Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is Brexit actually going to happen?

Will we have a brexit?


  • Total voters
    362
Then let me spell it out to you: If you support Brexit, people who are happy to openly spout this racist shit to total strangers are your political bedfellows. And if you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you get fleas!
Your team built a wall man.

Aaaagh this debate will be the death of me honestly.
 
Good luck with that.

Any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Considering the linked article says the French would bring in emergency legislation to avoid the need of visas, should a no-deal Brexit occur.

EU is generally generous with visa exemptions: granting them to countries ranging from Venezuela, through the United Arab Emirates, to Ukraine

So, it's not going to happen to the UK.
 
This will be the last time any incumbent will chuck a public vote out there for the masses to have their say on an issue of this magnitude - it threatens their own legitimacy
Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it). Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have. Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.

That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.
 
Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it). Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have. Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.
The Swiss model sounds good in theory, but it's pretty problematic in practice. Despite making voting as easy as it can possibly be, the referendums regularly get miserable turnouts of 40 per cent or less, and it is very possible for well-organised minority groups to get the 100,000 signatures needed to put questions to referendum in which they energetically mobilise their core to vote, while the apathetic majority offers no opinions.

The Swiss system also isn't immune to its Brexit moments. They voted to impose quotas on immigration in 2014, which would mean ending free movement of people from the EU, which would also mean ending all kinds of trade deals with the EU. Still hasn't been resolved, despite the fact that Swiss referendum results are in theory legally binding. As with brexit, some issues can't be boiled down to such simple questions because you also have to ask 'which of these other things are you prepared to give up in order to do this thing?' for the answer to the question to be meaningful.
 
Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it). Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have. Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.

That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.
Can't help thinking it would be more democratic to at least wait until we have actually left.
 
The Swiss system also isn't immune to its Brexit moments.
Fair points - I'm not trying to avoid Brexit moments though, thats not why to support it. Without deeper social changes it can be dangerous, i appreciate that. Support for the death penalty is the classic UK example. Hitler ran some infamous referendums. Referendum are particularly complex in terms of when to call them, on what issues etc. I've not read up on it, I'm sure theres much work and examples out there, but my point is a more general support of deepening democratic power (as part of wider social change).
 
Fair points - I'm not trying to avoid Brexit moments though, thats not why to support it. Without deeper social changes it can be dangerous, i appreciate that. Support for the death penalty is the classic UK example. Hitler ran some infamous referendums. Referendum are particularly complex in terms of when to call them, on what issues etc. I've not read up on it, I'm sure theres much work and examples out there, but my point is a more general support of deepening democratic power (as part of wider social change).
Yeah, I used to think the Swiss system was a good idea and something that could be learned from, but I'm not so sure now. Also, it does build on a peculiarly Swiss political history, in which 'direct democracy' has very deep roots. But despite that, it still has to confront massive voter apathy and the system is most definitely played by powerful interest groups.

There are two separate ideas here aren't there? First there is representative democracy in which you elect a representative who makes decisions on your behalf and is held to account for those decisions at the next election. Second you have direct democracy in which decisions are taken by asking questions in a referendum. Personally, I see huge limits to the second of these. In theory at least, the first means that those making the decisions are held to account for the consequences of those decisions. That's the main problem with direct democracy - who is accountable when the decision leads to dire consequences?

To extend democracy within the UK system, I would favour some kind of second chamber and/or regional assemblies elected by random ballot. Bit like jury service, but I don't like compulsion, so I'd allow for people to opt out of it.
 
The temptation of the Swiss system is that for every narrow-minded question to do with minarets or immigration, there is a question to do with abolishing the army or introducing a universal citizen's wage (both real examples, both, sadly, defeated). But on balance, I don't think it would work here as well as it does there, and I don't think it works too well there tbh.
 
The temptation of the Swiss system is that for every narrow-minded question to do with minarets or immigration, there is a question to do with abolishing the army or introducing a universal citizen's wage (both real examples, both, sadly, defeated). But on balance, I don't think it would work here as well as it does there, and I don't think it works too well there tbh.
tl;dr? the swiss system is full of holes
 
Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it). Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have. Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.

That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.

I'm not ambivalent as to whether a 2nd ref smacks of making it up as you go along. The process is so dynamic and far more difficult than a number of Brexiters claimed despite the warnings, that I think a 2nd ref is needed on the deal (whatever that is) or staying in the EU.
 
I think a second / approval referendum wasn't considered because on both sides of the debate most people with a strong view had this idea their side was bound to win decisively. Nobody expected this 52/48 shit (in reality 37/35/28 shit) and nobody thought we'd need some kind of tie breaker later.

I say take it to penalties, balls fired from a nice big cannon.
 
Back
Top Bottom