Politics Brexit: not inevitable

The Brexit is a sign of distrust toward Bruxelles not to Europe.
The real problem of any federalism system is the risk of dilution of responsability, specialy if we lack of real unity. At the end, Nobody is responsible for nothing. At the end it 's the open door to individuals greeds.IMO.

That is certainly the case with the EU.
 
A second referendum ignores the will of the people... they have spoken.

You may not like their answer, but saying the decision is non-binding... I don't want to entertain this notion because of the doors it could open.

The EU needs to learn from Brexit-- and learn quickly. A major course correction is overdue.

A 2nd referendum is possible, certainly as the split was very close, 48 - 52 %.
But if they want to do that, they should do it quick, no time to waist.
Britain should get his mind straight.

And Europe should learn some lessons.
 
Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Greece...

Leaving the EU is stupid.
But the EU should change quickly.
Frustration about the EU policy and management of Europe by the politicians is very high.
These people are particrats, appointed by their political fractions, they are not elected and they are not acountable for their actions. Furthermore they squander money and they are hughely overpaid.
 
side note: I tried to give a thumbs down to Maciamo's thread opening, but system said I already voted?

This would have made eight thumbs down to one thumb up. The thumbs have spoken.
 
and he is right, again

13502107_10154250056573695_427179259271673103_n.jpg

Probably its a normal reaction and disappointment for not being re-elected after world war two. One would have thought that Churchill would have been voted in with a landslide right after being victorious after world war 11 but instead suffered a heavy defeat in the 1945 elections. It must have been a great disappointment, and people do say things like that in this situation. He was referring to the British electorate who anyway holds Winston Churchill in high regard.....but still voted him out
 
Last edited:
Perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that London (1) is the most Muslim city in Britain, (2) has a Muslim mayor, and (3) is the least ethnically English part of England. In other words, London fits all the "requirements" for being a pro-Remain area IN ENGLAND (because Scotland and Northern Ireland, as this referendum has shown, are DIFFERENT cases with DIFFERENT interests from the rest of Britain).

You would find that many 'indigenous' Londoners and other British people who made London their home (so to speak) who are a majority would be more acceptant of other cultures and somehow a good percentage are born with it. The countryside (and not only in England are usually more nationalistic and the lower the income the more nationalistic they would be. London is the Richest city in the UK in general and diversity has something to do with that too. The Indians, Bangladeshi's, Pakistanis and Africans would be considered British too and their roots in London go back to the '40's. There has always been an anti immigrant party in the England such as National Front who used to Lobby against these minorities. However the irony is that the influx of workers from the EU seem to have helped to make these parties more popular.

An election of a London major would need much more then simply a Muslim vote, and support from much a broader spectrum. At any rate he attended the gay pride with his wife, not something very comparable with IS ideology like so many far right groups portrayed him to be!

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/26/londons-muslim-mayor-slams-brexit-vote-gay-pride-event/
 
Good to know. But still it would seem that it does not affect you directly whether the UK leaves the EU or not. What would you change for you personally?

It would not change much personally, accept the fact of the impact it might have on the EU in general. My country seems to be heavily affected, as there are close historical links. However that can swing both ways. We could also benefit. It all depends on the new terms negotiated. My feeling is that there will be a mellow and smooth transaction. It works better and in the interest of both sides. The downside is that if the Uk (or England) keeps on doing well or even does better, then the EU will never be the same like we know it now. The UK is going to serve like a pilot project in some respect. The results will have positive or negative impact on the EU depending on the outcome. Its a wait and see issue.
 
The religious difference translates into an economic and social difference; that's the point. The way I hear it from the Irish community here is that the hiring, union preferment, salaries, even access to social services, everything was skewed so that the Protestants had an advantage, and lots of gerrymandering of electoral districts to keep it that way. The way they tell it the Protestants didn't want to lose that advantage by joining "Catholic" Ireland.

Has all that changed? Was it not true in the past?

Maybe it's the people I know. :) There were more than a few Irish-Americans who in the past gave money to the IRA even though if asked they would have said they never supported terrorist organizations.

Thats how I know it too. The EU has managed to open the borders between north and south which I am hoping it could be seen as something positive and now they are used to it. That might be compromised now, but again we do not know what the negotiations are going to bring about. Its still all a closed box.
 
Probably its a normal reaction and disappointment for not being re-elected after world war two. One would have thought that Churchill would have been voted in with a landslide right after being victorious after world war 11 but instead suffered a heavy defeat in the 1945 elections. It must have been a great disappointment, and people do say things like that in this situation. He was referring to the British electorate who anyway holds Winston Churchill in high regard.....but still voted him out

do you know when and why Churchill said this <
I think is a general truth, not less today than after WW II
 
Did you see this Video about ESM (European Stability Mechanism) here on Youtube ? If It's true, the ESM members seem to have a real oversized Power over the Peoples. No? It's look like they are above the laws? Did you see the Article 32 on their Immunities and Privileges (ESM treaty on line). Of course the Brits didn't sign it but Greece, France, Portugal, Italy, Spain etc... and Germany signed it...
The link here for the ESM Youtube video explaining ESM, just to be fair and let people to have their own point of view.
 
Last edited:
this is the comment of Die Welt :

They see Brexit as a symptom of general distrust of the EU.
They blaim the arrogance of Junker and the desastrous way Merkel handled the refugee crisis, without consulting any one else.

Result is people voting for nationalistic parties like Orban in Hungary or populist leftists like Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain.

http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommenta...ben-auch-Merkels-Alleingaenge-abgewaehlt.html

In Italy the populist Beppe Grillo won.
Now Renzi decided to organize a referendum in Italy about the implementation of institutionial reforms. He said he'll resign if the people vote against.
There is a big chance the campaign will play on sentiments, just like the Brexit campaign. And Beppe Grillo will claim all Italian problems are due to the EU and the Euro currency.

All over Europe there is discontent about politics talking to much and doing to little.
 
Don't any of you think it is unbelievable how can smart people, such as Maciamo and bicicleur, support a second referendum (which is anti-democratic in both theory and practice)? BTW, David Lammy can always go back to Guyana if he's not happy with the decision of 52% of the British people (after all, he could enjoy pseudo-democracy there).
 
this is the comment of Die Welt :

They see Brexit as a symptom of general distrust of the EU.
They blaim the arrogance of Junker and the desastrous way Merkel handled the refugee crisis, without consulting any one else.

Result is people voting for nationalistic parties like Orban in Hungary or populist leftists like Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain.

http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommenta...ben-auch-Merkels-Alleingaenge-abgewaehlt.html

Very perceptive analysis, in my opinion.

Faced with a flood of undocumented, un-screened refugees, the EU was unable to craft a unified response, and left each individual nation to deal with it alone. That just highlighted the fact that the political mechanisms don't exist for effective action.

Economically, some have prospered, but for others it's a story of stagnation and high youth unemployment.

Greater flexibility and creative thinking were necessary, and from what I can see the current leaders are incapable of it.

They may think that by brutally punishing Britain they will prevent a mass exit, but I think it may backfire on them.

As for having a second referendum or having Parliament negate it in some way, all I can say is you either have a democracy or you don't. If your leaders call for a referendum and then refuse to abide by it you can toss all of it out the window. What is the plan? Is it to keep on having votes until the leaders get the result they want? This is why you have to be careful and judicious in calling for referendums. You're opening Pandora's box.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/
 
What if Conservative party will decide not to implement conclusion of referendum, not to leave, argumenting that this is not in line with their party vision and policy? They can declare that this matter will be left for next elected government/party to decide.
 
Don't any of you think it is unbelievable how can smart people, such as Maciamo and bicicleur, support a second referendum (which is anti-democratic in both theory and practice)? BTW, David Lammy can always go back to Guyana if he's not happy with the decision of 52% of the British people (after all, he could enjoy pseudo-democracy there).

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remem...tes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

a referendum is not democracy, it's insanity
 
What if Conservative party will decide not to implement conclusion of referendum, not to leave, argumenting that this is not in line with their party vision and policy? They can declare that this matter will be left for next elected government/party to decide.

the dammage is done, the ghost is out of the bottle, now decisions have to be made
the longer you wait, the longer the uncertainty
Cameron wants to resign in october and leave negotiations for his successor,
but neither investors nor the EU are prepared to wait any longer
 
As an American I have to take some responsibility for this... First we had Bush wrongly invade the Middle East (Iraq), then we elected a feckless leader in Obama to further louse things up. The Arab Spring caused by our mistakes launched the migrant crisis.

Two horrible Presidents in a row.
 
My policy regarding migrants from Syria would be to accept all female applicants and all children under sixteen. Adult males would have to stay and fight to protect their homeland. Simple I know... but what else is there?

(If Sweden and Germany had tried my approach they would both be more content with their respective conditions.)
 
In my defense, I neither voted for Obama nor Bush. I also spoke out loudly against the Iraqi invasion...

Ron Paul would have performed so much better.
 
I think is a general truth, not less today than after WW II

.....except when the results are to our liking......then we say the people were sensible.
 

This thread has been viewed 73618 times.

Back
Top