Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[kabbes]

Then that has implications for its "workability".

No, it simply has implications regarding which of the three possibilities should be preferred in the absence of a trade deal. If it is the most preferred, it is perfectly workable.

 

[andysays]

So does, in principle, any potential consequence of leaving the EU have to be tolerated simply because people "weren't consulted about it"?

As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.

In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.

 

[teuchter]

No, it simply has implications regarding which of the three possibilities should be preferred in the absence of a trade deal. If it is the most preferred, it is perfectly workable.

Preferred by who?

 

[teuchter]

As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.

In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.

I've not said your aims are sinister, and I don't believe they are sinister. I don't think that a hard land border, or a sea border, would necessarily threaten "peace". I do think they might have unhappy consequences for people living in Ireland, and I don't think you can ignore that.

 

[butchersapron]

I doubt if I can craft an argument which convinces you that those in power aren't cynical and I won't even try. It's a pretty barren cul de sac to go down.

However when you said:



You seemed to be saying that the referendum result was binding in perpetuity until there was another referendum asking the same question. This article has some interesting thoughts on that:

A mandate can be either democratic or irreversible, but it cannot be both – an argument

I think that what kabbes was trying to get across is that your idea of a party being elected to simply reverse or dilute brexit is a bit of fantasy given that elections are always fought on multiple issues - the last election demonstrated that beyond any reasonable doubt. In fact the only democratic mechanism that allows single issues to be voted on is a referendum - and leave won that - also beyond any reasonable doubt. So the reality would be party with a pledge to reverse brexit winning but not elected on that basis then reversing the actual only democratic political mandate on the issue. And if you want to go down that road the last election resulted in parties committed to honouring the democratic referendum results winning 85% of the vote. So allied with the referendum results i think its pretty clear what democracy says - and the anti-democratic potential of your preferred scenario.

As for this guff about a united ireland 'subverting the gfa' - no it doesn't. The gfa put in place a mechanism for moving towards a democratically agreed consensual united ireland. It is not an agreement that is designed to set the current situation in stone. I wonder if those so suddenly concerned with the gfa have given the thing more than cursory glance as they boot it down the road as the latest transparent anti-brexit political football.

 

[sleaterkinney]

And the people of NI voted to remain in the EU; if they choose to leave the UK and become part of Eire, as there is provision for under the GFA, then both those wishes could be met simultaneously. I've already said that would be my preferred solution but that ultimately it's not for me to decide.

But my post referred deliberately to the people of Britain, who have voted to leave the EU but weren't consulted about the GFA, and who, I suggest, cannot and should not be prevented from doing so because of the GFA.

That's just your construct though, the UK is leaving the EU so it has to come up with a solution for NI, which is a part of the UK.

It wasn't all of Britain either, Scotland was remain.

 

[teuchter]

The gfa put in place a mechanism for moving towards a democratically agreed consensual united ireland.

At a pace determined by the people living there, not at a pace determined by what's convenient for the majority of UK residents.

 

[Winot]

As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.

In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.

What’s extraordinary is how sensitive Leavers like you are about your victory. Lots of straw men about being smeared as racist or in favour of restarting the Troubles. If anyone accuses you of that then by all means call them out - but don’t use it as a way of evading the difficulties of implementing the decision you’ve made.

 

[butchersapron]

At a pace determined by the people living there, not at a pace determined by what's convenient for the majority of UK residents.

There is no mechanism for hurrying people into a united ireland via the gfa as result of brexit or anything else.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Constitutionally, those in power can pretty much always find a way to do whatever the fuck they want. When I talked about a step back from Brexit subverting the democratic process, do you think I meant constitutionally?

Democratic process. You've not been reading the papers lately have you?

 

[kabbes]

Preferred by who?

By whom

By whomsoever is relevant to the decision making process.

 

[Winot]

In principle, given time, the U.K. government can reasonably diverge from a referendum result based on their electoral mandates. But not so soon after the result of direct question. It’d create a massive democratic crisis.

That’s not what you said though. You said

Only if that were the only dividing line between parties. Which it never will be. Otherwise, how can it override a directly asked question?

So the question is how long after the referendum is long enough. And that depends on what has happened since and how big the mandate is at the GE.

 

[DotCommunist]

only the lib dems would go for such madness at this time. And I'm sure I can guess who'd vote for them again

 

[WJ90]

TBH there's no overwhelming desire to leave, unless you think 52:48 is a massive majority

Correct; but the legal process of leaving has already been started, thus you need an overwhelming desire to remain to overturn that.

 

[philosophical]

So the people of Britain are simply not allowed to leave the EU, even though they voted to do so, because the people of Ireland voted for something else which might be difficult (though certainly not impossible) to continue if Britain were to leave.

Sounds legit...

The UK can leave the EU, all they need to do is come up with a credible plan as to how to do it. It shouldn't be at all a problem because many many brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, it would be nice if they told the rest of the population mind you.

 

[philosophical]

One of your perfectly workable solutions was a united Ireland. That can't come about without subverting the GFA unless enough people vote for it.

I'm less clear about whether a hard land border technically subverts the GFA. It seems at least to subvert the spirit of it though.

Whatever it subverts, the practicality of doing it is either impossible, or impossibly draining on resources.

 

[stethoscope]

I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made

 

[teuchter]

I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made

100% it's my responsibility to consider the consequences of whoever I vote for getting into power.

 

[Hollis]

The UK can leave the EU, all they need to do is come up with a credible plan as to how to do it. It shouldn't be at all a problem because many many brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, it would be nice if they told the rest of the population mind you.

Immigrants.

I wonder if May went back to the EU and said, if we can stop/limit this free-flow of immigrants, then we'll stay part of the gang?

 

[stethoscope]

100% it's my responsibility to consider the consequences of whoever I vote for getting into power.

No vote from you next time then

 

[philosophical]

I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made

It would be a good idea for voters to think up credible plans for what they are voting for, it might focus the minds of some before they vote.
For me the crucial difference between local elections and general elections, and the referendum, is that the referendum is now for all time (I certainly don't want another one) and other election happenings can be re visited, including the credibility and practicality of plans regarding housing.
Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.

 

[teuchter]

There is no mechanism for hurrying people into a united ireland via the gfa as result of brexit or anything else.

If a united Ireland is one of the "workable solutions" and the GFA is not to be subverted, then it has to happen via the GFA, and it has to happen in, what, the next two years or something. Maybe some people think that's something that's in some way likely to happen. As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.

 

[eatmorecheese]

Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.

And you'll keep reacting ad nauseam like a broken record.

 

[kabbes]

As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.

I don’t think you understand what “workable” means either.

 

[Santino]

It would be a good idea for voters to think up credible plans for what they are voting for, it might focus the minds of some before they vote.
For me the crucial difference between local elections and general elections, and the referendum, is that the referendum is now for all time (I certainly don't want another one) and other election happenings can be re visited, including the credibility and practicality of plans regarding housing.
Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.

That's not very democratic. In a democracy you should respect the outcome of the process and work together to implement it.

 

[butchersapron]

If a united Ireland is one of the "workable solutions" and the GFA is not to be subverted, then it has to happen via the GFA, and it has to happen in, what, the next two years or something. Maybe some people think that's something that's in some way likely to happen. As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.

So the operation of the gfa leading to a united ireland subverts the gfa?

 

[philosophical]

And you'll keep reacting ad nauseam like a broken record.

Yep. The broken record is an excellent technique.

 

[philosophical]

That's not very democratic. In a democracy you should respect the outcome of the process and work together to implement it.

I suppose that is your personal definition of what democracy means, you won't be surprised to know I disagree.
If there was a 'democratic' decision to haul off people without generations of proof that their ancestors were born in the UK and force them on transport to somewhere else I would not 'respect' that at all but fight against it as best I could.

 

[teuchter]

So the operation of the gfa leading to a united ireland subverts the gfa?

huh?

 

[philosophical]

Clause six of the GFA sets out how a United Ireland might come about.