Behemoth Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Simples! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 No can do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 I don't know why it took them more than 70 years to decide the Schleswig-Holstein Question. I mean, come on, decide: Denmark or Germany? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 [double post] Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 In case anyone genuinely doesn't understand why Brexit isn't simple: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/11/04/how-brexit-will-end Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 As I have been explaining to anyone interested for months now, the constitutional jam over exit is caused by the fact that the referendum, randomly invented by PM Cameron, has no legal force. Parliament is sovereign, members are there to represent their constituents, not the “will of the people,” so you won’t get a Brexit until Parliament agrees; a fact underlined by BJ’s great wheeze of shutting Parliament down. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 Imagine a referendum in the US over, say, gun laws. The will of the people says, let’s do x, y, z. Senate says, well no. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Orik Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 Wouldn't it be simpler, not to mention cheaper, to seek out some number of people who supported this idiocy and execute them by order of The Queen before holding another referendum? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
voyager Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 If you doubt the influence of the press... https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/24/business/media/trump-subscription-new-york-times.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Behemoth Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 Wouldn't it be simpler, not to mention cheaper, to seek out some number of people who supported this idiocy and execute them by order of The Queen before holding another referendum? Referenda are simply an unacceptable form of governance -- and frankly an abdication of leadership -- when it comes to decisions that catastrophically punish one subset of the population for the perceived benefit of a small (or even large) majority. This is exactly why we have parliaments and (for better or worse) why the US senate is constructed as it is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Orik Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 I thought we had parliaments to make lobbying work more productive. But I agree of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 All of this is true, but the incessant back and forth is what makes it ludicrous. The British have never fully embraced the EU (never accepted the Euro over the Pound, etc...), always felt they were supporting "lazy" nations - their word not mine. At the end someone, somewhere needs to have the courage and insight to make a decision. What makes this "not simple" is the total ineptitude of those seeking to put forward their own agenda. That New Yorker article makes it appear as an impossible situation, which it's not. It's only impossible because the "leaders" can't or won't see the forest for the trees. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Orik Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 Right, if only they had the wisdom of North American leaders who have long ago formed a single federation, redrew and reduced the number of historical subdivisions ("states"), and allowed free immigration to fill up their giant swaths of empty land. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich Posted October 26, 2019 Share Posted October 26, 2019 LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted October 27, 2019 Share Posted October 27, 2019 All of this is true, but the incessant back and forth is what makes it ludicrous. The British have never fully embraced the EU (never accepted the Euro over the Pound, etc...), always felt they were supporting "lazy" nations - their word not mine. At the end someone, somewhere needs to have the courage and insight to make a decision. What makes this "not simple" is the total ineptitude of those seeking to put forward their own agenda. That New Yorker article makes it appear as an impossible situation, which it's not. It's only impossible because the "leaders" can't or won't see the forest for the trees. Denmark seems able to do this without any undo angst. The problem is that David Cameron unwisely called for that referendum, and given the Irish border there’s no intelligent politically acceptable way to effectuate the result. (Also the vision of post-EU Britain held by the faction whose propaganda caused that result is truly odious— and not what the Leavers were led to believe they were voting for.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.