4 ms·

"The majority of EU citizens did not vote in the Brexit referendum" The overwhelming majority of EU citizens did not vote to join the EU, nor did they vote in

"The majority of EU citizens did not vote in the Brexit referendum" The overwhelming majority of EU citizens did not vote to join the EU, nor did they vote in favour of the Treaty of Lisbon upon which the authority of the EU currently resides. Nor do any of the citizens of the EU get to vote for the EU executive, or anyone who has any material influence over legislation (their MEP's can't introduce legislation). In fact, majorities of several EU nations voted against the Treaty of Lisbon after which it was 'passed anyways' (I'm looking at you France), and after which the other referendums were cancelled because the elites knew it would would fail. And of course UK citizens never voted to join the EU, they voted to join the EEC. Most EU citizens want something like the EEC, with some nice freedom of movement. They don't want a hard or ideological political union. Have a look at Pew historical polling, it's interesting [1] - it shows the majority of even very large EU nations actually wary of the EU - up until the 'Brexit scare'. After Brexit, this will continue to languish downward. The EU has so many existential issues that it's facing, and it doesn't seem to want to suggest anything other than 'more political union' as an answer, which is clearly not it. (See the recent 'twinning' agreement signed by Macron and Merkel last week as an example of trying to get some political momentum going on the pro-EU side). The EU needs to reform, but it can't unfortunately for a variety of reasons, and I don't see any meaningful path forward. [1] http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/15/post-brexit-europeans-more-favorable-toward-eu/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/15/post-brexit-europeans-mo...

petre 8y ago
> Most EU citizens want something like the EEC, with some nice freedom of movement. They don't want a hard or ideological political union. I believe the EEA is just that.
- patrickk 8y ago
  EEA is basically paying the EU membership fees, without any voting power regarding how the EU should be run.
  - petre 8y ago
    Members of the EEA have to accept EU legislation and make payments to the EU and the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Not full emmbership fees. Also they're part of the decision process shaping EEA policies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area#Rights_and_obligations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area#Rights_... Another option is EFTA and bilateral agreements like Switzerland. However, the May government decided not to pursue EFTA membership and Norway isn't that keen since thay're afraid it would impact future EFTA/EU negotiations and they could use some of their current rights.
alasdair_ 8y ago
>And of course UK citizens never voted to join the EU, they voted to join the EEC. Of course, the "UK Citizens" are not citizens, but subjects. Of a monarch. Whom they also did not vote for.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  They are de-facto citizens, and the UK Monarchy has effectively no power, ergo your comment is moot, and deflects from a very real and tangible issue of democratic deficit in the EU.
  - handzbagz 8y ago
    The EU is far more democratic than the UK. In fact I happen to think that FPTP is one of the contributing factors to Brexit. For decades people have been living in areas where their votes didn't matter at all.
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      "The EU is far more democratic than the UK." This is demonstrably false. + The UK (like other European nations) has a fairly vibrant democracy, with representatives who make legislation. + People know who their reps are, and vote on the basis of party ideals. + Governments live and die (i.e. they fall) on votes made by reps. + Governments are hugely responsive on many issues, and have no choice but to bend given popular demand. + There are popular plebiscites on major issues such as Scottish independence and Brexit. Contrast that with the EU: + Nobody related to creating legislation, or providing strategic or material guidance is elected. Nobody speaking on behalf of the EU is elected. + MEP's cannot introduce or amend legislation. + Pragmatically, there are very low voter turnouts, and people have generally little knowledge as to who their MPs are, or what the platforms are. + There are no popular plebiscites, but worse, due to the above, the EU Executive is notoriously tone deaf to the will of the people. (They just don't care, because they think they are 'right' - which is a natural thing frankly in any body that doesn't have to worry about the status of their power) + The legal foundation of the EU, based on various treaties, most notably the Treaty of Lisbon, is on shaky ground. French voters literally voted against the Treaty, and it was enacted anyhow. This is not a 'trade agreement' - this is about devolution of major constitutional powers, so this is a problem. Referendums were cancelled in other nations because they would have been lost. ... Summary: the UK, much like most other European nations, is considerably 'more democratic' than the EU. If you're going to take a boldly contrarian stance, the onus is on you to provide the evidence.
sveme 8y ago
"Representative democracy". The power to accept or deny things like the treaty of lisbon lies with the members of parliament that represent the people, not with the people itself. Why should it be different for things like the treaty of lisbon than for things like taxation?
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  "representatives" cannot arbitrarily change the constitution, create new forms of government and devolve national powers without real consent. For the same reason Scotland cannot leave the UK without a referendum, for the same reason Quebec cannot leave Canada. The Treaty of Lisbon represented enough change that it was to be ratified by referendum. But guess what? It was voted down too often among the first to hold referendums, so the elite just kiboshed the whole thing. And skipped the referendums knowing they would lose. Now consider that the French population roundly rejected the treaty [1], and then their government simply changed a few items and passed it anyhow, without again deferring to the people. Is the 5th Republic even legally legitimate now? The French Government, acted directly against the will of the the people to devolve signifiant sovereign powers. It's an appalling and brutal transgression of democracy, and there should be consequences. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitut...

petre 8y ago

> Most EU citizens want something like the EEC, with some nice freedom of movement. They don't want a hard or ideological political union. I believe the EEA is just that.

patrickk 8y ago
EEA is basically paying the EU membership fees, without any voting power regarding how the EU should be run.
- petre 8y ago
  Members of the EEA have to accept EU legislation and make payments to the EU and the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Not full emmbership fees. Also they're part of the decision process shaping EEA policies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area#Rights_and_obligations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Area#Rights_... Another option is EFTA and bilateral agreements like Switzerland. However, the May government decided not to pursue EFTA membership and Norway isn't that keen since thay're afraid it would impact future EFTA/EU negotiations and they could use some of their current rights.

alasdair_ 8y ago

>And of course UK citizens never voted to join the EU, they voted to join the EEC. Of course, the "UK Citizens" are not citizens, but subjects. Of a monarch. Whom they also did not vote for.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
They are de-facto citizens, and the UK Monarchy has effectively no power, ergo your comment is moot, and deflects from a very real and tangible issue of democratic deficit in the EU.
- handzbagz 8y ago
  The EU is far more democratic than the UK. In fact I happen to think that FPTP is one of the contributing factors to Brexit. For decades people have been living in areas where their votes didn't matter at all.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "The EU is far more democratic than the UK." This is demonstrably false. + The UK (like other European nations) has a fairly vibrant democracy, with representatives who make legislation. + People know who their reps are, and vote on the basis of party ideals. + Governments live and die (i.e. they fall) on votes made by reps. + Governments are hugely responsive on many issues, and have no choice but to bend given popular demand. + There are popular plebiscites on major issues such as Scottish independence and Brexit. Contrast that with the EU: + Nobody related to creating legislation, or providing strategic or material guidance is elected. Nobody speaking on behalf of the EU is elected. + MEP's cannot introduce or amend legislation. + Pragmatically, there are very low voter turnouts, and people have generally little knowledge as to who their MPs are, or what the platforms are. + There are no popular plebiscites, but worse, due to the above, the EU Executive is notoriously tone deaf to the will of the people. (They just don't care, because they think they are 'right' - which is a natural thing frankly in any body that doesn't have to worry about the status of their power) + The legal foundation of the EU, based on various treaties, most notably the Treaty of Lisbon, is on shaky ground. French voters literally voted against the Treaty, and it was enacted anyhow. This is not a 'trade agreement' - this is about devolution of major constitutional powers, so this is a problem. Referendums were cancelled in other nations because they would have been lost. ... Summary: the UK, much like most other European nations, is considerably 'more democratic' than the EU. If you're going to take a boldly contrarian stance, the onus is on you to provide the evidence.

sveme 8y ago

"Representative democracy". The power to accept or deny things like the treaty of lisbon lies with the members of parliament that represent the people, not with the people itself. Why should it be different for things like the treaty of lisbon than for things like taxation?

sonnyblarney 8y ago
"representatives" cannot arbitrarily change the constitution, create new forms of government and devolve national powers without real consent. For the same reason Scotland cannot leave the UK without a referendum, for the same reason Quebec cannot leave Canada. The Treaty of Lisbon represented enough change that it was to be ratified by referendum. But guess what? It was voted down too often among the first to hold referendums, so the elite just kiboshed the whole thing. And skipped the referendums knowing they would lose. Now consider that the French population roundly rejected the treaty [1], and then their government simply changed a few items and passed it anyhow, without again deferring to the people. Is the 5th Republic even legally legitimate now? The French Government, acted directly against the will of the the people to devolve signifiant sovereign powers. It's an appalling and brutal transgression of democracy, and there should be consequences. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitution_referendum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitut...