OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

Sorry ramAnag, whilst I find most of your argument persuasive, to say that it now boils down to poor or untruthful info provided by warped politicians is garbage imo. This is democracy, it involves lies, poor and misleading info 24/7,365 days a year for the lifetime of every parliament and every general election. If a new referendum was held it would continue to rely on crap from the politicians...just different crap. So we take a decision and move on oddly even when the decision we take may be crap. Some think the original decision to join was the result of crap spouted by Heath and much of what he said is now known to be crap but we voted to join and accepted it!! As they say QED.

Mac...whichever way we look at it I believe the key phrase in this whole debate belongs to BaaLocks and is...'we shouldn't be imposing this level of change on any country without being clear exactly what we mean by it'. People weren't clear and, imo, the only people who will disagree with the sentiment of that phrase are those with something to fear.

If what you say about warped and misleading politicians is true, and I'm inclined to agree, does that mean we have to continue to put up with it? Surely we should take a stand and maybe now is the time to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macstheman

Sorry ramAnag, whilst I find most of your argument persuasive, to say that it now boils down to poor or untruthful info provided by warped politicians is garbage imo. This is democracy, it involves lies, poor and misleading info 24/7,365 days a year for the lifetime of every parliament and every general election. If a new referendum was held it would continue to rely on crap from the politicians...just different crap. So we take a decision and move on oddly even when the decision we take may be crap. Some think the original decision to join was the result of crap spouted by Heath and much of what he said is now known to be crap but we voted to join and accepted it!! As they say QED.

---

Strangely complicit mindset - we've made a decision without any real clue of where it will lead us and on less than perfect, nay incorrect information. I'm certainly not suggesting a second referendum but instead a moment to clarify what it is that we are agreeing to rather than leaping blind into our countries future. If you are so confident we made the right choice then it shouldn't be a problem should it? It seems a bit strange that this air of 'oh well, we know we didn't know the finer points of what we were voting for, yes both sides lied but it got me what I personally wanted so why change it'. The true answer is that you don't know what it got you and if you march blindly into a post-EU Britain without even a care for the details then it basically leaves our leaders free to decide and interpret whatever they believe was in line with what was voted for. Personally, I don't want to be a sheep (outside of football) resigning my right of challenge to one 'Yes / No' question every forty years.

If not, I guess you have no problem with the Iraq war also? Yeah, Blair lied but we took the decision and moved on oddly. As they say QED.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Angry, you're right...I do confess to a natural inclination towards being 'European' rather than an isolated Islander. I also thought about it and concluded that in the interests of Trade, Employment, the Environment, Peace, Freedom to work, study and travel abroad, Security, Influence in Europe and the World and Research Funding that we were better off 'in' than 'out'.
Those were my reasons, not any desire to just maintain the status quo, indeed I would like to see change within the EU and do not support the sometimes unnecessary level of bureaucracy or any move towards an increase in federalisation.
Haven't seen anything since to change my mind yet, but the argument has moved on...the question now is...have we been given enough truthful and objective information to be able to 'ratify' the conclusion reached by 37% of the electorate back in June or are we just afraid to go back and check that the process was sufficiently well informed and not based on a web of deceit.
What are you afraid of?

---

I see you have jumped on the 'ratify' bandwagon since Baalocks raised it.. That's fine.
What we can't do is change everything now the referendum has been finished. We could go on forever until you get the answer you want.
I still don't know how tou actually get enough hard facts to ever be in a position to ratify anything. We would just have another 1000 post thread with people spouting that this or that is a lie.. Nice in theory I suppose but impossible in practice.
What am I afraid of? Loony lefty remainers and a fully implimented European Union where we have lost all our so called voice and ability to change from within.
Where we differ is that I would never ever describe myself as a European.. Georaphically I might be but from a culture perspective, I don't believe we are. Just my opinion, will probably get all sorts of ridiculous remarks thrown at me but I don't really give a poo.

:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BaaLocks

If not, I guess you have no problem with the Iraq war also? Yeah, Blair lied but we took the decision and moved on oddly. As they say QED.

---

The right or wrong of the Iraq war is another discussion but be clear on what you are suggesting. Do we have to ratify ever bleedin decision that is made. Okay you will say that these are pretty major decisions and I have a certain sympathy with that but we cant risk paralysis on major decisions. Some would argue that by the time we finish talking and going round in circles the problem as got out of control. Sometimes there is a need for action and not just talk.
:mad:

I would suggest that "the people" in general are not aware of the details and ramifications of the majority of decisions made in the last 80 years. Before then there was no specific media involvement other than via the newspapers which were read by few. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were people in the Outer Hebrides that never knew we were involved in the First World War until the "man" came to take the flower of their youth.

Did people really understand the reasons for the Second World War and the build up thereto? Suez? The Cold War? Joining the Common Market? I doubt it because they were fed internal propaganda to support the political decision making.

Its only with the explosion of the information age via the Internet and (curse the word) social media that the man in the street has been given easy access to contradictory "information" on subjects of major import - eg Iraq as Baalocks has noted. Until this information explosion, Joe Public has been treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed ****.

Was the decision to send the BEF to France made fully in the knowledge of the consequences - I'm sure not. It resulted in 6 years of conflict, millions of deaths and casualties and we very nearly lost. However that decision, as monumental as it was, was not subject to the intense media scrutiny that the EU decision was. the nation unified behind a governmental decision, apart from a few conscies.

the difference of course is that Joe Public was expected to make a decision here, and so way more information was put into the public domain. Not all of this "information" was entirely reliable, having been spun by its originators and, worse yet, twisted out of shape by ill informed commentators on social media. Rather than too little information being made available to base a decision, there was too much. One could not filter the truth from the fiction - be it official fiction or recycled socially mediated fiction.

The problem with everyone having the ability to comment on something via twitter etc is that it basically exposes the views of the "bloke down the pub" to a huge audience. For some bizarre reason people think that if they have seen something on twitter then it has more credence than the bloke spouting off in the public bar - but its no different. It exposes the ignorant (as to fact, not meant as an insult) to the views of potentially even more ignorant people (possibly meant as an insult): and it gets believed. So information mixes with misinformation and it magnifies.

Decision makers (in this case you and me) are exposed to so much that they cannot filter out the crap from the other crap. Its not that we were given too little information to make a decision on, but rather too much: or indeed we should never have been asked in the first place.

So to go back to the public and say "here is all the detail of what we have negotiated, do you still agree to leave upon this basis?", laudable as it is in theory, quite simply wont work. The media will pull it apart, rebuild it, reshape it, twist it, it will get ****ted from place to place and distorted and once more a tangled mess will sit before those people who are least equipped to make a decision - eg us.

I hate to say it but we have to trust those in government to cut the best deal. Throwing that decision back to the grass roots would magnify the madness that resulted in the decision to hold a referendum in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngryRam

.....
Where we differ is that I would never ever describe myself as a European.. Georaphically I might be but from a culture perspective, I don't believe we are. Just my opinion, will probably get all sorts of ridiculous remarks thrown at me but I don't really give a poo.

:mad:

---

Angry - there is no way I consider myself European either. In fact I do not even consider myself British: I am English and say so on any form where you have to insert "nationality".

It helps to filter us out from the Celts :D:D:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngryRam

Do we have to ratify ever bleedin decision that is made. :mad:

---

No, and I don't believe that this one should have ever gone to referendum. Ed Milliband (dear God can't believe I'm saying this) was 100% right when he said there are far more important issues facing the country at this time. All it has done has sent us into a world a paperwork, obfuscation and distraction that will take a fair while to resolve.

To the broader point, I generally agree with Roger that we elect a government and allow them to then decide how to run the country. However, they do that based on a manifesto - which they propose and we then consider. If you don't want to read that manifesto and vote for your party for no other reason than that they have the right coloured rosette then that is your choice. But at least it is a choice! In this case we had no real choice, we had to guess what we thought 'In' or 'Out' meant, or go with the garbage being fed to us by both sides.

Is it unworkable to clarify and ratify? Maybe, I don't really know. But it feels a more responsible thing to do to at least explore it than to sit back and just say 'oh well, duped again'. The Iraq War, the banking crisis, now this - how many times are we as a public going to bend over and take it up the pooper without complaint? Those three events, all of which we seemingly have had done to us without informed consent, will (or at least the first two that have already happened) negatively affect every family in this country in terms of finance, security and economic stability. We live in a poorer, more divided, less fair, less secure Britain because of Iraq / Afghanistan and the banking crisis. Yet we now say - yeah, you fooled me twice before so go on, have another go.

I don't ask for a chance to vote on every single decision this country makes. But I do ask that when I am asked, once or twice in a lifetime, that I am allowed to respond to the correct question and not just a vapid, whitewashed version of what I actually think.

Anyway, after saying I don't do emotional leaving speeches, I think I've said all I can on this one. Well done all for a pretty well structured debate throughout, pleasantly devoid of 'no, you're a tosser'. If only one good thing comes out of all of this (and I am sure there will be more, I am not that naive) I have to say I have seen more engagement in politics in the last six months than at any time since the devil witch was around. That has to be a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger_ramjet

Federal EU claims Olympic success - Britain outraged at hijacking of medals in a new EU version of the medals table!

www.medaltracker.eu

Sorry cannot post link properly as posting from phone

---

And people say the EU isn't about one state?
Kin brilliant. Federal Europe, was/is/will always be the goal. Deny that and you really are deluded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BaaLocks

If only one good thing comes out of all of this (and I am sure there will be more, I am not that naive) I have to say I have seen more engagement in politics in the last six months than at any time since the devil witch was around. That has to be a good thing.

---

Thats a harsh description of Barbara castle, if not inaccurate!!