5 ms·

Where does the "dangerous" come in? What makes the EU government inherently better at governing and representing interests the of British people than a British

Where does the "dangerous" come in? What makes the EU government inherently better at governing and representing interests the of British people than a British government? There is something about local democracy that some people simply don't understand. Voters can apply more pressure on locally elected officials than central officials. Ever since Thatcher's government began systematically reducing the powers of local government, central government can and has often overridden the choices of local voter, because they are not directly answerable to local voters. If voters don't like some policies set by local politicians and officials they can organize effectively to have them changed and the officials removed. What kind of pressure can the people say Hammersmith exercise over an EU policy they don't like, assuming they know who to address, and can even bring political pressure to bear on them?

Symbiote 9y ago
Taking the example of Hammersmith, at the previous election 50% of people didn't vote for the MP that won. What can they do, when they disagree with a local decision? What about a national decision? The EU government is at least more representative of its electorate. For the EU level (London constituency), the Hammersmith resident is represented by four Tory, two Labour, one UKIP and one Green MEP. With that range, it's more likely someone will find time for their opinion. The solution is therefore to fix the electoral system in the UK, meanwhile I'm glad the EU government exists above it. We could also start electing the House of Lords. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_(UK_Parliament_constituency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_(UK_Parliament_con... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_(European_Parliament_constituency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_(European_Parliament_co...
- presidente20 9y ago
  If you want an elected House of Lords, why would you be in favour of the EU? In the EU the elected house is a ratifying chamber only (akin to the Lords). You're glad to be ruled by the undemocratic executive EU but not the undemocratic ratifying Lords?
notahacker 9y ago
I think the "dangerous" comes in when you have morons in mass media screaming will of the people, saboteurs traitors every time somebody has the temerity to suggest that leaving the EU might not be a good idea, or that we might wish to debate whether the PM's preferred position on leaving the EU is the correct one. Attlee called referenda the "tool of dictators and demagogues", and whilst he might have been referring specifically to the tendency of such leaders to use their initial popularity to vote themselves powers to deal with more difficult times, it could apply equally to the use of the referendum result to argue that a 52-48% margin of opinions at a particular point in time means that continuing to express the views held by the latter group is somehow disreputable
- vfclists 9y ago
  Who are you calling "morons", the media companies or the people who support Brexit? This is the kind of arrogance that got Brexit to succeed and Trump to become president, the habit of liberals labelling people who disagree with them racists, populists, Islamophobes, homophobes and everything else you can think of. If you want Trump to stay in power for 2 terms and Brexiteers to come out in greater numbers keep opining in that manner. Democracy implies respecting the will of the majority whether you agree with them or not, regardless of how misinformed or ignorant they are, and a willingness to work them to bring about a change in their views if you are convinced about yours. The same attitude here is the same attitude seen by EU officials who feel express openly that the expect the leaders of their member states should put their (the EU leaders) views ahead of their electorates, and you feel that because of some real or imagined benefits of their rule the rest of the public ought to put up with that arrogance.
  - eropple 9y ago
    > Democracy implies respecting the will of the majority whether you agree with them or not Really, profoundly odd that you start going off about Trump in the same post where you write this. He didn't win the popular vote. He does not represent the will of the majority.
    - 9y ago

Symbiote 9y ago

Taking the example of Hammersmith, at the previous election 50% of people didn't vote for the MP that won. What can they do, when they disagree with a local decision? What about a national decision? The EU government is at least more representative of its electorate. For the EU level (London constituency), the Hammersmith resident is represented by four Tory, two Labour, one UKIP and one Green MEP. With that range, it's more likely someone will find time for their opinion. The solution is therefore to fix the electoral system in the UK, meanwhile I'm glad the EU government exists above it. We could also start electing the House of Lords. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_(UK_Parliament_constituency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_(UK_Parliament_con... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_(European_Parliament_constituency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_(European_Parliament_co...

presidente20 9y ago
If you want an elected House of Lords, why would you be in favour of the EU? In the EU the elected house is a ratifying chamber only (akin to the Lords). You're glad to be ruled by the undemocratic executive EU but not the undemocratic ratifying Lords?

notahacker 9y ago

I think the "dangerous" comes in when you have morons in mass media screaming will of the people, saboteurs traitors every time somebody has the temerity to suggest that leaving the EU might not be a good idea, or that we might wish to debate whether the PM's preferred position on leaving the EU is the correct one. Attlee called referenda the "tool of dictators and demagogues", and whilst he might have been referring specifically to the tendency of such leaders to use their initial popularity to vote themselves powers to deal with more difficult times, it could apply equally to the use of the referendum result to argue that a 52-48% margin of opinions at a particular point in time means that continuing to express the views held by the latter group is somehow disreputable

vfclists 9y ago
Who are you calling "morons", the media companies or the people who support Brexit? This is the kind of arrogance that got Brexit to succeed and Trump to become president, the habit of liberals labelling people who disagree with them racists, populists, Islamophobes, homophobes and everything else you can think of. If you want Trump to stay in power for 2 terms and Brexiteers to come out in greater numbers keep opining in that manner. Democracy implies respecting the will of the majority whether you agree with them or not, regardless of how misinformed or ignorant they are, and a willingness to work them to bring about a change in their views if you are convinced about yours. The same attitude here is the same attitude seen by EU officials who feel express openly that the expect the leaders of their member states should put their (the EU leaders) views ahead of their electorates, and you feel that because of some real or imagined benefits of their rule the rest of the public ought to put up with that arrogance.
- eropple 9y ago
  > Democracy implies respecting the will of the majority whether you agree with them or not Really, profoundly odd that you start going off about Trump in the same post where you write this. He didn't win the popular vote. He does not represent the will of the majority.
  - 9y ago