Jump to content
Gracii Guns

British Politics

Recommended Posts

Just now, SoulMonster said:

Firstly, politicians cannot just decide that the people get one and only one chance to voice their opinion on a subject. Politicians cannot make such restrictions on the Democratic rights of a people. Only people can reduce their own power. 

Secondly, this is especially true if it is only some politicians trying to limit the Democratic rights of people. A Tory can't just stand up and declare that there will be only one democratic election regarding a subject. The entire collegium of politicians don't hold that power, much less some of them.

Thirdly, the once and for all argument obviously was directed at the outcome of the referendum, not the referendum itself. Brexit is a once in a lifetime thing. But deciding on whether to Brex doesn't have to.

Oh dear. You really hate democracy, don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Ehh, Scotland and Northern Ireland are in the United Kingdom!!

(Gibraltar is an overseas territory).

 

So what? The UK didn't vote Leave, only England and Wales. You can't claim the whole UK voted Leave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and now add onto that list

- a general election.

Literally every conceivable outcome of Brexit has been vetoed by this (2017) Parliament, the worst Parliament in our entire history. We cannot even vote them out now! They have removed that from us (or the fixed-term parliament act has). All you have now is constitutional deadlock. I suppose Johnson may as well tend his resignation and request a Corbyn premiership. Soviet Socialist Republics of Britain (he won't want ''Great'' in there) beckon...

Ironically an arch-Eurosceptic also!  

4 minutes ago, Padme said:

So what? The UK didn't vote Leave, only England and Wales. You can't claim the whole UK voted Leave

The referendum was for the United Kingdom in toto, not itemized according to home nations (however such a referendum would achieve an result I will not comment on...). 

Edited by DieselDaisy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

But Parliament isn't stopping a Brexit (and hence being in conflict with the outcome of the referendum 3 years ago), they are trying to stop a hard Brexit, which it is unlikely the majority of the populous wants. So you are wrong in saying that the Parliament refuses to implement the Democratic outcome of the referendum, they are just trying to do it in a not mind-blowingly stupid way. 

Yes they are. That is exactly what they are doing, slowly but surely. If you seriously think that isn't happening, you are being very naive, my friend. We will eventually be forced to have a second referendum, which will basically be a choice between Remain and a deal which is Brexit in name only (Remain). This has been the tactics of Remainer MPs ever since the referendum, to delay and delay again, dragging the process out over such a long period of time, in cahoots with the EU, to the point where we are paralyzed as a country and people are worn down and demoralised. It is disgusting but I wouldn't expect much else from our disgraceful, contemptible politicians, who all have their snouts firmly in the trough.

Edited by bucketfoot
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Literally every conceivable outcome of Brexit has been vetoed by this (2017) Parliament, the worst Parliament in our entire history. We cannot even vote them out now! They have removed that from us (or the fixed-term parliament act has).

They have learnt very well from their EU overlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bucketfoot said:

They have learnt very well from their EU overlords.

They are the EU, in that they're part of the same metropolitan elite and possess the same anti-democratic tendencies. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

You may be too premature in your celebration (I assume you're happy about Benn's bill being passed in its second reading in Commons, or maybe about the defections reducing Boris's majority, or both perhaps?). There are now 102 amendments in Lords introduced by Brexiteering peers - each must be voted on twice so over 100 hours of continuous proceedings.

How about now? :lol: 

69852780_10162062591865702_1530207615324

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Oh dear. You really hate democracy, don't you?

It amuses me that you find the concept of asking the population again, three years after the last referendum, to voice their opinion on something as a guide for politician, as un-democratic. To me, democracy is exactly that: to give the people a voice and a vote. It leaves me with the distinct feeling you only care for democracy as far as it gives you the results you want. I guess I am more ideologically bound to democracy as a governing style whereas you only care about yourself.

Which makes it ironic that you question my feelings for democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

What would be an ''acceptable Brexit deal''? There is NOTHING left!! Every conceivable outcome of Brexit has been thrown out by this ridiculous Parliament.

Eh, no. The Parliament has not been presented with a deal that would be of benefit to the UK and its population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Eh, no. The Parliament has not been presented with a deal that would be of benefit to the UK and its population.

There is virtually no conceivable soft-Brexit outcome that they have not vetoed: customs Union; single Market (Norway); single market with customs Union (Norway plus); basic free trade deal (Canada); some vague Corbyn twaddle about ''economic closeness'' - these have all been thrown out of this same Parliament indicatively as has the withdrawal agreement legislatively. There is the (theoretical) withdrawal agreement minus Backstop, which the EU won't countenance. Fundamentally though they don't desire Brexit, well over half of them don't. They aim to frustrate Brexit. I'll ask you a question: what could they conceivably do during the three months' extension that they haven't been able to do in three years? It is just to frustrate Brexit further - with a healthy does of retained Liberal snowflake grievances against Boris Johnson thrown in (''Boris is a rye' sist for commenting on burkas'' etc etc). 

(I'm not a huge admirer of the man myself I should point out. I think he's a tit. But I am just explaining how I perceive it.)

There needs to be a general election immediately. It is that simple. 

5 hours ago, Dazey said:

How about now? :lol: 

69852780_10162062591865702_1530207615324

What an unfortunate misnomering of a surname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

It amuses me that you find the concept of asking the population again, three years after the last referendum, to voice their opinion on something as a guide for politician, as un-democratic. To me, democracy is exactly that: to give the people a voice and a vote. It leaves me with the distinct feeling you only care for democracy as far as it gives you the results you want. I guess I am more ideologically bound to democracy as a governing style whereas you only care about yourself.

Which makes it ironic that you question my feelings for democracy.

I believe if you are going to instigate the virtually unprecedented instrument of a United Kingdom referendum and stick ''once in a generation'' on it, it should be literally that: once in a generation. Otherwise it makes a mockery of the entire process of voting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

There is virtually no conceivable soft-Brexit outcome that they have not vetoed: customs Union; single Market (Norway); single market with customs Union (Norway plus); basic free trade deal (Canada); some vague Corbyn twaddle about ''economic closeness'' - these have all been thrown out of this same Parliament indicatively as has the withdrawal agreement legislatively. There is the (theoretical) withdrawal agreement minus Backstop, which the EU won't countenance. 

In other words, it hasn't been possible to reach an agreement with the EU that would benefit the UK and hence the Parliament have had to reject them all...

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

I believe if you are going to instigate the virtually unprecedented instrument of a United Kingdom referendum and stick ''once in a generation'' on it, it should be literally that: once in a generation. Otherwise it makes a mockery of the entire process of voting. 

Firstly, politicians cannot just decide that the people get one and only one chance to voice their opinion on a subject. Politicians cannot make such restrictions on the Democratic rights of a people. Only people can reduce their own power. 

Secondly, this is especially true if it is only some politicians trying to limit the Democratic rights of people. A Tory can't just stand up and declare that there will be only one democratic election regarding a subject. The entire collegium of politicians don't hold that power, much less some of them.

Thirdly, the once and for all argument obviously was directed at the outcome of the referendum, not the referendum itself. Brexit is a once in a lifetime thing. But deciding on whether to Brex doesn't have to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

In other words, it hasn't been possible to reach an agreement with the EU that would benefit the UK and hence the Parliament have had to reject them all...

...and consequentially paralysis. More procrastinating. 

The rest of your post is just gibberish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

...and consequentially paralysis. More procrastinating. 

They did what they are supposed to do: Act in the best interests of the UK. Sure, the have received a mandate to get the UK out of the EU, but without any details regarding that mandate they have to wait until an agreement presents itself that makes sense, one that actually benefits the UK and their constituents. That's their job. It is not like people voted to leave the EU under any circumstance.

Edited by SoulMonster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

The rest of your post is just gibberish.

I don't think it is gibberish to point out that politicians can't declare a referendum to be final on a subject, nor can any single politicians simply decide to limit the populations' democratic right to voice their opinion on a subject, and lastly, it is not gibberish to point out that the "once in a lifetime" rhetoric was directed towards the outcome of the referendum (because a Brexit is kind-of final) and not the democratic process of letting the people voice their opinion on the matter.

The more time that passes, the more obvious it is that a second referendum must be held for any decisions (leave or remain) to have sufficient democratic legitimacy. Especially considering all the lies from the "Project Fear" campaign leading up to the first referendum.

I get that this must be vexing to a proud nationalist like yourself, but, like, get with the times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

They would what they are supposed to do: act in the best interests of the UK. Sure, the have received a mandata to get the UK out of the EU, but without any details here they have to wait until an agreement presents itself that makes sense. That's their job. It is not like people voted to leave the EU under any circumstance.

They have had three bloody years!! 

Let's get one thing in perspective. This prorogation which triggered Boris's defeat would have shaved 3-4 days off of Parliament's session! They have had three years under a remainer Prime Minister (Theresa May) to decide how to implement the outcome of the referendum, yet are triggered by the shaving off of three days!

What are they going to do in three months that they couldn't do in three years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't think it is gibberish to point out that politicians can't declare a referendum to be final on a subject, nor can any single politicians simply decide to limit the populations' democratic right to voice their opinion on a subject, and lastly, it is not gibberish to point out that the "once in a lifetime" rhetoric was directed towards the outcome of the referendum (because a Brexit is kind-of final) and not the democratic process of letting the people voice their opinion on the matter.

The more time that passes, the more obvious it is that a second referendum must be held for any decisions (leave or remain) to have sufficient democratic legitimacy. Especially considering all the lies from the "Project Fear" campaign leading up to the first referendum.

I get that this must be vexing to a proud nationalist like yourself, but, like, get with the times?

That is one of the worst dodges I have ever heard. You'll literally will not accept that 17.4 million chose to leave the European Union in an once in a lifetime vote. Every sort of dodge, explanation and falsehood has to be provided by yourself to avoid this fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

They have had three bloody years!! 

It is not their fault, really, that a good agreement hasn't been put before them. Thye can't just accept an agreement that is deeply flawed and which they know will hurt the UK. That's not what people voted for in the last referendum, there was no option "Leave the EU under any circumstance, even if we can only get a deal that is really fucking bad for us".

Maybe a good agreement can't really be done with the EU and you will simply have to reconsider your foolish and brash decision to leave?

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

That is one of the worst dodges I have ever heard. You'll literally will not accept that 17.4 million chose to leave the European Union in an once in a lifetime vote. Every sort of dodge, explanation and falsehood has to be provided by yourself to avoid this fact.

Because it wasn't a "once in a lifetime" vote. Politicians can't just make such a decision. And, sorry to say it, if they fooled you into thinking so you are a bit slow. Only the people in a democracy can make a decision to limit their own democratic right in such a way. Not politicians, especially not some politicians who use it rhetorically.

Edited by SoulMonster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People obsessed with parliamentary sovereignty crying because parliament exerts sovereignty! :lol: 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

We all know why Corbyn now doesn't want a general election of course,

 

You're forgetting that Labour has faced this situation before. The last time around when May called for an election, early polls showed Labour was dead. Well the election showed they were alive and well.

I believe that Remainers should vote for Lib. Dem if Labour doesn't come up with a clear plan. And Brexiters should vote for Brexit Party. Polls at this point don't mean too much. There is no election day yet. We haven't seen any manifesto from anyone. And the campaign hasn't started.

 We don't even know if the EU has agreed to the three months extension. Once there is a answer. And once more negotiations have been agreed. Then an election can take place.

And btw... there is something called first time voters

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/04/more-than-100000-people-apply-register-vote-youth-uk-general-election

Edited by Padme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

You may be too premature in your celebration (I assume you're happy about Benn's bill being passed in its second reading in Commons, or maybe about the defections reducing Boris's majority, or both perhaps?). There are now 102 amendments in Lords introduced by Brexiteering peers - each must be voted on twice so over 100 hours of continuous proceedings.

I do hope you weren’t advocating for action by unelected bureaucrats in order to frustrate the will of the House of Commons? :lol:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dazey said:

People obsessed with parliamentary sovereignty crying because parliament exerts sovereignty! :lol: 

What is parliamentary sovereignty though but something that solely emanates from the electorate, the same electorate (17.4 million) who voted to exit the European Union?

50 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Maybe a good agreement can't really be done with the EU and you will simply have to reconsider your foolish and brash decision to leave?

Nope. They voted against that proposal also (184 for, 293 against).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dazey said:

I do hope you weren’t advocating for action by unelected bureaucrats in order to frustrate the will of the House of Commons? :lol:  

You should note that at no stage did I endorse Boris's prorogation, which is what has triggered this cynical, although perfectly legal, parliamentarian behaviour. Refusing a general election is of the same ilk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×