK]

I followed my gut and went for crash out.

Like all these sorts of things I rooted for my least favourable outcome then at least I have the silver lining of winning the poll if it is realised.

[Ulmita]

Yes, I absolutely want the EU to fall.
It's a right-winged dictatorship that slowly destroys the entire European continent.

C'mon dude. I think you're over exaggerating. EU needs to change some stuff and its a normal thing to happen just as it happens to any new unification of such or even smaller scale. Its not right wing and its not a dictatorship. Its actually wonderful if you think about it. We kept killing each other for so long and now we are united, isn't this a step towards the right direction?

What destroys everyone and not just the EU continent is the fact that Capitalism has reached a point that no longer can provide for the small and medium classes of people.

In general Unification = Good (hopefully one day EU will federalize and then grow with other countries in it as well - Russia, Turkey, etc)
In general Division = Bad poop are coming our way

[Shalcker]

In general Unification = Good (hopefully one day EU will federalize and then grow with other countries in it as well - Russia, Turkey, etc)
In general Division = Bad poop are coming our way

I think it has more to do with certain practices getting entrenched and resistant to change, and so changing the core without breaking entire thing down doesn't look feasible.

Like, maybe EU could still work if it would go away from "total consensus" and allow for significant dissent/different approaches within.

But with "EU way or the highway" like we see with Brexit there isn't much hope in that regard.

[Ulmita]

But with "EU way or highway" like we see with Brexit there isn't much hope in that regard.

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Let me give you an example. In a soccer team or any kind of team, the players need to play according to the team's standards, strategy and goals. You can have a or some players doing w/e they feel like doing, because at the end the team will go nowhere. This is true not only to sports but applies to almost any team activity including our professional life.

Now i get that a union needs to respect the individuality of each member and this is were the things go gray in the case of Britain / EU.
I have fixed feelings about this situation. From one hand i respect the Britons but from the other hand the Union must be protected at all costs even if that means making an example of someone / something.

[Shalcker]

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. Let me give you an example. In a soccer team or any kind of team, the players need to play according to the team's standards, strategy and goals. You can have a or some players doing w/e they feel like doing, because at the end the team will go nowhere. This is true not only to sports but applies to almost any team activity including our professional life.

What about if some player say "we should change course" and "we should strike/relax this particular rule" and the other member strongly opposes it because current situation benefits them more?
Something they perhaps even championed and other side reluctantly agreed to, and then found way to exploit it so that the tables turned?

At least as declared in EU every member is equal. If someone cannot have their way in something critical to them that is also critical issue to other member (from opposite side), how can consensus be maintained? You need to find ways to resolve this contradiction without leaving the EU; not every country can be strong-armed to particular viewpoint and not every country can yield on some of them all the time.

Suppose everyone will say "Germany should cap their exports to EU to at least as much as they import from other EU countries for the good of EU", will Germany agree?

Now i get that a union needs to respect the individuality of each member and this is were the things go gray in the case of Britain / EU.
I have fixed feelings about this situation. From one hand i respect the Britons but from the other hand the Union must be protected at all costs even if that means making an example of someone / something.

Suppose as result both Britain and EU will get stuck in multi-decade recession - will it still work as a lesson? If neither will?

Results are most likely to be mixed.

Also, if you want to ever have Russia in, you'll need security guarantees. Which, in current arrangement, means Russia as NATO member... extremely tall order given overall relations trajectory.

[Ulmita]

What about if some player say "we should change course" and "we should strike/relax this particular rule" and the other member strongly opposes it because current situation benefits them more?
Something they perhaps even championed and other side reluctantly agreed to, and then found way to exploit it so that the tables turned?

At least as declared in EU every member is equal. If someone cannot have their way in something critical to them that is also critical issue to other member (from opposite side), how can consensus be maintained? You need to find ways to resolve this contradiction without leaving the EU; not every country can be strong-armed to particular viewpoint and not every country can yield on some of them all the time.

Suppose everyone will say "Germany should cap their exports to EU to at least as much as they import from other EU countries for the good of EU", will Germany agree?

Suppose as result both Britain and EU will get stuck in multi-decade recession - will it still work as a lesson? If neither will?

Results are most likely to be mixed.

Also, if you want to ever have Russia in, you'll need security guarantees. Which, in current arrangement, means Russia as NATO member... extremely tall order given overall relations trajectory.

I think the poster above me covered me in many ways. UK's demands go over and beyond any kind of meaningful union, and i think its best to either compromise or either leave the union completely.

As for the guarantees with Russia, i agree with you 100%. Russia needs to get into NATO ASAP (but then who is going to break the bad news to Lockheed and Boeing? We are talking about 100's of billions of lost revenue if the "bad guy" suddenly disappears)

[Naiyano]

I don't belive in a hard crash out on the 29th of March. It would be the right thing to do so. The EU will probably not take the blame for the hard brexit and let these morons in british parliament talk more about what they not want.

May has to present a plan or strategie so. If the EU will extend without a solid plan for the the future I'm losing faith in it tbh. Everyone all over the world can follow the brexit comedy and the EU has to establish theirself as a still functioning union which is able to make hard descisions about what they want.

[Flarelaine]

The number one concern is the anti-globalism movement which is not something that can be adequately addressed; how do you explain to people who think their country can just go at it alone that they will be better off in a world of predatory trade practices with giants like the US and China trampling on everyone else?

I blame Shakespeare!

This England never did, nor never shall,
Lie at the proud foot of a conqueror,
But when it first did help to wound itself.
Now these her princes are come home again,
Come the three corners of the world in arms,
And we shall shock them. Nought shall make us rue,
If England to itself do rest but true.

Best Shakespeare character if you ask me.

- - - Updated - - -

communist dredge

Funny you should use that phrase. Have you by chance ever played Guild Wars 2?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I absolutely want the EU to fall.
It's a right-winged dictatorship that slowly destroys the entire European continent.

And my wish is coming true. Once people see that Brexit isn't so bad, other countries will follow.
I suspect France will be next, perhaps Italy and Greece.
Benelux will quickly follow once it's just them, Germany and central-Europe.

It took way too long, but finally the goal of destroying the EU will be achieved. Things will be better once that is gone.

Some people just want to see the world burn. Nice of you to admit you are one of them, it's an illustrious company.

[Shalcker]

The UK felt their financial contributions should be closer to a net zero. They receive a substantial rebate.
The UK did not want to join Schengen. They were allowed to not join Schengen.
The UK wanted to keep their currency. They kept their currency.

At some point it's not about one member not agreeing with some of the rules. If we have a club and one member consistently does not agree with the rest, exit IS the only option.

They didn't join Schengen and yet they were in freedom of movement for workers?

...how was that supposed to work?

[Dhrizzle]

They didn't join Schengen and yet they were in freedom of movement for workers?

...how was that supposed to work?

You can't travel from an EU country to UK or Eire without showing a passport, so no Schengen. However EU citizens have the automatic right to access the UK, can live and seek work here, hence freedom of movement of workers.

[Shalcker]

You can't travel from an EU country to UK or Eire without showing a passport, so no Schengen. However EU citizens have the automatic right to access the UK, can live and seek work here, hence freedom of movement of workers.

So, they got to show passport, but they cannot be rejected once they do so? All they get by not joining Schengen is "you need to show passport"?

...i can see why that would be contentious issue.

[LeGin Tufnel]

They didn't join Schengen and yet they were in freedom of movement for workers?

...how was that supposed to work?

Two entirely separate vehicles.

It's nice to see the whole world and their partner has a viewpoint on this. This thread is becoming truly globalist. Although I don't seem to recall debating with anyone from the Indian subcontinent.

Kangodo, your opinions are those of the lunatic fringe. Literally.

I mean: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...KCN1R10XM?il=0Why on earth would the EU grant a longer delay only to see it shot down by the House of Commons? They have better things to do than hold worthless votes.

IMO, no - this is just Leadsom being Leadsom. No deal vs long extension: parliament would vote for a long extension. All data so far indicates parliament is still heavily opposed to no deal. Which leads to:

A long extension cannot be given. It makes absolutely no sense.

It would have to be for a second referendum. That could be the only justifiable reason. GE would not solve anything. Yes, EU elections would be a farce.

It comes back to what choices would be on a second referendum, how it would be phrased, binary vote?, multiple choice?, transferable vote? I'm glad to see Huehue shares my optimism.

[mojojojo202]

May is going to ask for a short extension.

Pretty much confirms no deal Brexit in my mind.

3 months will (or should) be used to pass the 500or so bits of legislation and statutory instruments needed to have a functional legal code after leaving.

[LeGin Tufnel]

May is going to ask for a short extension.

Pretty much confirms no deal Brexit in my mind.

3 months will (or should) be used to pass the 500or so bits of legislation and statutory instruments needed to have a functional legal code after leaving.

Ahh, ok. Sorry I'm not keeping up:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1R10GN

OK. So, IMO EU should refuse this. Offer long extension or no extension.

[LeGin Tufnel]

I think Slant would have an aneurysm though.

lol, quite

Nope... I'm punting for two possibilities now:

a) EU refuses short extension. Vote of no confidence. Revoke A50 before March 29.
b) EU refuses short extension, grants long extension on guarantee of second ref.

[Shalcker]

As for the guarantees with Russia, i agree with you 100%. Russia needs to get into NATO ASAP (but then who is going to break the bad news to Lockheed and Boeing? We are talking about 100's of billions of lost revenue if the "bad guy" suddenly disappears)

Don't forget that then Russian companies can compete with US companies for NATO defense procurement too - it's not just "bad guy" stuff (they'll just shift China there).

All in all, highly unlikely sadly.

[Slant]

I have given my thoughts extensively on the second referendum but really the more I think about it, the more the UK participating in in EU elections seems more problematic. I understand that their seats would be redistributed pro rata to member states. I have no idea how exactly they'd campaign within the UK and what exactly they'd be supposed to do once elected.

Fun idea (fact?)! The UK can technically!? and legally revoke article 50 and then invoke it on the same day!!! That way you get an automatic two year extension without even having to ask the EU and I am not even sure the EU would be able to do anything about it. After all:
a) The ECJ has ruled you can unilaterally revoke it
b) If you revoke it you would automatically be a normal member state
c) Any member can invoke Article 50 at will with no further consultation from the EU itself

I think @Slant would have an aneurysm though.

This is a possibility. But usually, in the legal field, when something can be abused as obviously as this, courts tend to jump in and create artificial limits to stop bullshittery. The ECJ would not look kindly upon such behaviour and would - when asked - start looking into the teleological interpretation of the paragraph, what the creators wanted to achieve, how they achieved it, how one can adequately honour that original sentiment and how the rest of the treaties can still be respected etc.

I imagine we would very quickly see some sort of time limit on A50 being invented by the courts. It is their job to fill out gaping holes such as the ones left by A50 to make the original idea of A50 usable without breaking everything. At least until the legislative comes in to fill them proper. As they should have done in the first place. A50 is a terrible, terrible accident of good intentions meeting half-assed efforts.

Other options could be to sue the UK in front of the ECJ to have their voting rights in EU institutions removed, then go and reform A50 (which has to be done anyway) and raise the bars on invoking A50 to a point where the UK would have trouble legally invoking it again. One such idea that keeps banging around in my head is to ask for more than just a simple majority from the member states, if they absolutely have to do a referendum. This matter should have been decided by a two-thirds majority. I was super surprised that any nation would make such a monumental shift without a two-third majority of something being required along the way, just once.

Etc. There's a lot of stuff we can do if they revoke A50. Not all of them is bad.

And, we must not forget... the ECJ has said in its preliminary ruling that A50 has to be called within the constitutional regime of the member state. I think it's fair to doubt that the UK could at this stage revoke A50 constitutionally. They pretty much would have to start the process right about now. The ECJ could simply reject it.

[Slant]

Yeah this is the discussion that needs to be had and perhaps it would be better to ask for an interpretation of the existing article from the ECJ first instead of trying to resolve this in parliament. It just came to me that they could technically do this and wanted to share it for the lulz

I added a few bits and pieces. Thing is, under normal circumstances, this (A50 lacking proper shape) shouldn't be resolved in front of a court. Court's always the last solution. You'd want this debated and solved adequately in the EP, because they are the democratically elected ones (unlike judges, as qualified as they may be).

I'm not sure the ECJ can publish... opinion pieces on its own. It has to be asked first. Anything else would probably be viewed as interference with the legislative.

[Kronik85]

Big tings a gwaan!

The Maybot can't even write a letter without shit hitting the fan. This morning the plan was to write to the EU asking for a short extension, there is now talk about an emergency debate now with the view to asking for a long extension.

[Dizzeeyooo]

The Maybot can't even write a letter without shit hitting the fan.

Not lying to parliament is such a difficult requirement to meet these days