Slashdot Mirror
'No Turning Back' on Brexit as Article 50 Triggered (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader shares a BBC report: Britain's departure from the European Union is "an historic moment from which there can be no turning back," Theresa May has told MPs. The prime minister said it was a "unique opportunity" to "shape a brighter future" for the UK. She was speaking after Britain's EU ambassador formally triggered the two year countdown to the UK's exit by handing over a letter in Brussels. It follows June's referendum which resulted in a vote to leave the EU. In a statement in the Commons, the prime minister said: "Today the government acts on the democratic will of the British people and it acts too on the clear and convincing position of this House." She added: "The Article 50 process is now under way and in accordance with the wishes of the British people the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union."
They'll be poorer, less powerful and less influential. However, they might actually be happier. Or, at least a fraction of the population will be.
and thanks for all the fish and chips.
But perhaps they could change place with Canada. Europe gets Canada and Northern America gets the UK.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
*What* is it doing wrong ? unaccountable ? you DO know that the EU is governed by ELECTED individuals ?
-- UK (as represented by a woman)
Scotland and Northern Ireland aren't leaving.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum.
Without Scotland, there is no UK.
Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
The last time I checked tech was subject to the forces of economics, this is a big shift in both economics and business relationships.
Maybe you should read more tech news and less Kardashian news...
This is the only method member states have of telling the EU it's doing it wrong: leaving.
How is this comment modded up? Do you think the only way of telling your own government is to leave? The EU government, like the UK government, is full of elected officials.
Saying the UK has no control over the EU is like saying the West Midlands or Greater Manchester have no control over the UK.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
This is the only method member states have of telling the EU it's doing it wrong: leaving.
This isn't England taking their ball and going home. This is England slashing the ball up with a knife and breaking their own legs. The EU will find a new ball (probably one with a Scottish accent) and keep playing while England is stuck in bed with a broken leg for 6 months.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Next, we'll be reading stories that Kim Kardashian has given birth to twins on this site.
She DID?!? Why didn't we hear about this sooner?! You're all letting us down here! You need to submit an article!
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
In related news, Scotland's parliament has just "approved plans to request a referendum on independence that could take place just before Britain completes its withdrawal from the European Union". Ireland may not be far behind in making its own bid for independence. Would it still be "Great" Britain if it was just England and Wales?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Airstrip One was always part of Oceania, not Eurasia.
"Kardasian news"
or as the the romans say : "panem et circenses"
While I don't know any specifics, there are likely differing laws in the EU and in Britain. This may lead to different data and computer laws.
Or, maybe the Kardashians are back.
One could, you know, vote for their MPs in the European Parliament...
Finding God in a Dog
UK out of the EU....Ireland in....what to do, what to do?
Finding God in a Dog
This is the UK's shoot your foot off moment. It won't even be the UK within 5 years - 80% chance that Scotland will vote to leave the UK to rejoin the EU, and ffff know's what's going to happen in Northern Ireland.
Not surprised that was posted by an anon coward.
I think a lot of this is caused by a 'divide and conquer' strategy. question is : by whom and for what purpose ?
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Heh. There was some article from The Onion that I can't find now, that talked about how the Balkans were continuing to subdivide into independent nations to the point that nearly every man, woman, and child was their own country. The represented the "nations" by halftoning a map of Yugoslavia.
Never thought I'd see the same thing happen to the UK.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
as a Canadian I agree! We don't Americans coming up here and ruining this great nation with their bizarre, trashy world views.
Counterpoint: Yesterday when walking along a trail in the U.S. I had to pick up a Tim Hortons bag and various boxes inside. Americans may have some "trashy views" but you Canadians are spreading LITERAL trash in America. Yet again Americans are left to clean up messes other countries make.
So I'm more than happy to support that wall into Canada, I'm not so sure all the Canadians that cross over to shop in the U.S. from Canada or to get real health care would be all that happy.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Saying the UK has no control over the EU is like saying the West Midlands or Greater Manchester have no control over the UK.
They do?
Elok
I don't think that's necessarily true.
All of the evidence actually suggests the opposite; it's continental Europe that will be in that position, and likely sooner rather than later.
The main disaster facing the EU now is their failed immigration policies. Yes, the UK has made some of the same mistakes, but getting out of the EU will help them remedy the situation on their end. But Europe, outside of a small number of Eastern European nations, has shown no real desire to enforce their borders properly. They've been flooded with millions of uneducated, unskilled, and often violent third-worlders from some of the worst places on Earth.
These foreigners have shown no willingness, or ability, to integrate into European society. In fact, it has often been the opposite: they want Europeans to conform to their beliefs and customs! We see this in the ethnic enclaves that have ruined large parts of many of Europe's oldest cities. We see this in the "no go" zones, where even the police are subject to violent attacks. We see this in the grenade attacks that now happen in Sweden every couple of weeks!
The really dangerous part is that even the European-born children and grandchildren of these foreigners refuse to integrate with European society in any positive way. There are parts of German cities, for instance, that now resemble Istanbul more than they do a German city. This has become a multi-generational disaster that will plague Europe for decades, if not centuries.
Not only have Europe's demographics been utterly destroyed, but their overall EU economy and that of the member states is in utter turmoil. Greece has been a disaster for about a decade now. Spain is only slightly better off than Greece. Italy is barely hanging on. There are numerous banks, including at least one in the economic powerhouse of Germany, that are on the brink.
These sorts of problems are just side effects of the rampant bureaucracy that has infected Europe, essentially paralyzing it with over-regulation and economic distortions.
At least the UK realizes there are serious problems that need to be addressed now. They're putting themselves in the position necessary to address their issues. But Europe? Aside from nations like Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, Europe is doing absolutely nothing to truly address the serious problems that are plaguing them now. These problems will only get worse, and will harm Europe for decades and perhaps even centuries to come. Europe will likely end up resembling the many failed states of Africa and the Middle East.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum.
By then, the PIGS-shit will be hitting the fan, and they might change their mind.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum. Without Scotland, there is no UK. Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
Well it would get interesting as the EU doesn't let new entrants in on legacy deals. It's the euro, Schengen, full package if Scotland wants to rejoin. Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
After Brexit, Scotland will reconsider if they still enough common interests to remain in the UK. If the West Midlands or Greater Manchester wish to do the same, that's their prerogative, too.
This whole concept of Nationalism and Nation-States is only a 19th century experiment and it doesn't seem to working out well in a lot of cases. It might turn out that the most stable expression of democracy is something that resembles the loosely allied city-states of ancient Greece.
If a simple 50% majority was sufficient to join, then a 50% majority is sufficient to leave.
Neither should be the case as turning over so much power should be a supermajority decision of people in a nation (because if you can't convince most people that such a big change is a good idea, you have no business doing it.) But somehow people are trained to believe a simple majority is a godlike authority instead of an abstraction of might makes right, which it should be treated as.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It's funny (in a sad kind of way) that OP is complaining about the EU not listening to its members.
The Brexit vote won with about 51% of the votes. That's not exactly a strong consensus, and IIRC, the regions that most strongly rejected Brexit were Scotland and Northern Ireland. Yet, they were railroaded, and Brexit went ahead anyway.
This wouldn't be "so" bad given other circumstances, but the problem is compounded because back when Scotland had its own referendum, there were already grumblings about the "Brexit", but Scotland rejected independence because they were given assurance that everything was fine and that the UK would remain in the EU.
Fast forward a bit, and, unsurprisingly, they were back-stabbed. And now, they - and Northern Ireland - want an independence referendum.
This referendum, of course, will be punted forward indefinitely. "Now is not the time", and similar political bullcrap.
So, which Union is not listening to it's members again?
Excuse me nice gentlemen. I don't mean to interrupt but, I've been searching news articles trying to find my cat. Have you seen my cat?
I read on some alt-news site that her twins are going to be named "Brexit" and "Brenter".
The shit hit the fan long ago in the PIGS countries. Their already recovering. The UK is where shit will hit the fan soon.
I voted Remain but the behaviour of "my" side since the referendum makes me wish I'd voted Leave. Specifically, finding as many ways as possible to say "I'm surrounded by idiots!". I even received a written warning from a close friend, saying that I'd better never discuss the subject with him if I'd voted Leave.
The EU is a pretty big mess. Look into the situation with their accounts if you care. A business run the same way would be shut down. And some are asking, given the rise of populism, the Greek debt crisis, and so many other issues, whether there will be an EU to leave in 2 years time.
Renewable mandates for one, aimed at eliminating the most effective carbon-free energy source. France is moving backwards thanks to the EU.
Especially for the 48% who voted against this stupid decision.
Let's hope the deal will be as close to a full membership as possible.
you are so ignorant. no point trying to explain the way it works to you
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
What ever happened to a good old war of conquest. If the queen were to lead her army and reconquer Scotland, the British Empire could be reestablished in England. Once that is done. I think Spain would be ripe for the taking. Then maybe Italy. I would hold off on France and Germany till the end. France would be an unruly province and difficult to maintain from afar. Point of the story is that Britain could within say 100 years conquer Europe and unite the continent that way.
Better to be ruled by a virile expansionist tyrant than a committee of do good liberals who systematically legislate out individual freedoms one by one for the good of the people and the wealthy business owners who get them elected to said European commiittees of enlightenment.
People need struggle. If they are not struggling against nature they will be struggling against their fellow man.
I can order my stuff from Germany or any other EU country. No need hang in UK.
Saying the UK has no control over the EU is like saying the West Midlands or Greater Manchester have no control over the UK.
This seems like a distortion of the OP's proposition. I read it more like saying that the only control the two sheep have over what the three wolves have for dinner is to get out of the common pasture.
It's so sad that even after Brexit people like the above commenter continue to display their ignorance and have apparently no idea how the EU works or what it actually is. Here is an executive summary:
- The president of the European Council is elected by the heads of state of all member states.
- The president of the European Commission is elected by the European Council.
- The members of the European Parliament are elected directly from the citizens of the member states.
- The president of the European Parliament is elected by the European Parliament.
- The European Commission is not democratically elected, they are civil servants, but the European Parliament can dismiss it by a vote of censure or no confidence. Legislation of the European Commission must be approved by the European Parliament and/or by the European Council (depending on the kind of legislation).
- The European Council consists of the heads of state of all EU member states, the European Commission President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy. Obviously, the heads of states are all elected democratically by the citizens of their respective country, since the EU does not allow member states that do not satisfy high democratic standards.
Not only that, the whole structure of the EU is the result of unanimous votes of all member states, which is one of the reasons why it took so long to built this union, and the European Council usually has to decide unanimously (= not a single vote against) and only under rarer exceptions by majority. This means that (by population) smaller countries have a much larger voice in the EU than larger countries, but since voting usually has to be unanimous, this has never caused any problems. Moreover, just like the EU has been built by their member states it can also be changed by their member states. But it doesn't stop there. The EU is also ridiculously cheap, the EU budget is only about 1% of the total GDP of its member states, and the 28 current EU countries spend about 50 times more on national expenses than on the EU budget!
And here is the most ironic and sad thing about the Brexit: Since 1985, the UK got a rebate of 66% on their EU spending! No joke, they got a 66% refund, just so they don't bitch around too much. Talking about ungratefulness...
And will be dead within 10 years. Hooray for the sudden outbreak of common sense (Trump, Brexit, etc)
The biggest issue for an independent Scotland entering the EU is that Spain and Belgium, both with fairly strong regional independence movements (Spain with the Catalan independence movement and Belgium with Wallonian independence) would likely veto Scottish entry, simply because to allow Scotland entry would send the message that breakaway regions could remain part of the larger European Union.
As it is, it's clear Theresa May is no mood to permit another independence referendum before the final deal with the EU, and while the SNP can certainly make a lot of noise, it isn't very clear that a majority of Scots even want another referendum at this point.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
How do you say "Please yes please I surrender help us" in greek?
put real border control on the UK border
Don't they have some wall they could fix up a bit ?
Why do you omit more than 50% of the populace who voted for Brexit? Considering the massive amount of propaganda for "remain" having over 50% for exit is an insanely high number.
It's almost like you are actually ignoring facts to back an ideology. Why does that seem so familiar? Oh, I got it! The elitists in the US did and do the same thing. People have caught on to the game, repeating the lies won't make the true. All it does at this point is expose the amount of people involved in attempting to maintain the charade.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Maybe so. But when the people you're playing ball with beat you up and take your lunch money every single day, destroying your ball and spending 6 months in bed with a broken leg might not be such a bad way out of the situation.
This is going to hurt the UK very badly, but the EU has become a disaster thanks to Merkel. The sad thing is, she'll just lose the next election retire very well and leave the next generation to suffer
Exactly the opposite. Nation states work well, and the effort to do away with them has caused terrible stresses that will almost certainly lead to war and privation.
The Scots will not be allowed to join the EU because existing member states do not want to encourage their own separatist movements.
the US controlled both, as we surely shall.
UK is losing free access to a market 6x their domestic, and won't be the financial market for Europe. Hard to see how that won't result in a slowed economy and they'll certainly have less political influence as they can no longer affect EU policies.
UK is also losing access to a workforce 6x their domestic, willing to move and work for much less than UK natives.
Wake up! "The economy" has to account for the general welfare of the people, it's more than just the total revenues of the businesses,
Also, if the UK ever needed an emergency tactic to prevent economic collapse, they can let their currency float.
Greece, a member of the EU, was not allowed to do that (even though it would have helped them).
Welcome, Northern-Ireland, Scotland and Wales. (and a dozen islands)
Why would they have a problem with these terms? It looks like the Scots are pretty sick of the Brits and their nonsense at this point.
Maybe so. But when the people you're playing ball with beat you up and take your lunch money every single day, destroying your ball and spending 6 months in bed with a broken leg might not be such a bad way out of the situation.
The discussion was about the UK leaving the EU. You are evidently talking about something very different (although I haven't got a clue what exactly).
This is going to hurt the UK very badly, but the EU has become a disaster thanks to Merkel.
The Merkel that very successfully pulled Germany through the world's worst economic crisis in decades, accomplished a budget surplus during the crises, saved the Euro multiple times and prevented political chaos across the continent, you mean? How exactly?
The sad thing is, she'll just lose the next election
It doesn't seem that way, currently. The CDU won the state election in Saarland last week by an unexpected margin and the SPD is already decreasing in the polls. It's very likely that the CDU/CSU will remain the largest fraction in the Bundestag and Merkel is their chancellor candidate.
and leave the next generation to suffer
From what exactly? Merkel's governments haven't been perfect, but she did rather well given the circumstances. They should have invested more in infrastructure and increased defence spending earlier on, and shutting the nuclear power stations was a stupid move driven by public opinion rather than reason, but overall, few countries have been governed as well and as stably as Germany in the past decade. I fail to see what the next generation would be suffering from.
The Scots will not be allowed to join the EU because existing member states do not want to encourage their own separatist movements.
This isn't a separatist situation, however. In fact, allowing Scotland in would validate the EU because it shows people wanting to be EU members. This is a case of EU members wanting remain EU members. It might cause an issue if say, Spain ever tried to leave the EU but Catalonia wanted to stay as members, but you aren't going to see much support for separatist groups splitting off from a current EU member to create a new EU member state.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
the people have spoken already. Surely we don't need to go through all that again? Get over it.
Glad the Brits came to their senses. If the Scots leave. It is no loss.. They were the poor man of GB anyway. Let them suck bennies from the EU if they want.
This is the UK's "flight 93 election"
Not sure if I understand the intent of the reference.
Is this "heroically wrest control from the Muslims"
-or-
"fly the plane into the ground"?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum. Without Scotland, there is no UK. Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
Well it would get interesting as the EU doesn't let new entrants in on legacy deals. It's the euro, Schengen, full package if Scotland wants to rejoin. Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
But Scotland isn't a new entrant. They are already members of the EU, albeit through association with Great Britain. If Scotland votes for independence the EU can just interpret that not as the UK leaving and Scotland applying as a new member, but England leaving while Scotland retains it's current membership. And if England gets the treatment and outcome that most people outside the "leave" campaign believe they will get, Srotland will have no problem going along with the Euro, Schengen, etc. Scotland on the euro will be a much stronger currency than England on the pound.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Yeah, in my experience the British have no problem with folks leaving their little empire, they certainly don't go to war with places that decide they want to leave.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
It's just that the UK was one of the wolves...
Renewable mandate the creation of more renewable power plants. Not to close atomic ones... Now certain people with anti atomic agenda love to make you think so, but it is not the reality...
From DG clima website:
Electricity will come from renewable sources like wind, solar, water and biomass or other low-emission sources like nuclear power plants or fossil fuel power stations equipped with carbon capture & storage technology. This will also require strong investments in smart grids.
European text: Energy Roadmap 2050
Sadly few will read your post and even fewer will learn anything.
Islam is not a race you idiot! If you are going to repeat the communist globalist talking points at least use the correct lines. No meal ration for you comrade!
This applied when the UK was in the EU.
Now that it is leaving there will be huge pressure on Spain and Belgium to accept Scotland and I believe they would not veto it.
The Merkel that very successfully pulled Germany through the world's worst economic crisis in decades, accomplished a budget surplus during the crises, saved the Euro multiple times and prevented political chaos across the continent, you mean? How exactly?
Exactly, the same Merkel who introduced over 2 million Syrian refugees into a country over under 100 million, welcoming all those people to rape women in the streets and drive trucks through crowded markets....all while incomprehensibly ignoring people suffering and dying in Afghanistan, South Sudan, Somalia and a dozen other war torn nations. What is it about Syria, their suffering his hardly unique.
The same Merkel who, in addition to destroying any potential for German to succeed for generations to come is forcing other EU member nations to create the same internal disasters for themselves. So not only has she wiped out Germany, she's bringing down the EU.
She is their worst leader since Hitler, and if there's ever an exception to Godwin's law, this is it.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to expect people in the UK to understand how the EU places people into positions of power, let alone take the time to find out before voting on it, when so many of them clearly don't understand how their own government works. Far too many people don't have a clue even at the most fundamental of levels; every time a PM gets ousted and someone else steps in you get the usual "they were not elected" crap - newsflash - the UK elects a *party* that then gets to put whomever it chooses into 10 Downing Street for the duration of that party's term. Most of them would probably have a heart attack if someone sat them down and explained the real division of power and responsibilities between elected MPs and the unelected career bureaucrats in the Civil Service...
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Because the only possible way to maintain your sovereignty is to pay non-elected bureaucrats from other countries to dictate every aspect of your country.
The EU was setup as a Trade Union with standard currency, which most people agreed with as a "Trade Union" with standard currency. Once it started making demands on everything from members paying for a private private army to demanding how a country handles immigration the EU failed in it's purpose.
Your position and statement is disingenuous and dishonest.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
You may be right, but Scotland is a country, not just a "breakaway region".
This is the only method member states have of telling the EU it's doing it wrong: leaving.
It's doing what wrong? Maybe look up the history of the EU and what it hoped to achieve (specifically how it has so far perfectly achieved it) before saying they're doing it wrong.
By then, the PIGS-shit will be hitting the fan, and they might change their mind.
*Yawn* Yeah that FUD campaign ran it's course a few years back.
As long as you're going to tell people to get educated about the differences between the terms, here are some CGP Grey videos about the subject:
The Difference between the United Kingdom, Great Britain and England Explained
The (Secret) City of London, Part 1: History
The (Secret) City of London, Part 2: Government
And here's one about the whole Brexit thing itself, though it's from just after the vote so is now somewhat out of date, though the speculation about what the results might be "if" it goes through are presumably still relevant.
Brexit, Briefly
.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
You didn't even bother with a half truth, you went with the old FLAT OUT LIE! It was 53.4% that voted to LEAVE from England, with 73% turnout. If you tally all of the votes including Wales, Scotland, and Ireland tally was 17,410,722 to leave, 16,141,231. Which is still 52% of the vote _TOTAL_ (51.89%).
Ireland and Scotland had the worst turn outs, which means they didn't have a strong enough opinion to vote.
Your opinion denies things we call facts. Your opinion is invalid and based on some fantasy land that does not exist. Only a complete lunatic attempts to deny facts to support their delusional ill gotten opinion.
Citation for the intellectually challenged who can't find results. Don't worry, I know you won't look.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
ISIS are there to create an islamic state under their interpretation of islam.
Islam is no more about taking over the world than christianity is. Nutcases and morons do, but they're generally, now that secularism is there to go "What the fuck are you thinking of?!?!?!?" to them, unable to get the fellow followers-in-tribeal-name to follow them.
I believe Spain at least would. It has an ongoing crisis with Catalonian independence, and for them this is an existential issue. They might, in the long run, allow Scotland in, but not after some lengthy period of time.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Wallonia has been a part of Belgium for less time than Scotland has been part of the United Kingdom.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
But Scotland isn't a new entrant. They are already members of the EU, albeit through association with Great Britain. If Scotland votes for independence the EU can just interpret that not as the UK leaving and Scotland applying as a new member, but England leaving while Scotland retains it's current membership.
As I understand article 50, legally it's too late for that. Even if Scotland got independence tomorrow there is no provision to abort the exit process and if an agreement is not reached the treaties expire automatically. They can get more time, but only by an unanimous vote by the council. Other than that "If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49." where article 49 is the general application process. Which means Scotland would essentially have to qualify as a new country. I'm sure that if Scotland acts quick enough the EU could fast track the process so the beginning of their membership starts as the UK's end, but to formally follow the Lisbon treaty it'd probably have to be "new" which means they'd have to fulfill the current eligibility requirements. Besides the EU would probably want that, they hate the special deals some countries have.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The history in WP is a bit confusing but it sounds like it was never really an independent nation per se as Scotland is. Is that not so?
Of COURSE the Scots want another swing at independence, they weren't happy at the first result and only grudgingly accepted it in the first place.
The fact is that Scotland is a proto-Socialist state with exceedingly generous programs and benefits NOT supported by their own industry or tax base. Their fanciful extrapolations of a post-Scotcession world are sheer fiction, pre-supposing every possible advantage (Scotland gets to keep every drop the North Seas oil at no cost to themselves; Scotland gets to keep using the GBP; more or less free access to the EU) and hand-waving the rest. In fact, the economic picture now is even MORE bleak than it was then with oil at half the price it was. Their golden goose is laying eggs distinctly non-golden today.
OF COURSE they want to stay in the EU. They need to make sure whatever udder they're latched onto is on the healthiest possible cow.
But be clear:NOBODY will accept them into the EU. There are so many nascent disaffected minorities from the Basques to the Bretons to the Flemish that NO major state will want to validate the quixotic secessionist movement by granting it the recognition of admission to the EU.
cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
-Styopa
She added: "The Article 50 process is now under way and in accordance with the wishes of as few as 26.6% of the British people the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union."
Fixed that for you.
The EU government, like the UK government, is full of elected officials.
Except the EU, identical to but smaller than the UN, isn't a government, it's a coalition of mostly unelected globalists controlling people. It has some elected officials, but it does what it does and it always favors more globalism, not anything to benefit the people it rules.
Not an independent country as such, now, but then again the history of the Low Countries is an exercise in confusion, but at the end of the day the Wallonians are as distinct a community as the Scots are, and the "marriage" as it were that created the Kingdom of Belgian was one of those Great Power exercises in drawing borders, with the idea as much as anything to weaken certain nations and create semi-artificial barriers with the hope of sustained peace.
Catalonia might be a better example, as even after the union of the crowns with the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabellia, Catalonia, much like Scotland until the Act of Union, maintained its own independent political institutions, and even after Spain was more fulsomely united, the notion of Castilan/Catalan autonomy is very longstanding and of a similar historical age as Scotland's. Spain, like the UK after it, devolved powers to Catalonia and other "autonomous regions", but there remains a very strong Catalan independence movement, and this is precisely why Spain is unfriendly towards Scottish independence or any easy path to an independent Scotland's joining the EU. For Spain this represents the potential of significantly inflaming Catalan independence. If the EU were to admit Scotland quickly into the EU, that would send the message that Catalonia would expect the same quick admission.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Ot's May's decision to allow or disallow that referendum, though, which is brilliant.
Which non-elected bureaucrats are these? The ones that could be dismissed by a vote of the fully elected European Parliament?
Yes, exactly those same bureaucrats!. England can not directly impact the EU parliament, even when their own interests are being trashed by the same. They have to put everything on hold and wait for the EU vote schedule, and hope that the other members of the EU allow the UK to determine it's own positions.
And what dictatorial powers?
What dictatorial powers, the ones you pulled out of your ass as a strawman? I never said dictatorship, I said the EU parliament had gotten involved in much more than _TRADE_ as it was originally founded and agreed to. I gave you two of the easy examples to find, but there are plenty more. If you can't figure it out from the 2 examples given you are simply being dishonest to maintain a delusion (or perhaps just to be a liar for the purpose of propaganda). If you happen to be morally bankrupt, I can't fix your corrupt morality. I can only point out facts for bystanders to protect themselves from people like you.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
While it is doubtless true that most voters that voted on the Brexit referendum did indeed vote to leave the EU, I am pretty sure that it is not what most people in Britain actually wanted. Calling it the "will of the people" is just balderdash. It is simply the outcome of the democratic process in this instance, nothing more and nothing less.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Great, hopefully Greece won't be long before abandoning EU also.
Enough with the fascist bunch of eurokleptocracy.
You have mixed up Wallonia and Flanders: it's in Flanders that a signifcant amount of people want independence from Wallonia (and maybe from Brussels too; I'm not sure anyone knows how to handle Brussels in case of a split).
This sig under construction. Please check back later.
And this people is a paradigm of the stupidity of the common EU fanboy.
White washing a fascist regime by validating through naive double-speaking as democratic a long chain of appointed highly paid technocrats.
Democracy starts and ends to the first level of elected, full stop.
Everyone beyond that is just a puppet of those who really rules and that's right now Germany.
It's likely that the EU would fast track Scotland in, maybe even avoid them leaving if Sturgeon managed to get a referendum on her timetable. The EU is looking favourably on those who wish to remain, trying to offer individual citizens "associate membership" and stating today that Article 50 can be cancelled right up until the deadline if we change our minds.
By the time they get the referendum, joining the Euro will probably look pretty sweet. The Pound will fall as the deal emerges, or fails to emerge. What's more if they join the Euro they won't take any UK Sterling debt with them.
The border will likely remain soft, similar to the Irish border. The whole thing is a joke really, we can't realistically establish hard borders with Ireland, Scotland and Spain.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Well, not in over 200 years, anyway.
There are a large number of former colonies that peaceably left the empire, although many of them remain in the commonwealth and share a common monarch. The American Colonies just got impatient.
Both Spainish and Belgian governments have said that they wouldn't block Scotland joining the EU. Chances are it would be done as part of the Brexit deal anyway, which they stand to gain from. Spain especially, because they can insist on joint control of Gibraltar or at least use it as a very powerful bargaining chip.
May is in an impossible situation with Scotland. The Scottish government will likely make legal challenges against many aspects of the Brexit deal, and maybe on the referendum point itself. Some aspects of the deal can't be negotiated without Scotland, e.g. agriculture which the Scottish government has power over. Even beyond Brexit, we can't do free trade deals that involve Scotland without including their government, because of the aforementioned devolved powers.
The very best she can hope for is two years of agitation and legal problems.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yes.
So if California voted to leave the US you are saying that it could go without a problem?
And here is the most ironic and sad thing about the Brexit: Since 1985, the UK got a rebate of 66% on their EU spending! No joke, they got a 66% refund, just so they don't bitch around too much. Talking about ungratefulness...
And why did we get the 66% rebate? The system used to calculate budget contributions was obviously unfair. It was so unfair that all the member states agreed and gave the rebate to the UK. See here.
Well, I learned nothing. It was known to me already.
The Energiewende isn't working. Germans now enjoy astronomical energy prices, yet carbon intensity is still essentially flat. They remain dependent on coal, neighboring hydro, and have no hope of meeting their carbon commitments. Highly uncompetitive energy prices will certainly impact future generations, and Merkel is responsible.
Worse yet, the rest of the world refuses to learn from Germany's very expensive experiment. The EU has mandated that the rest of Europe chase Germany over the cliff, even the countries which have already successfully decarbonized with nuclear and hydro.
Scots are Brits too!! (For the moment)
Indeed, what gets conveniently forgotten by Brexiteers is how much of an influence the UK had on key parts of the EU. The single market, for example, was pushed by the UK and took a fair bit of persuading before European countries got on board with the idea. We lost that influence because the right-wing, eurosceptic press ran a successful disinformation campaign over the years and encouraged Brits to elect eurosceptic MEPs who were happy to take their EU salary and do bugger all. Yes, I'm looking at people like Nigel Farage, who did nothing to help British fisheries when he could. I couldn't stop laughing when I saw Farage championing himself as the saviour of British fishing, when all he did in the European parliament was enjoy the gravy train and screw over British fishing.
The only plus side is that when Brexit goes tits up, Farage has promised (BWAHAHAHAHAHA) to quit the UK and, presumably, use his new-found German citizenship to enjoy a cosy lifestyle in the EU.
Okay, let England (sans London) and Wales secede, while Scotland, London and Northern Ireland remain a part of the EU. Wales becomes an independent country, capital Cardiff, while England moves its capital to the Midlands.
Northern Ireland becomes a part of Ulster province for the Irish Republic, while Scotland becomes independent. Sadiq Khan becomes the Emir of London, while QEII, Theresa May and everyone else moves to England. Prince Charles, who is a de facto Muslim, can become the Sultan of London.
In my opinion, I think they would. If the vote was close, like 51% in favor, there would be some legal maneuvering to prevent it; ballot measures can be overturned by the Supreme Court. But if support for leaving was at 60% or more, there is just not the political will to oppose it. Certainly not enough to go to war. As Peter Theil pointed out, Republicans would actually stand to gain the most from a California exit because they would have almost unopposed control over the remainder of the country.
The EU government IS NOT ELECTED.
There is a significant "meta" election game, almost on every european country, the elections for representatives for EU have been turned to criticism or support of the local governments and other local political games.
Of course that's just for the EU parliament, everyone else in obviously unelected.
Even the so-called president of the EU election was a democratic mockery last time that in the end he even had to be APPROVED.
Britain has survived far worse. What makes you think leaving the EU will be the death knell?
That's an easy one to answer: Scottish independence. Without Scotland we are no longer Great Britain and certainly not a United Kingdom. What happened today was that we shot ourselves. What remains to be seen is whether we shot ourselves in the head, the foot or the gut. My guess is the latter because unless we either reverse the decision or the EU itself collapses the UK is likely to suffer a long and lingering death both from Scottish and possibly Northern Irish independence as well as internal political conflicts in England and Wales. The latter is because leaving the EU is unlikely to fix any of the issues most of those who voted for it would like to see fixed and the 48% who voted against it are being utterly ignored in pursuit of a "hard" Brexit. This is a self-inflicted existential crisis and I see a good chance of it getting very ugly.
So it's not the citizens of European nations directly electing the holder of this position.
So it's not the citizens of European nations directly electing the holder of this position.
So it's not the citizens of European nations directly electing the holder of this position.
So it's not the citizens of European nations directly electing the holders of this position. (At least you admit it this time!)
It's very, very difficult to consider something to be "democratic" when the holders of these various positions are not directly elected by the people they govern over.
Two World Wars were fought because of Nationalism in Europe. The attempt at applying the Nation-State paradigm in Africa and the Middle East has failed and lead to a perpetual state of conflict in both regions. The future of government will either become more globalist or hyper-local. But the current status quo is clearly not a stable equilibrium.
Not only was it only 51%, but when you break down the reasons why people voted leave you discover how fragile that majority was.
A lot of people were promised by Vote Leave that it was a vote to leave the EU, but remain in the EEA (the "Norway" option) - which was torpedoed within hours of the result being called. I know quite a few people who voted that way, and are livid that this option is not going to happen. Indeed, they are probably the most vocal and active campaigners against Brexit now.
Vote Leave also admitted that they couldn't win on facts, so had to make an emotional appeal. The £350m for the NHS was for a lot of people a vote clincher, and I still know people who believe it will happen - despite the fact even Vote Leave said it never promised that, and it won't happen.
The fact that the Leave campaigners couldn't distance themselves fast enough from the result speaks volumes. Indeed, the Davis/Fox/Johnson triumvirate was fascinating to see put in place: they really don't look too good these days, and know deep-down they are expendable when things go wrong. Davis's recent grilling by parliamentary committee was hilarious in highlighting just how clueless they are about all the issues, and how totally unprepared they were to enact what they've been pushing for years. Someone I know involved in planning for Brexit called it an "unmitigated disaster" recently, and I think we can all see why.
You didn't even bother with a half truth, you went with the old FLAT OUT LIE!
Why do you omit more than 50% of the populace who voted for Brexit?
You were saying?
Because the person DID omit more than 50% of the UK who voted Brexit, then came back and lied claiming it wasn't more than 50%. I prove them wrong, which in Slashdot's SJW moderators find to be "flamebait" instead of what it should be. Which is called "informative". The facts were provided from a Left leaning site called the BBC, not Alex Jones.
If the truth hurts, too fucking bad.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I don't think the Spanish government sees it that way. They worry that if the approve Scotland's inclusion in the EU, it will be interpreted as telling people it's ok to separate from your country, a precedent they don't want heard in Catalonia.
Unfortunately there's a good chance that Scotland wouldn't be allowed to join the EU, and not because it wouldn't be a good idea, but because humans are petty creatures. Of course that's also why Britain is leaving....
"which means they'd have to fulfill the current eligibility requirements"
And what makes you think they wouldn't? Shit, if some of the Eastern European countries managed to get in, I see no reason why Scotland could not join as a "normal" member without any special deals.
Russia funds several anti-EU far right parties in the EU.
"NOBODY will accept them into the EU"
You're a stupid English person in total denial of the situation, but don't worry, I've heard heaps of idiots repeating this tripe.
Of COURSE Scotland will be accepted into the EU, why on earth would you think otherwise?
And then there's the EU commission. They write legislation....The representatives don't write legislation, they get the civil service to do it.
I hate the fact that the UK is leaving the EU and I wish we were staying but your rosy picture of EU democracy is not really correct. The EU commission is not at all like a civil service because they propose legislation. Civil servants have to follow the will of their political masters they do not get to propose the laws themselves mainly because they are unelected like the commission.
The EU really needs a simplified, clearly democratic structure where the power lies with those elected at the European, not national, level and the UK should have remained in and argued for this. Sadly though the national governments know that if they did this the EU government would have enough democratic authority to directly challenge them which is the reason behind the overly complex, and democratically dubious, structure we currently have.
The ECSC was first proposed by French foreign minister Robert Schuman on 9 May 1950 as a way to prevent further war between France and Germany. He declared his aim was to "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible"
So, the main driver of the precursor of the EU was not just trade, but to "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible".
Which is why it was never implemented in that way, and nowhere in the EU's founding doctrine will you find this language. That unelected bureaucrats have thwarted the initial agreement is not a surprise. The same should be said for Countries like the Iceland and UK who pulled out of the agreement.
The only country seeing any benefit from the EU for the last decade has been Germany. Which is why Iceland was the first to pull out, the UK was the 2nd, France heavily favors an exit, and Greece Spain and Italy are all either bankrupt or on the verge and would probably pull out if they could.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
So far as I'm aware, Spain has made no such statement. It's position is considerably more nuanced:
http://www.politico.eu/article...
Essentially, it means Scotland won't be able to "remain" in the EU if it should secede during or around the time of Brexit, and that Spain might agree to "eventually" let Scotland in. In other words, it is in the Spanish government's best interests that Scotland spend some amount of time out in the cold, simply because Spain cannot afford to be seen to be rewarding any independence movement, lest it light a fire underneath Catalan independence.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
put real border control on the UK border.
They can rebuild Hadrian's Wall and make the Romans pay for it!
At least her dim-witted sibling didn't suggest "Denise" and "Danephew".
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Second to this, since when is it OK to force one country to subjugation and deny their entry to the EU, in the interest of morally supporting other countries that are forcing subjugation on other territories.
Fuck the UK, and fuck Spain: if Scotland or Catalonia vote to succeed then bloody well let them. If they then apply to the EU and meet those requirements, then let them join. Stop trying to dominate others, it's so last-century of you!
It isn't obvious at first glance, but pro-renewable policies are not only anti-nuclear, but anti-baseload energy. Baseload nuclear provides reliable clean energy over 90% of the time, and mandates for wind and solar force it to run at reduced capacity, and get off the grid whenever wind/solar are available. Conventional nuclear isn't economical when run this way, and inevitably it is replaced by inefficient natural gas turbines, which are responsive enough to fill in the (often large) gaps in renewable energy supply.
There will always be a need for peaking plants, but a renewable heavy grid will necessitate much greater peaking capacity and substantially higher ramp rates. Without ample storage, wind+solar+inefficient gas will emit even more CO2 than gas alone, where the bulk of energy can be produced by efficient combined cycle turbines.
Smart grids are a requirement created by the renewable "solution". The grid worked fine before, and couples well with both conventional generation and advanced nuclear, which can also load follow. Moreover, it doesn't need to be oversized for a much larger peak renewable capacity, leaving the grid largely underutilized most of the time. That only compounds the economic disaster of wind/solar/storage.
Wallonian independence???? HAHAHAHA. Right. On average Flanders subsidizes Wallonia to the tune of €2 per day.
It's the FLEMISH with an independence movement, and it's a minority. They're vocal, but a minority. And it won't happen because both Flanders and Wallonia need Brussels, a (practically) French speaking city situated within Flanders.
And from what I've heard the French speaking politicians say, they'd welcome Scotland into the EU.
For Spain, you might have a point; I don't know.
I guess the difference is that the UK is already made up of different countries. Scotland is a country, not just a region or something. And it used to be an independent country too.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
1) "Could" and "should" are two very different concepts.
2) Are you saying that the US, or California, is an effective democracy?
Spain has explicitly stated that it will not veto the accession of Scotland. They said that they would prevent Scotland from being fast-tracked into the EU, i.e. circumventing the normal accession procedure - which, as EU officials have repeatedly stressed, is a legal impossibility in any case so it's basically a moot point.
See here
In general, people only "forget" that principle of a Westminster parliament when it happens when the opposing party is in power. I can't recall too many Labour members decrying the undemocratic nature of Gordon Brown becoming PM after Tony Blair stepped down. It's really just an impotent taunt.
As it is, I can't imagine too many sane Labour members wanting to have had a General Election any time in the last year, Brexit or no, since every poll indicates Labour would suffer pretty catastrophic losses, and the last two byelections at Stoke and Copeland demonstrated that. Labour clung on in Stoke, but lost Copeland, a seat it has held since before the Second World War. Only the delusional Momentum types seem to be under any kind of illusion that a GE held right now wouldn't leave Labour even weaker. Like it or not, the majority of British voters may not like the Conservatives (and shouldn't, since Brexit really is the culmination of a forty year civil war among the Tories), they simply do not see anyone else as a reasonable alternative.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Whoops, sorry. I should have said they're sick of the English.
Also, won't Scots always be "Brits", no matter what? Scotland will always be part of both "Great Britain" (an island) and "the British Isles" (the group of islands which includes GB). Or is "Brit" in this context a demonym only for a citizen of the UK?
Naming in the British Isles is really, really confusing. (For example, is "Ireland" a country, or an island? It's both! And they're not the same, because the statement "Northern Ireland is part of Ireland" is simultaneously true and false.)
I wonder why someone modded your original post down a point?
Seemed like a "Funny" to me. Some people just cannot take a joke. Too much caffeine, I guess.
Two world wars were fought because Europe was controlled by a group of international globalists who made backrooms deals to parse out the world between themselves. They were the first international wars because for the first time in history it was not nations fighting but international interests and power blocks.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
My observations as an American:
1) When we had random conversations with people we met, they all asked me what I thought of Brexit. Regardless of what I told them (which was neither supportive nor critical), to a person they were all Brexit supporters.
2) The presence of immigrants was very apparent after arriving. The tube car from Heathrow was half Indian subcontinent or Arab, and the hotel (in Westminster, 3 blocks from Parliament) was staffed almost exclusively by Eastern Europeans.
My sense is that the immigrant population combined with economic stagnation of middle and lower classes has crossed some psychological tipping point for a lot of people. I think if the middle class was booming there would be a lot less support for Brexit.
That was just the foreign minister, Alfonso Dastis. He doesn't really have a say. What he said is just bluster, because there isn't even a queue to join. It doesn't work that way, you join when you are ready and the order of application has historically made no difference on the order of joining.
It is up to the EU, and the EU has indicated it would welcome Scotland on multiple occasions. At the end of the process there would be a vote requiring all 27 members to agree, but it is unlikely that Spain would veto it at that point. It would only serve to bring the weight of Germany and other states down on it, and achieve nothing. In fact, it might harm its chances of getting some control of Gibraltar.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
So the UK was treated very fairly, after all. Now what was the problem again?
Isn't that like saying because somebody found a discarded Star Bucks
Like a Rooski spy such as yourself that cannot even spell "Starbucks" does not already know there are Starbucks in Russia...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm not even going to entertain theories about internationalist globalists conspiracies from someone who can't even get basic historical facts straight.
The allied city-states of ancient Greece weren't nearly as stable as current democracies. Most Polis' merely had some tens to hundred thousands of people and yet they constantly ended up in wars and so on. Most of these Polis' were very rigid internally and had very random attitudes towards others; without any particular methods for improvement built into their politics. All of which are very bad.
I personally believe that you cannot actually really ignore neighboring states and do halfway whatever your Polis wants this month. You're better off formalizing what you can and cannot do in an union or federal nation, and only very deliberately manipulate aspects of these agreements.
I think it is best that we take a more modern "union/federal" approach like in Switzerland or even the EU or USA and work on improving the underlying mechanics in an academic - scientific way.
But there are many improvements possible. For instance, the whole situation with garbage in - garbage out for information: Have we really done all for democracy in terms of providing voters and their representatives with documentation for voting topics that would be as good or better as those major business deals are decided on? [I don't mind if multiple entities provide the documentation, but there should be consequences for not being reasonably correct and not making corrections to mistakes quickly.] Do our representatives or we ourselves really have enough time to parse and understand that information?
And with regards to "proper" representation, have we really optimized the whole situation with directly voting vs. delegating votes? Why can't I actually vote directly on some issues I care about? Why can't I delegate my vote share to a specific person on a certain issue?
I realise you mean "English" for "Brits". However, I think it inaccurate to think of either "Scots" or "English" as some homogeneous entity. England may have voted in total to leave the EU, but many English (like yours truly) voted to remain. On the other hand, Scotland may have voted to remain in the EU, but many Scots voted to leave.
To be honest, if Scotland gets another referendum, it's not going to be an overwhelming majority whatever way they vote, which means that it, like the UK, is likely to remain divided.
(I know a number of Scots, who vary from those extremely passionate about Scottish independence, to those equally as passionate about remaining in the UK).
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
True, it is is usually the opposition that uses it at any given time, but why would supporters in power do so? The situation was pretty much reversed from Blair/Brown when it was Thatcher/Major or Cameron/May for instance. Agreed on Labour's chances in a GE though; if nothing else Corbyn has shown some serious issues with the way Labour elects its leaders; when the party members, MPs and unions are not in agreement, the only winners are going to be the other parties, with the LibDems, SNP, and Plaid Cymru most likely to be the main benefactors.
That also probably explains a lot of Theresa May's haste with Brexit and her "good deal or out by default" stance though, despite even Leave saying that defaulting to WTO would be an unmitigated disaster until such time as trade deals could be sorted out - and who knows how long that might take in practice? With Labour on the ropes and the LibDems supposedly planning on running on a Remain manifesto should they get a chance in a GE, she has to close the deal before the next GE or there's a potential that enough people who might want to Remain (either because they have done all along, or because they have reconsidered their choice) deciding that's worth a four year punt on what would most likely end up being a LibDem led coalition to achieve. Not very likely at present, I'll grant you, but who knows what state the UK and EU economies might be in by the time the next GE rolls around?
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Leaving the EU will not be the end of the world. Look at the closest countries that are not members either: Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Canada. All of them are quite livable places.
One quote from this article;
On 12 September 2015, the British government unveiled a Mau Mau memorial statue in Nairobi's Uhuru Park that it had funded "as a symbol of reconciliation between the British government, the Mau Mau, and all those who suffered". This followed a June 2013 decision by Britain to compensate more than 5,000 Kenyans it tortured and abused during the Mau Mau insurgency.
You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - Blake
I agree that the GE is a major push for getting Brexit completed by 2019. It's optimal, as it means the full effects, whatever they may be, won't be felt until after the 2020 election. But remember, the Tories' have their "bastards" (as John Major so infamously and yet aptly called them), the strong contingent of Eurosceptics in the Conservative Party, and while at the moment May has the chief bastards close to her (except Michael Gove, who is now sitting in a richly-earned political version of the Gulag), she has to stick to the timeline they want as well, lest the current sense of unity among the various Tory factions unravel.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Spain is not going to get Gibraltar back. There is no way that a sitting Tory Prime Minister would ever alter or abrogate the Treaty of Utrecht. Not going to happen, and it is of sufficiently small importance to the EU (technically Gibraltar isn't even part of the EU, or at least the customs union) that I can't imagine Germany even concerning itself with it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
No, the UK didn't get a "66% refund". You haven't read your own link properly.
The UK has been the second biggest net contributor to the EU after Germany for several years - net contributions being (amount being put into the EU) - (amount being taken out of the EU).
How can Britain be getting 2/3 off and still paying more money than every other country bar Germany? Sorry, your comment doesn't stand up to basic scrutiny.
Russia, along with random fascists.
To make all countries vicious hate-filled messes that violently oppress random groups of people, especially migrants and the poor. Because if Russia can't have a functioning government, they might as well try to eliminate those that do exist.
Ditto with fascists, who are still upset they aren't allowed to murder people who aren't white at will.
Sounds like the "remain" people should move to Scotland, and the "leave" people should move to England.
It's likely that the EU would fast track Scotland in, maybe even avoid them leaving if Sturgeon managed to get a referendum on her timetable.
Says who? Spain, for one, will do everything they can to make sure Scotland never joins.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
So you're saying the virile (what?) expansionist tyrant isn't going to take away your freedom?
Which is why it's imperative for Scotland to secede from the UK before the actual "Brexit", so they can claim to already be a member.
This decision is reversible, no matter what Theresa May says. Whatever can be undone can be redone. Her point of view is that of a politician handling a controversial file and so she has to build and maintain support for this course of action. Therefore her message is 'no turning back' because if turning back is going to be done, then why Brexit in the first place? And merely to suggest that undoing Brexit is possible opens that whole can of worms.
I do not take the position that Brexit should be undone. That is a matter for future British voters and politicians.
What I do say is, maybe the EU could use some changes? Not destruction, not that. However the EU is notably bureaucratic and clumsy. Possibly some differing allocation of powers might be helpful, and I include in that both greater and lesser centralization, depending on the issue. Sometimes a crisis helps clarify issues and focus minds.
Remember that prior to the PIGS financial crisis, it wasn't even clear that the EU Central Bank would defend the Euro. It took that crisis to establish the backbone of the EU Central Bank. It wasn't a matter that you'd think would be left open to interpretation or undecided until a crisis point, but it was.
I guess the difference is that the UK is already made up of different countries. Scotland is a country, not just a region or something. And it used to be an independent country too.
Yugoslavia was before it's break-up a full-fledged federation, unlike the UK. Also, Serbia and Montenegro were independent countries just before Yugoslavia was created, as were Croatia and Bosnia, although much earlier (back in the Middle Ages). The difference between the UK and Yugoslavia was just that the UK was created a lot earlier and has lasted for a lot longer, building up a "British" identity. Also, the UK has generally been a successful country. Yugoslavia, in the end, was not.
Heh. There was some article from The Onion that I can't find now, that talked about how the Balkans were continuing to subdivide into independent nations to the point that nearly every man, woman, and child was their own country. The represented the "nations" by halftoning a map of Yugoslavia.
Never thought I'd see the same thing happen to the UK.
The Onion was not being very original there. Just before Yugoslavia broke up, a famous satirical show from Sarajevo (Bosnia) called "The Surrealists' Top Chart" (Top lista nadrealista) had an episode in which every street in the city proclaimed itself its own republic, erecting fences and border guards and everything. They also had an episode in which every constituent part of Yugoslavia declared its own separate language and denied that they were speaking a common one (called Serbo-Croatian back then), making fun of the idea that phrases that sound exactly the same could be made by decree into "completely different and distinct" languages. That part actually came true (today we have Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin).
Defending the EU (or should I say only France?) is not a problem at all till France has nuclear weapons.
Spending money on big military is such a waste. Just spend some money for a few ICBMs with MIRVs carrying goods size nuclear warheads. Plus some minimal personnel guarding, maintaining, aiming, and firing them. No need for a big military for defence purposes.
>> Without Scotland, there is no UK.
Of course there is. England, Northern Ireland and Wales won't suddenly cease to exist. The UK just wouldn't by definition include Scotland any more. The reality is that England is the UK's financial engine, and England has been financially supporting Scotland since at least 1707.
The idea of Scotland gaining independence is like saying a person with no other income has just decided to be voluntarily independent from welfare.
If Scotland got independence they would financially become a 3rd world country overnight as their economy is based on only a few significant export industries. Oil is the biggest but independence means they'd lose its revenue since an independent Scotland wouldn't own or control North Sea oil or gas, or even still be able to use the Pound or Euro. All that has already been decided.
After independence, their main export would be food/drink(whisky) (£4.25 billion/year) then legal, accounting, management, architecture, engineering, technical testing and analysis activities (collectively, £2.3 billion), their total exports (includes other stuff like textiles and farming) would be an estimated £48.5 billion which isn;t sufficient for what they as a country need to survive independently.
Yeah I gave up wondering about why various moderation actions were chosen over a decade ago.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Maybe it is not completely ruled out that Scotland can break away from UK and later join EU.
Czechoslovakia did split into Czech Republic and Slovak Republic and later they both joined EU.
That seems very muddy calling it a different country post-1707 given the wording of the Acts of Union that established the Kingdom of Great Britain. It is even a bit muddy post-1607 with the single individual as hereditary monarch of both. It's been over 300 years since this union was established, and it's not like Scottish people remained only in the North and English or Welsh people remained only in the South.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Theres also a middle east version of same story on theonion
Good on invoking Article 50! The EU is nothing but a NWO SLAVE "state". There is ZERO good that has come from the EU! It only enslaved the countries that joined it! DEATH to the EU! Only scumbag GLOBALISTS think the EU is a good thing! These "union" states are a BAD thing for mankind!
The Truth is a Virus!!!
depends if they still had to fund that parasitic queen of theirs
I wish them all the luck in the world and don't blame them in the god damned slightest.
So why are the non-democratically elected European Commission civil servants the one's who are allowed to propose the laws, and not the democratically elected European Parliament? The European Parliament is only allowed to vote on these laws and not propose their own. I think this stinks quite frankly.
The heads of state and the members of the European Parliament are the only ones directly elected by their citizens and I personally have a problem with this. The EU Commission and the president of the EU parliament are - I guess I'll call them - second order "elections". A hierarchy. And these are the people who get the most power to propose laws and direct things.
I don't know if that looks to you, but it certainly looks to me like a way of making things more "manageable" for a fewer people to get their own way and having the common folk another "step away" from the decision making process.
I'm living in Vietnam. Now I'm not saying it's as bad as here, but they have a hierarchical system here too. A particular region votes for a representative, and that representative votes on behalf of the people for the next level up in the chain of power. So of course, these people are the ones who drive around in nice cars and have nice things happen around election time.
I know it's asking a lot but...Maybe read the REST of my post?
The part where it says for Scotland to be admitted, the admission must be unanimous, and there's NOT A CHANCE IN HELL that the many EU countries who have their own separatist nationalist movements will invite in Scottish irredentists.
I'll even give you the link...again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And I'm American. I don't honestly give a flying fuck what happens to Scotland.
-Styopa
er that was the 1600s it hasn't changed since then really
British citizens living overseas weren't allowed to vote.
These people are arguably the most affected by this decision.
There's more British citizens living in other EU countries than the margin of the win in the vote.
West Midlands and Greater Manchester have no control over the UK.
Well, it's true that the original Paneuropa by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi didn't include Britain... Then again, it DID include half of Africa, as well as wacky ideas about racial mixing to make Europeans look like the Egyptians of old, so I guess we're right on track on that one.
I think everybody knew the UK was doing it wrong long before they elected to leave the EU.
None of that ever happened. Let's stick to things that actually happened if you want to make a point.
And why did we get the 66% rebate?
Because the UK was not willing to pay its fair share and threatened to leave.
In practice, joining the Euro can be delayed indefinitely. This is why Sweden still uses the Krona. Border control can probably be negotiated on a practicality basis.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum. Without Scotland, there is no UK. Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
Well it would get interesting as the EU doesn't let new entrants in on legacy deals. It's the euro, Schengen, full package if Scotland wants to rejoin. Which would mean they'd have to leave the pound and put real border control on the UK border.
And that would be an issue because... You already find it difficult to use English pounds in Scotland as most stores only accept Scottish Pounds. This is entirely to do with giving a 2 fingered salute to England. So accepting the Euro wont be much of an issue.
Border control with the South... Ya can bet ya wee fanny that's acceptable. Hell, I'd be surprised if the Scots don't push the English back to Hadrian's wall and keep those English oot.
Meanwhile England will be losing the population of Scotland, the backbone of it's armed forces, the picturesque highlands, the wealth of the North Sea and Brewdog.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Why would they have a problem with these terms? It looks like the Scots are pretty sick of the Brits and their nonsense at this point.
The Scots are Brits.
How can Britain be getting 2/3 off and still paying more money than every other country bar Germany?
Because it's one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and currently the fifth largest economy. Also you're not "paying more money than every country bar Germany". In one measure you're third, but correcting for GNI you're in ninth place, after Belgium, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, Luxenbourg, and frigging Italy. The latest of which has an economy in shit state.
So you're only paying a large sum, in absolute terms because you're a large country. One would expect a large country to pay more. Corrected for the size of you're economy, you're not in the top five, and just barely squeeze in the top ten.
And yes, the UK rebate is a thing. Most definitely.
Stefan Axelsson
You forgot to mention the Council of Ministers, where the (elected) ministers of the member states are gathered per policy domain, and where most EU legislation ultimately arises -- in a sense, the most powerful body within the EU.
She never let in 2 million syrians some of whom turned around and raped women in the streets on new year's? Wow, you need to stop getting your news from ISIS and and the South Sudan free press.
Except that they have no way into the EU. The second they leave Britain, their economy will be in the toilet, and will not qualify for EU membership.
its not nearly as bad as the UK's or US's government.
Even better, those Romans already paid for that wall!
Spain has already gone on record saying they have no problem with an independent Scotland joining the EU. What they don't want, is for Scotland to become automatic EU member upon independence from the UK.
Sometimes the kitchen sink blocks. And there's a door in the corridor that won't stay shut and I bump into it during the night.
So I think I'll burn the house down and go and live under a bridge. Who knows, in ten years I might find a better house.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."