6 ms·
Petition for London independence signed by thousands after Brexit vote
- Zenst 10y agoI live in London, this is silly and seeing so many remain/pro-eu people chuck toys out of prams and be frankly akin to upset children being told no you can not stay up past 9pm as it is a school night, play out in many forms. Still, more people voted to leave the EU than voted for the current government, so can see how some things are viewed by the loosing side and some people sore losers would be putting it mildly.
- ChrisClark 10y agoI'd be seriously upset if my country voted to destroy itself too. Luckily we're doing pretty good in Canada.
- no_wave 10y agoYeah, I even heard there's a little land in Vancouver that's still owned by Canadians
- SuddsMcDuff 10y agoaaaaaaand it's gone. For 25 million. To a Chinese tycoon.
- codys 10y agoA vote to leave EU is hardly a vote to destroy itself. Saying it is is blatant fear-mongering.
- trelltron 10y agoClearly you haven't been paying attention
- Analemma_ 10y agoExplain to me why London's clearly expressed democratic desire to stay is less valid than the overall nation's vote to leave (especially when the margin in London was much larger than for the nation overall). This is the problem with direct referendums, and why this Brexit vote should never have happened: as soon as you say that "we need direct democracy so the people can have a voice", smaller geographic areas which hold the opposite view have equally valid claims. (EDIT: a lot of my replies seem to be missing the point. I mean why is London's desire less valid philosophically, not legally. Obviously London could not legally depart without a vote in Parliament, but if Londoners clearly express their desire to leave the UK and the UK doesn't let them, well, that seems awfully antithetical to the direct democracy that the Brexiters say they want)
- mac01021 10y agoI'm not sure this has any impact on the validity of the desire, but it sounds like a border-control nightmare.
- robotresearcher 10y agoBecause London isn't a sovereign nation.
- lmm 10y agoNor is Scotland or Northern Ireland, but they're talking about independence.
- robotresearcher 10y agoThese are completely different cases. Scotland has been its own traditional country for a very long time, and the union with England was formed when the King of Scotland became also King of England and not the other way around. Northern Ireland is the vestige of a brutal occupation of Ireland by England. The Catholic population traditionally loyal to Ireland now outnumbers the UK-supporting Protestants. London has never been a country. This is obviously a protest demonstration and not a serious proposition.
- SandersAK 10y agoI think people are scared of the very real financial implications this will have on London. What interest does the EU have now in keeping the key finance entities in London now that Britain has made clear its not interested in controlling or actively participating in The EUROPE economy.
- alexchamberlain 10y agoI don't necessarily agree with the parent's sentiment; however, I agree with the observation that there seems to be more hysteria on the remain side, than celebration on the leave side.
- k-mcgrady 10y agoPossibly due to the fact that we can see the immediate negatives and nobody - not event he people who campaigned to leave - can honestly say they know what's going to happen in the long-term. There are things they hope will happen but there are no immediate benefits, only immediate harm.
- alexchamberlain 10y agoAgain, playing devil's advocate: what are the immediate downsides? We're still in the EU today, and will be for apparently 2 and half years. The currency movements are positive for as many people as they are negative. The share movement has taken us to last weeks level on the FTSE 100 (FTSE 250 is down on a week). Interesting impact on Euro and european stocks, which suffered worse than UK stocks. Again, I must emphasise I'm not making an opinion either way. Just pointing out there are statistics and opinions both ways.
- k-mcgrady 10y agoYes, bad losers that's it. It wouldn't anything to do with sterling dropping to incredibly low levels? Scotland and NI both calling for independence? Farage admitting on live TV that one of the major leave adverts was completely false? The fate of a country being decided by a public that is very uninformed and swayed, on both sides, by baseless propaganda?
- lettergram 10y agoYeah.. I don't see this happening.
- howlingfantods 10y agoIt seems like there's a large possibility that this will be the beginning of the dismantling of the UK. Scotland is likely to have a second independence referendum and Sinn Fein is calling for a referendum for Northern Ireland to unify with Ireland. London seceding, however, seems unlikely.
- nextos 10y agoI think Brexit supporters are not aware of the consequences of their vote. UK had a pretty good deal with EU. Now, securing a trade deal similar to that of Norway will require also accepting freedom of movement, whose termination was one of the main arguments used by Brexit campaigners. The science & tech sector is gonna get hit badly. Some of my British colleagues here in Cambridge are very upset and considering to move out. For young progressive people, it's pretty dramatic to see a big regression in your own country I guess. The Guardian is registering some of their opinions, and they are pretty heart-breaking: http://the75percent.tumblr.com/ http://the75percent.tumblr.com/ I imagine the finance sector, which fuels most London economy will get a big hit too. Also, I have a hard time understanding how Brexit voters, who have a vision of a strong UK, did not factor in a more than likely split-up with Scotland after this. Very disturbing. It seems overly easy to trick masses into acting irrationally.
- pinaceae 10y agoMorgan Stanley is moving 2000 employees/jobs to Dublin and Frankfurt, away from London. Announced today.
- alayne 10y agoDoesn't seem to be true: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-24/morgan-stanley-denies-report-it-started-moving-staff-from-london http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-24/morgan-sta...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- 10y ago
- TorKlingberg 10y agoNot going to happen, but I can see the sentiment. The Brexit vote was basically rural England telling London to shove it. "You wanted to be a cosmopolitan world city, but if us old people in the county don't like what we see, you can't have it." As an analogy, imagine if the people in California that voted for Proposition 8 got really upset about the Supreme Court overruling them, and didn't like all the non-native Californians immigrating to SF and LA, so they voted to secede.
- k__ 10y agoYes. That's a big problem in all countries.
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y agoSo basically, rural England has long felt "you threw us under a bus, why should we help you". Now the feeling is mutual.
- tajen 10y agoIf OP has a correct interpretation, that would be the best example of "why the richer must check that the poorer get a good part of the cake". Or why London should redistribute to rural England (or why Germany still funds the Greek economy).
- SideburnsOfDoom 10y ago> Or why London should redistribute to rural England "London should" ? I know several people (Londoners) who would retort "London reliably votes for Labour. If they were in power there would be more redistribution, rural people don't vote for their own best interests, fools, etc." You could argue that labour has been "neoliberal" and not very good at this lately; you cannot say that the Conservatives have been better.
- aphextron 10y agoI get that Brexit is an important topic. But can we keep politics out of HN? This place is the last bastion of sane, intelligent discourse I've found on the internet.
- mac01021 10y agoPolitics is a subject about which it is useful to have sane, intelligent discourse, no?
- davidw 10y agoSane, intelligent discourse and politics are not a stable combination. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6120530 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6120530
- aphextron 10y agoExactly. I fell in love with this site because it seems to have some kind of magical force field against the insanity that is internet discussion. I really hope that never changes.
- jaynos 10y agoI don't see it as politics. I see it as economics because that will be where the biggest impact is. I agree that HN is a bastion of sane, intelligent discourse and I've enjoyed reading "sane, intelligent" takes on Brexit from "sane, intelligent" people all over the world.
- CaptSpify 10y agoAlthough I disagree with you, I agree with your sentiment. Even smart people become silly when it comes to politics. I wish HN had a tagging/sub system where I could opt out of certain topics.
- lmm 10y agolobste.rs is a very similar site with such a system. Happy to send you an invite if you like.
- 100k 10y agoUK votes to leave EU. Scotland and London viving to leave UK to stay in EU. Anyone else feel like they're living in a Ken MacLeod novel?
- sp332 10y agoIt sounds like Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. Various corporations and residential enclaves carve out tiny sovereign chunks of the landscape and negotiate trade and travel between themselves.
- 100k 10y agoYeah. In The Star Faction, the UK has devolved into a bunch of autonomous microstates, which the government in exile is trying to reunite.
- draw_down 10y agoLeaving the EU is bad, but leaving the UK would be good. Alright.
- sildur 10y agoRemaining in the EU is bad, but remaining in the UK would be good. Alright.
- known 10y agoAn Independent Nation should not have more than 2 million citizens https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_interdependence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_interdependence
- andy_ppp 10y agoI would actually be in favour of this but we'll almost certainly not get the choice. Much like the London Mayoral Election it would probably include European Union Citizens in the vote to leave England so I'd say it has a fairly good chance of passing should Sadiq Khan decide a vote were sensible. As another commenter said, there is no sensible way to organise society through direct democracy because of bad decision making on behalf of the electorate, but once pandoras box is opened it becomes hard to say no.
- redtuesday 10y agoI actually like the direct democracy system switzerland has. A poster on neogaf made a good comment about it: "As a Swiss citizen and, thus, a strong believer in the merits of direct democracy, I have to respectfully disagree :-) Elements of direct democracy can work very well, 'if' (and that's a pretty significant if) there are appropriate institutional safeguards in place and there is an actual lived culture of regular direct democratic political participation (as in Switzerland where we vote four times a year on numerous important and less important issues both on the communal, the state and the federal level). However, calling one-off referendums on momentous issues that severely affect the course of an entire nation in a representative democracy is, indeed, bullshit if you ask me. I mean, we're seeing the results right now. [1] Several things in fact: - We have proportional representation, which insures that the constitution of our parliament actually reflects the will of the voting populace (but that's true of most representative democracies as well, of course; I know that the UK with its FPtP system is a special case in that regard). - There is no oppositional party system. No party has an absolute majority in parliament (as in the UK) and there are also no formal coalitions among parties (as, for example, in Germany). Individual bills are drafted and passed as a result of compromises among several parties. - Same goes for the executive branch. Our government is a directorate of seven ministers elected from the country's four largest parties. We don't have a PM calling the shots and setting the agenda, but a committee of politicians with different ideas and ideologies being bound to constructively work together and compromise to actually get things done. - All this means that bills passing through parliament are usually rather moderate compromises that already have the support of several parties. Swiss parliament procedures are usually very slow because of that whole "finding compromises" thing, but it also means less "scattershot politics". When a bill passes, it usually means that it's here to stay and won't be rescinded by a different government just a few years down the line. - Furthermore, politicians are fully aware that controversial bills will ultimately have to pass a people's referendum. This means that they tend not to come up with proposals that go too far or are too radical, because radical (far-left or far-right) bills usually don't stand a chance in a referendum. - With regards to people's initiatives, they're quite rare to actually pass, because you don't just have to carry the majority of the voting populace but of the Cantons (states) as well. - Also, people's initiatives can only be proposed on a constitutional level. That means that if an initiative passes, it is up to the government and/or parliament to actually implement this and come up with the actual laws. Usually, this means that radical proposals put forward through people's initiatives are, if they actually manage to pass a vote, toned down significantly the parliamentary procedure that follows. That's just a very rough outline of what I meant by "institutional safeguards". I'm not saying that it's perfect (nothing is), but considering the sheer amount of issues that we have the privilege to vote on each year, I think it's safe to say that the system works out very well in >90% of the cases. As I said, however, all of this is deeply ingrained in the structure and everyday reality of our political system, so it's a different beast to a purely representative democracy doing a one-off referendum on a momentous issue." [2] [1] http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=208220412&postcount=4315 http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=208220412&postcou... [2] http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=208223523&postcount=4625 http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=208223523&postcou...
- carsongross 10y agoI have absolutely no problem with this idea. Europe once had free cities. Why not again?
- gardano 10y agoThat was my first thought too. A return to nation-states a la ancient Greece.
- sjclemmy 10y agoThe problem with England / Britain / UK is representation. Every time we make any big political decision 50% of the electorate is marginalised and ignored for 5 years. We need a better system, one where representation is proportional.
- k__ 10y agoIn other countries too. I live in a big city in Germany and most of the people in rural areas of my state vote conservative, only the people in big cities vote liberal. It already feels like the cities are different than the rest of the country.
- lucozade 10y agoI'm not sure I follow. We've just had a very proportional vote (assuming you're over 18 and not in prison). 48% just got marginalised for somewhat longer than 5 years. What would a proportional general elections have helped with other than making Nigel Farage deputy prime minister?
- sjclemmy 10y agoPR doesn't work for binary questions, it works for electoral representation. Referendums are a blunt instrument. In the general election the winner takes all and the losers are marginalised. Big majorities in first past the post are bad for democracy. If there was a decision making process that took into account all who voted we might have a more engaged electorate.
- jerf 10y ago"We need a better system, one where representation is proportional." Well, keep seceding from things and you'll get there. Back in the 1990s, a lot of technoutopians thought that in the future, polities would tend to break into smaller pieces naturally. Computers would tend to reduce the scales necessary to make services work, by lowering the number of administrative personnel needed. Big government has had a pretty good run in the past 20 years and people forgot about the idea, but maybe that was just a big government bubble. Silicon Valley makes a lot of money on disintermediation. Who's to say government itself isn't something that can and should be disintermediated? I think people subconsciously assume that if the system holds together, their side will naturally win out, due to sheer rightness. (And won't it be fun to rub your power in the loser's face?) One of the things Brexit ought to be doing to a lot of HN posters here is reminding them quite concretely that that is not true. You may just bind everything and everybody into one big polity, only for it at the last moment to be taken over by the very people you didn't like. It's all fun and games to increase Federal power and jurisdiction over a lot of life to show those racist everything-phobic bumpkins in the flyover states how they are supposed to live life... then you wake up one day and the entire apparatus is at Trump's fingertips. Maybe building that big apparatus wasn't as good an idea as it seemed at the time. Maybe we'd all be better off leaving each other alone a bit more.
- davidw 10y agoYou guys got your politics thread, can we drop it now?
- return0 10y agoThe best case for UK unity is to join the US.
- k__ 10y agolol, wat, should the UK send their unemployed to the US, so they build "the wall" for them? ;)
- BuckRogers 10y agoThe UK move is interesting. On London, of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system. They're doing well under it all. But what's done is done. From what I can see, the real focus should have been, long ago, making sure ALL of Britain was doing well. Not just London. That ship has sailed and now the UK will have to come together and ensure mutual prosperity or risk further divide. On Scotland, it seems to me that Scotland already got their vote. I can't see the UK allowing another one. There may be a SNP staged vote, but it won't have any teeth without it coming from Downing St. So I'm dismissive of the Scottish indie idea at this point. It just didn't pan out. Anyone who wants that, needs to at minimum, wait until oil prices rise again. But I don't see any of it happening. Scotland's chance may have already been spent but Northern Ireland is in the best position of anyone. They're in the best position of all the UK 'principalities' to barter the best economic deal between either the UK or Ireland/EU. They can basically become the New Scotland and do what Scotland was doing, pre-Scottish independence vote. The SNP made a big mistake pushing for their vote before the EU-UK referendum. I expect Wales and England (outside of London) are pretty content with the outcome of the vote. They had the most to gain. Though I don't think NI and Scotland are going to lose economic power with an independent UK, if they don't start revolting. Interesting how it all turned out, because this time London was in agreement with the UK states on the periphery. It was Wales and England who wanted out, and I think this was rational and the right move from a working man's standpoint. The EU from what I've seen (I've lived and worked in the EU) is mostly beneficial the elites and people doing well. Most of my friends in France and other EU countries curse the EU a bit. It's not just the Brits who are upset with the undemocratic system the EU put into place or the policies. I watched all the Scottish independence debates with Alex Salmond vs Alistair Darling and was letdown by Salmond's general performance. Also recently watched the Brexit 'documentary' and was not impressed with the arguments put in place there. Especially the comparison to Switzerland which is the wrong example, for many reasons that I won't go into here. The UK may become a Norway of sorts but not a Switzerland. Honestly, not sure I'd want to become a Switzerland given how they make a lot of their money.
- lucozade 10y ago> The UK move is interesting Completely with you up to this point. > On Scotland, it seems to me that Scotland already got their vote 100% agree. If we hadn't just voted to leave the EU. There is every chance that a second referendum will have a significant backing in Scotland now. The last one died mostly from an economic argument. We've just royally blown that as the line "England can't be trusted with the economy" will have more than enough evidence regardless of the oil price. My guess is that it'll all come down to the EU's reaction. In the first ref they were against a break up so they said it would be difficult to re-join. If they spin that around and welcome Scotland, which is a very real possibility, then I think they'll go independent. > Northern Ireland is in the best position of anyone Indeed. But they'll not be a New Scotland. Scotland's pretty prosperous nowadays. NI not so much. But the EU is good at throwing cash at small nations so if they vote to leave the UK, and can stay in the EU, they'll be fine. Well, assuming that it doesn't re-ignite the Troubles, of course, which is a not insignificant risk if there's a strong push for a united Ireland. > I expect Wales and England ... had the most to gain Really? What I don't get is why the rural parts of England voted out. Westminster really couldn't give a shit about them. As far as I can tell, the whole economies of East Anglia and Wales are based on EU subsidies. I could understand (though not agree with) an immigration argument for cities but they all voted to stay except Birmingham. > The UK may become a Norway I sincerely hope not. It's got a much smaller economy that's really quite reliant on oil (though they're working on that). Fortunately we have a fairly large economy although it's centred on services so it's going to get a pummeling for a while. Hopefully we'll only regress about 5 years and not take a lot more than 10 years to make it back up. > of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system This'll be me in case it wasn't clear from the rant. What's not massively clear though is, while a lot of England and Wales was doing badly in the EU, what is it about leaving that will turn, say Doncaster, into Croesusville?
- smoyer 10y ago"We need to break free of the dead weight" You also need to look at how they became dead weight and why they feel differently - I'm going to project a bit but I'm guessing they'd say that Londoners were out of touch with the rest of the country. It's a shame that the ruling elites have become so good at disenfranchising their constituents. Let's take the idea of an independent London to a humorous conclusion. I'm imagining the rest of the country building a "Trump Wall" around London to keep the undesirable elitists contained in their fancy playground. Then heavy tariffs on imports and exports on trade. Those who live outside London but provide the rudimentary services will dramatically increase their prices (you still can't make due in London without four maids and a cook!) which will, combined with tarriffs/taxes levied by the non-Londoners will improve the GDP of the rest of the country dramatically. So in the end, those who voted to leave the EU because they weren't benefiting from the economy between the UK and the EU will start benefiting - the Londoners will have no choice but to share. And that's all the proletariat wanted to begin with.
- Anderkent 10y ago> Those who live outside London but provide the rudimentary services will dramatically increase their prices (you still can't make due in London without four maids and a cook!) You what? Okay, first of all, define the area of london. I think if London seceded pretty much every satellite town that mostly lives from business with London would go with it. So hopefully people who work in london wouldn't have to go through the wall. London is already responsible for a huge portion of the taxes that UK collects; if the mechanism of collection is changed to tarriffs instead it would hardly matter. And the rest of the UK would still ahve to compete with the EU providers in that, so they couldn't be that prescriptive. (Assuming of course london gets to keep its airports) Those who voted leave weren't voting for economical reasons; they were voting out of protest, against their own interest.
- pskocik 10y agoTechnology may well bring about a collapse of democracy as we know it. No longer are the mediocre and the below mediocre insulated from actual decision making for reasons of impracticability. In this day and age, letting everyone vote o anything is quite realistic and as democratic as it gets.
- billyjobob 10y agoGo ahead London, become independent. The City makes more profit than the rest of the country, so you don't need them, do you? Then see how much the UK starts charging you for the food/water/power/transport/infrastructure it provides that you rely on to exist.
- k__ 10y agoThey could probably migrate much of this by becoming a tax-haven.
- nikolay 10y agoAnd rename it to New Pakistan?
- alansmitheebk 10y agoWhat the hell is wrong with you people? Stop behaving like petulant children. This isn't just a protest vote. It has real consequences. Even if you don't care that you are fucking up your own economy can you at least be mindful that your stupidity is fucking up the global economy? I thought we Americans were the dumb dumbs...