Discussion:
"Why Britain Brexited"
Add Reply
Pamela
2020-02-04 12:01:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".


Starting with ...

Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.

Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.

It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.

But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.

----

There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for most countries:
independent national sovereignty.

In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.

Ending with ...

Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
Incubus
2020-02-04 12:09:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
Roger
2020-02-04 12:20:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
It's not a case of not understanding, it's more a case of being afraid to look ;-)
Dan S. MacAbre
2020-02-04 12:32:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
It's not a case of not understanding, it's more a case of being afraid to look ;-)
I regard it as trying to establish the (future) historical narrative.
Pamela
2020-02-04 13:00:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Roger
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs in
order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip
it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of
economic isolation at the very moment the rest of the world,
led by Donald Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
It's not a case of not understanding, it's more a case of being afraid to look ;-)
I regard it as trying to establish the (future) historical narrative.
I'm inclines to agree; some people would rewrite history just to prove
they are right in a lost argument.
Ceaser did manage this to a certain extent....his own official history
of his invasion of England is a hoot. But then in his case not many
people were prepared to write a contradictory account :D
Which official history are you referring to? Neither of the two Casears
who invaded Britain authorised an official history. Contemporary
historians wrote their own accounts.
Farmer Giles
2020-02-04 12:35:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.

They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not let
the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow suit, so
everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.

Those who operate here and elsewhere against the wishes of individual
nations and people do so only to attempt to achieve that end.
Pamela
2020-02-04 19:13:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in
a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from
its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not let
the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow suit, so
everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
Post by Farmer Giles
Those who operate here and elsewhere against the wishes of individual
nations and people do so only to attempt to achieve that end.
Farmer Giles
2020-02-04 19:17:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in
a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from
its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not let
the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow suit, so
everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
I can, but I'm not going to. You know who and what you are, you don't
need me to spell it out.
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Those who operate here and elsewhere against the wishes of individual
nations and people do so only to attempt to achieve that end.
Pamela
2020-02-05 14:17:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs in
order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip
it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of
economic isolation at the very moment the rest of the world,
led by Donald Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not
let the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow
suit, so everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
I can, but I'm not going to. You know who and what you are, you don't
need me to spell it out.
Do "they" exist at all?
Incubus
2020-02-05 14:26:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs in
order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip
it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of
economic isolation at the very moment the rest of the world,
led by Donald Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not
let the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow
suit, so everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
I can, but I'm not going to. You know who and what you are, you don't
need me to spell it out.
Do "they" exist at all?
Like many vegans, they'll tell you soon enough unless they happen to be keeping
a low profile due to enganging in an act of sabotage.
Farmer Giles
2020-02-05 15:55:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs in
order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip
it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of
economic isolation at the very moment the rest of the world,
led by Donald Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is to
destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not
let the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow
suit, so everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
I can, but I'm not going to. You know who and what you are, you don't
need me to spell it out.
Do "they" exist at all?
Doesn't it tell you on your payslip - or are you just a willing volunteer?
Pamela
2020-02-05 16:30:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Incubus
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs
in order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to
rip it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed
waters of economic isolation at the very moment the rest of
the world, led by Donald Trump, is putting up trade
barriers.
In other words, they still don't understand why we voted to leave.
The rulers have been defeated, and they don't like it. The plan is
to destroy the nation state and turn everything into easy-to-control
supranational blocks.
They care neither about democracy nor the welfare of the people. The
battle has not ended, in fact it has only just begun. They dare not
let the UK succeed, otherwise they fear others will want to follow
suit, so everything will be done to make sure that she doesn't.
Who is "they"? Can you give a name of one of them?
I can, but I'm not going to. You know who and what you are, you don't
need me to spell it out.
Do "they" exist at all?
Doesn't it tell you on your payslip - or are you just a willing
volunteer?
Okay, now I think I get it.
Keema's Nan
2020-02-04 13:10:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration,
Well that is the first lie.

RBU
Incubus
2020-02-04 13:41:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration,
Well that is the first lie.
To those who can't accept it, it's easier to think of it as a blip. On the
other hand, those who actively go against the wishes of the people will of
course wish to spin it that way. Look how they have invoked the Russians and
the billionaires as the villains of the whole piece, despite the number of
millionaires who actively supported the Remain campaign.

The only aberration is that, for once, the wishes of the silent majority were
heard. Long may it continue, say I.
Tufnell Park
2020-02-04 13:45:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.

What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.

Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Dan S. MacAbre
2020-02-04 13:52:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
    Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
    which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
    midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
    world of superpowers.
    Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
    blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
    moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation
    at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
    putting up trade barriers.
    It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where
    it is going.
    But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history,
    marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
    ----
    There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative
    act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for most
    independent national sovereignty.
    In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
    politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
    radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
    most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
    turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
    union.
Ending with ...
    Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
    reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
    country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
    were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.

https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-against-britain/
Roger
2020-02-04 14:31:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
    Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
    which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
    midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
    world of superpowers.
    Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
    blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
    moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation
    at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
    putting up trade barriers.
    It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where
    it is going.
    But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history,
    marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
    ----
    There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative
    act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for most
    independent national sovereignty.
    In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
    politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
    radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
    most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
    turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
    union.
Ending with ...
    Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
    reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
    country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
    were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-against-britain/
Well one thing we do know is that Brexit is not a good thing for Multinationals like Amazon and McDonalds; for them it's convinient for the world to be grouped into big jurisdictions.

And in effect we also know another thing; these companies never openly take sides in political debate, they spend a lot of money on political lobbyists AND spin doctors to shift the general public debate.

In the contect of Brexit it is my personal belief that they are behind the tendency to spin the term 'Sovreignty' into 'Nationalist'....or at least assimilate them so that they mean roughly the same thing....i.e. if you don't think political union is a good thing that's only because you are an ignorant rascist and your views have absolutely no basis in economic fact.

And frankly it has worked to a certain extent; indeed it seems to empower some remainers with a feeling they automatically know more than anybody who wants to leave; and therefore any arguments that may be proposed for leaving must be immediately discredited as being worthless.
Keema's Nan
2020-02-04 15:43:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-against-britain/
Well one thing we do know is that Brexit is not a good thing for
Multinationals like Amazon and McDonalds;
Good.

At last.

Maybe GB is going to take on the multinational bullies?
Post by Roger
for them it's convinient for the
world to be grouped into big jurisdictions.
And in effect we also know another thing; these companies never openly take
sides in political debate, they spend a lot of money on political lobbyists
AND spin doctors to shift the general public debate.
In the contect of Brexit it is my personal belief that they are behind the
tendency to spin the term 'Sovreignty' into 'Nationalist'....or at least
assimilate them so that they mean roughly the same thing....i.e. if you don't
think political union is a good thing that's only because you are an ignorant
rascist and your views have absolutely no basis in economic fact.
And frankly it has worked to a certain extent; indeed it seems to empower
some remainers with a feeling they automatically know more than anybody who
wants to leave; and therefore any arguments that may be proposed for leaving
must be immediately discredited as being worthless.
Pamela
2020-02-04 19:39:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 4 Feb 2020, Roger wrote (in
Post by Roger
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain
Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic
stupidity, which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of
history pushing midsize countries into multinational blocs in
order to compete in a world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of
these blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip
it from its moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of
economic isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led
by Donald Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the
next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm
for most countries: independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists,
and politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the
EU's radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer
union-manifested most obviously in its single currency-as the
aberration of history, turning what was once a confederation of
nation-states into a federal union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore,
a reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but
the country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just
as they were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-
Post by Roger
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
brexit- boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for
Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely
their opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-
against-britain/
Well one thing we do know is that Brexit is not a good thing for
Multinationals like Amazon and McDonalds;
Good.
At last.
Maybe GB is going to take on the multinational bullies?
The EU can and does stand up to multinationals, especially American ones,
but little Blightly might stuggle to do the same.

We're not very good at it. Britain has a history of sweetheart tax deals
with multinationals such as Amazon and Apple. What we ask them to pay is
very much less than what continental countries such as France demand.
Pamela
2020-02-04 19:24:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for most
countries: independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/
britain-brexit- boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-
against-britain/
The author of your article writes for the Wall Street Journal, a pro-Trump
Murdoch-owned rival to the NYT. He disgarees with just a few points out
of all the colossal output of the NYT which hardly condemns everything the
paper writes.

On the other hand the Atlantic, which has no skin in the Brexit game, uses
a London based journalistic to provide an independent view.
Dan S. MacAbre
2020-02-04 19:59:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Dan S. MacAbre
Post by Tufnell Park
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for most
countries: independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/
britain-brexit- boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
The Atlantic is an American magazine published mainly for Americans.
What the profess to know about Why Britain Brexited, is merely their
opinion and should be taken with a large grain of salt.
Have they asked the british people why we Brexited, i doubt it.
Seems to be part of a wider pattern.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/what-has-the-new-york-times-got-
against-britain/
The author of your article writes for the Wall Street Journal, a pro-Trump
Murdoch-owned rival to the NYT. He disgarees with just a few points out
of all the colossal output of the NYT which hardly condemns everything the
paper writes.
On the other hand the Atlantic, which has no skin in the Brexit game, uses
a London based journalistic to provide an independent view.
TBH, from his voice, I expect Murray lives in London, too; although I
suppose he could have moved to the US. If you can be bothered to find
out (I certainly can't be), feel free :-) He has things published by
lots of outlets; although my guess is that the one thing they have in
common is that they are right of centre. I'd suggest that he is a bit
'reactionary'.

The tone of the Atlantic article is certainly anti-Brexit. If you say
it is independent, that only means you agree with it. :-)
John
2020-02-04 15:32:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
I bet they said that about the reformation of the church of England.
Keema's Nan
2020-02-04 15:57:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
I bet they said that about the reformation of the church of England.
They can say what they like about the Church of England, but there was never
a referendum majority in favour (or not) of the church.
abelard
2020-02-04 17:00:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 15:57:56 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by John
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
I bet they said that about the reformation of the church of England.
They can say what they like about the Church of England, but there was never
a referendum majority in favour (or not) of the church.
they do vote with their knees

their churches are mostly deserted
--
www.abelard.org
KKKernal Corn
2020-02-04 17:15:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by abelard
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 15:57:56 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by John
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
I bet they said that about the reformation of the church of England.
They can say what they like about the Church of England, but there was never
a referendum majority in favour (or not) of the church.
they do vote with their knees
their churches are mostly deserted
And rapidly being converted into mosques!
abelard
2020-02-04 17:18:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by KKKernal Corn
Post by abelard
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 15:57:56 +0000, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by John
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic
isolation at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald
Trump, is putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and
where it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British
history, marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely
conservative act, returning to what remains, after all, the norm for
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
I bet they said that about the reformation of the church of England.
They can say what they like about the Church of England, but there was never
a referendum majority in favour (or not) of the church.
they do vote with their knees
their churches are mostly deserted
And rapidly being converted into mosques!
doubtless...and with a fair wind they also will be empty
after a couple of generation

then there is the people's palace
--
www.abelard.org
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:40:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 18:18:19 +0100, abeltard, the notorious, troll-feeding,
Post by abelard
doubtless...and with a fair wind they also will be empty
after a couple of generation
then there is the people's palace
And then there's the shit you got for brains, abeltard!
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:39:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 09:15:44 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by KKKernal Corn
Post by abelard
they do vote with their knees
their churches are mostly deserted
And rapidly being converted into mosques!
HOW "rapidly", you clinically insane psychopathic swine?
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"There will always be progressives such as Harriet Harperson who want to
take that extra step forward. Paedophiles are still a long way from
being widely accepted."
MID: <rlMUE.676067$***@usenetxs.com>
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:38:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 18:00:19 +0100, abeltard, the notorious, troll-feeding,
Post by abelard
they do vote with their knees
Beats voting with the shit you got for brains, abeltard!
Post by abelard
their churches are mostly deserted
Not as much as your head!
abelard
2020-02-04 16:33:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
You lost. It happened. Get OVER it!
the 'pammy' faction of fascist 'new' labour has an important
central theological dogma
'all nations and nationalism is bad'...hence all internationalism
is 'good'...
until that dogma is seen for the idiocy that it is, you may as well
try a discussion with a jehovah's witness or a scientologist
Oh I love it when JW's come round on a boring Sunday afternoon.......
you have too much spare time on your hands!
--
www.abelard.org
Vidcapper
2020-02-04 16:43:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
your objective pronouncement is most convincing
I have yet to come across a single Remoaner who will accept the simple
notion that we voted Brexit of our own free will!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
abelard
2020-02-04 16:57:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vidcapper
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
your objective pronouncement is most convincing
I have yet to come across a single Remoaner who will accept the simple
notion that we voted Brexit of our own free will!
well, i was for remain

but only idiots moan
--
www.abelard.org
NOT KWilly
2020-02-04 17:09:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
You lost. It happened. Get OVER it!
the 'pammy' faction of fascist 'new' labour has an important
central theological dogma
'all nations and nationalism is bad'...hence all internationalism
is 'good'...
until that dogma is seen for the idiocy that it is, you may as well
try a discussion with a jehovah's witness or a scientologist
Where would these socialists be without their collective farm / kalhoz
/ kibbutz?
abelard
2020-02-04 17:16:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by NOT KWilly
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
Starting with ...
Brexit is essentially an aberration, a decision of epic stupidity,
which, at its heart, seeks to reverse the tide of history pushing
midsize countries into multinational blocs in order to compete in a
world of superpowers.
Britain, in voting to leave the biggest and most advanced of these
blocs, has allowed an instant of nostalgic madness to rip it from its
moorings, casting it off into the exposed waters of economic isolation
at the very moment the rest of the world, led by Donald Trump, is
putting up trade barriers.
It is a story of a country that has lost control of who it is and where
it is going.
But that is only one way of looking at this moment in British history,
marking the end of one era and the beginning of the next.
----
There is another perspective, viewing Brexit as a largely conservative
independent national sovereignty.
In this view, shared by some conservative historians, economists, and
politicians, Brexit is primarily about protection from the EU's
radicalism, viewing the bloc's push for ever-closer union-manifested
most obviously in its single currency-as the aberration of history,
turning what was once a confederation of nation-states into a federal
union.
Ending with ...
Britain may not be able to influence the EU's direction anymore, a
reality that may soon preoccupy those in power in London, but the
country's prospects remain largely in its own control - just as they
were before.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
You lost. It happened. Get OVER it!
the 'pammy' faction of fascist 'new' labour has an important
central theological dogma
'all nations and nationalism is bad'...hence all internationalism
is 'good'...
until that dogma is seen for the idiocy that it is, you may as well
try a discussion with a jehovah's witness or a scientologist
Where would these socialists be without their collective farm / kalhoz
/ kibbutz?
you may well ask...

however, the kibbutz is voluntary...most socialism is about compulsion

as i saw it once described...fraternity by compulsion!
--
www.abelard.org
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:35:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 18:16:51 +0100, abeltard, the notorious, troll-feeding,
Post by abelard
you may well ask...
however, the kibbutz is voluntary...most socialism is about compulsion
The way YOU are "voluntarily" a troll-feeding senile arsehole, abeltard?
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:18:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 09:09:03 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by NOT KWilly
until that dogma is seen for the idiocy that it is, you may as well
try a discussion with a jehovah's witness or a scientologist
Where would these socialists be without their collective farm / kalhoz
/ kibbutz?
Rather ask yourself, where you trolling assholes be without your
troll-feeding senile idiots!
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"There will always be progressives such as Harriet Harperson who want to
take that extra step forward. Paedophiles are still a long way from
being widely accepted."
MID: <rlMUE.676067$***@usenetxs.com>
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:15:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 05:41:53 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by Pamela
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/britain-brexit-
boris-johnson-influence-control/605734/
You lost. It happened. Get OVER it!
Nope, serb peasant. It's ALL the Brits who lost, Brexiters included!
--
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"That [referring to the term "consenting adults"] is just an outdated legal
construct. Are you telling me that a 13-year old who spends 15 hours a day
on Facebook is incapable of consent?"
MID: <Og0VE.1298131$***@usenetxs.com>
Peeler
2020-02-04 17:16:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 04 Feb 2020 14:47:17 +0100, abeltard, the notorious, troll-feeding,
the 'pammy' faction of fascist 'new' labour has an important
central theological dogma
'all nations and nationalism is bad'...hence all internationalism
is 'good'...
until that dogma is seen for the idiocy that it is, you may as well
try a discussion with a jehovah's witness or a scientologist
What I can see here is what an abysmally stupid idiot YOU are, abeltard, you
mentally deficient troll-feeding senile asshole!
Pamela
2020-02-04 22:23:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
The article doesn't explain why the majority voted for Brexit. That
would be far more illuminating.
We already know about overblown claims for Brexit's benefits and illgeal
campaigning with dark money from the likes of Arron Banks.

Only 37% of the electorate voted for Leave. Only 27% of the population voted
for Leave. Those figures are most probably lower now.
Fredxx
2020-02-04 23:31:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
The article doesn't explain why the majority voted for Brexit. That
would be far more illuminating.
We already know about overblown claims for Brexit's benefits and illgeal
campaigning with dark money from the likes of Arron Banks.
Only 37% of the electorate voted for Leave.
Quite, only 34% voted to remain, which means 66% wanted to leave or
didn't care either way.
Post by Pamela
Only 27% of the population voted
for Leave. Those figures are most probably lower now.
Or more importantly only 24% wanted to remain. Those figures are most
probably lower now.

What a sore loser. Get out and get yourself a life.
Pamela
2020-02-05 00:37:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Fredxx
Post by Pamela
Post by Pamela
The Atlantic has an interesting article on "Why Britain Brexited".
The article doesn't explain why the majority voted for Brexit. That
would be far more illuminating.
We already know about overblown claims for Brexit's benefits and illgeal
campaigning with dark money from the likes of Arron Banks.
Only 37% of the electorate voted for Leave.
Quite, only 34% voted to remain, which means 66% wanted to leave or
didn't care either way.
Post by Pamela
Only 27% of the population voted
for Leave. Those figures are most probably lower now.
Or more importantly only 24% wanted to remain. Those figures are most
probably lower now.
What a sore loser. Get out and get yourself a life.
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit. Also that it is now
reduced.

Voting for the status quo does not need a majority. It is those who want
change who must focus on being a majority. As we have discussed it should
have been a super majority set higher than 50%.
Joe
2020-02-05 08:44:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the EEC/EC/EU
there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union' mean nothing to
you?
--
Joe
Pent
2020-02-05 09:59:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the EEC/EC/EU
there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union' mean nothing to
you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016 to
give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of the
commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer union'.

Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
kat
2020-02-05 10:27:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
  Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the EEC/EC/EU
there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union' mean nothing to
you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016 to give the UK
special status in the European Union? Where one of the commitments would exempt
the UK permanently from 'ever closer union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
I wouldn't have said that, I would have said that what he came home with wasn't
enough. There were other issues aside from "ever closer union".

But, "permanent exemption" would only have lasted until a pro-EU government
chose to dump it. And as, at the time, all main parties were generally pro-EU
we, the voters, wouldn't have any choice, nor would we have been asked.
--
kat
^..^<
Joe
2020-02-05 10:33:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:59:37 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the EEC/EC/EU
there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union' mean nothing
to you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016 to
give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of the
commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
And one of our PMs negotiated a more reasonable level of taxation, then
a later one gave half of the rebate back.

Are you telling us that, had we stayed in, no future PM would ever have
given up the UK opt-outs? Never?
--
Joe
Pent
2020-02-05 12:22:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:59:37 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the EEC/EC/EU
there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union' mean nothing
to you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016 to
give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of the
commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
And one of our PMs negotiated a more reasonable level of taxation, then
a later one gave half of the rebate back.
Are you telling us that, had we stayed in, no future PM would ever have
given up the UK opt-outs? Never?
The government elected by the people choice, NOT the EU forcing it on
us. As in the leavers slogan. Take back control.
Joe
2020-02-05 13:24:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 12:22:45 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:59:37 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the
EEC/EC/EU there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union'
mean nothing to you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016
to give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of
the commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer
union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
And one of our PMs negotiated a more reasonable level of taxation,
then a later one gave half of the rebate back.
Are you telling us that, had we stayed in, no future PM would ever
have given up the UK opt-outs? Never?
The government elected by the people choice, NOT the EU forcing it on
us. As in the leavers slogan. Take back control.
The people didn't decide to give up half the rebate. Democracy extends
*only* to choosing MPs, there is no democratic control over what they
do once in power. Yes, even so, it is better to be able to kick them out
afterwards than not.

That was why Corbyn was such a danger. What he promised to do was bad
enough, but once in power, he and Momentum could do whatever they
wanted, whatever they intended to do but didn't talk about in public.

Boris will face difficulties over what he just announced about cars,
especially as he cannot show any benefit at all from the action, it is
the purest of virtue signalling. It is noticeable that he didn't
mention it before the election, even the idiots who pass for policy
makers in the Conservative party could see that it wasn't a vote-winner.
--
Joe
Pent
2020-02-05 22:35:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 12:22:45 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:59:37 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the
EEC/EC/EU there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union'
mean nothing to you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016
to give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of
the commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer
union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
And one of our PMs negotiated a more reasonable level of taxation,
then a later one gave half of the rebate back.
Are you telling us that, had we stayed in, no future PM would ever
have given up the UK opt-outs? Never?
The government elected by the people choice, NOT the EU forcing it on
us. As in the leavers slogan. Take back control.
The people didn't decide to give up half the rebate. Democracy extends
*only* to choosing MPs, there is no democratic control over what they
do once in power. Yes, even so, it is better to be able to kick them out
afterwards than not.
Then you might as well say why leave the EU? Some PM down the road will
just beg the EU to take us back...

My point is it is OUR choice, not the EU.
abelard
2020-02-05 22:48:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 12:22:45 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 09:59:37 +0000
Post by Pent
Post by Joe
On Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:37:02 GMT
Post by Pamela
You agree there was no overwhelming majority for Brexit.
Yes.
Post by Pamela
Also that
it is now reduced.
No. There's no evidence at all for that, only wishful thinking.
Post by Pamela
Voting for the status quo does not need a majority.
How many times do you people have to be reminded? With the
EEC/EC/EU there *is* *no* 'status quo'. Does 'ever closer union'
mean nothing to you?
Do you not remember Cameron negotiated a deal on 19 February 2016
to give the UK special status in the European Union? Where one of
the commitments would exempt the UK permanently from 'ever closer
union'.
Oh, leavers said he walked away empty handed.
And one of our PMs negotiated a more reasonable level of taxation,
then a later one gave half of the rebate back.
Are you telling us that, had we stayed in, no future PM would ever
have given up the UK opt-outs? Never?
The government elected by the people choice, NOT the EU forcing it on
us. As in the leavers slogan. Take back control.
The people didn't decide to give up half the rebate. Democracy extends
*only* to choosing MPs, there is no democratic control over what they
do once in power. Yes, even so, it is better to be able to kick them out
afterwards than not.
Then you might as well say why leave the EU? Some PM down the road will
just beg the EU to take us back...
My point is it is OUR choice, not the EU.
the eussr is in a very weak position....so they are blustering
--
www.abelard.org
Loading...