Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

ynwa250505 posted:

winkyincanada posted:

Seeing the early results, it seems the UK is stupider, more racist, more selfish, more paranoid and more delusional than I imagined in my worst nightmares. I'm now kind of hoping they do vote to leave. The rest of the world might be better off without them.

Well, what do you know! The UK did vote to leave - the rest of the world might be better off.

Bloody damn democracy!!!

ps: I hope the nightmares ease eventually ...

"The rest of the world"? Crikey, I didn't know we voted to leave that too! 

winkyincanada posted:

dayjay posted:

winkyincanada posted:

Clay Bingham posted:

Gentlemen

How about some respect for our friends. It's not your country and the outcome whatever it turns out to be will have resulted from a democratic process. We've all had our say over the past couple of months, now its time to wish them the best and trust that life will go on for all of us.

 

Respect for those that didn't vote for racism, intolerance and exclusion. Contempt for those that did.

What an arrogant and judgemental view that is, and rather insulting to just over 50% of the U.K. Population who's votes have so far been counted.  There were far more factors at play than that very narrow list, and attitudes like yours, and others who refuse to listen to those who don't want to be ruled via Brussels, and who continue to play the race card, has only helped to push people into hardening their support for brexit.  There are many people who believe in democracy and tonight is democracy in action regardless of the end result

I agree with you that there are far more factors at play (or at least that their should be), but you're being naive if you think that a fair chunk (but no, not all) of the "Leavers" weren't motivated by distrust and/or hatred for people "not like them". The future of your country should not be decided by xenophobes and racists. It is a sad day for all of us.

Bottom line is that this was far too important a decision, and it is far too complex, for it to be decided by referendum. Your leadership is weak and spineless.

"weak and spineless" - clearly unlike Junior - he punches his opponents in Parliament - now that's what I call Leadership!!!

and as to the inadequacies of a referendum for complex decisions, Canada has had, not one, but two! I guess the electorate is smarter over there ...

Don Atkinson posted:

winkyincanada posted:

Seeing the early results, it seems the UK is stupider, more racist, more selfish, more paranoid and more delusional than I imagined in my worst nightmares. I'm now kind of hoping they do vote to leave. The rest of the world might be better off without them.

That applies to c.17m of the c.46m population entitled to a vote.

It will take a change of Government to implement their wishes.

I'm not sure how such a Government can be elected.

But the 46m didn't all vote ...

No change of government needed was needed ...

Hmack posted:

Having gone to bed at 4am in the forlorn hope that what I was witnessing was just a nightmare, I see that it is a reality.

So, David Cameron has not delayed his resignation. I would say good riddance, were it not for the fact that this will exacerbate the economic and social turmoil.  Also, as a supporter of the labour party with a great deal of admiration for Corbyn and his approach to politics up to now, I have to register my opinion in respect of his performance in the debate leading up to the election. I am afraid I have to say that he must go as well. His presence in the campaign, his apparent lack of conviction, and the lacklustre efforts of the labour leadership to participate effectively in the campaign are just too damning. 

And the icing on the cake - Donald Trump has just congratulated UK voters  - apparently, "BREXIT is a great thing". Donald Trump and Nigel Farage! Now they are fine bedfellows, aren't they.

I have been appalled by the result of general elections in the past, but I have never been so completely dismayed and disheartened by a national vote of any sort. I also have to admit that I did not see this coming. I was completely convinced that the British public could not possibly be so utterly naïve. (I can't even bring myself to prefix Britain by the word "Great", even as a joke. This is past joking about.

We have just done irreparable damage to the UK, and we have just helped create economic and social chaos in Europe and beyond.

I think Corbyn is awesome ...

It will take "years and years" before British workers are ready to fill the low-skilled jobs left by EU migrants, Brexit Secretary David Davis has conceded.

He said the UK was not about to "suddenly shut the door" on low-skilled EU migrants because UK nationals were not likely to take up the low-paid jobs in care, farming or hotels and restaurants for some time.

Mr Davis' comments, made during a visit to Estonia, will raise questions over Theresa May's pledge to use Brexit to take back control of immigration and reduce net migration to the tens of thousands.

Difficult to make this sorry saga up, isn't it !

No doubt we shall have to use £350m pw to encourage these essential workers to actually come to the UK to help us out. And the EU will charge us a "premium" to provide this service.

Is there anybody in the HoC that is wise enough to say "enough is enough" ?

Don Atkinson posted:

Is there anybody in the HoC that is wise enough to say "enough is enough" ?

Yes ... The problem is they are Liberal Democrats...

I have removed a particular post and any associated replies.  As a first post it had all the hallmarks of a troll post and hence unacceptable on this forum.  A reminder to members new, and sometimes old, by all means come into the padded cell to discuss stuff outside of music and hifi, but if all you want to do is come to this forum and extol what are considered by many as controversial or extreme views on issues unrelated to Naim then I'm afraid this isn't the place for you.

The forum is quite a broad church culturally and politically, however we are all united by our love of music and an appreciation of Naim.  Whatever arguments we may have, it's always worth bearing in mind what brought us together here.

Richard Dane posted:

I have removed a particular post and any associated replies.  As a first post it had all the hallmarks of a troll post and hence unacceptable on this forum.  A reminder to members new, and sometimes old, by all means come into the padded cell to discuss stuff outside of music and hifi, but if all you want to do is come to this forum and extol what are considered by many as controversial or extreme views on issues unrelated to Naim then I'm afraid this isn't the place for you.

The forum is quite a broad church culturally and politically, however we are all united by our love of music and an appreciation of Naim.  Whatever arguments we may have, it's always worth bearing in mind what brought us together here.

Thanks, Richard. I'm sure we should all endorse your sentiments.

Clive

George F posted:

Dear Don,

Your opening post is loaded with the idea that we might be sleep walking out of Europe, and to my mind this suggests that you think staying in - I may have mistaken your meaning - would be a bad thing.

You then say that you have no idea where you should look for informed thought on the subject.

I am guessing that your remember the referendum that took us into the EEC. And I guess that you have probably been wide awake to the implications of this membership ever since. I am surprised that you need to have a quick debate now not to be certain of your own mind.

Certainly I do not think anything our Prime Minister may extract as a reform of our relationship with the EU is going to be enough to put right was put wrong forty years ago. Indeed I discount his sayings so far as having any significance on the issue with his tub-thumping rhetoric about cutting benefits to migrants. The issue is far more radical than that.

ATB from George

 

I fully accept the reasons and fears for the pro and anti EU debate where there are solid arguments in both camps, BUT we should consider something that I think no-one else had mentioned. What was originally voted for way back when we joined the EEC, was a TRADING partnership  which has morphed into something TOTALLY different. It appears that several of the more powerful elements (with excellent government credentials) have tended to gang up on selected "unfavoured" nations  to put them at a disadvantage either by restrictive or unfavorable trading regimes. Greece is one sad case but others, who have no sound manufacturing base will follow with no hope of recovery or survival. More could be done to invest in these ailing nations or this will surely drive a wedge between the haves and have nots. Germany , given their sudden impact with the fortunate escapees from the eastern bloc prove that expanding "under developed" (non industrial) member states can surely make the present EU stronger. Surely industrial investment in the likes of GREECE should be a priority as they will not survive as a purely agrarian society. Henry Morgenthau suggested in 1945 that this should be the fate of Germany. Had this been allowed ,Germany would probably be somewhere down the league table instead of the thriving powerhouse it has become through determination and HARD WORK.

We need to focus on NEEDS OF ALL NATIONS if we are to succeed as a United Europe.

PS. I reflect on the previous comment regarding "why do we allow Politics to spoil an otherwise great website?"

Richard Dane posted:

The forum is quite a broad church culturally and politically, however we are all united by our love of music and an appreciation of Naim.  Whatever arguments we may have, it's always worth bearing in mind what brought us together here.

Indeed for the love of music, major political and cultural events usually generate great musical revolutions which we could look forward to enjoying.  Probably the Sixties was the main example of that, progressing rock 'n' roll onto further levels of hard rock/ metal.  Certainly the winter of discontent and what created music "year Zero" through punk rock.  Hip-hop superseded all.  Interesting times will create very powerful music.  This will be led by the youth of course... hopefully they haven't run out of new ideas.

An interesting speech by Sir John Major at Chatham House this evening.  I was reminded of the plain and common-sense speaking style which I think never got the credit it deserved when he was PM.  Anyway, some interesting common ground with Blair's speech e.g. the over-statement of the promises of Brexit; the realism needed about how difficult a process this will be; the importance of transparency in what can be achieved; and the folly of shouting down the '48% remainers'.

I was also struck by Major's assertion of how strong the binding forces are on continental Europe to ensure the EU project survives the UK's departure.   

I wasn't at all impressed with Jacob Rees-Mogg's comment, as reported last night on the BBC New at Ten, about Major's speech.

He failed to rise to the occasion and made not a single comment as to why Brexit was such a fantastic thing. He merely slagged Major as being a bitter looser of no consequence. And implied that all those who voted to remain, were of a similar ilk.

Rather unfortunately, I have found a similar response both on this forum and from other people with whom I am acquainted and who have told me they voted to leave.

MDS posted:

An interesting speech by Sir John Major at Chatham House this evening.  I was reminded of the plain and common-sense speaking style which I think never got the credit it deserved when he was PM.  Anyway, some interesting common ground with Blair's speech e.g. the over-statement of the promises of Brexit; the realism needed about how difficult a process this will be; the importance of transparency in what can be achieved; and the folly of shouting down the '48% remainers'.

I was also struck by Major's assertion of how strong the binding forces are on continental Europe to ensure the EU project survives the UK's departure.   

48% remainers is a significant minority, and the issues involved are very consequential to the future of UK (and others), I still say in the face of all thats occured to date that we should have a second vote as to whether UK should leave Europe. 

Oh dear the Remoaning goes on, and on, and on. Yes, 48% did vote to Remain but 52%, a larger number, voted to Leave on a binary choice question. I can only assume you diehard Europhiles only read Europhile publications and are quite unaware of the malaise and discontent permeating much of Europe which will almost certainly result in a completely changed political geographic map by the time Brexit happens. Even Poland looks like it will replace its own Donald Tusk as head of the EU Council and they are none too keen on the Euro according to a poll today. However, apparently 25% of Brits still inexplicably want to join the Euro.

Merkel looks shaky, Hollande is dead in the water and Le Pen might just sneak in as President. italy is all over the place, Greece is a basket case and so it goes on. Am afraid more nostalgic votes or even reversals are not going to sort out the EU.

andarkian posted:

Oh dear the Remoaning goes on, and on, and on. Yes, 48% did vote to Remain but 52%, a larger number, voted to Leave on a binary choice question. I can only assume you diehard Europhiles only read Europhile publications and are quite unaware of the malaise and discontent permeating much of Europe which will almost certainly result in a completely changed political geographic map by the time Brexit happens. Even Poland looks like it will replace its own Donald Tusk as head of the EU Council and they are none too keen on the Euro according to a poll today. However, apparently 25% of Brits still inexplicably want to join the Euro.

Merkel looks shaky, Hollande is dead in the water and Le Pen might just sneak in as President. italy is all over the place, Greece is a basket case and so it goes on. Am afraid more nostalgic votes or even reversals are not going to sort out the EU.

andarkian, you have failed to rise to the occasion. You made not a single comment as to why Brexit was such a fantastic thing (*). You merely slagged us Remainers (we are NOT remoaners) as being bitter loosers of no consequence.

(*) Ok i'll give you the one about the EU falling apart at the seams, and yes, I am aware of the malaise and discontent permeating much some of Europe, but it ain't gonna collapse any time soon, IMHO and this is quite a negative outlook. So meanwhile, what are the great opportunities that lie ahead post Brexit ?

Don Atkinson posted:

andarkian posted:

Oh dear the Remoaning goes on, and on, and on. Yes, 48% did vote to Remain but 52%, a larger number, voted to Leave on a binary choice question. I can only assume you diehard Europhiles only read Europhile publications and are quite unaware of the malaise and discontent permeating much of Europe which will almost certainly result in a completely changed political geographic map by the time Brexit happens. Even Poland looks like it will replace its own Donald Tusk as head of the EU Council and they are none too keen on the Euro according to a poll today. However, apparently 25% of Brits still inexplicably want to join the Euro.

Merkel looks shaky, Hollande is dead in the water and Le Pen might just sneak in as President. italy is all over the place, Greece is a basket case and so it goes on. Am afraid more nostalgic votes or even reversals are not going to sort out the EU.

andarkian, you have failed to rise to the occasion. You made not a single comment as to why Brexit was such a fantastic thing (*). You merely slagged us Remainers (we are NOT remoaners) as being bitter loosers of no consequence.

(*) Ok i'll give you the one about the EU falling apart at the seams, and yes, I am aware of the malaise and discontent permeating much some of Europe, but it ain't gonna collapse any time soon, IMHO and this is quite a negative outlook. So meanwhile, what are the great opportunities that lie ahead post Brexit ?

Given  that you have given me the benefit of the doubt on the current failings of the EU, I will give it to you that the 'benefits' are nebulous. to say the least. However, I have watched the EU from near and afar for many years and its institutional  lack of democracy, its creeping agenda of federalism with itself at the helm, its ability to override local, national laws and legal decisions, its ability to define where our borders begin and end and its open border policies were not to my taste at all. In fact, you know, I know, even our politicians  know that the Referendum was all about immigration, sovereignty and border controls though it is not terribly PC to admit it. 

As far as I am concerned, when someone offers you a place on a lifeboat when a ship is clearly holed beneath the hull it is probably wise to jump in pretty quickly and not stand about questioning on the ultimate destination of the lifeboat itself. As ever, the sensible nations will want to trade with other sensible nations even if they are governed by moronic politicians and I do mean you, Sturgeon, Salmond, Corbyn, Abbott, Nugee, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, Hollande, Farron, Clegg, Brown, Blair, Cameron and certainly Nuttall.

Trying (and possibly failing, but trying nonetheless) to put the actual EU bit to one side, and looking just at voting and fairness and that sort of thing...

It seems to me that in one way, the vote to leave the EU was a vote to have an agreement drawn up.  Leaving the EU will happen on a given set of terms, and the terms weren't known at the time of the vote, so it's not as if the vote was about the terms themselves.  Rather, the vote to leave was at least in part an instruction to the govt to go and get an agreement hashed out about the terms of leaving.  That's not a comment on misleading campaigns or anything, it was impossible to know the terms at the time.

Once that agreement has been reached and so the terms are known, I struggle to see why we should not have another referendum, this time with a trinary question.  1) Leave on these terms.  2) Go back and try again (i.e. we still want to leave, you've just got us a bad deal.  We're not leaving until it's better).  3) Stay (i.e. although in principle leaving was a good idea, if this is what leaving looks like, it's not a good idea).  If it'd help, it could be a two round thing like the French elections - first vote is between all three, then second vote is between the two most popular results in the first vote.

There are, I'm sure, legal issues around it all.  But in principle, can any leavers explain why something (at least vaguely) like that wouldn't be fair or democratic?  Because it seems to me that the only way it would be unfair is if 52% of voters voted for 'leave, leave at any cost, leave under any terms, leave no matter the consequences'.  And that just isn't what people voted for, even if a portion of people who voted leave would agree with it.

Dave***t posted:

Trying (and possibly failing, but trying nonetheless) to put the actual EU bit to one side, and looking just at voting and fairness and that sort of thing...

It seems to me that in one way, the vote to leave the EU was a vote to have an agreement drawn up.  Leaving the EU will happen on a given set of terms, and the terms weren't known at the time of the vote, so it's not as if the vote was about the terms themselves.  Rather, the vote to leave was at least in part an instruction to the govt to go and get an agreement hashed out about the terms of leaving.  That's not a comment on misleading campaigns or anything, it was impossible to know the terms at the time.

Once that agreement has been reached and so the terms are known, I struggle to see why we should not have another referendum, this time with a trinary question.  1) Leave on these terms.  2) Go back and try again (i.e. we still want to leave, you've just got us a bad deal.  We're not leaving until it's better).  3) Stay (i.e. although in principle leaving was a good idea, if this is what leaving looks like, it's not a good idea).  If it'd help, it could be a two round thing like the French elections - first vote is between all three, then second vote is between the two most popular results in the first vote.

There are, I'm sure, legal issues around it all.  But in principle, can any leavers explain why something (at least vaguely) like that wouldn't be fair or democratic?  Because it seems to me that the only way it would be unfair is if 52% of voters voted for 'leave, leave at any cost, leave under any terms, leave no matter the consequences'.  And that just isn't what people voted for, even if a portion of people who voted leave would agree with it.

Because primarily call me Dave said that the referendum was in or out and I and 17.4 million others took him at face value no matter what the Pimlico Plumber, Gina Miller or anyone else thinks. As to the deal, it's a business proposition so how and why are you going to have a referendum on that? If it's  bad deal we will lose, the Germans will lose, the French will lose and any European country that has a trade surplus with us will also lose. However, as I said earlier, the EU is morphing before our eyes and your alternatives will be quite different in two years time and certainly not for the better.

But isn't that essentially insisting that all leave voters voted for 'leave no matter what the consequences, even if they're dire', when that couldn't have been the case?

I'm not interested in what any political figure thinks, what shape the EU will be in, what the Germans want, or anything like that here.  Only what would serve fairness and best democratic practise.  It seems to me that the arguments about Blair's speech, Major's speech, what Rees-Mogg says and so are missing that question and getting lost in the politics.

The rationale for a second referendum once the terms are known is to find out what people want - without it, we won't know people's informed decision.  Surely more information is better than less?  Surely asking people for their considered verdict is better than making them stick to a decision made in the dark?

An analogy - a patient gives consent for an operation to remove a tumour.  An operation that hasn't been performed before, and is based on medical technology which hasn't been invented yet.  By the time the date of the operation comes around, the research has been done and the technology developed.  But as well as removing the tumour, the operation will move their internal organs around, replace part of their brain with a well designed but untested computer, and give them asthma.  Or if you prefer, the side effects give the patient x-ray vision and the ability to fly.

Shouldn't the patient's informed consent, in the light of the new information, be sought again before performing the operation?

andarkian posted:

Oh dear the Remoaning goes on, and on, and on. Yes, 48% did vote to Remain but 52%, a larger number, voted to Leave on a binary choice question. I can only assume you diehard Europhiles only read Europhile publications and are quite unaware of the malaise and discontent permeating much of Europe which will almost certainly result in a completely changed political geographic map by the time Brexit happens. Even Poland looks like it will replace its own Donald Tusk as head of the EU Council and they are none too keen on the Euro according to a poll today. However, apparently 25% of Brits still inexplicably want to join the Euro.

Merkel looks shaky, Hollande is dead in the water and Le Pen might just sneak in as President. italy is all over the place, Greece is a basket case and so it goes on. Am afraid more nostalgic votes or even reversals are not going to sort out the EU.

I don't understand why you seem to almost revel in the prospect of political disruption elsewhere in Europe.  What can be gained by this by you, your children and grandchildren (if you have any)? These seem to be destructive views of the disaffected.  If the people of the UK and those in rest of Europe are to thrive, surely we need a more constructive approach?

MDS posted:

andarkian posted:

Oh dear the Remoaning goes on, and on, and on. Yes, 48% did vote to Remain but 52%, a larger number, voted to Leave on a binary choice question. I can only assume you diehard Europhiles only read Europhile publications and are quite unaware of the malaise and discontent permeating much of Europe which will almost certainly result in a completely changed political geographic map by the time Brexit happens. Even Poland looks like it will replace its own Donald Tusk as head of the EU Council and they are none too keen on the Euro according to a poll today. However, apparently 25% of Brits still inexplicably want to join the Euro.

Merkel looks shaky, Hollande is dead in the water and Le Pen might just sneak in as President. italy is all over the place, Greece is a basket case and so it goes on. Am afraid more nostalgic votes or even reversals are not going to sort out the EU.

I don't understand why you seem to almost revel in the prospect of political disruption elsewhere in Europe.  What can be gained by this by you, your children and grandchildren (if you have any)? These seem to be destructive views of the disaffected.  If the people of the UK and those in rest of Europe are to thrive, surely we need a more constructive approach?

You mean you do not like reality. Take a look at Sweden and you'll se what's coming next.

I'm a bit short sighted, so perhaps you could explain. What exactly is coming next? 

Hungryhalibut posted:

I'm a bit short sighted, so perhaps you could explain. What exactly is coming next? 

Lots of crap flat pack furniture with silly names and cheese with holes!

Bob the Builder posted:

 

Hungryhalibut posted:

I'm a bit short sighted, so perhaps you could explain. What exactly is coming next? 

Lots of crap flat pack furniture with silly names and cheese with holes!

I thought the cheese with holes came from Switzerland?

To continue the theme from the "other" thread...