Slashdot Mirror
Brexit: Government Rejects Petition Signed By 4.1 Million Calling For Second EU Referendum (independent.co.uk)
An anonymous reader shares an Independent report: The Government has rejected a call for a second referendum on European Union membership in a petition that was signed by more than 4.1 million people following the Brexit vote. It was the most-signed Government petition since the process was introduced in 2011. However in an official reply, the Foreign Office said 33 million people had had their say and "the decision must be respected. [...] We must now prepare for the process to exit the EU," it said. The petition, which was set up by a Brexit supporter before the referendum was held, had called for the Government to annul the results if the Remain or Leave vote won by less than 60 per cent on a turnout of less than 75 per cent. Government petitions which reach over 100,000 signatures must be considered for debate in parliament.
I'm putting together a petition to put the USA up for sale to the highest bidder
must be tech news
UK voters: We want to give a boat a silly name!
UK government: No.
UK voters: We want to break up the European Union and crash our economy on a single, simple-majority vote!
UK government: Okay.
We also have a halon fire extinguisher. Its always nice to have a fire extinguisher that kills people around.
Alot of those were bots so hardly a representative petition result
If it's the latter, I bet you most are fake. I heard 4-Chan was trolling and setup scripts to create fake signatures.
Dunno why Slashdot couldn't at least dig a bit deeper and fake trying to make this a tech related post....
No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is
the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time.
I suppose it is still better that a simple majority of folks make a bad decision we all have to live with, rather than a single evil fellow.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Forty-eight percent those who voted didn't want to leave the EU, so when you put together a petition to reverse Brexit, all you're really getting are the passionate pro-EU voters. And, petitions to reverse majority votes is not how a democratic election is supposed to work. You take a vote, and the majority wins. Period. Personally, thumbs up Britain! And if Scotland and Whales decide to walk, good luck with that. England has the strongest economy in the EU, and had that before the EU.
Personally I think it was a foolish decision to leave the EU. I don't believe it will be the massive disaster some predict, but I do believe it will have a negative impact on the UK into the future.
However, a vote was held. Those who voted spoke, and those who did not vote in effect voted "we do not care". The losing side does not simply get do-overs until it wins.
Amusingly, this petition was started by one of the Brexit supporter when it appeared they would lose the vote. The same would apply: they do not get do-overs until (from their view) the "right" answer is arrived at.
Yes, there were lies. There always are. People had every opportunity to do their homework and make up their own minds. If you do not properly avail yourself of that opportunity, that is on you.
The petition was always going to be rejected, and I say that as someone who signed it. However, it will become part of the historical narrative for this referendum and the aftermath.
It will also act as a signpost for any other country who holds a similar referendum in the future; really for a referendum of such a constitutional importance, a higher threshold than a simple majority should be required for any vote-to-change to be valid.
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
Multiculuralism ==> Fail=====|
Political Correctness ==> Fail | ================> European Union State Massive Fail. Eurostate colapse. Back to Nation States.
Gaystapo Dictatorship==>Fail|
UK voters: We want to give a boat a silly name!
UK government: No.
UK voters: We want to break up the European Union and crash our economy on a single, simple-majority vote!
UK government: Okay.
Crash (v): /kraSH/
1) To regain control of a country's internal affairs
2) To allow ones currency to float if needed
3) To negotiate better-than-average trade deals
4) To avoid membership fees
5) To control immigration in a manner advantageous to the citizenry
the people who still have a monarch hate democracy
they want to be lorded over by their "betters" and are deathly afraid of some imaginary money getting shuffled around for a few weeks
losers and cowards, throughout history.. lmao, the mighty british empire my ass
How many people who signed this petition were actually citizens of the UK?
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
Most people in the UK don't really want to leave the EU, but they wanted reforms on a few key points (as do people in many other european countries) and there was no way to get those reforms so the only option was to leave. If the key problems with the EU were addressed and another referendum held i'm sure the vast majority would vote to stay.
I agree with that viewpoint - I think it's likely a correct assessment of the situation.
Note that England has been grumbling about these points for awhile, and before the vote happened even went to the EU asking for reforms (and was denied, and insulted for asking).
Note also that now that the vote has happened, the rest of the EU won't let the UK back. They've been annoyed with the UK for awhile, and are glad to be rid of it.
So while I agree with your assessment of the situation, I have to file it under "academically interesting".
just wondering!
Houses prices plummeting...
I've been reading here for years about how the high housing prices were so bad in the UK. Make up your fucking minds.
Our housing prices are so high, we're all living on the streets.
House prices are falling
The end is nigh(or is it ni?)
I expected this to end with "I fart in your general direction. Your mother is a hamster and your fathers smells of elderberries".
This whole petition is stupid. Nobody in the UK who could vote was deprived of the opportunity to cast a vote in the brexit referedum.
Brexit won because most people didn't give a shit. And therefore of those who voted, the brexit part won. You cannot blame the referendum for the result. You can certainly blame those stupid lazy citizens that think they have no part to play in politics. Well guess what ? Votes do matter. Always. That's why I like the Australian system (very few countries implement this system) where the citizen is obliged to vote in an election. If you don't then the government can come after you with fines. Being a citizen carries with it civic responsabilities among which is to vote when elections take place.
Both rising *and* falling prices are bad, einstein. Especially if its rapid and involves housing. It makes either buyers or lenders drop out and the pain deters them from getting back in. Or the lenders declare an emergency and hold an economic gun to everyone's head unless the government prints up a nice big bailout for their cozy little class, screwing everyone else and undermining everything from the work ethic to the currency.
More stability would improve things, but the political class has disappeared up the anus of high finance and "US interests abroad". The only thing that will change is immigration. The UK will now be able to pursue further destabilization in other countries alongside the US--but with less human-fallout in the form of refugees. Whether that is "good" for the UK working class is unknown.
THat's not true. There are a lot of EU citizens who have made their home in the UK and contributed to the society and to the country, and were excluded from voting. However, Irish, Maltese and Cypriot EU citizens resident here WERE allowed to vote on the referendum.
There is actually a case proceeding in the Scottish parliament on this very topic of disenfranchisement.
Take off every 'sig' !!
Now you want backsies when you were the same ones that didn't go to vote or did a dumb "protest vote."
You made this bed. Lie on it.
High house prices are a significant problem. They indicate an excess of demand over supply.
Rapidly falling house prices are a significant problem. They indicate a rapid loss of faith in the economy.
It is perfectly possible for both of these things to be true at the same time.
If I have a sore finger, taking an axe to it is not a cure.
"...until they pick the alternative the ruling class prefers."
That worked before on EU votes. I don't think it will work this time.
Still, the Europhilic ruling class is exceptionally cross that mere citizens would dare to express opinions that differ from their elite betters:
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
You have to be in the top 80% of earners to be a net contributor, anything less and you are a BURDEN to the country.
Being an EU citizen doesn't make you a UK citizen. Can UK citizens resident in France vote in the presidential election ? I doubt it. On the other hand it's possible that they could be allowed to vote in local elections. This is not being disenfranchised. A citizen of a country has more rights (insofar as elections are concerned) than someone that simply resides legally in the country. If I go to the US, become a resident, pay taxes etc... I will still not be allowed to vote in their elections because I'm not an american citizen. Is this so fucking difficult to understand ?
As for the Brexit referedum, Irish, Maltese, Cypriots and those on the Gibraltar have an important historical and political connection with the UK so giving those citizens the ability to cast their votes in the referendum is justified.
The currency has already crashed, the stock market lost 140 billion pounds, and many major companies are now preparing for partial or complete relocations in order to stay within the EU. The main thing holding companies back is the possibility that the UK might agree to remain bound by the EU's rules and thus stay within the EU common market, thus rendering relocation unnecessary - expect a further crash if the UK doesn't remain in the common market. S&P has already slashed their growth forecast for the UK, and the UK has lost its AAA credit status.
The pound is at a recent low, but that's not a bad thing. It means more people will purchase UK goods and services than they normally wood. The UK will have a more favorable trade deficit, possibly even a trade surplus, which means money will flow into the country from abroad.
If it *were* a bad thing, then you'd be complaining about how from 2 two years ago up to the brexit, the pound lost 20% of its value. Why is it that the pound losing it's value after the vote is catastrophic, in your view, while losing 20% over 2 years isn't?
Can you explain?
One way that Greece could have eased their troubles was by floating their currency. They *asked* the EU for permission to do this, and were denied.
Are you saying that the UK should be *prevented* from floating their currency if they deem it necessary? I don't see that as a bad thing.
Can you explain?
(So long as inflation is kept under control. South American dictatorships devalue their currency by printing extra money, which makes their currency value go to shit. I don't see the UK regulators being stupid enough or corrupt enough to do that.)
Companies relocating to the EU are European companies... yes? And those European companies employ mostly non-UK workers, yes? And pay taxes to their parent country, yes?
So I don't see *that* as a problem either.
Can you explain?
And note that the EU growth rate has been going down, overall, in the last few years (and not because of the recession either).
Are you saying that remaining a part of a declining or stagnant union is a *good* thing for the UK?
Please explain.
And also note that Iceland hammered out a trade treaty with China in about a year, while the EU has been working on a similar treaty for over 20 years.
I'm really unclear why you think all this is bad. It's bad for people who do arbitrage ("the pound has dropped"), it's bad for EU companies ("they're moving away"), and it's bad for the EU economy ("UK was the 2nd largest contributor").
But I don't see it as bad for the UK people.
Care to explain?
link here http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/General%20Documents/20151214_Aidan_ONeill.pdf
Fuck off or provide evidence for discussion. People who do a job are contributing.
is this so fucking difficult to understand? 66 individual cases here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_foreigners_to_vote
And how many of these 4.1 Million signatories were UK citizens ?
It does appear that EU countries may act childishly and refuse good trade terms on emotional grounds. That is human, but is self contradictory to the argument that emotional people like you act like you're making, which is that the natural order of a Brexit will leave UK worse off. Making illogical trade decisions based on good-riddance spitefulness isn't the natural order of things. If you were confident in your logical argument, I would think you wouldn't need to create artificial barriers to tip the scale and make UK worse off.
This was a vote with long lasting and wide ranging implications that affected everyone on the planet. The sheer gall to say "Just kidding, Do over." like we were on a playground should be enough to confirm that we want to minimize this voting pools influence on international politics or finances (and I say this as a US citizen who is very afraid we'll be putting on the same dunce cap in a few months). The argument of the 50% margin rings hollow for the same reason, they set the rules... It wasn't forced on them by the EU, the UN, the US or the United Federation of Planets. It was their election under their rules and they got what they asked for.
Entering information on a a web page, automated or not, if not considered a signature. So there is exactly ZERO signatures on this petition.
Reading the news and opinion sites, it seems that liberal American columnists are, by-and-large, incensed by the result of Brexit vote. Why is that? They seem to act like it is really a threat to them.
You know, for the longest time I really believed that we had, fundamentally, an completely unbalanced and unusual abundance of morons in the USA. But after Brexit, I'm no longer ashamed. There is at least one other country with at least the same ratio (actually, a higher-ratio as there is zero chance the Trumpieceofshit will actually get elected here). So, from where I'm sitting, it looks like the per-capita moron ratio is actually higher across the pond! Oh glorious day! I'm no longer ashamed to be a United Statesian!
As much as I think the vote was a reckless fault that was mainly driven by old geezers who want their Empire back, I think that voting as many times until we have a result that we like is not the way to go. Especially the young people who are rightfully upset about having their entire lives get screwed up are the ones to blame - they were mainly absent from the referendum vote. There are also plenty who fell for the blahblah of the hopeless losers of UKIP and other ultranationalistic groups rather than spend half an hour and inform themselves properly. If you do not show up for the election or do not take it seriously to begin with, don't complain afterwards! What will eventually crash the British economy is that the young people will move away leaving the old bastards behind who wrecked their own country even worse than Thatcher did. I guess stupidity in the nth degree never dies...see the US: after presenting the worst president ever (Reagan) the Reps put a dimwitted reality show host up as candidate.
As honest as that 97% scientific consensus on man-made global warming/climate change.
Oh how fascinating this referendum has been. Leave said we send 350 Million a week to Brussels. Although we get a rebate on that so not entirely accurate but true. The rest is supposedly used to purchase share holding in national infrastructure we didn't agree to being for sale using our own money. HahaHaha. The hilarity of it all. If I take 350 from you and give you 160 back you still getting taken full gypsy style! Then if I use that money to buy share holding in your farm or infrastructure you just sold me a stake in it and I paid you with your own money. Lol, lol, lol, lol, ROFL!
It's interesting that the people who support "Remain" and lost the popular vote, keep insisting that a pure majority is somehow not good enough for such a big decision. Such people usually deride any vote that involves things like delegates or electoral colleges etc that do not adhere to the simple majority rule. But in this case, the elephant in the room is that NOBODY got to vote at all on getting the UK into the EU in the first place. The voters were only ever offered joining a trading block that would have no political/governmental element. Government officials then spent decades morphing it into a massive super-national government that started stealing the sovereignty of its member nations.
So much for the "Remain" people wanting honest democratic votes...
Perhaps their next vote should be whether to join the US. They can still keep the Queen if they want. We wouldn't take that from them, would we? I mean, unless we have to hock the crown to pay off some debts...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I take it that you like people you never voted for or have heard of in a foreign country (Belgium in this case) decide what you have to do, too?
Brussels is the seat of the EU government (or at least parts of it) so when we refer to rules from Brussels we do not mean "rules from Belgium" (whose national laws have no sway outside Belgium) but "rules from the EU government in Brussels". This is the same way that Americans refer to "Washington". It does not refer to the mayor of Washington DC enforcing rules on the rest of the US but you national government in Washington passing laws. So its the same with us, just a different city.
As for "foreign countries" passing rules that makes as much sense as someone in California saying that some federal law they do not like was passed by "foreigners" in other states and forced on them without their say. Since California has representatives in the US government this is clearly false and it is the same with the UK in the EU. The difference is that California has been part of the US for long enough that they are used to this give and take between the local and national governments.
In contrast the UK has only been in the EU for just over 40 years and it does not have any recent experience of give and take between regional and national governments because the Tories stripped all meaningful power from county, city and town councils to centralize it all in Westminster and the areas which DO have experience with strong regional government, Scotland and Northern Ireland, voted overwhelmingly for the EU and while Wales has a national assembly it is very limited in power.
So really "foreign" is just a matter of perspective. If you are still stuck 40 years in the past then yes the EU means that "foreign" countries have some sway over the UK. However if you regard the EU as our country and UK as a part of it then no, foreign countries do not have any sway because a foreign country is one outside the EU.
Making illogical trade decisions
It's not illogical just because you don't like it. Fucking us over would be a huge disincentive for anyone else to leave. Given that the EU collapse would be worse than the UK leaving and getting a bad deal, it would be logical to act very strongly to prevent the that happening.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
[https://youtu.be/37iHSwA1SwE]
Europe doesn't want to make the exit easy, they want it painful so that others don't look at it as something they want to copy. But the system as it was, was broken. There were very serious longstanding unaddressed issues that were happening in Britain that the EU was unwilling to address. Immigration is a deal breaker, since it seriously affects your ability to control taxation, schools, health care, and a million other parts of life. The EU wanted a federation, not an association. That left zero wiggle room. It was always all or nothing. And it got bad enough so that even if there is economic pain up front, many people were just fed up enough to say "to hell with it, lets go". The EU never ever bothered looking at the UK's concerns. There was never a negotiation "50% less immigration going both ways to maintain reciprocity". But negotiation was never on the table either. It was always 'all or none'. And globalization helped multinationals, and hurt small and independent business. And these people's concerns were never addressed either. And so now pain and suffering all around. Its a failure of globalization, and highlights the benefits and costs associated with trade deals.
The tariff without a FTA for trade is around 1% of the cost, that's insignificant compared to EU memebership fees honestly.
Great! Houses will finally be reasonably priced and people can start owning their own homes again.
My bank says that's not going to happen though?
It's okay, we can drop the EU mandated VAT which is currently around 20%.
Looks fine to me? I still get more Euros and dollars when I convert pounds to them?
Cool story, however we've seen growth with the rest of the world, not Europe. So, if we're barred from doing stuff with the EU, I guess we'll have to use the alternative... Countries that have actual growth.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Making subjects vote repeatedly until the globalist elites get their preferred outcome is one of the hallmarks of EU abuse.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Why assume illogical and artificial barriers when simple logic is enough? The UK will have a worse position for making deals with the EU and the rest of the world, towards the EU as there will be no special offers in order to keep the UK inside (which have advantages to the rest of the EU) and the rest of the world as a smaller market have less say than a larger one.
Talking about punishing the UK is foolish - there's no need. But thinking that others will offer better deals with nothing in return is foolish too.
As we predicted, they would find some way to PREVENT an actual exit. This just sets the stage, and all the big investors like George Soros and the Rothchildes will play the market long as demand for the pound drops and the Euro grows.
They shorted it just prior to the "vote" for Brexit.
The winers are all bullshit.
Keep voting until you get your way, not gonna work anymore, that's how they got into the EU in the first place.
What a scam.
I hioe they stay in customs union (a la Turkey). I don't care about anything else.
In UK, 4.1 million want a recount but 33 million "had their say".
So, the 4 million need to organize and determine who of the 33 million voted "leave".
Then, the 4 million goes on a killing spree against the "leave" proportion of the 33 million.
When the 4 million have attritted the 33 million down to 2 million remaining alive, then they have a winning voice to demand a re-vote.
Simple.
Do you want to stay in EU?
No; we want to leave.
Are you, *SURE* you don't want to stay in EU?
No; we want to leave.
Are you, *SURE* you don't want to stay in EU?
No; we want to leave.
Remain side tries to obstruct Brexit via backdoor tactics.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
My parents taught me how to never have people tell you what you have to do. Of course that means understanding civilization and since what that comes down to is nothing like the game by the same name, I can see how it can be hard for some people. As long as you interact with the sort of people who the community respects and they can act as character witnesses, as long as you realize that it is ultimately up to you what your defense is going to be and plan accordingly, no one is able to tell you what you have to do. The prosecution gets people to agree to a plea deal by letting them know how much the prosecution is going to inconvenience them. People live free when at every step they remind everyone else, the police, the prosecution the judge how much prosecuting them is going to cost. Of course that actually means planning ahead, which isn't most people's strong suit. Always emphasize how much of an asset you can be if you get your way and how much trouble it will be, not entirely of your own making, of course, if you don't.
... and they can always renegotiate to apply to the EU as Little Britain, to rejoin with Scotland which seems to be dead set on staying in. That is, if the EU survives all the other outbreaks of xenophobia.
Fun times.
Can we start a petition to call a second Australian election? Sure it will work!
Does Australia have a "none of the above" on the ballot paper you are forced to complete? If not then you are forced to choose between options that cannot reflect your opinion. I'd rather move to a democratic country.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Unfortunately for some firm (financial or engineering) some institution/testing/financial processing have to be done on EU soil. So retaining some EU market access would not be enough as per law they must be in an EU country. You would have to change that law first, and you can bet that this would be vetoes by country which have to win by having those institution forced to move.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Over 16 Million people voted to remain in the EU in the referendum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016). It would not be too surprising if every one of them signed the petition to hold another vote. Instead, only a quarter were sufficiently bothered with the outcome to sign the petition, so why would anyone advocate a new vote?
This is how it works:
Your polling card has a serial number on it, as does your voting slip. When you go to vote, you hand in your polling card and get given the slip. Both serial numbers are written in a log book next to each other.
The post office reads millions of hand written addresses every day and has done for decades. So how long would it take for GCHQ to cross reference every vote...?
The act of parliament that covers voting goes back to the late 1800s - it states you must CAST your vote in private. It has nothing to say about cross-referencing the paper trail.
If the government DON'T do this, then they're missing a trick. It's legal and the system allows it. (And I've heard from people within the system that they do indeed do it. The log books and voting slips are all sent off to "head office" after the vote.)
Australian commonwealth citizen who owns property in the UK and is resident for a majority of the year for tax purposes... I was allowed to vote also
False on all accounts. The property boom is fuelled by RTB "investors" sucking up the low end of the market via mortgages on negligible interest rates; and the mega-wealthy foreign investors buying the middle and upper end, especially in the larger cities. This creates a supply vs demand massively fucking up those that want to buy their own home where prices for a crappy 3 bed semi are need mortgages of 8x combined salary with 20% down. That's morally wrong, and you fucking know it.
Crashing the property market will be the best thing to happen to the England's housing. It means the workers can start owning their own home, and not be perpetually crushed into the gutter with massively increasing rents and millions of freeloading migrants jumping the queue; having their rents paid by the locals' taxes.
Today's prices are massive over-inflated, well beyond the usual boom-n-bust cycle. Anyone thinking their house is worth what rightmove suggests should sell right now, and rent for five year. Anyone gullible to think it'll remain so high and borrows against the equity is going to be financially ruined.
We gave it to them.
You didn't read very carefully. It may be logical on some political scale, like you say, to make illogical TRADE deals that make both parties worse off. But the point is that if such punishment resulted in UK GDP hit, that definitely doesn't prove the Remainers right.
Your reply doesn't make sense. I don't think you understand this thread. I'm not sure how to respond.
The petition has already been proven a joke. It was hijacked by bots all over the globe. I am surprised that the UK gov actually made a statement about this. Well, maybe not surprised at all...
"Abashed the Devil stood, and felt how awful goodness is..."
Taxation and laws without oversight and representation... Where have we witnessed this before? Congratuations, you now understand why the U.S. went through a similar referendum 230 years ago. History repeats itself.
Time will show that the U.K. managed to save itself by this move. It's only a matter of time before the E.U. ruins itself, just like all oligarchies.
Um, guys, the new unelected Prime Minister of the soon to be dissolved UK doesn't even officially take office until Wednesday GMT.
So, what government?
Meanwhile, the EU has conditionally accepted Scotland to take the UK seat after the UK turns into lesser Britain, or the Unitied Kingdom of England and Wales. Spain will force Gibraltar to remain part of Lesser Britain, out of spite, and the whole Ireland question depends on if Northern Island is permitted to exist like Scotland, as a separate nation that is also in the EU, or forced to remain with Lesser Britain.
It's a Constitutional Monarchy without a Constitution, actually. Get your facts straight. Canada and Australia are also Constitutional Monarchies, but have Constitutions, and when Scotland joins the EU it will also be a Constitutional Monarchy, but not sure about the Constitution for that one. All with the same monarch, but that's the fun part.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
In the US, left wingers use Europe as a supposedly superior example of how wonderful everything is under an even further left-wing government and policies etc. It's damned near to a religious thing with them. Any argument about social policy, government handouts, envronmental rules, college funding, health care, you name it. Any time a new government program is proposed or an expansion of an exiting one is proposed and some right-winger argues against it, the left-winger will say "well it works in Europe!". American left wingers all want to live in a left-wing Euro cradle-to-grave nanny state, but they do not actually want to move to one. They want to convert America into such a nanny state and force all their neighbors to accept the conversion whether they like it or not.
When people on the east side of the Atlantic do somethng that makes it look like Europe might not be a utopia, this is personally offensive to leftists on the west side of the Atlantic. The idea that the UK might actually vote to leave the nascent Euro uberstate, is extremely threatening to the true faith. It's about on par with a Pope announcing that he is a gay atheist. It's very shocking and threatening to the faithful. It's as damaging to the "brand" of massive intrusive government as the papal behavior of my example would be to serious Catholics.
Personally, I think the world is a safer place without all of Europe subsumed into a continent-wide superstate run by the Germans. Members of my family have twice in the past century needed to be able to safely arrive in the lush green peaceful and free lands of Britain before leaping onto the soil of France to save the Europeans from their repeated failures to stay independent from German technocrats with huge egos and unlimited geopolitical appetites. The EU is no guarantor of peace, NATO has had that role for decades and done it better than nearly any international organization in history. The EU is just a thin veneer of personal freedom of mobility covering a massive scheme to further enrich the super-wealthy and destry the national identities and political sovereignty of a bunch of nations without firing a shot. It's treason and appeasement with a marketing makeover.