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.
Scotland just voted to have a post-Brexit independence referendum.
Without Scotland, there is no UK.
Just the greater Welsh Hegemony.
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
Airstrip One was always part of Oceania, not Eurasia.
UK out of the EU....Ireland in....what to do, what to do?
Finding God in a Dog
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.
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.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-nor...
Scotland is definitely leaving the EU along with UK. If they vote for independence, they could reapply to the EU. But this is far from automatic, since there are other EU members that are struggling to discourage their own secessionists.
http://www.politico.eu/article...
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...
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.
Ironically, Canada just concluded CETA a free trade agreement with the EU and so Brexited UK will have no more than normal WTO trade status with Canada (which is what they'll start with after Brexit for all of those other nations you called out until they can negotiate some other agreements).
But had the UK stayed in EU, they would have had a premium trade arrangement with Canada they won't get now.
Even though Canada's head of state resides in UK. How is that for ironic?
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
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'
In other words Brexit will not affect how many refugees we are able, required and choose to take.
It might. The French might decide they don't want a foreign border on their soil and stop preventing people trying to cross the channel.
They are already reneging on the immigration promises anyway. They also promised to make it easier for people form outside the EU to come to the UK, especially spouses and other family members, but of course that was just a lie.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
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.
France has a better nuclear deterrent than the UK. It also has a better navy, since the UK is going to be without an aircraft carrier for many years.
The EU can look after itself.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC