Slashdot Mirror
In the Aftermath Of Brexit, Brits Google About Irish Passport, Meaning Of EU, and Why it All Happened
As the world makes peace with the news that the United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union, people in the UK are increasingly trying to figure out what this means. Google noted on Twitter late Thursday that "What is the EU?" was the second top UK question on the EU since the news broke, with "Why did Britain leave the EU?" being the first. The questions also speak volume about the awareness of the issue among them. Understandably, some people also resorted to the search engine to look for Irish passports. "Getting an Irish passport" keywords saw a 100% surge.
Voters rightfully want to control their country's own destiny without having to cater to some international rule-making body a thousand miles away. I feel the same about the World Trade Organization. Why are THEY making decisions for Americans?
True, voters are not always rational (Iraq cough), but people naturally want control and would rather make their own mistakes than let some world body far away make them instead.
Table-ized A.I.
It's mostly anecdotal at this point but there already seems to be a lot of buyers remorse. Thoughts on the possibility they'll have a follow-up "are you really sure?" referendum or at least an election where one of the parties campaigns on ignoring the result.
I stole this Sig
This was an advisory referendum only, with no force of law. The United Kingdom is not obligated to leave the EU.
Yes, a pro-separation change in government will soon take place. However, the more forcefully that the new government pushes for a full departure, the more forcefully Scotland and Northern Ireland will attempt to disentangle themselves from the United Kingdom.
Northern Ireland in particular might see a real increase in sectarian violence if EU separation is not handled with great care, so internal security and continental policy will become even deeper-entwined. These forces will certainly blunt immediate impulses towards separation.
The EU bureaucracy has allowed a large, hostile contingent to form in several European nations. Perhaps now an inward gaze, compelled by credible criticism, can form a more perfect union.
Except for the fact that Jews weren't actually raping women and otherwise controlling and terrorizing the German public. Trying to equate the Muslim invasion of Europe with Jews in 1930's Germany is obvious antisemitism.
Turnout was almost 73% of eligible voters. That's a very large number.
That means 27% of people of voting age didn't bother to vote, and I'm quite willing to bet that this non-voting group was skewed towards the younger end of the spectrum. (#)
Thus, it's probably fair to say that if enough of those non-voters *had* actually bothered to vote, the result would have gone moderately but clearly the other way.
As it stands, this is all academic now. But let's bear these people in mind- those who had a reasonable opportunity to vote, but didn't bother- because they have no right- not now, not in ten, twenty, forty years time, not ever- to complain about the consequences of this decision or anything remotely related to it.
You didn't vote? Then you voted Leave. End of story. STFU.
(#) This is almost always true, but it's quite clear in this case that older voters were not only more anti-EU and likely to support Leave, but also more actively cared about it than younger voters' tendency to be more pro-EU but generally passive. An illustration of how those older voters skewed the debate was the endless stream of newspaper letters, commenters on Radio 4 et al explaining that "I voted for a common *market* in 1975, blah blah blah". To put this into perspective, anyone old enough to have had a vote in 1975 would have to be almost sixty at the very least today. Yes, those people making the most noise about Europe are those already approaching- if not well into- retirement age, with their careers behind them and a "Back to the 50s" post-war mentality. Yet the consequences of their choice will dictate the future of a 19-year-old student long after they die off in 15-30 years time.
Still, if that student couldn't be bothered to vote anyway, he can STFU too.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
the third-worlder isn't all that much better off than before
Utter nonsense. Go look at some statistics on standards of living in various third world nations.
Oh, wait, that would require listening to experts. Never mind, go back to your echo chamber.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
I suspected that Putin is funding many of the nationalist right wing groups in Europe. In other words, he likes stirring the shit. Brexit doesn't benefit the UK or Europe or even the US. It doesn't help when austerity is punishing the working class all across Europe and their voices are being ignored. It makes them easy marks for nationalist and right wing groups and con men. As the UK begins to negotiate its exit the EU will play hardball because if they make concessions, other countries might bolt too. A disunited Europe is exactly what Putin craves for. And if the US chooses the wrong president, it won't be their to help hold Europe together.
On a separate but related note: Texas secessionists are smart enough to understand what Brexit is and have been emboldened by it. Expect to hear more about Texit if Hillary becomes president.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Well, there's some interesting twists here.
Scotland's balance of payments is highly dependent upon oil prices, which are currently low. But when Scottish independence was on the table, there was talk of Scotland's financial sector relocating to London. But in a situation where Scotland was part of the EU but the rest of the UK was not, the shoe would be on the other foot. Many American companies maintain a presence in the UK to have a foothold in the EU; in a post-Brexit/post Scottish independence world the place to be would be Scotland, and the economic impact of that would be scaled by the relatively low population of Scotland - about 5.3 million. That's fewer people than live in Greater London (8.5 million).
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
unless we fix our own xenophobic problems by ourselves, the world will be looking at the UK and USA for examples of what happens when you let xenophobia take over the country.
As opposed to examples of what happens when you let aliens take over the country? Or could we just ask the American Indians that question? Or see what happened to the Romans in the fifth century?
You are comparing military conquests with Hispanics migrating to the US or refugees migrating to the UK? Once Hispanics or Syrian refugees start killing tens of thousands of Americans or Brits per year, and setting up their own governments after conquering cities, your comparison would hold some weight. Until then it is xenophobic nonsense.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke