4 ms·

With every area save England flatly stating that they would rather leave Britain than leave the EU, I think the consequences of this move are highly exaggerated

by s_q_b 10y ago

With every area save England flatly stating that they would rather leave Britain than leave the EU, I think the consequences of this move are highly exaggerated. First, there is a real possibility that Britiain will not exit the EU at all. The referendum is actually non-binding in a legal sense. Parliament could vote to suspend it tomorrow. Another referendum could be held. The Privy Council could even intervene on its own authority. Second, Britain has yet to invoke Article 50 of the EU charter, which would formally begin the separation process. Despite the insistent (and foolish) efforts of the French and German governments for Britain to invoke Article 50 immediately, they have not done so, and thus remain an EU member in good standing. Third, there is a substantial body of evidence that a large portion of the "Leave" voters had no idea the consequences of their actions. The areas that have gathered, or will have gathered by week's end, as many signatures as the original Leave petition include; Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, and London. In short, almost all of the U.K., save rural and smaller cities in England proper. Northern Ireland is even holding talks with the Republic of Ireland to unite the island. Protest Northern Ireland frantically scrambling to join the Catholic Republic of Ireland, and receiving a tepid response, is something I never thought I would see in my lifetime. The nation of Britain is disintegrating into its constituent parts. Great Britain may never leave because there simply may not be a Great Britain any more. Finally, Britain's elite are already seeking to mitigate the effects of the referendum. Even if they hold their country together successfully, Britain will almost certainly seek a treaty to retain their economic rights while gaining some control over their immigration process. Let's not start burning the furniture yet. Britain was independent for most of the post-War period. The current panic may be merely the flip side of irrational exuberance.

euroclydon 10y ago
UK just raised the bet chasing a straight. The best course for their politicians is to present a united front, show strength and resolution in the people's decision, which is what I think Cameron is doing. Displaying public indecision is the worst thing they can do for their bargaining position. They need to hold out and hope other EU members have similar referendum results. Then, they'll be on the right side of this thing, and all the EU countries can begin to move forward on a renegotiated regime. A Trump win in November, or even the prospect of it, helps the UK now. The problem with this idea of an Anglo trade and defense block with US, UK, Canada and Australia though, is the US is not Anglo enough any more and Canada's PM is French and liberal. So they have to talk about freedom from regulations and such, and hope enough non-anglos buy in. It seems like the narrowest of paths to me. The US and their currency will remain strong only through immigration and decent birth rates. Closing the borders just won't work.
EGreg 10y ago
That's right. I wouldn't be so worried about the EU as I am about the UK, which wouldn't be so united any more. On decentralization: http://magarshak.com/blog http://magarshak.com/blog
- iofj 10y ago
  The EU did to Greece what it did because it was feared that the bankruptcy of the least member of the EU would topple German banks into bankruptcy. That non-payment on 1.3% of total government debt would cause a disaster. Now the second-biggest economy is leaving the EU, with unknown implications for lots of financial instruments ... There is at least a serious case to be made that this could be bad.
mbrd 10y ago
> Northern Ireland is even holding talks with the Republic of Ireland to unite the island. Protest Northern Ireland frantically scrambling to join the Catholic Republic of Ireland, and receiving a tepid response, is something I never thought I would see in my lifetime. Not true, see http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36621822 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36621822
- s_q_b 10y ago
  You have to understand the broader demensions of interaction between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, going back at least to the Anglo-Irish war, and perhaps back to the plantation of Ulster. Ireland is quite literally the first colony of the British. It only recently emerged from centuries of civil war, and the Protestant-Catholic conflict has abated within the past five years. For the topic of unification to even be seriously discussed is extraordinary, and without precedent. Forgive me if I don't believe a government funded news outlet, with a vested interest in the outcome, a deep cultural belief in Anglic superiority, that was so sure the U.K. independence vote would fail, when they discuss issues of Irish affairs. One could be forgiven for believing the government line at the moment. But if viewed through the eyes of Irish history, current events are clearly unprecedented. In Ireland, there are many people alive who remember the Troubles in vivid detail. For the Deputy Prime Minister, and more importantly several prominent Anglo-Protestant politicians, to even broach the subject is to risk reopening Pandora's box. Even now there are armed groups operating in the RoI with the explicit goal of finally driving the British from their lands. Even a cursory understanding of Irish history is sufficient to appreciate that the current discrete (and even public) communiques would be in the realm of fantasy even a few short years ago. The vast majority of the Northern Irish voted to remain in the E.U. With the loss of their British patrons, as the inevitable loss of Scotland unfolds, Protestants in Northern Ireland already know that the E.U. is their only assurance of security and insulation from the chaotic collapse of Britain.
  - blibble 10y ago
    the only people talking about it are Sinn Fein, and a united republican Ireland is the only reason they exist, so, surprise surprise, they're talking about the unification of Ireland
vegabook 10y ago
Small problem: the Europeans have had enough of Britains's perfidious ways and are not inclined to being patient. This pandoras box is therefore open for business and cannot easily be be rammed shut again.
- logingone 10y ago
  Would the EU not love to have the UK do a u-turn, showing the other potential EU leavers that leaving looks better than the reality?
  - mike-cardwell 10y ago
    If the UK stays in the EU despite this referendum result, then there will be significant civil unrest and it will lurch even further to the right. I doubt it would be in the benefit of the EU to have a member state who's population chose not to be in it, and yet are forced to stay in it. That is the sort of unrest that will spread across borders.
    - logingone 10y ago
      The member state chose not to be in it for long-known reasons. If the EU learns the concept of democracy from this, and entertains the idea of loosening its stubborn insistence that things set up in a way that has long been problematic and is now seriously damaging, they might dare to consider some flexibility and the idea of loose coupling. Edit (I forgot my point and finished too soon :) If the EU relaxed a little the departing member state may democratically u-turn.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - vegabook 10y ago
    Yes but there are powerful forces within Europe that always felt Britain was a ball and chain, especially in the latin bloc led by France. This is not going to be simple as they will insist that a rubicon has been crossed. Recall that Charles de Gaulle himself was against British involvement in continental Europe, considering it a trojan horse. Just recently and for a whole decade, for example, Britain was vocally pro Turkish accession to the EU, against Italy and France. Ironically the same issue was used by the Brexit campaign, feeding Britain's image as an opportunistic Judas. Distrust of Britain runs deep in the southern bloc. As such, with all these forces, this vote genuinely reshuffles the deck, in Europe itself, even if Britain now backtracks.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> With every area save England flatly stating that they would rather leave Britain than leave the EU That's wrong on several levels: (1) Wales, like England, voted Leave, (2) The referendum only covered leaving the EU, not relative preference for leaving the UK vs. leaving the EU, (3) While NI voted by majority to stay in the EU, the issue of leaving the UK vs. staying in the UK is one of recurring interest in NI, and every indication I've seen is that the majority that favors staying in the UK is larger and more solid than that that prefers staying in the EU. Sure, NI republicans are making a big deal of the Remain vote in NI, but NI republicans are not in the same position as Scottish nationalists. Of the four countries of the UK, the only one that seems to be more inclined to leave the UK than the EU is Scotland, which seems to have stayed last time it had an independence largely because of uncertainty over whether, if it left England, it would be able to smoothly join the EU. Brexit renders that consideration moot. > The referendum is actually non-binding in a legal sense. That's technically true (well, not entirely: it was legally binding as to the improved deal Britain had secured from the EU, which was expressly contingent on a Remain victory in the referendum. So, staying in the EU is already less attractive than it was before the vote -- when it was already not attractive enough for a majority of UK voters to want to stay.) > Parliament could vote to suspend it tomorrow. I'm not sure what that even means; the non-binding referendum already happened, and the action that would be needed to implement it (invoking article 50) is one of, as the sources I've seen have indicated, royal prerogative not dependent on Parliamentary action, so Parliament "suspending" the referendum or its would seem to be a meaningless symbolic act. > Northern Ireland is even holding talks with the Republic of Ireland to unite the island. No, its not. Sinn Fein has indicated that unification should be reopened as a topic based on the Remain vote in NI, but Ireland isn't interested, and neither (unsurprisingly) is the unionist-majority NI government. > Finally, Britain's elite are already seeking to mitigate the effects of the referendum. Even if they hold their country together successfully, Britain will almost certainly seek a treaty to retain their economic rights while gaining some control over their immigration process. Of course they'll seek to get all the benefits of EU membership without the bits they don't like. But its not really likely that they'll get that.

by s_q_b 10y ago

euroclydon 10y ago

UK just raised the bet chasing a straight. The best course for their politicians is to present a united front, show strength and resolution in the people's decision, which is what I think Cameron is doing. Displaying public indecision is the worst thing they can do for their bargaining position. They need to hold out and hope other EU members have similar referendum results. Then, they'll be on the right side of this thing, and all the EU countries can begin to move forward on a renegotiated regime. A Trump win in November, or even the prospect of it, helps the UK now. The problem with this idea of an Anglo trade and defense block with US, UK, Canada and Australia though, is the US is not Anglo enough any more and Canada's PM is French and liberal. So they have to talk about freedom from regulations and such, and hope enough non-anglos buy in. It seems like the narrowest of paths to me. The US and their currency will remain strong only through immigration and decent birth rates. Closing the borders just won't work.

EGreg 10y ago

That's right. I wouldn't be so worried about the EU as I am about the UK, which wouldn't be so united any more. On decentralization: http://magarshak.com/blog http://magarshak.com/blog

iofj 10y ago
The EU did to Greece what it did because it was feared that the bankruptcy of the least member of the EU would topple German banks into bankruptcy. That non-payment on 1.3% of total government debt would cause a disaster. Now the second-biggest economy is leaving the EU, with unknown implications for lots of financial instruments ... There is at least a serious case to be made that this could be bad.

mbrd 10y ago

> Northern Ireland is even holding talks with the Republic of Ireland to unite the island. Protest Northern Ireland frantically scrambling to join the Catholic Republic of Ireland, and receiving a tepid response, is something I never thought I would see in my lifetime. Not true, see http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36621822 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36621822

s_q_b 10y ago
You have to understand the broader demensions of interaction between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, going back at least to the Anglo-Irish war, and perhaps back to the plantation of Ulster. Ireland is quite literally the first colony of the British. It only recently emerged from centuries of civil war, and the Protestant-Catholic conflict has abated within the past five years. For the topic of unification to even be seriously discussed is extraordinary, and without precedent. Forgive me if I don't believe a government funded news outlet, with a vested interest in the outcome, a deep cultural belief in Anglic superiority, that was so sure the U.K. independence vote would fail, when they discuss issues of Irish affairs. One could be forgiven for believing the government line at the moment. But if viewed through the eyes of Irish history, current events are clearly unprecedented. In Ireland, there are many people alive who remember the Troubles in vivid detail. For the Deputy Prime Minister, and more importantly several prominent Anglo-Protestant politicians, to even broach the subject is to risk reopening Pandora's box. Even now there are armed groups operating in the RoI with the explicit goal of finally driving the British from their lands. Even a cursory understanding of Irish history is sufficient to appreciate that the current discrete (and even public) communiques would be in the realm of fantasy even a few short years ago. The vast majority of the Northern Irish voted to remain in the E.U. With the loss of their British patrons, as the inevitable loss of Scotland unfolds, Protestants in Northern Ireland already know that the E.U. is their only assurance of security and insulation from the chaotic collapse of Britain.
- blibble 10y ago
  the only people talking about it are Sinn Fein, and a united republican Ireland is the only reason they exist, so, surprise surprise, they're talking about the unification of Ireland

vegabook 10y ago

Small problem: the Europeans have had enough of Britains's perfidious ways and are not inclined to being patient. This pandoras box is therefore open for business and cannot easily be be rammed shut again.

logingone 10y ago
Would the EU not love to have the UK do a u-turn, showing the other potential EU leavers that leaving looks better than the reality?
- mike-cardwell 10y ago
  If the UK stays in the EU despite this referendum result, then there will be significant civil unrest and it will lurch even further to the right. I doubt it would be in the benefit of the EU to have a member state who's population chose not to be in it, and yet are forced to stay in it. That is the sort of unrest that will spread across borders.
  - logingone 10y ago
    The member state chose not to be in it for long-known reasons. If the EU learns the concept of democracy from this, and entertains the idea of loosening its stubborn insistence that things set up in a way that has long been problematic and is now seriously damaging, they might dare to consider some flexibility and the idea of loose coupling. Edit (I forgot my point and finished too soon :) If the EU relaxed a little the departing member state may democratically u-turn.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- vegabook 10y ago
  Yes but there are powerful forces within Europe that always felt Britain was a ball and chain, especially in the latin bloc led by France. This is not going to be simple as they will insist that a rubicon has been crossed. Recall that Charles de Gaulle himself was against British involvement in continental Europe, considering it a trojan horse. Just recently and for a whole decade, for example, Britain was vocally pro Turkish accession to the EU, against Italy and France. Ironically the same issue was used by the Brexit campaign, feeding Britain's image as an opportunistic Judas. Distrust of Britain runs deep in the southern bloc. As such, with all these forces, this vote genuinely reshuffles the deck, in Europe itself, even if Britain now backtracks.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> With every area save England flatly stating that they would rather leave Britain than leave the EU That's wrong on several levels: (1) Wales, like England, voted Leave, (2) The referendum only covered leaving the EU, not relative preference for leaving the UK vs. leaving the EU, (3) While NI voted by majority to stay in the EU, the issue of leaving the UK vs. staying in the UK is one of recurring interest in NI, and every indication I've seen is that the majority that favors staying in the UK is larger and more solid than that that prefers staying in the EU. Sure, NI republicans are making a big deal of the Remain vote in NI, but NI republicans are not in the same position as Scottish nationalists. Of the four countries of the UK, the only one that seems to be more inclined to leave the UK than the EU is Scotland, which seems to have stayed last time it had an independence largely because of uncertainty over whether, if it left England, it would be able to smoothly join the EU. Brexit renders that consideration moot. > The referendum is actually non-binding in a legal sense. That's technically true (well, not entirely: it was legally binding as to the improved deal Britain had secured from the EU, which was expressly contingent on a Remain victory in the referendum. So, staying in the EU is already less attractive than it was before the vote -- when it was already not attractive enough for a majority of UK voters to want to stay.) > Parliament could vote to suspend it tomorrow. I'm not sure what that even means; the non-binding referendum already happened, and the action that would be needed to implement it (invoking article 50) is one of, as the sources I've seen have indicated, royal prerogative not dependent on Parliamentary action, so Parliament "suspending" the referendum or its would seem to be a meaningless symbolic act. > Northern Ireland is even holding talks with the Republic of Ireland to unite the island. No, its not. Sinn Fein has indicated that unification should be reopened as a topic based on the Remain vote in NI, but Ireland isn't interested, and neither (unsurprisingly) is the unionist-majority NI government. > Finally, Britain's elite are already seeking to mitigate the effects of the referendum. Even if they hold their country together successfully, Britain will almost certainly seek a treaty to retain their economic rights while gaining some control over their immigration process. Of course they'll seek to get all the benefits of EU membership without the bits they don't like. But its not really likely that they'll get that.