The Brexit aftermath thread

[Slant]

The terms left and right is used all the time in political discourse.

Words like racists and nazi's are not helpful at all.

I understand you don't like being wrong, but grow the fuck up buddy.

Again, if the shoe fits?

You can't moderate the use of the word just because you hear it too much and don't like it. Sometimes it's not that the word is overly used, sometimes it's that there's just a lot of racists around. And as for the Brexit group, the amount of racists in the Brexiteer army is way the hell disproportionally large. And you're defending them. I don't know about the other guys, but if I was you, I'd look at my life choices and maybe reevaluate what I did. And for what reasons, because so far you have not brought up a reasonable argument for Brexit. 1435 pages in and NONE of y'all did. But y'all are getting really good at deflecting, smokescreening and distractions.

[sircaw]

Again, if the shoe fits?

You can't moderate the use of the word just because you hear it too much and don't like it. Sometimes it's not that the word is overly used, sometimes it's that there's just a lot of racists around. And as for the Brexit group, the amount of racists in the Brexiteer army is way the hell disproportionally large. And you're defending them. I don't know about the other guys, but if I was you, I'd look at my life choices and maybe reevaluate what I did. And for what reasons, because so far you have not brought up a reasonable argument for Brexit. 1435 pages in and NONE of y'all did. But y'all are getting really good at deflecting, smokescreening and distractions.

I am not defending them in the slightest, please stop putting words in my mouth. I am asking you and others to stop painting every person that voted for Brexit as Racists, you know this is untrue.

And getting childish remarks like this below, does not help

They are your buddies. You should tell them.

[Slant]

I am not defending them in the slightest, please stop putting words in my mouth. I am asking you and others to stop painting every person that voted for Brexit as Racists, you know this is untrue.

And getting childish remarks like this below, does not help

But we don't. We are specifically talking about racists and that they are a disproportionally large group in the group of Brexiteers. That's just something you can't deny. And it's not our responsibility to fix the problems in the Brexiteer group for you. You're kinda guilty by association at this point.

Reasons for Brexit:

1. Immigrants.
2. Duh, Empire!
3. Unicorns!
4. Fuck Westminster, fuck Brussels, fuck anyone that tells me what to do.

That is a pretty comprehensive list of reasons why people voted for Brexit. People may believe in multiple of those reasons, but nobody has ever been able to come up with anything that couldn't be summed up in one of these four reasons.

Feel free to tell us what your personal reason to vote Brexit was. Without knowing it (far too lazy to go back and check if you ever revealed it), I'm almost positive that it's one of those four.

And unfortunately, two of those are by and large racist reasons (although Empire is additionally also an idiotic reason), one is a retarded reason and the fourth one is an idiotic reason. But feel free to get serious and convince me that you have a legit reason to support Brexit.

[Mayhem]

I am not defending them in the slightest, please stop putting words in my mouth. I am asking you and others to stop painting every person that voted for Brexit as Racists, you know this is untrue.

I did and you scoled me for it, so idk.

[Skulltaker]

The terms left and right is used all the time in political discourse.

Words like racists and nazi's are not helpful at all.

I understand you don't like being wrong, but grow the fuck up buddy.

They are used to label a broad group of people, attempting to lump them together to make an easier argument. Also, you've failed so far to point out how anyone is wrong.

Again, you hang with racists, you're a racist. Simple as that. If you wanted to distinguish yourself from them you would have done so pages ago, but you didn't, instead, you're making up excuses.

I am not defending them in the slightest, please stop putting words in my mouth. I am asking you and others to stop painting every person that voted for Brexit as Racists, you know this is untrue.

And getting childish remarks like this below, does not help

Yes, you are. You're universally defending people who voted for Brexit from being labeled as racists, even though you know fully well that a decent chunk of them are racists. So the fact remains, Brexiteers are racists, just like Trumpkins.

The moment you say 'No, not all of them are racists, but many of them were, and with voting for Brexit I gave these people a voice and supportet their racist endeavour' I'll go ahead and say 'Of course not all of them are racists'.

Fact remains that you knowingly and willingly supported racists. You and your family, after what you've told us. How does that feel?

[sircaw]

But we don't. We are specifically talking about racists and that they are a disproportionally large group in the group of Brexiteers. That's just something you can't deny. And it's not our responsibility to fix the problems in the Brexiteer group for you. You're kinda guilty by association at this point.

Reasons for Brexit:

1. Immigrants.
2. Duh, Empire!
3. Unicorns!
4. Fuck Westminster, fuck Brussels, fuck anyone that tells me what to do.

That is a pretty comprehensive list of reasons why people voted for Brexit. People may believe in multiple of those reasons, but nobody has ever been able to come up with anything that couldn't be summed up in one of these four reasons.

Feel free to tell us what your personal reason to vote Brexit was. Without knowing it (far too lazy to go back and check if you ever revealed it), I'm almost positive that it's one of those four.

And unfortunately, two of those are by and large racist reasons (although Empire is additionally also an idiotic reason), one is a retarded reason and the fourth one is an idiotic reason. But feel free to get serious and convince me that you have a legit reason to support Brexit.

I just don't like the way the EU as an organization is run and to what end it is becoming. In the beginning, it was simply a trading initiative, however, it has changed, warped into something very different. It's now a massive protectionist block with billions of tones of red tape. I believe in free trade, not just for the UK but for everyone in the world, I have a horrid feeling that in the future, the EU is going to encapsulate all the other countries thus become one large entity. I feel the Eu is the beginning of the end in eroding a countries sovereignty.

I don't want the UK or France or Germany for that matter to be just a nondescript country in 20/30 years' time. I want their cultures to remain as is, not forged into one massive melting pot of indistinguishable mess.

I mean i recall an article many months ago, with someone in the eu wanting to tighten the rules and regulations so that is was even harder for another country to leave the Eu. I can't recall the exact article but my mind was blown when i saw it, i was like wtf, this is meant tobe a choice to be in the Eu, not an order.

When i see things like that, i dont want it.

- - - Updated - - -

They are used to label a broad group of people, attempting to lump them together to make an easier argument. Also, you've failed so far to point out how anyone is wrong.

Again, you hang with racists, you're a racist. Simple as that. If you wanted to distinguish yourself from them you would have done so pages ago, but you didn't, instead, you're making up excuses.



Yes, you are. You're universally defending people who voted for Brexit from being labeled as racists, even though you know fully well that a decent chunk of them are racists. So the fact remains, Brexiteers are racists, just like Trumpkins.

The moment you say 'No, not all of them are racists, but many of them were, and with voting for Brexit I gave these people a voice and supportet their racist endeavour' I'll go ahead and say 'Of course not all of them are racists'.

Fact remains that you knowingly and willingly supported racists. You and your family, after what you've told us. How does that feel?

Give it a rest, you're just talking shit, nothing you are saying has any relevance to me.

Your trying to fabricate things to fit your petty agenda.

[Slant]

I just don't like the way the EU as an organization is run and to what end it is becoming. In the beginning, it was simply a trading initiative, however, it has changed, warped into something very different. It's now a massive protectionist block with billions of tones of red tape. I believe in free trade, not just for the UK but for everyone in the world, I have a horrid feeling that in the future, the EU is going to encapsulate all the other countries thus become one large entity. I feel the Eu is the beginning of the end in eroding a countries sovereignty.

I don't want the UK or France or Germany for that matter to be just a nondescript country in 20/30 years' time. I want their cultures to remain as is, not forged into one massive melting pot of indistinguishable mess.

I mean i recall an article many months ago, with someone in the eu wanting to tighten the rules and regulations so that is was even harder for another country to leave the Eu. I can't recall the exact article but my mind was blown when i saw it, i was like wtf, this is meant tobe a choice to be in the Eu, not an order.

When i see things like that, i dont want it.

It was never simply a trading initiative. It was always meant to politically fuse France and Germany together, starting with the very first coal agreement. So that's the British not understanding the EU part one.

The EU, like ANY trading initiative, is protective in nature. But not in the sense that you think. You're thinking of them being protectionist because suddenly the UK is throw on the other side of the fence, but what you'll find if you look at every trade agreement the EU puts out, is that it's primarily working on removing trade barriers. It's very much the opposite of just "protectionist". So that claim is just plain wrong. UK not understanding the EU part two.

The EU is limited to Europe. The big expansions have already happened, we're now just talking about fringe countries, most of which are not suitable for the EU. A nation's sovereignity was never in danger, is not in danger and won't be in danger in the foreseeable future. So that claim is invalid as well, as demonstrated by the UK unilaterally leaving. UK not understanding the EU part three.

The EU is protecting national and even regional culture, as demonstrated by the fact that a Belgian region could basically veto CETA. So that claim is also completely contrary to what actually happens in the real world. You not paying attention and voting on an issue you clearly don't know enough about.

So, as you can see, none of the reasons you gave are valid. You know they are not valid, because a simple Google search would tell you why they are invalid. I've given you examples just off the top of my head from recent history, but there are more readily available for you to look up.

But, to confirm what I said earlier, you clearly fall into category four: Fuck Brussels, don't tell me what to do. Cos all the legislation happening in Brussels is being implemented into national law by the UK Government, in a manner that suits the UK. So you're saying Fuck Westminster, fuck Brussels, fuck anyone trying to tell me what to do. That's it.

So, what exactly is it you don't like? Or... who told you not to like whatever they told you not to like?

[sircaw]

It was never simply a trading initiative. It was always meant to politically fuse France and Germany together, starting with the very first coal agreement. So that's the British not understanding the EU part one.

The EU, like ANY trading initiative, is protective in nature. But not in the sense that you think. You're thinking of them being protectionist because suddenly the UK is throw on the other side of the fence, but what you'll find if you look at every trade agreement the EU puts out, is that it's primarily working on removing trade barriers. It's very much the opposite of just "protectionist". So that claim is just plain wrong.

The EU is limited to Europe. The big expansions have already happened, we're now just talking about fringe countries, most of which are not suitable for the EU. A nation's sovereignity was never in danger, is not in danger and won't be in danger in the foreseeable future. So that claim is invalid as well, as demonstrated by the UK unilaterally leaving.

The EU is protecting national and even regional culture, as demonstrated by the fact that a Belgian region could basically veto CETA. So that claim is also completely contrary to what actually happens in the real world.

So, as you can see, none of the reasons you gave are valid. You know they are not valid, because a simple Google search would tell you why they are invalid. I've given you examples just off the top of my head from recent history, but there are more readily available for you to look up.

So, what exactly is it you don't like? Or... who told you not to like whatever they told you not to like?

Unfortuenly my worries about the erosion of a countries sovereignty are real, you might not think so, but I do and it's a real threat that I believe will happen.

I am sorry If I am not prepared to take your word for it.

I can literally see a superstate evolving, I mean you have the currency now in check, you have the flag in place, when is the EU army coming? another thing that said would never happen.

I mean i remember when guy verhofstad said “High time for a European Army to take matters in our own hands.”

The integration of the EU is happening all around, they are doing things they never said they would.

so I don't understand when you say, it's not going to happen, because it's happening, and the longer it goes on, the more integrated the countries will be.

I Do not want that, you might not like it but that in a word is why I wanted out of the EU.

And regardless if i was French, German, Austrian etc, i would want the same.

[Slant]

Unfortuenly my worries about the erosion of a countries sovereignty are real, you might not think so, but I do and it's a real threat that I believe will happen.

I am sorry If I am not prepared to take your word for it.

I can literally see a superstate evolving, I mean you have the currency now in check, you have the flag in place, when is the EU army coming? another thing that said would never happen.

I mean i remember when guy verhofstad said “High time for a European Army to take matters in our own hands.”

The integration of the EU is happening all around, they are doing things they never said they would.

so I don't understand when you say, it's not going to happen, because it's happening, and the longer it goes on, the more integrated the countries will be.

I Do not want that, you might not like it but that in a word is why I wanted out of the EU.

And regardless if i was French, German, Austrian etc, i would want the same.

So, two things... I mean there's a lot to unravel, but the main two issues you have are these:

1. Loss of control
2. Creation of a superstate.

I can address both at the same time with how the EU works. When the EU legislates anything, where does that authority come from? There's various ways we did it in history, the Egypts thought their Pharao was a God. In the middle ages they thought the King or Emperor was given authority by God, and so on. Well, those are pretty stupid ideas, so we got rid of them. So what about now? Well, typically, modern democracies say the authority comes from the people. Probably the best solution we have for now to answer the question: "What gives you the right to impose rules on me?" A pretty good answer: "Well, most of the people in this country, actually."

And that is essentially your problem. Now, about the EU? Who gives them that right? Well, the member states do. Every single right has been granted to the EU by every single member state. And that's not a one way street. As the German constitutional court has established a long time ago, the ultimate sovereignity on German territory lies with the German Government, given by the German people. Now, as part of that authority, The German Government can grant the EU certain rights and aspects of authority to act on behalf of Germany. And that translates into common speech: Germany can take that authority back anytime it chooses to. For instance, by quitting the EU. Just like the UK did. And the same is largely true for any member state in the EU, because the democratic principle that derives authority from the people is mandatory for all member states (one reason why Poland and Hungary are so much in trouble now is because they break that rule).

So, when you think national sovereignity is eroding, you couldn't be further from the truth. You just demonstrated it. In the most stupid fashion, I'll say, but you ultimately proved the reason why you want to leave wrong... by leaving. It's like someone saying I bet I can't fly, and I'll prove it by jumping off this cliff. Well, nobody ever disputed that you can't fly and now you're just falling to your death. Congrats?

About the creation of a super state, the EU does not have the authority to do that. There are several things that need to happen. Remember, authority is merely granted by the member states. And it's not a blank cheque, either. We're talking about very specific aspects of authority that need to be specifically named. And that is temporary. For a superstate to exist, and let's just call it a country, because that's what you're clearly thinking of, the EU would need to derive its new sovereignity directly from the people. Not the member states. There is some direct democracy going on in the EP, believe it or not, but I doubt that could be seen as enough for an actual country. It's enough for an entity that gets given state-like authority acting on behalf of its member states, but really, you'd want to go more into the direct democracy direction than it is now.

Second, the people in the EU are not ready for that idea, yet. The people in Brussels know this, the member states know this, everyone, even the most pro-EU nutjob knows this. And this is why your fear is so irrational. You're afraid of something nobody wants, nobody even seriously talks about. Based on what? There is no evidence suggesting that the EU is even moving in that direction. If you follow the actions of the EU, you will notice very quickly that the EU is merely reacting to events happening. There is little to no proactive legislation going on. Homogenisation of regulations is a big topic here. Whenever something gets regulated, it is because someone (typically a consumer protection agency of some sort) saw a deficiency that could be solved by aligning things like Banana classification. If Bananas had a type rating A, B, C based on their shape and size, it would make ordering and sorting Bananas on an industrial scale much simpler, the consumer would know what type Banana they have in their hands regardless of them being in Croatia, Spain or Germany. But when there's no need for regulation, or the regulation's benefit doesn't outweigh the effort needed to implement it, it's not done. Take your British power plugs. They're very different from continental plugs. It might be smart to align everything, but we never did, because the effort it would have for you guys to change EVERY PLUG is just disproportionally high in comparison to what... what would the benefit be? That we can buy appliances from UK stores and plug them into our walls? Doesn't happen often enough to be relevant if you ask me. But me going into a British supermarket buying fruit, I can guarantee you, that'll happen every single time I'm in the UK.

So, I know you don't care, but that's just a small glimpse of why you're irrational, why you're falling prey to cheap propaganda (hint: only Brexiteers talk about a superstate) and why your reasons are not factually valid. You may still have them, and I probably can't talk you out of them, but they are invalid. One look into the treaties would show it to you, too. But you never looked. You enjoy being fearmongered and looking into the actual legal text would take that illusion from you.

And all you accomplished by leaving is that you can't even influence the thing you don't like. Whereas every normal Eurosceptic stays in the EU and tries to make their voice heard, get things fixed they don't like. The EU isn't perfect, but quitting is the least constructive type of participation. And most of us are in it to win it. Quitters never win.

[Huehuecoyotl]

No wonder dribbles spins you in circles.

I would laugh along with you for that, but I know you seriously think this. Which just makes me sad.

I'd ask you to point me to proof of dribbles doing any such thing, but I know how you react when someone asks for proof. I also know you might link to a post of dribbles saying "see! I win!" and say that was proof. So pretty pointless, all in all.

Oh, and pointing out that all racists voted for Brexit isn't painting everyone with the same brush. But it is something called "guilt by association". If your ideologies align with racists on a regular basis, you need to have a pretty strong look at your ideologies to ask if they're ones you can be proud of. The fact you refuse to even think that way suggests that you have no problem with lining up alongside the racists.

How would you describe a person who stands on the same side of the argument as racists? Because I know what I'd call them.

[sircaw]

So, two things... I mean there's a lot to unravel, but the main two issues you have are these:

1. Loss of control
2. Creation of a superstate.

I can address both at the same time with how the EU works. When the EU legislates anything, where does that authority come from? There's various ways we did it in history, the Egypts thought their Pharao was a God. In the middle ages they thought the King or Emperor was given authority by God, and so on. Well, those are pretty stupid ideas, so we got rid of them. So what about now? Well, typically, modern democracies say the authority comes from the people. Probably the best solution we have for now to answer the question: "What gives you the right to impose rules on me?" A pretty good answer: "Well, most of the people in this country, actually."

And that is essentially your problem. Now, about the EU? Who gives them that right? Well, the member states do. Every single right has been granted to the EU by every single member state. And that's not a one way street. As the German constitutional court has established a long time ago, the ultimate sovereignity on German territory lies with the German Government, given by the German people. Now, as part of that authority, The German Government can grant the EU certain rights and aspects of authority to act on behalf of Germany. And that translates into common speech: Germany can take that authority back anytime it chooses to. For instance, by quitting the EU. Just like the UK did. And the same is largely true for any member state in the EU, because the democratic principle that derives authority from the people is mandatory for all member states (one reason why Poland and Hungary are so much in trouble now is because they break that rule).

So, when you think national sovereignity is eroding, you couldn't be further from the truth. You just demonstrated it. In the most stupid fashion, I'll say, but you ultimately proved the reason why you want to leave wrong... by leaving. It's like someone saying I bet I can't fly, and I'll prove it by jumping off this cliff. Well, nobody ever disputed that you can't fly and now you're just falling to your death. Congrats?

About the creation of a super state, the EU does not have the authority to do that. There are several things that need to happen. Remember, authority is merely granted by the member states. And it's not a blank cheque, either. We're talking about very specific aspects of authority that need to be specifically named. And that is temporary. For a superstate to exist, and let's just call it a country, because that's what you're clearly thinking of, the EU would need to derive its new sovereignity directly from the people. Not the member states. There is some direct democracy going on in the EP, believe it or not, but I doubt that could be seen as enough for an actual country. It's enough for an entity that gets given state-like authority acting on behalf of its member states, but really, you'd want to go more into the direct democracy direction than it is now.

Second, the people in the EU are not ready for that idea, yet. The people in Brussels know this, the member states know this, everyone, even the most pro-EU nutjob knows this. And this is why your fear is so irrational. You're afraid of something nobody wants, nobody even seriously talks about. Based on what? There is no evidence suggesting that the EU is even moving in that direction. If you follow the actions of the EU, you will notice very quickly that the EU is merely reacting to events happening. There is little to no proactive legislation going on. Homogenisation of regulations is a big topic here. Whenever something gets regulated, it is because someone (typically a consumer protection agency of some sort) saw a deficiency that could be solved by aligning things like Banana classification. If Bananas had a type rating A, B, C based on their shape and size, it would make ordering and sorting Bananas on an industrial scale much simpler, the consumer would know what type Banana they have in their hands regardless of them being in Croatia, Spain or Germany. But when there's no need for regulation, or the regulation's benefit doesn't outweigh the effort needed to implement it, it's not done. Take your British power plugs. They're very different from continental plugs. It might be smart to align everything, but we never did, because the effort it would have for you guys to change EVERY PLUG is just disproportionally high in comparison to what... what would the benefit be? That we can buy appliances from UK stores and plug them into our walls? Doesn't happen often enough to be relevant if you ask me. But me going into a British supermarket buying fruit, I can guarantee you, that'll happen every single time I'm in the UK.

So, I know you don't care, but that's just a small glimpse of why you're irrational, why you're falling prey to cheap propaganda (hint: only Brexiteers talk about a superstate) and why your reasons are not factually valid. You may still have them, and I probably can't talk you out of them, but they are invalid. One look into the treaties would show it to you, too. But you never looked. You enjoy being fearmongered and looking into the actual legal text would take that illusion from you.

And all you accomplished by leaving is that you can't even influence the thing you don't like. Whereas every normal Eurosceptic stays in the EU and tries to make their voice heard, get things fixed they don't like. The EU isn't perfect, but quitting is the least constructive type of participation. And most of us are in it to win it. Quitters never win.

I mean that is your take on it, but your coming from a viewpoint that wants to be part of the EU, I don't, I am at the opposite end of what you're hoping for or supporting. I want my country to succeed, I want it to thrive just as I want the EU too, I have no malice to them unless they start trying to pull a fast one as they did with the vaccines at the Irish border.

will there be consequences for leaving the EU, I have always said would be, I have always accepted that but my belief is the stake of my country which i dearly love is under threat, maybe not right now but in 30 years it will be.

I appreciate your effort in having a proper chat, it's a decent change from the usual race card, bigoted reasons that people keep slinging around, but I can not see my view changing much on how I have voted.

I just believe there is just too much to lose.

People need to accept, that there are other reasons that people voted to leave the eu. You might not agree with it but know you can at least know why.

One thing I will say is this. I don't know who was reasonable for the lack of information available on what the Eu does in terms of how it operates.

I think Tusk was the guy that said, the EU did not do very well of telling people what it was all about and how it operated.

Up to the referendum, I only knew like one person in the European parliament, and that was Junker, maybe that is my fault, maybe the British government fault or like Tusk said it was a failure of the Eu to communicate with its people.

Perhaps if they did, all of them, the vote would of been different.

Last post for the say I am sick of editing.

[Muzjhath]

I mean that is your take on it, but your coming from a viewpoint that wants to be part of the EU, I don't, I am at the opposite end of what you're hoping for or supporting. I want my country to succeed, I want it to thrive just as I want the EU too, I have no malice to them unless they start trying to pull a fast one as they did with the vaccines at the Irish border.

The hillarious thing with this statement is that the EU was for a long time practically the only big economy that allowed for export of Vaccines outside of it. The UK didn't, the US didn't. And good on them. Neither should the EU. Instead it became a fucking mess and BoJo whined about tyranny.

As for the information thing. The EU is very good at putting it out there. It is, however, dry and boring as fuck. So very little news coverage happens. Which is more on us. Meanwhile until recently I always knew who the Swedish EU Comissioner was. Knew some of the MEP. Etc. I try to keep some check on what's happening. But we get about as much news from Brussels as we do from our Riksdag. Because most of it is dry and we get scandals and big things.
Because our Parliament doesn't act like a school cafeteria.

Also, even if the EU becomes more Federated with a single foreign policy (A thing that I personally see as a short-longterm goal (say 50-100 years)). The induvidual parts won't lose their culture. Same as someone from the PNW has a different culture from a Texan, who is different from someone from the Panhandle, who is different from someone from Miami. Who again is different from someone from Minnesota.
You being scared of culture erasure is something that's bordering on racist scaremongering. It might not be anything of the sort, but it is a tool supremacists use to recruit. More so because cultures almost never get erased (Even if the English tried darn hard with the Irish). Culture develops all the time however. Just look at Polka. And the moment a culture stops developing it's seen as "dead". Same as with language.

[Demolitia]

I mean that is your take on it, but your coming from a viewpoint that wants to be part of the EU, I don't, I am at the opposite end of what you're hoping for or supporting. I want my country to succeed, I want it to thrive just as I want the EU too, I have no malice to them unless they start trying to pull a fast one as they did with the vaccines at the Irish border.

will there be consequences for leaving the EU, I have always said would be, I have always accepted that but my belief is the stake of my country which i dearly love is under threat, maybe not right now but in 30 years it will be.

I appreciate your effort in having a proper chat, it's a decent change from the usual race card, bigoted reasons that people keep slinging around, but I can not see my view changing much on how I have voted.

I just believe there is just too much to lose.

People need to accept, that there are other reasons that people voted to leave the eu. You might not agree with it but know you can at least know why.

One thing I will say is this. I don't know who was reasonable for the lack of information available on what the Eu does in terms of how it operates.

I think Tusk was the guy that said, the EU did not do very well of telling people what it was all about and how it operated.

Up to the referendum, I only knew like one person in the European parliament, and that was Junker, maybe that is my fault, maybe the British government fault or like Tusk said it was a failure of the Eu to communicate with its people.

Perhaps if they did, all of them, the vote would of been different.

Last post for the say I am sick of editing.

It's wishful thinking to believe the UK, standing alone, will do well agaisnt bigger blocs and alliances that grow more powerful everyday. You're sinning by pride here. Big time.

Tusk and Juncker actually said the exact opposite of what you state. Cameron specifically asked him to stay out of the debate altogether during the referendum, when they offered a hand.

Juncker was the president of the commission, not of the parliament. The only (former) MEP you probably have ever heard of is Nigel Farage. If the UK was lacking representation at the EP, blame it on him , because he never showed up to the committees he was a member of there (including, surprise, fisheries). The same goes for his fellow party members and MEPs.
I'm grateful Slant recapped the first 500 pages of this thread for you, but whatever fears and feelings you had for voting leave have been debunked 10 times already. Ultimately you will have to align your regulations with your closest trading partner, without having a voice, simply because ... geography. Whatever freedom and independence you think you won by leaving is an illusion ( and again, it was not lost but pooled with other countries willingly and democratically).

[sircaw]

It's wishful thinking to believe the UK, standing alone, will do well agaisnt bigger blocs and alliances that grow more powerful everyday. You're sinning by pride here. Big time.

Tusk and Juncker actually said the exact opposite of what you state. Cameron specifically asked him to stay out of the debate altogether during the referendum, when they offered a hand.

You're thinking about the wrong statement, the statement I am referring to was months after the referendum was completed.

Juncker was the president of the commission, not of the parliament. The only (former) MEP you probably have ever heard of is Nigel Farage. If the UK was lacking representation at the EP, blame it on him , because he never showed up to the committees he was a member of there (including, surprise, fisheries). The same goes for his fellow party members and MEPs.
I'm grateful Slant recapped the first 500 pages of this thread for you, but whatever fears and feelings you had for voting leave have been debunked 10 times already. Ultimately you will have to align your regulations with your closest trading partner, without having a voice, simply because ... geography. Whatever freedom and independence you think you won by leaving is an illusion ( and again, it was not lost but pooled with other countries willingly and democratically).

You're thinking about the wrong statement, the statement I am referring to was months after the referendum was completed.

As for the UK being bigger or better, those are your words, not mine, I do want the uk to be successful, I don't know why you are measuring them against the Eu, I am not after a first-place rosette here, just to be good enough to stand on our own two feet.

As for recapping 500 pages, again, my fears, my rational and my reasoning are mine, your not debunking anything, do you know what the eu will be like in 30 years, no you don't.

Stop trying project your ideals on to me.

[Pannonian]

Ha! THERE GUYS SEE THIS?

Fuck yeah, I'm right. I'm godamn right. VINDICATION!

I'll say this out loud for everyone to hear, dylsexic people are absolutely PARANOID about their spelling and use spell checkers all the time. Anytime I catch someone fucking up spelling and going "Oh I'm dyslexic" that's bullshit, he's just being lazy and uses a lazy excuse, cos if he WAS dyslexic, he'd be all over his post with a spell checker.

Godamn, thanks for pointing this out. And everyone else can cut him some slack, cos that's a legit excuse.

That's the main reason i edit my posts 5-7 times - and still miss a lot...

[sircaw]

That's the main reason i edit my posts 5-7 times - and still miss a lot...

join the club, most people have no idea what it's like to keep going over and over again, and there are still a dozen mistakes littered in there.

The worst is missing words, sometimes a whole sentence can miss like 3-4 words in a phrase, and to me it still sounds fine lol. cry

[Slant]

I mean that is your take on it, but your coming from a viewpoint that wants to be part of the EU, I don't, I am at the opposite end of what you're hoping for or supporting. I want my country to succeed, I want it to thrive just as I want the EU too, I have no malice to them unless they start trying to pull a fast one as they did with the vaccines at the Irish border.

will there be consequences for leaving the EU, I have always said would be, I have always accepted that but my belief is the stake of my country which i dearly love is under threat, maybe not right now but in 30 years it will be.

I appreciate your effort in having a proper chat, it's a decent change from the usual race card, bigoted reasons that people keep slinging around, but I can not see my view changing much on how I have voted.

I just believe there is just too much to lose.

People need to accept, that there are other reasons that people voted to leave the eu. You might not agree with it but know you can at least know why.

One thing I will say is this. I don't know who was reasonable for the lack of information available on what the Eu does in terms of how it operates.

I think Tusk was the guy that said, the EU did not do very well of telling people what it was all about and how it operated.

Up to the referendum, I only knew like one person in the European parliament, and that was Junker, maybe that is my fault, maybe the British government fault or like Tusk said it was a failure of the Eu to communicate with its people.

Perhaps if they did, all of them, the vote would of been different.

Last post for the say I am sick of editing.

You want your country to succeed in what? Countries have no win condition. The win condition is existing. Congrats, your country is succeeding. Continually. With or without the EU. So what metric are you measuring this by? Ah, I don't think you are. You're just using words cos they sound nice. You've not actually thought about any of what I said, which is not surprising if a bit disappointing.

"BELIEF" has nothing to do with any of this. It's politics, not religion. The difference is, we have factual evidence to base decisions on. What you believe in is utterly irrelevant and does not serve to validate your position, merely the irrational nature of it. And your 30 year claim is just... pure fantasy at this point, as there is zero evidence for anything changing dramatically to justify the phrase "the stake of my country" as you use it. Quite the opposite, the stake of your country is now in jeopardy as a direct result from Brexit in that Scotland is giving another independence referendum more than just a serious thought. You and your position are actually endangering the Union more than the EU ever could have.

What do you have to lose? Cos so far, you haven't come up with anything that was actually in danger of being lost. Not a single thing, as I elaborated rather broadly just one post before.

Nobody is "responsible for a lack of information" if you don't go out and seek it. It's nobody's business to educate you on how the EU works. But, being what they are, they have a gadzillion websites, and everything is public and available for anyone to find with minimal effort. That you're not aware of it is you choosing to ignore it. Not anyone else's fault.

The EU can't communicate with people that start the conversation with "Everything the EU says is a lie." That's the end of their responsibility. And yet, they tried. Oh, boy did they try. Everyone tried. You got videos, pdocasts, letters, public statements, documentaries, people like me, teachers, professors, simple people, rich people, poor people and their frickin' dogs explaining, educating, arguing, debating, screaming, begging you to listen... and yet, you refused. We tried everything and more, and you chose to remain ignorant. Ignorant of the possible consequences, what is actually happening, how the EU works, who is lobbying for Brexit, how much money they stand to make out of it... that was your choice, and your choice alone.

And it comes back to this simple fact: You chose to do this because you just didn't give a fuck, tossed a coin and decided you're a nationalist, cos "Duh, Empire!" And right now you're just defending your decision, not because it's smart, but because you don't want to feel like the dunce that got defrauded by JRM, Farage and all the other slimy fuckwits that got away with the biggest crime in English history.

Edit: It's funny... when I heard "The EU is a tyrannical dictatorship" from someone the first time, the initial, normal reaction in me was "The fuck? That can't be true..." and I looked it up. People like you reacted like this: "A tyrannical dictatorship born out of WW2? Yeah, that absolutely sounds reasonable to me..." and didn't check up on anything, you just started believing in the religion of Brexit. People like Dribbles? They're the worst, they reacted like this "Tyrannic... boy, this is going to be fun, let's join in on the bullshit, see if we can make some entertaining bloodshed happen!" And if you deal with Dribbles for a while, you can tell he knows what's up. He knows exactly what's up. The way he makes posts, I would bet rl money he can't post them without giggling to himself a little... to him this is just a big joke.

- - - Updated - - -

That's the main reason i edit my posts 5-7 times - and still miss a lot...

Don't worry about it. It's not a stigma and we should be adult enough to not make a point of it. I've yet to see any post on any forum where someone makes fun of people with dyslexia. It can become an issue if something's actually intelligible, but that has happened maybe once or twice where I can see it and it was resolved by the person just saying "Yo, can you try to write that again, I have no idea what you're saying" and that's the end of it.

I hate it when people pick on other people's spelling, it distracts from what the other guy is saying and serves no real purpose but to diminish that person. As if their spelling made what they said smarter or dumber.

[sircaw]

You want your country to succeed in what? Countries have no win condition. The win condition is existing. Congrats, your country is succeeding. Continually. With or without the EU. So what metric are you measuring this by? Ah, I don't think you are. You're just using words cos they sound nice. You've not actually thought about any of what I said, which is not surprising if a bit disappointing.

"BELIEF" has nothing to do with any of this. It's politics, not religion. The difference is, we have factual evidence to base decisions on. What you believe in is utterly irrelevant and does not serve to validate your position, merely the irrational nature of it. And your 30 year claim is just... pure fantasy at this point, as there is zero evidence for anything changing dramatically to justify the phrase "the stake of my country" as you use it. Quite the opposite, the stake of your country is now in jeopardy as a direct result from Brexit in that Scotland is giving another independence referendum more than just a serious thought. You and your position are actually endangering the Union more than the EU ever could have.

What do you have to lose? Cos so far, you haven't come up with anything that was actually in danger of being lost. Not a single thing, as I elaborated rather broadly just one post before.

Nobody is "responsible for a lack of information" if you don't go out and seek it. It's nobody's business to educate you on how the EU works. But, being what they are, they have a gadzillion websites, and everything is public and available for anyone to find with minimal effort. That you're not aware of it is you choosing to ignore it. Not anyone else's fault.

The EU can't communicate with people that start the conversation with "Everything the EU says is a lie." That's the end of their responsibility. And yet, they tried. Oh, boy did they try. Everyone tried. You got videos, pdocasts, letters, public statements, documentaries, people like me, teachers, professors, simple people, rich people, poor people and their frickin' dogs explaining, educating, arguing, debating, screaming, begging you to listen... and yet, you refused. We tried everything and more, and you chose to remain ignorant. Ignorant of the possible consequences, what is actually happening, how the EU works, who is lobbying for Brexit, how much money they stand to make out of it... that was your choice, and your choice alone.

And it comes back to this simple fact: You chose to do this because you just didn't give a fuck, tossed a coin and decided you're a nationalist, cos "Duh, Empire!" And right now you're just defending your decision, not because it's smart, but because you don't want to feel like the dunce that god defrauded by JRM, Farage and all the other slimy fuckwits that got away with the biggest crime in English history.

I have thought about what you have said, I had read months and months of your pro-EU propaganda for years now, it's nothing new, its the same anti-UK rhetoric i have heard on these forums on a daily basis.

You're showing a hell of a lot of arrogance there, the EU is not the beginning or the end-all of civilization.

The fact of the point is you need to accept that the uk voted in a particular way, I am happy with the referendum result and and don't give two shits about your constant bitching and whine.

I love my country, DEAL WITH IT, and it's got nothing to do with the Empire or racism bla bla. Jesus the nerve of you is staggering.

you just dont fucking listen do you.

[Demolitia]

You're thinking about the wrong statement, the statement I am referring to was months after the referendum was completed.

As for the UK being bigger or better, those are your words, not mine, I do want the uk to be successful, I don't know why you are measuring them against the Eu, I am not after a first-place rosette here, just to be good enough to stand on our own two feet.

As for recapping 500 pages, again, my fears, my rational and my reasoning are mine, your not debunking anything, do you know what the eu will be like in 30 years, no you don't.

Stop trying project your ideals on to me.

Tusk did say the EU cpuld do a better job communicating. There are 2 problems. Regulatory work is boring and doesn't get much traction in the mainstream press. And heads of states like to control the narrative and don't encourage direct EU intervention in the news, because ... sovereignty?
The EU has been fine since its inception in 51. It has not destroyed the culture of its members, nor taken control of anything against it members wishes. You just try to justify your vote for leave based on some myth and disinformation you read in the british press using its exevutive arm as a scapegoat.
I am not projecting ideals. The EU has grown and further integrated as a response to crisis. An eu army might or might not be created when the parliament and all member states' leaders fell it makes sense financially and strategically to have one. But it will not be a power grab from the commission.

- - - Updated - - -

I have thought about what you have said, I had read months and months of your pro-EU propaganda for years now, it's nothing new, its the same anti-UK rhetoric i have heard on these forums on a daily basis.

You're showing a hell of a lot of arrogance there, the EU is not the beginning or the end-all of civilization.

The fact of the point is you need to accept that the uk voted in a particular way, I am happy with the referendum result and and don't give two shits about your constant bitching and whine.

I love my country, DEAL WITH IT, and it's got nothing to do with the Empire or racism bla bla. Jesus the nerve of you is staggering.

you just dont fucking listen do you.

I don't think it's anti UK rhetoric. It's genuine dismay at the decision, and trying to understand the reasonning behind.
Not accepting "reasons" that are not based on truth or facts, or "because sovereignty", or "because we can", as a justification is not unreasonnable, or intolerant on our part.

[sircaw]

Tusk did say the EU cpuld do a better job communicating. There are 2 problems. Regulatory work is boring and doesn't get much traction in the mainstream press. And heads of states like to control the narrative and don't encourage direct EU intervention in the news, because ... sovereignty?
The EU has been fine since its inception in 51. It has not destroyed the culture of its members, nor taken control of anything against it members wishes. You just try to justify your vote for leave based on some myth and disinformation you read in the british press using its exevutive arm as a scapegoat.
I am not projecting ideals. The EU has grown and further integrated as a response to crisis. An eu army might or might not be created when the parliament and all member states' leaders fell it makes sense financially and strategically to have one. But it will not be a power grab from the commission.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't think it's anti UK rhetoric. It's genuine dismay at the decision, and trying to understand the reasonning behind.
Not accepting "reasons" that are not based on truth or facts, or "because sovereignty", or "because we can", as a justification is not unreasonnable, or intolerant on our part.

At the end of the day, i really think most of this conversation here is pointless, maybe one of two people are looking for an honest debate, but the rest are not.

I should not have bothered commenting in this thread, like a friend of mine said, its best to stay out this thread, if you comment your only going to get attacked etc etc. He was right.

Thanks for the convo, i am out.