|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 23:14:45 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 23:14:45 GMT
*snork*
I tried. I'm afraid no explanation would be satisfactory to someone with such a strong opinion of our supposed stupidity. Define then what is the meaning of 'solid' and what is the meaning of 'explanation'. What would constitute for you a solid explanation? Facts and figures? A list of reasons such as more independence, less beholding to the EU machine? Greater flexibility? More in charge of our own destiny? Frustration of the wastage in human terms of time and money? More control?
No, forget it. I've spent too much time on this already with what I think is reasoned information to assist someone with seeing this particular leaver's point of view. If none of it has made any impact then I begin to believe it is not me that is blinkered. The effort can only extend so far. In fact several long paragraphs and posts too far that results in dismissive one line comments to my justifications. I will eat some chocolate and move on.
Time for bed, said Zebedee.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 0:00:36 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kimby on Sept 30, 2018 0:00:36 GMT
Bixa, just wait til onlyMark asks us to explain why Americans voted for Trump!
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 0:06:09 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kimby on Sept 30, 2018 0:06:09 GMT
I for one appreciate your efforts Mark.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 0:59:27 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 30, 2018 0:59:27 GMT
I'm afraid no explanation would be satisfactory to someone with such a strong opinion of our supposed stupidity You needn't put words in my mouth, nor try to twist what I've said. As far as I know there are three people who have participated in this thread who are pro-Leave. Only one of them has ever stated a concrete instance which he felt would make the UK benefit by leaving the EU. As it turned out, the instance turned out to be one of the lies promulgated by the Leave campaign -- but still, it sounded true and thus was a point that would make some people vote to leave. Neither you, Mark, nor anyone is obligated to explain his/her position. But I continue to wonder why those who want to leave cannot or will not explain their reasons in other than emotional terms.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 8:24:15 GMT
Post by mossie on Sept 30, 2018 8:24:15 GMT
Well I am a 200% leaver, and extremely prejudiced against the EU, I must admit. We were bombed during the war by Junkers and to have one of their distant, drunken relations lording it over us is untenable. That is of course out and out prejudice, but it feels to me for a long time that the EU goes against our interests out of spite, the carve up of the fishing policy is an example. They want to take over our armed forces completely, despite the fact that we and the Americans have been bearing the lions share of their defence ever since the war. Germany in particular has benefited enormously, and not a word of thanks even, just contempt. The waste and corruption in the EU bureaucracy is blatant, they have not been able to get their accounts audited for many years. SO, we should have done this years ago. It particularly annoys me as when it began I thought it an excellent idea and even voted to stay in when we were given the chance. However when we were promised a vote on the disastrous Maastrict Treaty, we were cheated out of it by EU chicanery, and I have been very anti ever since.
Whatever hardships we will have to endure by leaving cannot compare with those imposed on us by Germany in the war.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 8:25:13 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 8:25:13 GMT
What do you think I've been saying? I made a decision based mainly but not wholly on emotion. Was that not clear? Obviously not. Not by a long way it seems if after all those paragraphs you are still wanting something that is not on "emotional terms".
I can only talk for myself but after all that I said I thought I was clear on stating that the reasons are not based on financial benefits, on monetary terms, on anything at all, as said, that is 'tangible', where facts and figures etc can be rolled out in support and examined or debated upon at length. Something that is your "solid evidence". You are wanting the impossible. It is like unicorn shit. Two steps removed from the possible, i.e. there are no unicorns, so there is no excrement.
Here is the point - when voters were bombarded with supposed facts an figures from both sides, with accusations of fake news from one side to the other, when supposed experts and commentators gave their grounds in terms of loss/benefits and evidence, when figures relating to people, immigrants, health service, trade, income, cost of living and the numerous other categories of life that would be affected by your decision, when every day the numbers changed, when every day the information became more complex and contradictory - it was not a simple, in relative terms, decision about which party to vote for in an election - it was a decision to extricate the UK, or not, from the insidious and cancerous spiders web of complexity affecting every aspect of life in the UK from the corrupt a wasteful juggernaut of an organisation staffed by nepotistic cronies and jobsworths defending their own little fiefdoms of power, angling and manoeuvring to get more of their cut of the cake and where altruism is a concept they left behind many, may years ago when they were young and naive and wanted to "do good".
(You may have noticed that all that last paragraph was based on emotive terms and nothing substantive that can be put into the light and examined with dispassion.)
Hence, when someone is confronted by conflicting information for weeks and months, when parsing out what is relevant and accurate is impossible, when what is concrete one day is washed away and/or disputed at length and changed, what does a person do? What does any reasonable sane and experienced person fall back on? Emotion. The feeling of what is the right thing to do.
Rather than clinging on to facts that are fluid as a justification, rather than building your decision on substantive evidence that is shot away from underneath you at will, substantive evidence that an interested third party can examine and agree or disagree with, evidence that is deliberately tailored to appeal to sections of the community, where it is targeted at them for effect, evidence that is so obvious in what it is meant to achieve to be influential and yet also is based on spurious evidence itself, nothing but conjecture and is often misleading and slanted to manipulate - the only option is to make a decision on what you believe. What your core values are, what you personally see as important - an emotional decision.
The vast majority of the UK population recognise when they are being manipulated. It matters not if eventually you agree with the object of the manipulation but to any and all who took part they know they are left with a nasty taste in their mouth as to how it was gone about. Devious and damaging misinformation abounded.
You will not get substantive evidence from me, as said, it is impossible because it does not exist. Justification in terms of facts and figures does not exist. Anyone who has clung on to hard evidence as a basis will find in the future that things have changed and not turned out like they expected, on either side. It never does stay as stated when other influences come into play. Which they invariably will and do.
Conclusion - just to hammer it further for the hard of hearing - I made an emotional decision where substantive reasons do not play a part because of their unreliability, manipulation and lack of foundation. I can agree with anyone in their reasons for making a decision if they are based on their feeling of right and wrong and not of facts and figures, substantive evidence given beforehand, as those can be shot down in flames. If someone voted to stay because of their emotion that it is intrinsically right, then I have no argument with that at all.
You will not get what you are looking for so for god's sake, don't give a one line reply after reading it all either for the first time or again, and still not getting it and saying, "So many words, and still no solid explanation."
Kimby - maybe I could have done as you suggested and shortcut my explanation by asking that very question, "Why did those who voted for Trump do so?" Thanks.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 8:34:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by mickthecactus on Sept 30, 2018 8:34:46 GMT
Eloquently put.
I am still a leaver and one reason was Project Fear which was a big factor in my vote.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 13:24:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kimby on Sept 30, 2018 13:24:48 GMT
As a total and poorly informed outsider, I wonder if a factor for some of the Leavers could be a nationalistic impulse with its roots in nostalgia for the British Empire. That would be similar to the America First, Make America Great Again slogans touted by the Trumpers.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 14:14:18 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Sept 30, 2018 14:14:18 GMT
I totally appreciate the effort that Mark has made to explain his complex thoughts.
I am a bit reminded of the 1981 presidential campaign in France where one of the big arguments against Mitterrand was "there is a risk of adventure." Well, Brexit certainly contains a risk of 'adventure.' My own analysis is mostly negative, but I fully understand the feeling that something 'different' might be better. After all, in France Macron was elected barely more than a year ago and his approval ratings have become rather alarming because people finally understood that he did not have a magic wand. I am afraid that Theresa May (or whoever becomes Prime Minister next week -- who knows?) does not have a magic wand either.
I will add, however, that one complaint that I have read about the EU which I will NEVER accept is the idea of "We are paying more than we are getting back." That is the whole point of international solidarity. The rich countries are supposed to help the poorer ones. It is one of the reasons that the EU exists. Obviously if one cannot accept that element, it is time to leave -- but don't expect any help afterwards.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 14:19:41 GMT
via mobile
Post by mickthecactus on Sept 30, 2018 14:19:41 GMT
As a total and poorly informed outsider, I wonder if a factor for some of the Leavers could be a nationalistic impulse with its roots in nostalgia for the British Empire. That would be similar to the America First, Make America Great Again slogans touted by the Trumpers. I think that is a fair point Kimby. Also Brits don’t take well to being told what to do.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 15:08:18 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 15:08:18 GMT
"The rich countries are supposed to help the poorer ones." Which in principle I agree. Yet it becomes somewhat irksome when we for some time appear to be chucking good money after bad. If we are or not is not the issue, it is the perception that we are. Plus, and this is also a crucial point, we, because we are one country amongst many in the EU, seem to have little say or control over it. We are tasked with pumping more and more money into the EU coffers, as one of the richer countries it seems fair to do so, but then when countries who receive it blatantly waste it by not adhering to the conditions in which it was given.
Some countries give the appearance of the EU being a cash cow where they can cock up big time their own economy with little sanction, even though much is threatened, and still get more, especially from Germany. Snub their noses at the agreements made and blithely carry on their own way. If it wasn't for Germany, France and the UK, the EU would have gone tits up years ago. People will abuse the system. When countries abuse the system it is time for a rethink. Maybe they should also realise they are part of a community and try to contribute accordingly. Now we are leaving, the Germans generally are very sad about this, so I'd like to see what happens in future years.
The EU in the long term needs to be run as a business, not a charity for the poorer countries who demand much, get it and then say it wasn't enough, we want more. Any country wishing to join needs to be given as much help as necessary, both in monetary terms as well as support technically, politically and in every way possible but there should be a time limit (excepting there may be natural disasters and other extenuating circumstances but.....) if you fail to pull your weight after all the assistance given, after a certain length of time, say ten to fifteen years, then you are chucked out and have to reapply. How well would that go down huh?
There is an expression , "You are taking the piss," which seems to apply also to much that does seem to happen policy wise within the EU. I have expressed my opinion, I am proud to be from the UK, but I am far from being a nationalist. I am far too young to understand the British Empire. I do not yearn for those days. Much was faulty with it as I have learned during my experiences and travels. But as touched upon, I carry the same generalised British gene that influences my opinion of being told what to do and held to ransom over it. I will help you stand on your own two feet. I will hold you up until you are strong enough to support yourself. But if you can't be arsed to try in a meaningful way, to listen to my advice and trot out excuses that you need more from me over and over again. I will drop you like a shot and turn my back on you.
The divorce is painful and we will lose out for sure. But lose out for how long? Will my children benefit from this? Who knows. But I can say that my character is something I have said previously, that I will willingly cut my nose off to spite my face to achieve what I want. If I lose out financially then so be it. If whatever spiteful restrictions the EU puts on the UK that affect me personally, then so be it. I will live with it/them. But, I want out. I want to have to survive without being beholding to others, nor be told the price of membership of a club includes numerous restrictions on what I can and cannot do and that I have little power to change or influence them. Just demands.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 15:11:53 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 15:11:53 GMT
Besides the fact that we have more variety of cheeses than any other country. I like cheese.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 15:35:19 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Sept 30, 2018 15:35:19 GMT
Your complaints would almost be valid if we did not all think at the same time that our own countries are pissing away their money in ridiculous and outrageous ways. Do you really think that it will make you feel better if your taxes are no longer going to fucking useless wogs but instead to total wankers inside the UK? People will always complain until the day you expel every single person of foreign origin, and then within ten minutes they will begin to complain about anybody else who is different, probably the Scots, the Welsh, the Irish or the person who lives down the block.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 17:26:25 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 17:26:25 GMT
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 17:35:43 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 17:35:43 GMT
I just can't imagine your train of thought that leads you from my comments that I do no wish to continually prop up failing economies in EU countries with the conclusion I am a member of the National Front and wish the cleansing of Britain. That is puzzling, sad and unwarranted. It seems I am unable to convey my opinions and reasoning without them being glossed over as not part of the question or misinterpreted to the extreme.
I must practice my English to remove any trace of ambiguity in order to get my point across. I probably should take a story writing course or at least have gone to a high class University to have improved my education when I was younger. Five 'O' levels appears to not be enough. Plus a six month course at a technical college. Though one of them was in English. Mustn't forget 'CSE' French as well.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 18:27:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by mickthecactus on Sept 30, 2018 18:27:26 GMT
Immigration never ever was a factor in my decision.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 18:41:52 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Sept 30, 2018 18:41:52 GMT
I never thought that it was except in the most extreme cases. My own feeling is that it is a (mistaken) desire/illusion for sovereignty, and I quite understand the desire, but I just cannot understand that anybody thinks that they can extirpate themselves from obligations to other countries without extreme consequences. (Or perhaps it is just a craving for American chlorine chicken, hormone meat and GM fruits and vegetables.)
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 19:59:26 GMT
Post by whatagain on Sept 30, 2018 19:59:26 GMT
I will add, however, that one complaint that I have read about the EU which I will NEVER accept is the idea of "We are paying more than we are getting back." That is the whole point of international solidarity. The rich countries are supposed to help the poorer ones. It is one of the reasons that the EU exists. Obviously if one cannot accept that element, it is time to leave -- but don't expect any help afterwards. That is also my principle aversion for leavers. Second was to control immigration - something that always reminds me of Hitler. So I prefer a Junker at the head of Europe (he'll pass, someone else will come) than hearing to control immigration - we have enough already, etc etc. As to want to control how money is spent, same goes for our taxes, and same goes for money I give my daughter : I'd like her to spend intelligently the money I give. It is not the case, but I must know that once money is out of my pocket, so is my control over it. And it is only money. Finally, I don't care if UK leaves or stays. I am not spending energy on it - same goes for Flemish who want to leave Belgium : most are good people, I can discuss it over a beer but refuse to get involved anymore. But from my own education (business school)) I have seen that when companies when grow they get to control the market. Splitting companies into smaller parts mean having less and less importance. Military power ? It is a dream to believe UK has a good military. It has not. The only way to have a military that would deter enemy is what has been done : NATO : meaning aggregating forces. Even 30 000 Belgians can then add their weight. We were neutral in 14 and 40 and we were eaten piecameal. Now UK wants to retain full control about their military - ok. But there is no more british empire, there isn't even a Royal Navy : no more good aircraft carrier. Who would be afraid of beating UK ? Then France, then ... Same goes for business : you create Europe you have a chance to compete versus USA (who are not our friends anymore) or China (who may become aour friends but have a long way to go) or India (who will become a partner). I believe in number : 10 Millions people : nobody cares. 350 millions, people start wondering. 1,5 billions : nobody attacks you. Onmy fools start a commercial war with a giant.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 30, 2018 20:52:12 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 30, 2018 20:52:12 GMT
A couple of comments - 1) Controlling immigration has never been, as with mick, a factor in my decision. Believe that or not. *shrugs shoulders* 2) "It is only money." Taking all factors into account as regards rebates and with a quick look at the UK Office for National Statistics we probably paid in on balance about 8.1 Billion UK pounds in 2016. Sure, "It's only money." 3) I've missed what the connection is between us being in the EU and being in NATO. I understood we can be in NATO without being in the EU. If so, thus the (dire) state of our military is not an issue. Things on that front (pun) will not change so I can't see the relevance. We wont be attacked and if so, we wouldn't be alone. 4) Agree with your last paragraph. That is a problem for sure.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 1, 2018 3:24:14 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Oct 1, 2018 3:24:14 GMT
Not by a long way it seems if after all those paragraphs you are still wanting something that is not on "emotional terms". Well, after all that talk about emotion, it seems what it boils down to is that you think the UK consistently gives out more than it gets and that some EU countries intend to remain on welfare. Believe that if you will, but beyond international solidarity and decency, it eventually benefits all the other countries both monetarily and culturally to keep a struggling member from going under and to keep it propped up until it can stand alone. Further, even the experts cannot accurately pin down all the hard money benefits that accrue to the UK because of its membership in the European Union. It goes far beyond the simple arithmetic of what you all pay out less the rebate. All those things that do not have to be paid because of membership have to be factored in, along with the attendant ease of doing business with member countries. I am watching my own country being ravaged right now by a completely venal and self-serving political party, a situation not terribly unlike what is happening in the UK. I wish to hell we belonged to a union of nations which could stop the rape of the environment; that we'd be forced to abide by restrictions for the common good. I just cannot understand that anybody thinks that they can extirpate themselves from obligations to other countries without extreme consequences. True. In this situation there is no simple walking away. The UK has ties that cannot be neatly severed, nor can it expect to get out without honoring the commitments it has already made. you create Europe you have a chance to compete versus USA (who are not our friends anymore) or China (who may become aour friends but have a long way to go) or India (who will become a partner). I believe in number : 10 Millions people : nobody cares. 350 millions, people start wondering. 1,5 billions : nobody attacks you. Onmy fools start a commercial war with a giant. Yep. If you want to win at cards, you have to have something in your hand. I am still a leaver and one reason was Project Fear which was a big factor in my vote. But Mick, if you now know that much of what Project Fear claimed is not true, why are you still a Leaver? it feels to me for a long time that the EU goes against our interests out of spite, the carve up of the fishing policy is an example. They want to take over our armed forces completely, despite the fact that we and the Americans have been bearing the lions share of their defence ever since the war. Germany in particular has benefited enormously, and not a word of thanks even, just contempt. The waste and corruption in the EU bureaucracy is blatant, they have not been able to get their accounts audited for many years. SO, we should have done this years ago. I Re: fishing -- www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/11/brexit-uk-fishermen-fishing-industry-quotas-uk-government - and - www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/common-fisheries-policyAbout defence -- Mossie, are you talking about NATO? If so, how have the UK and the US been bearing the lion's share of defense? I realize you are in a special position in this conversation in the sense that you remember before the UK entered the EU, plus can remember German bomb attacks on England. But is it really useful to hold a grudge against all those Germans who weren't even born until after the war?
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 2, 2018 16:15:45 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Oct 2, 2018 16:15:45 GMT
I had to chuckle at this -
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 2, 2018 16:33:36 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Oct 2, 2018 16:33:36 GMT
That's quite good. I was watching Boris live this afternoon, and it was not nearly as well done.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 2, 2018 21:55:28 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Oct 2, 2018 21:55:28 GMT
Odd how there is no answer to logic.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 2:15:51 GMT
Post by questa on Oct 3, 2018 2:15:51 GMT
I have not been following this saga but what I can't understand is why any sovereign country would WANT to get into bed with the UK. What goes on in their Parliamentary squabbles is there to entertain the Press and hoi-poloi with illusions of democracy and decency. Meanwhile the back-room-boys plot and manipulate situations to achieve more power at the expense of their allies and trade partners.
India...invaded by a trading company which had its own Army. created a society of hostility and subjugation...stripped all the assets it could creating poverty where once it was minimal. Got out of the mess leaving it a blood bath which persists in the north today.
Middle East W.W.1 ...Promised the disparate Arab peoples that if they fought together against the Turks (fellow Muslims) they would be given Arabia as an independent country. Even as this promise was being made, France and UK were drawing up the Sykes-Picot agreement which divided Arabia into several smaller countries to be ruled by the European appointees. The mess and infamy of this also persists to today.
W.W.2 When the call came for Australian and New Zealand troops to assist Mother England, they came in their thousands. They fought all over Europe and Africa. When the Japanese entered the war our troops were needed to defend S.E.Asia. The back-room-boys didn't agree and insisted that Anzac troops stay in Europe. It took the threat of seceding from the Empire before our troops were sent into the Pacific War.
Don't know about you, but I wouldn't buy a used car from this company.
(Individual Brits are not all like this, of course, just have to learn to get out and vote, and "keep the bastards honest")
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 5:10:49 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Oct 3, 2018 5:10:49 GMT
Oh dear. The UK certainly does seem to have an appalling past. I'm sure no other country in the EU has such a chequered one.
Wait, what........?
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 5:19:26 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Oct 3, 2018 5:19:26 GMT
But, but, but ....
Questa, you're pretty much dismissing a country because of its history, and even the most recent historical thing you list happened 75 years ago. You could go country by country across the globe and come up with an equally damning list for each of them.
But remembering the history of only the past 100+ years, encompassing both world wars, the whole idea of the European Union and the fact that it actually functions, is pretty miraculous and wonderful. And one of the reasons it functions is because of a common commitment to avoid that kind of finger-pointing among the nations.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 5:52:08 GMT
Post by questa on Oct 3, 2018 5:52:08 GMT
Agree with both of you. France and Belgium had terrible bloodshed in Africa as they divested themselves of their colonies, and other countries have also major conflicts in their recent history. My own country has a poor record in its treatment of the indigenous people.
I suppose what I am thinking is "When the chips are down, can you trust them to do the right thing...for everyone, not just self interest"
But then you will say..."but that applies to everyone. not just UK"
And I will say "**sigh** yes you are right. Not having a good day here. Thanks for you answers!"
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 7:54:40 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Oct 3, 2018 7:54:40 GMT
"Odd how there is no answer to logic."
Unless you happen to be one of the billions upon billions who have faith in a deity, obviously.
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 10:08:37 GMT
Post by questa on Oct 3, 2018 10:08:37 GMT
Too heavy for my brain today. Besides I am not one of the billions.
"on the surface I appear to be deep, but deep down I am really quite shallow."
|
|
|
Brexit
Oct 3, 2018 13:14:11 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kimby on Oct 3, 2018 13:14:11 GMT
"Odd how there is no answer to logic." Unless you happen to be one of the billions upon billions who have faith in a deity, obviously. Touché mark! Humans seem to be pre-wired for superstition.
|
|