Interesting little anecdote. A few years ago, someone I know who takes a great interest in politics was explaining to me "the globalist plan", which is apparently to dismantle all the World's nation states and instead create three administrative areas, three superstates. Broadly speaking, they would be: 1. The Americas 2. Europe and Africa 3. Asia and points East This was a bridge too far for me and sounds as fanciful to my ears as it does to everyone else's. Fast forward to 2019 and apparently Verhofstadt is expounding upon the virtues of "mo' EU" including Africa. I found a clip of him ranting but wasn't able to keep a link. I will try to track it down. It's like I crossed over through a quantum portal and entered a parallel universe where nothing makes any sense.
Because most of the prolific moaners on here haven't made the move yet and are somewhat selfishly scared that it will effect them and their living off the UK pensions and healthcare of course
Probably an ex pat here. Your so wrong. Watching Brexit is like watching the UK implode, very sad. Normal folk over here, French, Belgian, dual nationality, Spanish. All baffled by what they see as self harm. Many are not big EU fans but they see many benefits, including stability (probably the real big one). The UK though has been typically insular, despite being close neighbours they seem to prefer to burn bridges. There are/were so many options to Leave without causing stress and damage to the economy, but that doesnt seem to fit with the 'one vision' Brexiteers seem to have. Time will tell but I suspect the usual suspects (ERG mob) have several selfish reasons for wanting Brexit. Whats good for the average person in the street is not one of them. It looks though that even some of them seem to be shying away from crashing out. As to selfish, I have children in their mid twenties, just in/out of uni. I genuinely think they will have less opportunities. Certainly in the short term. A fast copy and paste, as this is really water under the bridge; 61 percent of males aged 18 to 24 years voted for the UK to remain within the EU, whereas an equal 61 percent of males in the 50 to 64 age brackets voted in favor of a “Brexit”. The peak share came from women between the ages of 18 and 24, 80percent of whom voted for 'Remain'. So for me its not fcuk the UK, its fcuk the old people. You had your chance, just look at the politicians that you have voted in over the years... OK, now ducking for cover.
Given that there are yet to be any established benifits of leaving the EU, and the huge risks of doing so leave the country potentially exposed to a lower standard of living for most - these personal reasons sound as good as any.
The "someone you know" had just read 1984. Big deal. I read it when I was about 13. And so you've found one swivel-eyed loon in the EU who wants to include the whole of Africa. Amazing. How much chance do you think that has of ever materialising? In a 1'000 years perhaps? Maybe. If humanity is still here (it probably won't be). But you appear to be worried that this might be closet EU policy. Stop being bonkers. Was it a big night last night?
It's the 50 to 80 age group of parliamentary leaches that have ruined it why are they the only ones of that age group wishing to remain - it's certainly not because they are brighter than the average man/woman - thicker for sure seeing them talk
Point well made. So many in the UK have allowed the themselves to have the wool pulled over their eyes. The issues in the UK are the result of bad Governance from within, not as a result of the EU. Seems difficult to comprehend for many that they are pushing back against the wrong lot.
No. They will only improve when the British themselves want them to improve. They are within the British remit. If they are like they are, it's because the people running the country - the Brits - are happy for them to remain so. Britain already has "control". It doesn't need to "take it back".
Glidd, I have no idea why you are trying on a hat that isn't your size here. You have stated before that you do not live in an EU country plus you have also stated that you don't have a dog in the Brexit fight. You are an expat, of long standing, not a wannabe expat. You cannot vote for or against Brexit. How does my post apply to you in any way? As for ruination, I have not stated that ruination will be imposed by the EU on the UK. I said that any such ruination would be irrelevant to the wannabe expats I refer to. For myself, I believe that in order for the UK to be safe from any future EU ruination, the UK needs to not be politically administered by it. Possible ruination scenarios include - imposition of the Euro upon the UK. Imposition of EU laws incompatible with British values (strictly controlled speech, foreign control over UK Armed Forces and other such items). Foreign political leadership that the UK electorate cannot vote for, or against, nor remove if considered to be "unsuitable".
None of these things have been eliminated by being a member of the EU, either. If the UK people as a whole suddenly decided to take an interest in politics, in social structure and cohesion, in quality of life, etc, and wanted to vote for a political party willing and able to try to deliver such things ... there is a greater chance that this political party could do this without interference from the EU, its rules and its endgame plans. Given the choice between "nothing ever changes, bloody UK politicians" and "nothing can ever change, bloody EU oligarchs", I choose the former. And in the full knowledge that, most likely, not much will change either way. At least I won't be paying for two lots of gravy-sucking political parasites if the UK is outside of the EU.
You are using vocabulary like "ruination" which is inflammatory and just wrong. You might as well say "genocide" - it's about as likely to happen. Would the UK be "ruined" if it adopted the Euro? Has Germany been "ruined" by the Euro? Or The Netherlands? No? Right then. We'll take that possible source of "ruination" off the table. "Strictly controlled speech" - please point out the laws governing France, Belgium, Spain etc which prevent free speech. On the other hand, my brother sent me the book "Billion Dollar Whale" about the Malaysian financial scandal, for Xmas. You can't get it in the UK but you can in Australia where he lives. A bit like "Spycatcher" you'll remember. UK "free speech" laws prevented publication. The EU has a veto system in place (one of the reasons it's so hard to govern) so that nothing can be imposed on anyone. Which is why the UK did not adopt the Euro or Schengen. But you know that this is going to change imminently?
Glidd, I would like to have introduced you to "the point" but it appears who have just missed it. Have a read of what I wrote again, only this time stop using your crayons to add content along the way. I'm glad you read 1984, by the way. When you grow up, read it again and see what you may have missed as a youngster. It's a good read. How was your big night, by the way? Growing your own veg means an unlimited supply of home-brew, t'would appear.
I may have time now (as I dodge the bombardment of incoming) to address this interesting post. It appears to me to back up my argument that the Brexiteers accept that Brexit is not going to improve the country economically but that that is a price worth paying for the "upsides". But one of those "upsides" can't be monetary, ie that we pay for a double load of bureaucrats, because that would be just the "cost of doing business" if the balance came out in favour of the UK being better off economically by being in the EU. In any case... better off... what does that mean? The problem in the UK isn't GDP, it's how the income is distributed. If so many people are so poor, it's not that there is no money but that so many people are so rich. You could make things fairer by taxing internet companies, or foreign oligarchs, or bankers or all sorts of things. This is easier as part of the EU (solidarity) than outside it. Leaving the EU won't help this at all. Another "upside" - overcrowding. This looks good on paper. Cut EU immigration, problem solved. What that wilfully ignores is that 50% of immigration to the UK is not from the EU. 50% is within Britain's control. It doesn't have to accept Chinese, Russians, Bangladeshis or Nigerians. It chooses to. So if it was so worried about immigration, why didn't it seek to reduce these migrants years ago instead of focusing on Polish plumbers and Romanian cabbage-pickers? In any case, when was the last time a Polish plumber bombed your Underground system or pop concert? We could talk about the EU army. If you've got a veto, you can't be made to join it. Is it really a thing anyway? Why is being in the US army preferable? Would the EU army have voted to get involved in Iraq and Afghanistan? What have been the upsides of Britain's involvement in these wars? How can a hypothetical EU army, with hypothetical downsides really be a reasonable motive for being desperate to leave the EU? The "soon to be raising of taxes" - really? How soon? How? First I've heard of it. Sounds like another myth to me. Of course, the UK could veto these ethereal taxes if necessary. "Taking back control" and giving it to...whom? Momentum? Jeremy Corbyn and trotskyites? Or a load of Old Etonians so that they can make Britain even more comfortable for Old Etonians? British politics is broken. It's black and white, adversarial. The first-past-the-post electoral system is past its sell-by date. Yet we know that nothing will change because the Cons and Lab don't want it to. So you want to hand over more control to people who are clearly incapable of accepting it, as the current Brexit mess illustrates only too clearly. Was there a referendum because the people were unhappy being part of the EU? No. There was a referendum because people like Rees Mogg wouldn't shut up about it so Cameron caved in. Rees Mogg wants more power for people like him - hedgefund managers and bankers. The media they control got on the bandwagon and whipped up a frenzy about a false solution to Britain's problems. There is no middle of the road printed media in the UK. It's all right or leftwing. I used to read the Independent - centre. That was so popular it closed. Brexiteers are being sold a pup. But they'll only find out it's a hamster when they get it home.
Glidd, I like you but for Goat's sake, educate yourself a little, yeah? You are not paying close enough attention to these issues. If I was obsessive, I would have kept links to reports of Austrians, Swedes and Germans being muzzled by the authorities in respect of incidents in those countries. Alas, I have time to read reports but not keep databases of them for the benefit of lazy or uninformed forum members. These are reports in the MSM by the way or from the ECJ itself, before you start getting sweaty over thoughts of "bloggers" and "Alex Jones". Germany has not been ruined by the Euro. It has profited, to the tune of trillions. France has lost out by trillions, as have Spain and Italy. We all know how Greece is doing (even if it is, as far as the EUrophiles are concerned, all Greece's fault). By the way, you used to have far better reading and comprehension skills before. You don't seem to understand the way I used the term "ruination" and seemed rather focused on it, in a toddlerish way. "Ruination? Don't you mean, genocide?". LOL. You've changed. The EU has a veto system in place. Which is to be partially withdrawn in a couple years time, specifically in respect of member-state taxation rules. Thin end of the wedge, you can say goodbye to the veto in general, within our lifetime, that is certain. Yeah, "Spycatcher". I have a copy of that one, from the time it was banned. I didn't get arrested and go to court for owning it, or telling anyone I owned it, by the way. Just FYI.
A marvellous dissection of the situation, Glidd. If I might precis it for you, it appears to boil down to: You cannot change things in an independent UK where you can vote for the people who make laws and policy ... so you may as well stay in an EU, which has overseen the situation the UK has now, and whose laws and policies you will have no practical control over and whose leadership you cannot vote for. You can also pay for the privilege of remaining in the EU plus you can pay the salaries of the leaders who will change nothing in the EU as well as the salaries of the UK leaders who will also change nothing. Yep, you nailed it.
Animal Farm has more resonance for me. Its truths are universal and somehow inevitable whereas 1984 seemed more, uh situational? to me. Both books are essential, relevant reading but what you take away from them ... that varies widely, it seems! In any event, they predict broad themes, they are not blueprints for modern methods of disinformation and control. There are subtleties and wrinkles these days that no one could have foreseen, not even Orwell (though he'd have recognised them, I am sure).
