5 ms·

As an English person, I care a great deal. I voted to remain.

madaxe_again 6y ago
Likewise, but that cause is lost. They’ll be leaving the UN Security Council in the next few years most likely, in the name of control and sovereignty. I’d get out while you can.
- arethuza 6y ago
  I can't see the UK voluntarily leaving the UN Security Council and as we usually act as the sidekick of the US I can't imagine they'd want the UK to leave either.
  - corford 6y ago
    On the other hand, I can see the other more powerful Security Council countries leaving and setting up something else (to which the UK, now a rather middling power, will not be invited).
    - gadders 6y ago
      6th largest country by GDP out of 195 is a strange definition of "middling".
      - manquer 6y ago
        India is 5th largest GDP and also a nuclear power, it is not a permanent member and does not have veto power on the SC. Germany/Japan are higher than both India and U.K. and still not part of council for obvious historical reasons. GDP and nuclear arsenal are just two aspects to power, lot more to it than just that. When France and UK became part initial members the SC. They were still colonial powers controlling a lot of the world, and won the war, they are no longer have that kind of strength or influence. If a new council were created in the somewhat near future it would be because power dynamics have shifted far enough that the current council is no longer useful, from the current members UK and France are most likely to ones for that shift and not enjoy similar rights. New powers at the table could be EU as a whole, India, Brazil perhaps Japan and Germany etc.
        gadders 6y ago
        As it's the security council, I think a functioning military would also be a requirement. Germany and Japan don't have this.
        dragonwriter 6y ago
        Germany and Japan have functioning militaries; they have legal restrictions on their use, but those restrictions don't, IIRC, obstruct their participation in anything that the Security Council would decide.
- docdeek 6y ago
  Leaving their permanent seat on the UNSC would be the last thing the UK would do if they were committed to control and sovereignty.
- rgblambda 6y ago
  Not sure if you're joking but the UNSC is associated with power and prestige. The UK would need to be dragged out of that. Same goes for NATO.
  - madaxe_again 6y ago
    And the U.K. had unprecedented power and control within Europe, and were willing to walk away. The press in the U.K. is attacking UN agencies daily - it would not surprise me in the slightest if the U.K. decided the SC was too constraining, their veto not big enough. Same goes for NATO - the ERG want out, and feel the contributions are an unfair burden. They are right now opaquely “streamlining” the military. How that helps meet the NATO commitment, not clear. Everyone said {the many things that have come to pass over the past few years} would never happen, that it would be an insane choice. At this point, the insane choice is the inevitable choice, so I’d put money (actually, I have, I am shorting sterling, hard, as a hedge) on them leaving both the UN and NATO.
    - dTal 6y ago
      >At this point, the insane choice is the inevitable choice At this point I am beginning to wonder what is behind the pattern. Are we witnessing the failure of governments acting in the best national interests because they have finally become fully subverted from within by selfish forces? A common pattern to the madness in the US and the madness in the UK is that an inner circle stand to get very rich from all the goings-on.
    - kentrado 6y ago
      Maybe it has something to do with the EU? What I see missing in a lot of this discussions is always a honest critique of the flaws of the EU that may have caused Brexit. The EU has a serious democratic deficit and this will never be resolved.
      - pjc50 6y ago
        > The EU has a serious democratic deficit and this will never be resolved. Somewhat true, but so does the UK with its unelected upper house! Having Ian Botham made a permanent legislator because of his "loyalty" to the Party is not really the stuff of a democratic country. The EU does have flaws, but that's not the basis on which Brexit was fought.
- blibble 6y ago
  > They’ll be leaving the UN Security Council in the next few years most likely, in the name of control and sovereignty. again, based on what? half of your posts here are speculation based on no substance whatsoever what did the UK ever do to you?
DoingIsLearning 6y ago
As a non-british who has had a great deal of experiences in Britain, I say you will likely still be ok. I think there is a lot of 'good riddance' feelings in the EU population towards the UK right now but that is mostly driven by the way the media creates this black and white, us vs them divisive messages, none of which has any basis in reality. The UK had for many years served as the ironclad under which more budget conservative countries protected themselves in EU negotiations. The UK got all the hate and the stereotype of the 'difficult' person in the room and all the other countries got there defensive stand preserved. With the UK now leaving it's likely that the Netherlands or the 'New Hanseatic league' will probably fill the role of the 'difficult' person in the room. Irrespective of all the sanguine media, the UK still has a great deal of positive points that make it attractive for businesses when compared with other EU countries: - Flexible Labour law (e.g. France would be a counter-example) - Functioning/Expedient Legal system - Competitive tax framework - Access to VC levels of funding for startups mostly biased towards London, but still - The volume of funding available for University research and spin-offs (when comparing with other EU countries) - Network effects with the US. - An internal 60mil people consumer market, with a fairly high median disposable income (specially when compared with the EU27 median) and credit-friendly. The EU project has a lot of ideals and visions sliding along a spectrum. There should never be a situation where if you do not agree with me than you are against me, that is reductionist and will never work in a EU wide project with some many heterogenous countries and cultures. In my opinion we cannot artificially accelerate what is likely a multi-generational mind shift (slow creep towards an EU federation) with process-driven reforms. If I dare making a prediction I don't think the UK will be in a scenario of having to ration insuline medication or riots in the street as some describe, I also don't think the UK will be business as usual as some conservatives describe. It will mostly likely be somewhere in between because as with most things in reality this situation is nuanced and complex.
- osobo 6y ago
  Well, it's no so much 'good riddance' (we really want you to stay) as we're all glad the awkward political tug of war is over and we all know where we stand. Even if it isn't where we would have liked to, at least we can try and move on. As for the UK: A large part of their economy is based on a service industry, compounded by being the traditional gateway between the US and Europe. The rise of China, the stumbling of the US, the isolationist movement of the UK, draconian internet legislature and the EU being forced to pull together by Covid19 all undermine this classic business hub model.

Likewise, but that cause is lost. They’ll be leaving the UN Security Council in the next few years most likely, in the name of control and sovereignty. I’d get out while you can.

arethuza 6y ago
I can't see the UK voluntarily leaving the UN Security Council and as we usually act as the sidekick of the US I can't imagine they'd want the UK to leave either.
- corford 6y ago
  On the other hand, I can see the other more powerful Security Council countries leaving and setting up something else (to which the UK, now a rather middling power, will not be invited).
  - gadders 6y ago
    6th largest country by GDP out of 195 is a strange definition of "middling".
    - manquer 6y ago
      India is 5th largest GDP and also a nuclear power, it is not a permanent member and does not have veto power on the SC. Germany/Japan are higher than both India and U.K. and still not part of council for obvious historical reasons. GDP and nuclear arsenal are just two aspects to power, lot more to it than just that. When France and UK became part initial members the SC. They were still colonial powers controlling a lot of the world, and won the war, they are no longer have that kind of strength or influence. If a new council were created in the somewhat near future it would be because power dynamics have shifted far enough that the current council is no longer useful, from the current members UK and France are most likely to ones for that shift and not enjoy similar rights. New powers at the table could be EU as a whole, India, Brazil perhaps Japan and Germany etc.
      - gadders 6y ago
        As it's the security council, I think a functioning military would also be a requirement. Germany and Japan don't have this.
        dragonwriter 6y ago
        Germany and Japan have functioning militaries; they have legal restrictions on their use, but those restrictions don't, IIRC, obstruct their participation in anything that the Security Council would decide.
docdeek 6y ago
Leaving their permanent seat on the UNSC would be the last thing the UK would do if they were committed to control and sovereignty.
rgblambda 6y ago
Not sure if you're joking but the UNSC is associated with power and prestige. The UK would need to be dragged out of that. Same goes for NATO.
- madaxe_again 6y ago
  And the U.K. had unprecedented power and control within Europe, and were willing to walk away. The press in the U.K. is attacking UN agencies daily - it would not surprise me in the slightest if the U.K. decided the SC was too constraining, their veto not big enough. Same goes for NATO - the ERG want out, and feel the contributions are an unfair burden. They are right now opaquely “streamlining” the military. How that helps meet the NATO commitment, not clear. Everyone said {the many things that have come to pass over the past few years} would never happen, that it would be an insane choice. At this point, the insane choice is the inevitable choice, so I’d put money (actually, I have, I am shorting sterling, hard, as a hedge) on them leaving both the UN and NATO.
  - dTal 6y ago
    >At this point, the insane choice is the inevitable choice At this point I am beginning to wonder what is behind the pattern. Are we witnessing the failure of governments acting in the best national interests because they have finally become fully subverted from within by selfish forces? A common pattern to the madness in the US and the madness in the UK is that an inner circle stand to get very rich from all the goings-on.
  - kentrado 6y ago
    Maybe it has something to do with the EU? What I see missing in a lot of this discussions is always a honest critique of the flaws of the EU that may have caused Brexit. The EU has a serious democratic deficit and this will never be resolved.
    - pjc50 6y ago
      > The EU has a serious democratic deficit and this will never be resolved. Somewhat true, but so does the UK with its unelected upper house! Having Ian Botham made a permanent legislator because of his "loyalty" to the Party is not really the stuff of a democratic country. The EU does have flaws, but that's not the basis on which Brexit was fought.
blibble 6y ago
> They’ll be leaving the UN Security Council in the next few years most likely, in the name of control and sovereignty. again, based on what? half of your posts here are speculation based on no substance whatsoever what did the UK ever do to you?

DoingIsLearning 6y ago

As a non-british who has had a great deal of experiences in Britain, I say you will likely still be ok. I think there is a lot of 'good riddance' feelings in the EU population towards the UK right now but that is mostly driven by the way the media creates this black and white, us vs them divisive messages, none of which has any basis in reality. The UK had for many years served as the ironclad under which more budget conservative countries protected themselves in EU negotiations. The UK got all the hate and the stereotype of the 'difficult' person in the room and all the other countries got there defensive stand preserved. With the UK now leaving it's likely that the Netherlands or the 'New Hanseatic league' will probably fill the role of the 'difficult' person in the room. Irrespective of all the sanguine media, the UK still has a great deal of positive points that make it attractive for businesses when compared with other EU countries: - Flexible Labour law (e.g. France would be a counter-example) - Functioning/Expedient Legal system - Competitive tax framework - Access to VC levels of funding for startups mostly biased towards London, but still - The volume of funding available for University research and spin-offs (when comparing with other EU countries) - Network effects with the US. - An internal 60mil people consumer market, with a fairly high median disposable income (specially when compared with the EU27 median) and credit-friendly. The EU project has a lot of ideals and visions sliding along a spectrum. There should never be a situation where if you do not agree with me than you are against me, that is reductionist and will never work in a EU wide project with some many heterogenous countries and cultures. In my opinion we cannot artificially accelerate what is likely a multi-generational mind shift (slow creep towards an EU federation) with process-driven reforms. If I dare making a prediction I don't think the UK will be in a scenario of having to ration insuline medication or riots in the street as some describe, I also don't think the UK will be business as usual as some conservatives describe. It will mostly likely be somewhere in between because as with most things in reality this situation is nuanced and complex.

osobo 6y ago
Well, it's no so much 'good riddance' (we really want you to stay) as we're all glad the awkward political tug of war is over and we all know where we stand. Even if it isn't where we would have liked to, at least we can try and move on. As for the UK: A large part of their economy is based on a service industry, compounded by being the traditional gateway between the US and Europe. The rise of China, the stumbling of the US, the isolationist movement of the UK, draconian internet legislature and the EU being forced to pull together by Covid19 all undermine this classic business hub model.