Brexit

[Fenchurch]

Can someone explain why they did this and what it means

Why they did this:

Spoiler:

What it means:
http://indy100.independent.co.uk/articl ... yxD59VO3Nb

[Fenchurch]

I'll post something less polemic later maybe.

[Fenchurch]

So I spent the first day and a half with this horrible sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Then I felt better for a bit, but then I saw all that racism stuff online, and at the same time I've been trying to read and understand more of the point of view of the people who voted leave (the ones who aren't racists) but I still don't get it and I can't sleep and I feel sad. And I don't know how to help to make things better again.

[Fenchurch]

Two main reasons for me:
1) Both morally and economically, I see great value in having an elected government to make decisions for a group of countries together. I think there is an efficiency and benefit in sharing many of the same human rights laws, employment rights laws, environmental laws, manufacturing laws, etc.
2) Leaving makes us look selfish and petty as a nation, and as if we hate change and foreigners. That's not me, and I don't want other countries to see us that way.

For info, the main reason leave voters cite for their vote is "the principle that only our government should make decisions that affect us", which is a principle that I don't give a damn about.

[Fenchurch]

I think this is because you are both mis-fortunate in not having known the last of the time of innocent ideals and privileged in having no experience of authoritarian regimes.

??

There's nothing inherently authoritarian about having a government for multiple countries, any more than there is about having a government for one country.

In both cases, it is the responsibility of the people to elect representatives who will make good and fair decisions. But the system isn't wrong.

[Fenchurch]

Because you are satisfied with the EU government as it currently is as your own government? You can't understand at all understand why people may not think it is not legitimate as their own government?

If the UK had voted to stay what do you think would have been the next time you'd be given a chance to think about what form of governance you want for the EU?

Yes and no. I think it's completely legitimate and I want us to be a part of it.

I think about what form of government I'd like all the time, and I do what I can to influence it with my voice and my vote, but I'm not seeking to get rid of government entirely.

What are you issues with the EU, spring? And I don't mean issues with any of its prior actions, since those are determined by the elected representatives, but with its fundamental structure and process. What would you change and why?

Edited: to fill in a missing word and to clarify my meaning.

[Fenchurch]

Okay. I definitely agree with some of those, and the others I don't know anything about right now.

Do you think those issues will be helped by by our leaving the EU?

[Fenchurch]

the brexit vote was an anti-establishment vote

Sadly I don't see it like that at all. I don't think the people here who voted for leave wanted a different EU, and certainly not in the specific ways you've mentioned. What it came down to, both in polls and for people I've spoken to, is that they 'don't want to be governed by anyone who's not British', and think we 'need to reduce or control immigration'.

The 'this is broken' angle was one that the leave campaign leaders sometimes pushed in order to help their agenda, but they didn't offer any specific problems, or solutions for how it could be improved - nor did they take any steps to improve it from within (e.g. UKIP MEPs claimed their salaries but basically never attended or voted. That's people who want to destroy something, not improve it).

If you wanted to see improvements in the way the French government was run, do you think the best way to go about that would be a referenda to the people asking "do you want to have a government - yes or no?" I would say it's much better to campaign for those changes.

Earlier you seemed surprised that I don't see the EU as at all less legitimate than any other government. Do you see it as such? If so, why - for the reasons you've just mentioned?

[Fenchurch]

Oh wait I've just understood the first part of what you were saying.

But it's never been 'hammer or nothing'. There have always been other ways to make those kinds of changes happen, namely: campaigning, raising awareness, creating pressure. A referendum like this is not the only way and nor is it a good way to bring about the kinds of changes you describe.

[Fenchurch]

It isn't really... I've seen youtube lectures, infographics, news articles all talking about the benefits of the EU. It isn't just 'they're all racists', although I do still think much of the sentiment that led people to vote for brexit is on the same continuum as xenophobia and racism. But I agree that I haven't seen a posh pro-EU movie like that and I can understand people being swayed by it.

Flum, here are some rebuttals to the info in that video:
https://www.quora.com/How-accurate-is-t ... -the-movie

Many of the talking heads talked fondly of the Industrial Revolution - a time when British entrepreneurship and a lack of state intervention made the UK the workshop of the world.

Strangely, no one mentioned the huge exploitation of workers, including children, which that entailed. Perhaps the Sadlers Committee Report of 1832, which revealed the dire treatment of children in textiles mills and factories, was a piece of fiction and it was all peace, love and money during the Industrial Revolution.

Nor in the film was there any talk of workers’ rights, common security goals or countries coming together to combat issues such as climate change - all things EU remainers point to as reasons to stay in.

[Fenchurch]

And then Labour seemed to want to make sure that keeps happening by picking Corbyn, but never mind all that.

Do you actually think Corbyn is bad, or do you just think he's not populist enough and it's better to give people what they want?

[Fenchurch]

I think he's bad, but more to the point, I think he's bad for the party.

Well I guess my actual question was, why do you think that?

I'm pro-Corbyn and I know he still has fairly fervent 'grassroots' support. I also think he's a lot more decent and honest than most politicians, and I like his policies.

That's not to say that I don't think it's important to pick someone 'electable', but I'm not sure how that's an easy thing to judge, and so I don't think the pursuit of electable is important at the expense of picking someone actually good.

[Fenchurch]

myko you are so good at articulating what I want to say.

So the question is about the rest of the country that voted mostly for the top three parties, representing 75.2% of the total vote and 87.7% of the MPs. And I don't think you're winning those by going all in on a more extreme version.

I'm open to persuasion here, what kind of policies you think Labour needs to adopt to gain more centre-votes?

I've never been able to fully grasp what makes middle voters choose a side. I don't understand what they're looking for, it seems like it might be a nebulous personality thing more than anything else (both of the leader and the party as a whole), and the problem is I think a lot of that comes down to things that can't be predicted, like how they are treated by the media, how they behave in key moments, etc.

[Fenchurch]

The referendum shouldn't be binding because of the turnout. Of course, every other thing that's ever been passed with a <80% turnout is entirely binding and legitimate.

The result isn't binding, regardless of the turnout. But whether it should happen is still at question, partly because of how close the result was, and because of the consequences and how much is at stake.

Were you a leave voter then TSO, and if so, what was your main reason? And given the choice between: free trade with the EU and free movement of people, or no free trade with the EU and no free movement, which would you pick?

Is it also difficult to imagine why moving towards more center/moderate positions might capture more voters?

It's not that I can't imagine why; it's that I'm not personally clear on what a centrist or moderate voter wants. If I was able to personally choose the next leader of the labour party, and my main focus was picking someone with mass appeal, what should I be looking for?

[Fenchurch]

UK voters

still don't understand that they aren't "escaping" from EU regulation by leaving.

When you put it like this, it's like you don't know that 48% of us voted against the madness.