Brexit

[Morkonan]

For those intimately living within this situation:

Who, among any notables, is known as a person who is trying to bring unity to the UK despite the bickering over Brexit? But, while at the same time, maintaining that the referendum must be upheld as it is the "Will of the People?"

Isn't there someone out there who is simply trying to do the "let's just get on with it" kind of resigned indifference the Brits, and others, are famous for? But, with the added twist of actually trying to bring people back together instead of insisting on driving them apart?

In the US, we sometimes get "headlines" on this, but they're more often given less attention. Still Brexit stuff is always somewhere on the front-page for most news orgs. But, I've stopped paying much attention since it's just been the same old junk coming out of Parliament and May. Somebody else, surely, has to be making some kind of positive, uplifting, headlines in the UK, right?

[Mightysword]

I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree that believing in democracy and in following the vote as run makes me in some way a "softer" Remainer. I wish us to remain in the EU as much now as when I voted in the referendum, but I have to acknowledge that I am not in the majority there according to the results. If we end up with a second referendum, or Brexit never happens because of the current mess, I'll be simultaneously happy that my wishes have been followed and disappointed at what that means for our democratic system, such as it is.

By softer and harder I don't mean to question the strength of your belief. It's like there are people who don't like Trump, didn't vote vote him and won't vote for him in the future, but they accept "the people voted him to be the president, and I'll respect that" as oppose to the "HE'S NOT MY PRESIDENT!!" crowd who don't mind trying every trick of the book, clean or dirty to remove Trump even if just one day earlier.

The more I look at the backdrop issue, the more I think it's just an excuse, a silver lining for those who want to remain and also those who want to leave but don't dare to leave because of the consequence. While it looks like there are a lot of infighting and disagreement within the parliament, I'm somewhat suspicious it's all just theatrics where everyone is playing their part. It's fairly obvious at this point they won't agree on a single anything and save a revoke of article 50, the only other possible outcome is a hard exit, and they're playing the game where they won't have to take responsibility for the latter. And to achieve this, they're trying to push the EU's button so they are the one gonna do it. I bet there is a lot UK's politician "secretly" hope the EU will come out and say "ok time's up you're leaving", not because they want to finally leave, but because so they can blame the EU for it. They can use that basic to spin the narrative of the fallout for something like "hey we tried but it's the evil EU who forced it!" and hopefully absolve themselves. In case you think that's far fetch and "no way voters gonna fall for that!", remember nationalism is a thing, and "us vs them" is not exactly a hard narrative to sell.

Apparently there is at least one person in the EU see through this scheme, his name is Donal Tusk. Rumor has it today that he wants to just throw the UK a one year extension, and this will safely throw the UK and their scheming off their back. Most people seems to think it's because the EU doesn't want to keep having to call meeting for one extension or another, but I think the reason is because beside the inconvenience and that is that process is risky for the EU as well. By that I don't mean the business uncertainly, but given each extension has to be agree unanimously, there is the risk someone run out of patient and thus force the EU play right into the UK's trap and become the bad guy. This way the ball is put in the UK hand and they have to own it, and somehow I doubt your politicians actually like it despite the rhetoric. After all, who here can be confident that something can be worked out even if the UK has one more year?

Of course, those are just my opinion and probably I should wear the conspiracy hat as well. But it's hard to not at least contemplate that possibility. I know you guys have been referring to the current situation as a joke, but I think it's past the point of a joke now and more like deliberated. It's like when you look at someone and say "No one can be this stupid, so this person is just acting stupid in greater hindsight". I lost count on how many votes the UK has and even what it is about. The parliament took the control from the PM accusing of her being stubborn and running the clock down, and they then do exactly that themselves. I saw a comment like this on BBC yesterday: "We just received a confirmation of the confirmatory vote to confirm that nothing was confirmed".

Sure, you may say they're making themselves look like fools, but it's still better being fools then being death.

[BugMeister]

For those intimately living within this situation:

Who, among any notables, is known as a person who is trying to bring unity to the UK despite the bickering over Brexit? But, while at the same time, maintaining that the referendum must be upheld as it is the "Will of the People?"

Isn't there someone out there who is simply trying to do the "let's just get on with it" kind of resigned indifference the Brits, and others, are famous for? But, with the added twist of actually trying to bring people back together instead of insisting on driving them apart?

In the US, we sometimes get "headlines" on this, but they're more often given less attention. Still Brexit stuff is always somewhere on the front-page for most news orgs. But, I've stopped paying much attention since it's just been the same old junk coming out of Parliament and May. Somebody else, surely, has to be making some kind of positive, uplifting, headlines in the UK, right?

Dangermouse..

[CBJ]

Who, among any notables, is known as a person who is trying to bring unity to the UK despite the bickering over Brexit? But, while at the same time, maintaining that the referendum must be upheld as it is the "Will of the People?"

Isn't there someone out there who is simply trying to do the "let's just get on with it" kind of resigned indifference the Brits, and others, are famous for? But, with the added twist of actually trying to bring people back together instead of insisting on driving them apart?

Short answer: nobody. All the leading politicians are too busy trying to work out what will keep their own parties together, and put them in the least bad position to take power after this fiasco is finally over. A few lesser-known politicians have made some effort, but their attempts at compromise have generally been scuppered by the various vested interests. For example, someone called Nick Boles, who I'd never heard of until last week, brokered a possible compromise but ended up resigning from his party in frustration when it was voted down by his own colleagues.

[BugMeister]

- the public's lack of trust is causing a loss of faith..
- everyone's looking for a sign..

- apparently, we're on the way out..
- out of the bottle..

- just like the genie..

[pjknibbs]

Short answer: nobody. All the leading politicians are too busy trying to work out what will keep their own parties together, and put them in the least bad position to take power after this fiasco is finally over.

I've said it before-- I think the likes of Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage never actually wanted to win the vote in the first place. They wanted to lose, but by a narrow enough margin that they could still keep pushing the anti-EU agenda due to having some sort of mandate. Now they did win it, they don't know how to put the genie back in the bottle.

[Chips]

For those intimately living within this situation:

Who, among any notables, is known as a person who is trying to bring unity to the UK despite the bickering over Brexit? But, while at the same time, maintaining that the referendum must be upheld as it is the "Will of the People?"

How do you bring unity? You've got a population that approx half want out and half want in. You've got political parties representing up to ~40% of the voters that who voted for said party, who are within their own party, split. Those voters who voted for said party... are split. Throughout it all, the ever increasing hysterics are whipping people up more.

No-one is listening to anyone anymore. You just have to read comment sections to see how Remainers think collectively about those who voted Brexit are like, and the same in return. Those broad brushes are often vastly misguided and entirely prejudiced by the person making the claim about the other side.

Reminds me of the Fox Hunting circa 1999 was it? You either supported it, or didn't, and there was absolutely no meeting or dialog that'd ever get both sides to agree to ANYTHING.

Isn't there someone out there who is simply trying to do the "let's just get on with it" kind of resigned indifference the Brits, and others, are famous for? But, with the added twist of actually trying to bring people back together instead of insisting on driving them apart?

Theresa May? The problem is - get on with what? Leaving? Parliament aren't letting that happen - otherwise we'd have been out with the negotiated deal TM had. It's not Theresa May that's stopping it, it's the belief that the negotiated exit deal that she holds from negotiating with the EU is "not good enough", where the not good enough is:
1) Not remaining in the EU for those that, regardless of what was voted for, do not want the UK to leave and are willing to ignore the referendum to achieve it.
2) Not taking all the good bits of the EU despite meaning you take all the "bad bits" (quotes as it depends on viewpoint) - such as custom union means... the UK can't negotiate trade deals alone, it's only as part of the wider EU negotiation, which isn't (obviously) in an individual countries best interest.
3) Not leaving all the EU behind and going it alone.

Rumour had it the lack of acceptability was something to do with Northern Ireland, but it appears the EU agreed to it as did the UK Government - except it didn't appease the Brexit aspects of the Tory party and appeared to alarm others too... so got shot down. It was supposed to have something in place to appease that, but it still got shot down.

The Brexit fiasco is entirely Parliaments own making. Theresa May may be copping a lot of flak over how she's handled it, but Parliament hasn't got a clue either and they're as divided as the nation.

As has been said by even the various Europeans - "Parliament needs to decide what it is for" -- but at the moment our Parliament is utter garbage.

[Morkonan]

How do you bring unity? ....

Understood.

But, that's what "powerful leaders" are for. It's what they do. What I was looking for was evidence that there was one that was stepping up to the task. You can convince both those who like pirates and those who like ninjas to not argue about it while they're in the same room if you're an effective enough leader. (Pirates, always! Sometimes ninjas,tho...) But, to do that often requires appealing to a common cause or something "bigger" that can bind people together, like their hatred of somebody else. (Neither pirates or ninjas like Barney the Dinosaur - Fact.)

Theresa May? The problem is - get on with what?

Uh... "gettin' on?" Going somewhere? Doing something? I dunno, whatever the "Parliament Stuffs" that are supposed to be done to get other things done. In this case, Parliament appears to consider the Brexit Referendum an actionable act, so that means they're supposed to be making it happen.

Leaving? Parliament aren't letting that happen - otherwise we'd have been out with the negotiated deal TM had. It's not Theresa May that's stopping it, it's the belief that the negotiated exit deal that she holds from negotiating with the EU is "not good enough", where the not good enough is:
1) Not remaining in the EU for those that, regardless of what was voted for, do not want the UK to leave and are willing to ignore the referendum to achieve it.
2) Not taking all the good bits of the EU despite meaning you take all the "bad bits" (quotes as it depends on viewpoint) - such as custom union means... the UK can't negotiate trade deals alone, it's only as part of the wider EU negotiation, which isn't (obviously) in an individual countries best interest.
3) Not leaving all the EU behind and going it alone.

IIRC, and I apologize if I'm thinking of the wrong "Deal" that May had, what I remember reading after people had sifted through it and brought out the highlighted words there wasn't really anything there. It was kind of like getting a piece of paper full of "maybesos" or "to be decided." "The UK will leave Brexit with some kind of deal on a to be announced date under negotiated conditions to be decided upon at a later date." Or, something like that. IOW - The key points everyone was squabbling over weren't addressed.

...The Brexit fiasco is entirely Parliaments own making. Theresa May may be copping a lot of flak over how she's handled it, but Parliament hasn't got a clue either and they're as divided as the nation.

As has been said by even the various Europeans - "Parliament needs to decide what it is for" -- but at the moment our Parliament is utter garbage.

I can't know enough to fix the blame, so all I can say is that "The Government" called for a "Referendum" and, therefore, not acting competently after it is "The Government's fault." Parliament, May, whoever... Someone needs to find out who was saying all this was a bad idea and should be more well thought through before going into a Referendum and then elect them to all the offices. They're likely the only one smart enough to figure out a way to move forward. Unfortunately, though, they probable don't have a lot of influence to make that happen. Nobody was listening to them before the Referendum.

An interesting article on the effects Brexit has had in the E.U.: CNN: After Brexit, Europe will never be the same again.

Though the E.U. has been couched as an evil controlling bogeyman, the fallout from Brexit is directly reflecting on the effectiveness and competency of the E.U. Warning signs appear to be looming regarding how some other countries feel and the E.U. has basically been given notice that it needs to listen of the specific concerns of individual member-states or risk... further disillusionment.

... For example, someone called Nick Boles, who I'd never heard of until last week, brokered a possible compromise but ended up resigning from his party in frustration when it was voted down by his own colleagues.

Well, "there was an attempt" at least...

And, what does that say about "the helpers" in this current environment? Safety for politicians tends to reside at either end of the extreme where things like facts and reality rarely intrude to trouble their re-election bids.

[Chips]

Ack, apologies - I started typing out a reply about Labour, the Backstop (defaults to customs union if no agreement, and originally required EU to say was okay - which meant they could keep UK in perpetual customs union), Tories, party lines/divides and the EU - as usually, links, quotes, blah.

But then I realised, post 20 mins + links, quotes and more - life is too short and the post makes no difference; at some point you either have to continually invest time and energy or back out. As one of the worlds slowest posters, I can easily eat up 30 mins reading/linking/quoting and thinking for something that appears to be just 2-3 paragraphs. And entering a discussion means repeating this each time.

Meanwhile, it's dry outside and I've got mowing to do before driving 100 miles back to my work residence No disrespect in not engaging, just... I said before, debate may be good but time spent can't be claimed back and I don't really enjoy it, especially if I find myself doing it repeatedly and missing out on things I actually enjoy doing >.< If we were sat infront of log fire, in arm chairs, nice glass of wine - then heck yes But this room is 10 degrees C and i've 6 layers on.

So thought I'd say that rather than just "ghosting" (not replying!)

[BugMeister]

How do you bring unity? ....

Understood.

But, that's what "powerful leaders" are for. It's what they do. What I was looking for was evidence that there was one that was stepping up to the task. You can convince both those who like pirates and those who like ninjas to not argue about it while they're in the same room if you're an effective enough leader. (Pirates, always! Sometimes ninjas,tho...) But, to do that often requires appealing to a common cause or something "bigger" that can bind people together, like their hatred of somebody else. (Neither pirates or ninjas like Barney the Dinosaur - Fact.)

Theresa May? The problem is - get on with what?

Uh... "gettin' on?" Going somewhere? Doing something? I dunno, whatever the "Parliament Stuffs" that are supposed to be done to get other things done. In this case, Parliament appears to consider the Brexit Referendum an actionable act, so that means they're supposed to be making it happen.

Leaving? Parliament aren't letting that happen - otherwise we'd have been out with the negotiated deal TM had. It's not Theresa May that's stopping it, it's the belief that the negotiated exit deal that she holds from negotiating with the EU is "not good enough", where the not good enough is:
1) Not remaining in the EU for those that, regardless of what was voted for, do not want the UK to leave and are willing to ignore the referendum to achieve it.
2) Not taking all the good bits of the EU despite meaning you take all the "bad bits" (quotes as it depends on viewpoint) - such as custom union means... the UK can't negotiate trade deals alone, it's only as part of the wider EU negotiation, which isn't (obviously) in an individual countries best interest.
3) Not leaving all the EU behind and going it alone.

IIRC, and I apologize if I'm thinking of the wrong "Deal" that May had, what I remember reading after people had sifted through it and brought out the highlighted words there wasn't really anything there. It was kind of like getting a piece of paper full of "maybesos" or "to be decided." "The UK will leave Brexit with some kind of deal on a to be announced date under negotiated conditions to be decided upon at a later date." Or, something like that. IOW - The key points everyone was squabbling over weren't addressed.

...The Brexit fiasco is entirely Parliaments own making. Theresa May may be copping a lot of flak over how she's handled it, but Parliament hasn't got a clue either and they're as divided as the nation.

As has been said by even the various Europeans - "Parliament needs to decide what it is for" -- but at the moment our Parliament is utter garbage.

I can't know enough to fix the blame, so all I can say is that "The Government" called for a "Referendum" and, therefore, not acting competently after it is "The Government's fault." Parliament, May, whoever... Someone needs to find out who was saying all this was a bad idea and should be more well thought through before going into a Referendum and then elect them to all the offices. They're likely the only one smart enough to figure out a way to move forward. Unfortunately, though, they probable don't have a lot of influence to make that happen. Nobody was listening to them before the Referendum.

An interesting article on the effects Brexit has had in the E.U.: CNN: After Brexit, Europe will never be the same again.

Though the E.U. has been couched as an evil controlling bogeyman, the fallout from Brexit is directly reflecting on the effectiveness and competency of the E.U. Warning signs appear to be looming regarding how some other countries feel and the E.U. has basically been given notice that it needs to listen of the specific concerns of individual member-states or risk... further disillusionment.

... For example, someone called Nick Boles, who I'd never heard of until last week, brokered a possible compromise but ended up resigning from his party in frustration when it was voted down by his own colleagues.

Well, "there was an attempt" at least...

And, what does that say about "the helpers" in this current environment? Safety for politicians tends to reside at either end of the extreme where things like facts and reality rarely intrude to trouble their re-election bids.

- that you regard them all as nothing more than the manipulators of innocents.. (??)

- interesting article by David Mitchell in today's Guardian:
read:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... d-mitchell

*again*

[greypanther]

Ack, apologies - I started typing out a reply about Labour, the Backstop (defaults to customs union if no agreement, and originally required EU to say was okay - which meant they could keep UK in perpetual customs union), Tories, party lines/divides and the EU - as usually, links, quotes, blah.

But then I realised, post 20 mins + links, quotes and more - life is too short and the post makes no difference; at some point you either have to continually invest time and energy or back out. As one of the worlds slowest posters, I can easily eat up 30 mins reading/linking/quoting and thinking for something that appears to be just 2-3 paragraphs. And entering a discussion means repeating this each time.

Meanwhile, it's dry outside and I've got mowing to do before driving 100 miles back to my work residence No disrespect in not engaging, just... I said before, debate may be good but time spent can't be claimed back and I don't really enjoy it, especially if I find myself doing it repeatedly and missing out on things I actually enjoy doing >.< If we were sat infront of log fire, in arm chairs, nice glass of wine - then heck yes But this room is 10 degrees C and i've 6 layers on.

So thought I'd say that rather than just "ghosting" (not replying!)

Got to say this is probably the best post in this thread!
( Also there is toooo much " ghosting! )

[Bishop149]

The Brexit fiasco is entirely Parliaments own making. Theresa May may be copping a lot of flak over how she's handled it, but Parliament hasn't got a clue either and they're as divided as the nation.

I disagree with this one. This is almost entirely the government's fault (most specifically Mrs May) not Parliament's.

The government has approached this whole thing with the objective of doing whatever they damn well please assuming that any resistance from any quarter could be simply steamrolled over.
Initially they wanted to bypass parliament entirely and simply do the entire thing via the UK's version of executive authority, some what colourfully named "Henry VIII powers". This was blocked by the courts.
Then they decided that their slim majority was a bit dicey and called a bloody GE to try and increase it. Instead they lost their majority
Then they paid £1bn bribe to the DUP to get an even dicier majority back.
They tried to ensure that any vote in parliament happened after the event and merely amounted to a rubber stamp, this was blocked by parliament.

The government took this ridiculous authoritarian approach because they knew damn well they couldn't rely on support even from within their own damn party. Europe has always been a source of division in the Tories but until now they've always managed to rally around and put party first, not this time, this time it might spell the end of them.

If our whole Parliament had been involved from the beginning then perhaps we'd have a better more agreed outcome, but thanks to constant Tory intransigence, infighting and efforts to act like a dictator Parliament didn't even START to be involved until mid-January, 2.5 months before we were due to leave. . . and in that time we have arguably seem more progress towards some kind of compromise position between the 52:48 split than we've seen in the preceding 2 years.
Its obviously too little, too late but it's something.

Oh, and can we just talk about that £1bn bribe to the DUP? Money well spent Theresa. . . . thanks to their support you've easily enacted your negotiated. . . . . oh wait, no they haven't given you **** have they?. Literally the only thing the DUP have helped her with was surviving a no confidence vote.
A billion quid to save her own job. . . that's it! if you ask me that skating very close to my definition of treason.

[Alan Phipps]

To be fair though, Northern Ireland is a part of the UK and so £1 Bn spent on infrastructure and improvements there is not at all wasted money. I do take the point though that the outcome of the coalition with the DUP in order to retain power was indeed two edged and it has turned out to be of dubious benefit to the Tories.

[Morkonan]

...- that you regard them all as nothing more than the manipulators of innocents.. (??)
..

I don't know what you mean.

I suppose I could expand it to be applicable: If you force people to choose one of two choices but don't tell them the truthful consequences of either of them, they are innocent and blameless if one of those choices ends up causing harm. In that respect, one could argue the citizens of the UK are blameless here for making their choice, since it's doubtful there was any adequate discussion or dissemination of pertinent information. Deciding which/what information was valid would not have been a matter of opinion, either - If it was dependent or connected to E.U. membership, it would be effected. And, without a plan, the very real possibility of those effects not being known or being outside of the power of the UK to affect would have been very real.

[Observe]

...In that respect, one could argue the citizens of the UK are blameless here for making their choice...

In broad strokes, the decision was between nationalism and globalism. Between unity and separation. Between being subservient to foreign powers in the interest of the common good vs. being able to act independently. Everyone knew this. Sure, they didn't know the devil-in-the-details, but since this hasn't been done before, no one seemed to fully understand the complications involved.

[Ketraar]

...vs. being able to act independently.

I keep reading this and I keep wonder what people mean by it? Did the UK amass its wealth independently? Did it make its scientific discoveries independently? Maybe its language was made on its own? I struggle to see the appeal of this need for being "independently", but I dont see people go out foraging, or produce their own cars, their own roads, their own phones...

Thus this notion that

...one could argue the citizens of the UK are blameless here for making their choice...

No, the people are the ones that have the responsibility, maybe no fully, but the main issue in my eyes is that people think its not and "the politicians" are to blame, we did nothing wrong. I agree, "you" did nothing, nothing to get informed, nothing to get involved in electing the right people, nothing to demand proper representation, "you" did nothing and now all are paying for it. So yes, mostly people are responsible, they define and shape the societies they live in and doing nothing does the shaping just as much, if not more.

MFG

Ketraar

[Observe]

...vs. being able to act independently.

I keep reading this and I keep wonder what people mean by it? Did the UK amass its wealth independently? Did it make its scientific discoveries independently? Maybe its language was made on its own? I struggle to see the appeal of this need for being "independently"...

Part of the reason you may wonder what people mean by it, is because it is a fictional story. It's a made up narrative that some people believe represents truth. We all have such narratives running through our minds constantly. Humans are story-tellers and we organize around our stories. Most of them are pure fantasy.

[Golden_Gonads]

...In that respect, one could argue the citizens of the UK are blameless here for making their choice...

In broad strokes, the decision was between nationalism and globalism. Between unity and separation. Between being subservient to foreign powers in the interest of the common good vs. being able to act independently. Everyone knew this. Sure, they didn't know the devil-in-the-details, but since this hasn't been done before, no one seemed to fully understand the complications involved.

I'd argue with the 'in the interest of the common good' part of your comment. The EU is corrupt and incompetent, I mean Farage is an MEP for Christ's sake!

[Mightysword]

I suppose I could expand it to be applicable: If you force people to choose one of two choices but don't tell them the truthful consequences of either of them, they are innocent and blameless if one of those choices ends up causing harm. In that respect, one could argue the citizens of the UK are blameless here for making their choice ...

Only if you're talking about kids, sure. If an adult tricked and scam a 5 years old out his sweetroll, then sure I'll agree. But don't kid yourself here, 52% of UK voters voted to leave in the biggest turn out in history, while it may very well be "some" was misinformed, it would be outright denial to say none of them know what they were doing. We're talking about Adults in full command of their faculties, professionals that are probably more informed on the issues than all of us here among those 52%. If I were to be an upstanding UK citizen who voted leave, upon the assumption you're suggesting I can only see two conclusion: I voted knowing what I'm doing even though it turned out to be a mess, or I were naive and got tricked. Between those two I'm not sure which is the worse insult ... Remember how I was pretty dismissal of whole "Russian influence and collusion" from the get go right after Trump got into office? It wasn't because I support Trump, but as I said back then I would much prefer to believe American voters voted for a bad president by their own will rather than being an bunch of idiots who don't know what the hell they voted for. I find it's amazing people tried to use Russian as an excuse to absolves themselves from their responsibility as the voters - and maybe it does a little bit - but by doing that I feel they inflicted greater insult on themselves.

Shooting your own foot is bad enough, but it would be even worse if the reason you shot yourself in the foot because someone told you "just try to shoot yourself in the foot, it actually feels good!" and you actually freaking believe it.

[pjknibbs]

The EU is corrupt and incompetent, I mean Farage is an MEP for Christ's sake!

He was elected to that position, same way any of our MPs are produced. I mean, I could just as easily say that the UK Parliament is corrupt and incompetent--I mean, Boris Johnson is an MP for Christ's sake!