7 ms·

It boggles the mind why they went through with Brexit! Seriously.

lazyjones 7y ago
They were in the EU when this allegedly started, so it obviously isn't a magic cure for whatever the authors of the paper pretend it to be. So why is your immediate reaction to utter the feeling that Brexit is somehow going to make it worse?
- hhas01 7y ago
  Because Brexit solves nothing. It’s just spoiled ignorant children throwing a temper tantrum because the world doesn’t treat them as Special enough. How do you think they’ll react when they don’t get all the sunshine and roses the populist grifters told them they would? Meanwhile, purely on our future economic front, years of insulting and burning our #1 global trading partner and blowing off the deal we already had is not a good start. It’s a buyers’ market now, and Britain’s on sale.
  - JeromeLon 7y ago
    > How do you think they’ll react when they don’t get all the sunshine and roses the populist grifters told them they would? Easy one. They will say that it's because of EU being a bad looser and revengeful to them.
    - UncleSlacky 7y ago
      And that they're being sabotaged by "remoaners" who just don't believe in Britain hard enough.
  - coolplants 7y ago
    Brexit solves them not being a sovereign nation. Sovereignty from foreign rule is over what wars are fought, no rational actor would give it away without an existential threat.
    - DanBC 7y ago
      It doesn't though, we're still under obligations in international law and we're still under the ECHR. > Leaving the EU does not affect our rights under the ECHR, as this comes from the Council of Europe, not the EU. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-human-rights-work/what-does-brexit-mean-equality-and-human-rights-uk https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-human-rights-work...
      - coolplants 7y ago
        International law isn’t enforceable and doesn’t supersede sovereignty like the EU does. Plenty of countries violate international law (most of them) with nearly no repercussions.
        DanBC 7y ago
        See the comments of Lady Hale at [327-328]: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0131-judgment.pdf https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0131-judgme... > International law and standards > 327. In the High Court and the Court of Appeal NIHRC relied on a number of international treaties and judgments, decisions and general statements of treaty bodies. Horner J dealt with these in a section of his judgment entitled “International Law and Obligations”between paras 59 and 71. Again, I find myself in agreement with the judge in his observations and I do not repeat them. The Court of Appeal did not deal with these arguments. > 328. Although the traditional and orthodox view is that courts do not apply unincorporated international treaties (JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry [1990] 2 AC 418, per Lord Oliver at 499 and R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union[2018] AC 61), as Lord Hughes stated in R (SG) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions(Child Poverty Action Group intervening)[2015] 1 WLR 1449, para 137, such treaties may be relevant in a number of ways. NIHRC relies on the third of these, namely, where the court is applying ECHR via the HRA. As Lord Hughes observed, the ECtHR has accepted that, in appropriate cases, the Convention “should be interpreted ... in the light of generally accepted international law in the same field”. Similar propositions are to be found in Convention jurisprudence, most notably, Demir v Turkey(2008) 48 EHRR 1272, para 69; Neulinger v Switzerland (2010) 54 EHRR31,para 131 EU doesn't supersede sovereignty. Your points haven't addressed ECHR.
hhas01 7y ago
Because it’s easier to blame Others for not being the centre of the universe any more, than to man up and do something about it. Lazy, nihilistic, CBF, post-Empire shitehole. What a sick, sad waste of potential.
- refurb 7y ago
  Yeah, completely crazy to want your own self-determination.
  - zelos 7y ago
    I never really understand the special status given to national sovereignty. We all give up some control in a democratic system, from the local level upwards. Why is there some special status for the national level? What is it that’s so bad about giving up some control at that level as part of a greater system?
    - dageshi 7y ago
      When you no longer really believe (or never did believe) in one of the fundamental pillars of the EU e.g. ever closer union. If you don't believe in that then it's your duty to leave and let those that do continue forwards with an ever closer union. The UK joined really hoping to push the EU more towards a confederation which it would've felt comfortable in, the whole "working from the inside" thing that people are always saying is the best way to influence the EU. But ultimately a majority of the rest of the EU wants much closer integration than the UK would've ever been comfortable with... so here we are.
  - newsgremlin 7y ago
    Now the UK is free to do...what exactly that they could not before?
    - sbmassey 7y ago
      Make their own trade agreements? Hold their government accountable without having a circle of the government and the EU blaming each other?
dang 7y ago
"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

They were in the EU when this allegedly started, so it obviously isn't a magic cure for whatever the authors of the paper pretend it to be. So why is your immediate reaction to utter the feeling that Brexit is somehow going to make it worse?

hhas01 7y ago
Because Brexit solves nothing. It’s just spoiled ignorant children throwing a temper tantrum because the world doesn’t treat them as Special enough. How do you think they’ll react when they don’t get all the sunshine and roses the populist grifters told them they would? Meanwhile, purely on our future economic front, years of insulting and burning our #1 global trading partner and blowing off the deal we already had is not a good start. It’s a buyers’ market now, and Britain’s on sale.
- JeromeLon 7y ago
  > How do you think they’ll react when they don’t get all the sunshine and roses the populist grifters told them they would? Easy one. They will say that it's because of EU being a bad looser and revengeful to them.
  - UncleSlacky 7y ago
    And that they're being sabotaged by "remoaners" who just don't believe in Britain hard enough.
- coolplants 7y ago
  Brexit solves them not being a sovereign nation. Sovereignty from foreign rule is over what wars are fought, no rational actor would give it away without an existential threat.
  - DanBC 7y ago
    It doesn't though, we're still under obligations in international law and we're still under the ECHR. > Leaving the EU does not affect our rights under the ECHR, as this comes from the Council of Europe, not the EU. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-human-rights-work/what-does-brexit-mean-equality-and-human-rights-uk https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-human-rights-work...
    - coolplants 7y ago
      International law isn’t enforceable and doesn’t supersede sovereignty like the EU does. Plenty of countries violate international law (most of them) with nearly no repercussions.
      - DanBC 7y ago
        See the comments of Lady Hale at [327-328]: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0131-judgment.pdf https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0131-judgme... > International law and standards > 327. In the High Court and the Court of Appeal NIHRC relied on a number of international treaties and judgments, decisions and general statements of treaty bodies. Horner J dealt with these in a section of his judgment entitled “International Law and Obligations”between paras 59 and 71. Again, I find myself in agreement with the judge in his observations and I do not repeat them. The Court of Appeal did not deal with these arguments. > 328. Although the traditional and orthodox view is that courts do not apply unincorporated international treaties (JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry [1990] 2 AC 418, per Lord Oliver at 499 and R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union[2018] AC 61), as Lord Hughes stated in R (SG) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions(Child Poverty Action Group intervening)[2015] 1 WLR 1449, para 137, such treaties may be relevant in a number of ways. NIHRC relies on the third of these, namely, where the court is applying ECHR via the HRA. As Lord Hughes observed, the ECtHR has accepted that, in appropriate cases, the Convention “should be interpreted ... in the light of generally accepted international law in the same field”. Similar propositions are to be found in Convention jurisprudence, most notably, Demir v Turkey(2008) 48 EHRR 1272, para 69; Neulinger v Switzerland (2010) 54 EHRR31,para 131 EU doesn't supersede sovereignty. Your points haven't addressed ECHR.

hhas01 7y ago

Because it’s easier to blame Others for not being the centre of the universe any more, than to man up and do something about it. Lazy, nihilistic, CBF, post-Empire shitehole. What a sick, sad waste of potential.

refurb 7y ago
Yeah, completely crazy to want your own self-determination.
- zelos 7y ago
  I never really understand the special status given to national sovereignty. We all give up some control in a democratic system, from the local level upwards. Why is there some special status for the national level? What is it that’s so bad about giving up some control at that level as part of a greater system?
  - dageshi 7y ago
    When you no longer really believe (or never did believe) in one of the fundamental pillars of the EU e.g. ever closer union. If you don't believe in that then it's your duty to leave and let those that do continue forwards with an ever closer union. The UK joined really hoping to push the EU more towards a confederation which it would've felt comfortable in, the whole "working from the inside" thing that people are always saying is the best way to influence the EU. But ultimately a majority of the rest of the EU wants much closer integration than the UK would've ever been comfortable with... so here we are.
- newsgremlin 7y ago
  Now the UK is free to do...what exactly that they could not before?
  - sbmassey 7y ago
    Make their own trade agreements? Hold their government accountable without having a circle of the government and the EU blaming each other?

dang 7y ago

"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html