4 ms·

We did not vote for BRINO, which is what all these 'deals' are about - keep us tightly enough tied to the EU so that we can be forced back in in 5-10 years. Don

We did not vote for BRINO, which is what all these 'deals' are about - keep us tightly enough tied to the EU so that we can be forced back in in 5-10 years. Don't try and pretend this isn't the case, we all know it.

pjc50 7y ago
We're tied to the EU inherently through Ireland, which everyone keeps forgetting about. Sure, we can impose a border there, and perhaps people won't object that violently, but it won't go down well in the NI reunification referendum.
- jamiegreen 7y ago
  I am not sure anyone is forgetting about Ireland seeing as the media and the EU bring it up every five minutes
  - disgruntledphd2 7y ago
    Certainly not the Irish :) Just to note, when I was a child (actually almost until I was an adult) people were killing each other in Ireland, the UK and Northern Ireland every single week. We all got together, and that's been over for almost twenty years, because we pretended there was/wasn't a border so the pro-UK people could pretend it was there, and the pro-Ireland people could pretend it wasn't. Somewhat crazily, this actually worked. Unfortunately, Brexit (especially a hard one) necessitates a border. If there is a border in Northern Ireland, there will be violence, along with lots and lots of small businesses going to the wall, along with British troops back in Ireland and smuggling. It's basically a disaster, and while the British people have the right to leave the EU, and rule the waves again, te Irish people also have a right to not start violence in Northern Ireland again. Hence the backstop - it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU (although we are very, very sorry you're leaving), it's an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland.
    - jamiegreen 7y ago
      > Unfortunately, Brexit (especially a hard one) necessitates a border. Except that the UK and Ireland have both said they won’t build a hard border Under any circumstances , so who exactly is going to be installing this hard border? > If there is a border in Northern Ireland, There already is one (soft) > along with British troops back in Ireland There are British troops based in Northern Ireland right now just as there are elsewhere in the UK > it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU It just happens to have that effect, by being basically thr only treaty that it is impossible to unilaterally leave. > it’s an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland. It’s a political tool to ensure the UK doesn’t thrive outside the EU, given the sorry state of the rest of the Eurozone that would make the EU look bad. Unfortunately EU negotiators have been far more effective than British negotiators hence why we have a deal that is unacceptable to anyone (On either side) in the British Parliament it is so bad.
      - disgruntledphd2 7y ago
        >Except that the UK and Ireland have both said they won’t build a hard border Under any circumstances , so who exactly is going to be installing this hard border? They are both lying for political purposes. Unless the UK stay in the CM/SU, there will be a customs border. The EU will require one from the Irish side, and the UK will require one in order to get any trade deals. > If there is a border in Northern Ireland, >There already is one (soft) Have you been there lately? I pass the border a bunch when we travel north, and the only way I notice is the different signs and Google maps switching to miles instead of kilometers. > along with British troops back in Ireland >There are British troops based in Northern Ireland right now just as there are elsewhere in the UK Fair enough, however there were a lot more back during the Troubles. > it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU >It just happens to have that effect, by being basically thr only treaty that it is impossible to unilaterally leave. Like, it's impossible to leave unless the UK maintains the Good Friday Agreement, which essentially requires a mostly soft border. The border was a frequent target of republican terrorists and is likely to become so again, hence why you have US members of Congress saying that no trade deal with the UK is possible unless the GFA is maintained (are they also trying to trap the UK in the EU?). > it’s an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland. >It’s a political tool to ensure the UK doesn’t thrive outside the EU, given the sorry state of the rest of the Eurozone that would make the EU look bad. I'm not sure if there is anything I can say to change your mind on this, but I strongly disagree with your assessment here. >Unfortunately EU negotiators have been far more effective than British negotiators hence why we have a deal that is unacceptable to anyone (On either side) in the British Parliament it is so bad. The British government have literally done everything wrong here. They had no idea what they wanted, check. They set ridiculous red lines and had to walk them back, check. I completely agree that the UK negotiators have done a poor job, but it's been because there is no consensus even within Goevrnment as to what the UK should do (if anyone's interested in this, I strongly recommend checking out the speeches of Ivan Rogers).
- growlist 7y ago
  And how does that change the result of the referendum? What's happened over the last 3 years is an utterly scandalous denial of democracy, and it's frightens me tbh to see so many people acting in support of something other than respecting a democratic vote simply because it didn't suit them. If we had voted to remain and there was a movement attempting to force us to leave I would be manning the barricades in support of remain, despite the fact I voted leave and believe we should leave. And that's because the principle of freedom supercedes what I may or may not like. That's democracy: sometimes you lose, and you moan a bit, and then accept it and get on with things. In the end, democracy is the only thing that the little man has to defend himself and fighting to keep us in the EU is taking even that little thing away. Why bother voting ever again when if the result is inconvenient for the powers that be, they will simply declare democracy invalid?
  - pjc50 7y ago
    > If we had voted to remain and there was a movement attempting to force us to leave I would be manning the barricades in support of remain, despite the fact I voted leave and believe we should leave. No you wouldn't. The referendum was chaotic, with multiple leave campaigns, and people were constantly lied to about what the outcome would look like. If the debate had been much clearer about what the cost would be, especially of no deal, then it might have been acceptable. But the whole reason it's fallen apart is competing versions of "fantasy Brexit" that can't be delivered.
    - growlist 7y ago
      > No you wouldn't. I can see we're not going to get much further.
  - celticninja 7y ago
    Democracy allows for the changing of minds. As long as there is a vote that gives a PM a mandate for a course of action it can be done. Its not anti democratic to have another vote.
    - growlist 7y ago
pmyteh 7y ago
People voted for 'leave'. At the time, what 'leave' looked like was deliberately left open, by both sides. It's now received wisdom that that 'leave' meant that people wanted no deal Brexit and they wanted it hard, but that simply isn't true. As a separate issue, the windows of both sides on 'acceptable' Brexits have been diverging quickly, partly because everyone is now sick of it and partly because the hardcore on both sides are taking the opportunity to seize control of the narrative. As a consequence, anything short of WTO terms is now "BRINO" (which would actually describe the kind of Norway-plus exit fantasised by some on the Remain side after the defeat) and contrariwise anything short of revocation without a referendum is a betrayal of truth and justice. Never mind. It's not like we wanted a functioning polity after this is resolved, in any case...
- growlist 7y ago
  > At the time, what 'leave' looked like was deliberately left open, by both sides. This is not true. There is a video with at least Cameron, Osborne, Hillary Benn, Andrew Adonis, John Major, Peter Mandelson and possibly others that compiles some of their statements during the referendum campaign. I cannot find this video as it is either hidden or not on YouTube, but it pops up on Twitter from time to time. Each of them makes categorically clear that leaving means leaving the institutions, single market etc. etc. in terms that very much describe what the Remain camp has termed (in a manner that would make Orwell proud) a 'hard Brexit' - indeed, the very point of their calamitous prognostications was aimed at striking fear into the electorate in order that they vote to remain. There were voices in the Remain campaign clearly describing the hardest Brexit imaginable specifically in order to deter people from voting for it. To deny this in the face of overwhelming evidence is well, I'm not sure what to think of it but it's not honest argument.
  - pmyteh 7y ago
    And there are statements by the leave campaign saying that single market membership was on the table. Different parts of both campaigns saying different things to different audiences. And please don't accuse people of dishonest argument here. We don't do that.
celticninja 7y ago
We didn't vote for no deal either. It was a simplistic question that wasn't thought through. You may have wanted it but it was not the question that was asked and voted on. I get it you wanted this outcome and you are therefore against anything that stymies it, but it's not all about you.

pjc50 7y ago

We're tied to the EU inherently through Ireland, which everyone keeps forgetting about. Sure, we can impose a border there, and perhaps people won't object that violently, but it won't go down well in the NI reunification referendum.

jamiegreen 7y ago
I am not sure anyone is forgetting about Ireland seeing as the media and the EU bring it up every five minutes
- disgruntledphd2 7y ago
  Certainly not the Irish :) Just to note, when I was a child (actually almost until I was an adult) people were killing each other in Ireland, the UK and Northern Ireland every single week. We all got together, and that's been over for almost twenty years, because we pretended there was/wasn't a border so the pro-UK people could pretend it was there, and the pro-Ireland people could pretend it wasn't. Somewhat crazily, this actually worked. Unfortunately, Brexit (especially a hard one) necessitates a border. If there is a border in Northern Ireland, there will be violence, along with lots and lots of small businesses going to the wall, along with British troops back in Ireland and smuggling. It's basically a disaster, and while the British people have the right to leave the EU, and rule the waves again, te Irish people also have a right to not start violence in Northern Ireland again. Hence the backstop - it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU (although we are very, very sorry you're leaving), it's an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland.
  - jamiegreen 7y ago
    > Unfortunately, Brexit (especially a hard one) necessitates a border. Except that the UK and Ireland have both said they won’t build a hard border Under any circumstances , so who exactly is going to be installing this hard border? > If there is a border in Northern Ireland, There already is one (soft) > along with British troops back in Ireland There are British troops based in Northern Ireland right now just as there are elsewhere in the UK > it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU It just happens to have that effect, by being basically thr only treaty that it is impossible to unilaterally leave. > it’s an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland. It’s a political tool to ensure the UK doesn’t thrive outside the EU, given the sorry state of the rest of the Eurozone that would make the EU look bad. Unfortunately EU negotiators have been far more effective than British negotiators hence why we have a deal that is unacceptable to anyone (On either side) in the British Parliament it is so bad.
    - disgruntledphd2 7y ago
      >Except that the UK and Ireland have both said they won’t build a hard border Under any circumstances , so who exactly is going to be installing this hard border? They are both lying for political purposes. Unless the UK stay in the CM/SU, there will be a customs border. The EU will require one from the Irish side, and the UK will require one in order to get any trade deals. > If there is a border in Northern Ireland, >There already is one (soft) Have you been there lately? I pass the border a bunch when we travel north, and the only way I notice is the different signs and Google maps switching to miles instead of kilometers. > along with British troops back in Ireland >There are British troops based in Northern Ireland right now just as there are elsewhere in the UK Fair enough, however there were a lot more back during the Troubles. > it's not an attempt to trap the UK in the EU >It just happens to have that effect, by being basically thr only treaty that it is impossible to unilaterally leave. Like, it's impossible to leave unless the UK maintains the Good Friday Agreement, which essentially requires a mostly soft border. The border was a frequent target of republican terrorists and is likely to become so again, hence why you have US members of Congress saying that no trade deal with the UK is possible unless the GFA is maintained (are they also trying to trap the UK in the EU?). > it’s an attempt to prevent the return of violence on the island of Ireland. >It’s a political tool to ensure the UK doesn’t thrive outside the EU, given the sorry state of the rest of the Eurozone that would make the EU look bad. I'm not sure if there is anything I can say to change your mind on this, but I strongly disagree with your assessment here. >Unfortunately EU negotiators have been far more effective than British negotiators hence why we have a deal that is unacceptable to anyone (On either side) in the British Parliament it is so bad. The British government have literally done everything wrong here. They had no idea what they wanted, check. They set ridiculous red lines and had to walk them back, check. I completely agree that the UK negotiators have done a poor job, but it's been because there is no consensus even within Goevrnment as to what the UK should do (if anyone's interested in this, I strongly recommend checking out the speeches of Ivan Rogers).
growlist 7y ago
And how does that change the result of the referendum? What's happened over the last 3 years is an utterly scandalous denial of democracy, and it's frightens me tbh to see so many people acting in support of something other than respecting a democratic vote simply because it didn't suit them. If we had voted to remain and there was a movement attempting to force us to leave I would be manning the barricades in support of remain, despite the fact I voted leave and believe we should leave. And that's because the principle of freedom supercedes what I may or may not like. That's democracy: sometimes you lose, and you moan a bit, and then accept it and get on with things. In the end, democracy is the only thing that the little man has to defend himself and fighting to keep us in the EU is taking even that little thing away. Why bother voting ever again when if the result is inconvenient for the powers that be, they will simply declare democracy invalid?
- pjc50 7y ago
  > If we had voted to remain and there was a movement attempting to force us to leave I would be manning the barricades in support of remain, despite the fact I voted leave and believe we should leave. No you wouldn't. The referendum was chaotic, with multiple leave campaigns, and people were constantly lied to about what the outcome would look like. If the debate had been much clearer about what the cost would be, especially of no deal, then it might have been acceptable. But the whole reason it's fallen apart is competing versions of "fantasy Brexit" that can't be delivered.
  - growlist 7y ago
    > No you wouldn't. I can see we're not going to get much further.
- celticninja 7y ago
  Democracy allows for the changing of minds. As long as there is a vote that gives a PM a mandate for a course of action it can be done. Its not anti democratic to have another vote.
  - growlist 7y ago

pmyteh 7y ago

People voted for 'leave'. At the time, what 'leave' looked like was deliberately left open, by both sides. It's now received wisdom that that 'leave' meant that people wanted no deal Brexit and they wanted it hard, but that simply isn't true. As a separate issue, the windows of both sides on 'acceptable' Brexits have been diverging quickly, partly because everyone is now sick of it and partly because the hardcore on both sides are taking the opportunity to seize control of the narrative. As a consequence, anything short of WTO terms is now "BRINO" (which would actually describe the kind of Norway-plus exit fantasised by some on the Remain side after the defeat) and contrariwise anything short of revocation without a referendum is a betrayal of truth and justice. Never mind. It's not like we wanted a functioning polity after this is resolved, in any case...

growlist 7y ago
> At the time, what 'leave' looked like was deliberately left open, by both sides. This is not true. There is a video with at least Cameron, Osborne, Hillary Benn, Andrew Adonis, John Major, Peter Mandelson and possibly others that compiles some of their statements during the referendum campaign. I cannot find this video as it is either hidden or not on YouTube, but it pops up on Twitter from time to time. Each of them makes categorically clear that leaving means leaving the institutions, single market etc. etc. in terms that very much describe what the Remain camp has termed (in a manner that would make Orwell proud) a 'hard Brexit' - indeed, the very point of their calamitous prognostications was aimed at striking fear into the electorate in order that they vote to remain. There were voices in the Remain campaign clearly describing the hardest Brexit imaginable specifically in order to deter people from voting for it. To deny this in the face of overwhelming evidence is well, I'm not sure what to think of it but it's not honest argument.
- pmyteh 7y ago
  And there are statements by the leave campaign saying that single market membership was on the table. Different parts of both campaigns saying different things to different audiences. And please don't accuse people of dishonest argument here. We don't do that.

celticninja 7y ago

We didn't vote for no deal either. It was a simplistic question that wasn't thought through. You may have wanted it but it was not the question that was asked and voted on. I get it you wanted this outcome and you are therefore against anything that stymies it, but it's not all about you.