Jump to content

The now-enacted will of (some of) the people


blandy

Recommended Posts

I think that both what Awol says about the EU and what chrisp65 says about the Tory party are true. It's a referendum that asks people which of these two groups do you think would be easiest to beat in a fight. Personally, I think the EU is so chaotic it's easier to influence than the Tory party and therefore easier to fight against, so I'll vote them in charge. It's a pretty close run thing. I'd vote out of the EU if I thought it would work, but I'd also have to vote out of this UK - that's where the problem lies; it's a choice between two plates of warm brown crap and the question is which one do you think you'd be able to persuade to add most salt?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Not really.

Elections tend to be about bigger ideas at their heart. In principle anyway. Your voting for an approach. You vote for the approach that you think best suits the way the country is going and you accept that your vote is for the party you think will deal with the problems for you best. All the nonsense every ejection year asking about positions on policies are less about what they actually feel about whatever soundbite legislation issue, and are more about gauging the kind of approach they take to things. And mix in some popularity contest shit.

Referendums directly ask the populace to make a single decision. That works for simple things. Something is easy to have an opinion on. Do I like this flag, etc.

With something like the EU... Nah. I spent a lot of time and money learning about the EU. I'm pretty unusual as far as the populace goes. I don't feel completely confident in my ability to make the correct decision in a referendum on it. Average Joe? He doesn't have the first idea of what the EU really means for Britain, what the EU really does day to day and what the problems are with it on any front. And we're asking everyone to say yes or no. With the popularity contest shit thrown in because that anyways happens.

It's an absolutely awful decision.

Most of the things you could say against the referendum could also be said against elections so I'm struggling to buy into this idea that elections are fine but one referendum on EU membership isn't because most people aren't clued up on all the issues (as if most people are clued up on domestic issues). I'll always be very sceptical of arguments that run along the lines of "the public are too stupid to be able to make a choice". I know that isn't exactly what you said but that's the implication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mantis said:

Most of the things you could say against the referendum could also be said against elections so I'm struggling to buy into this idea that elections are fine but one referendum on EU membership isn't because most people aren't clued up on all the issues (as if most people are clued up on domestic issues). I'll always be very sceptical of arguments that run along the lines of "the public are too stupid to be able to make a choice". I know that isn't exactly what you said but that's the implication.

That isn't the implication at all.

There a difference between ignorance and stupidity.

You vote for a party because you're ignorant, in essence. You say 'go make these decisions for me'.

A referendum asks you to make the decision.

In this case its asking the entirety of the UK voting population to make a decision, that almost all of them, PhD academics to the lowliest drop out on the role, are ignorant of. I have books, thousands of pages, that go into this shit and the wider implications of the kind of decisions the EU makes, that one tread and had to read and understand, and I wouldn't call myself completely qualified to make this decision. The rest of the population mostly haven't had that luxury. So they're making a decision, a really important decision, from a position based on soundbites, stupid leaflets, and newspaper headlines. That isn't a sound foundation for that decision to be made on. And it's impossible to make everyone understand even the fundamentals of how the EU works. So it's probably a decision that doesn't fit a referendum very well.

It's not even bias. I'm pro-EU, just. It has problems, numerous ones, but I think we benefit overall. Even with that stance, I don't really like people making the same decision using soundbites and headlines to make it.

I get my hair cut by a foreign bloke. He's benefited from the EU obviously. We got into this subject the last time I was in. He's fairly anti-EU and likes to think he kinda gets it. He looked utterly confused when I started parking prattling on about even some fairly basic elements of the EU structure. That's the standard of knowledge making this call.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chindie said:

That isn't the implication at all.

There a difference between ignorance and stupidity.

You vote for a party because you're ignorant, in essence. You say 'go make these decisions for me'.

A referendum asks you to make the decision.

In this case its asking the entirety of the UK voting population to make a decision, that almost all of them, PhD academics to the lowliest drop out on the role, are ignorant of. I have books, thousands of pages, that go into this shit and the wider implications of the kind of decisions the EU makes, that one tread and had to read and understand, and I wouldn't call myself completely qualified to make this decision. The rest of the population mostly haven't had that luxury. So they're making a decision, a really important decision, from a position based on soundbites, stupid leaflets, and newspaper headlines. That isn't a sound foundation for that decision to be made on. And it's impossible to make everyone understand even the fundamentals of how the EU works. So it's probably a decision that doesn't fit a referendum very well.

It's not even bias. I'm pro-EU, just. It has problems, numerous ones, but I think we benefit overall. Even with that stance, I don't really like people making the same decision using soundbites and headlines to make it.

I get my hair cut by a foreign bloke. He's benefited from the EU obviously. We got into this subject the last time I was in. He's fairly anti-EU and likes to think he kinda gets it. He looked utterly confused when I started parking prattling on about even some fairly basic elements of the EU structure. That's the standard of knowledge making this call.

And you could say the exact same thing about regular elections. You make the distinction that in this case people are actually making the decision rather than choosing those that do but it's not as if this government and future governments won't be making the decisions connected to the referendum (e.g. how the UK leaves and what sort of relationship it forms with the EU if we leave or the extent the UK integrates into the EU if we stay). There's a distinction but it's not a particularly big one. The fact that most people are "ignorant" of all the facts isn't enough of a reason not to have a referendum particularly when the same applies to the people with regards to elections and indeed many of the people they elect.

For the record, I'm not in favour of loads of referendums.

Edited by Mantis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chindie said:

I disagree, obviously, but would you not agree that 'Elections are shit as well then' isn't really a defence of a referendum for a decision of this kind?

I don't believe elections are shit in the first place, I'm merely playing devil's advocate and highlighting the similarities.

Edited by Mantis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. I'm not sure it's the best devil's advocate but clearly we aren't going to agree.

What else is worthy of a referendum do you think?

Edited by Chindie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Chindie said:

OK. I'm not sure it's the best devil's advocate but clearly we aren't going to agree.

What else is worthy of a referendum do you think?

Not much comes to mind at the moment. There are a few hypothetical things but referendums aren't really something that should be held often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The minutiae of the EU, it's layers of commissions, committees and extensive bureaucracy are Byzantine by design. To truly appreciate it all you'd need to work there for a lifetime and that opaque nature of its operation is part of the problem, so in that sense I think Chindie is right.

However the referendum question for proles like me can be reduced to something much simpler: Do we want the people who make our laws to be accountable to us at the ballot box? 

Both leave and remain trade statistics about the numbers of laws made in Brussels but again that is too narrow a view, IMO. The fundamental point is the supremacy in law of the EU courts over the courts of the individual nation states.

At its heart the argument is about democracy, a subject so fundamental to our future governance that (IMO) it can only be made by the people. 

Do we wish to continue the direction of travel into a post democratic era through the EU, or not?

Arguing that 'X' politician or party is rubbish so better some unelected commission in Brussels spectacularly misses the point. Those people in Westminster, however crap they may or may not be are accountable to and can be removed by us, a sovereign people. 

To try and address the EU democratic deficit we've had the incredible spectacle of Cameron actually trying to redefine sovereignty, on the basis that if you can't win the argument you must change the question! 

Potentially unwinding the UK from involvement in the EU institutions will be a complex process but that doesn't mean it's not worth doing, or no country would ever seek independence from Empire.

I'm pretty sure Michael Collins, Ghandi and George Washington weren't wringing their hands about the current account deficit and implications for trade block protectionism while asserting the sovereignty of their people. 

Politicians can't be trusted to make this decision for us precisely because it is so big and they are compromised by personal ambition and vested interests. For good or ill the people must decide or the very principle of democracy is compromised.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Rest assured that the protection of the little guy will be enhanced by the tory party should we vote leave. They will put an end to looking after your chums in the city and they will stop money buying influence.

But but, The Tories! Mates in The City! 

See above reference puerile caricatures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Awol said:

But but, The Tories! Mates in The City! 

See above reference puerile caricatures.

Calm down love.

There's a chance there are caricatures on both sides of this fact free debate.

We both know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Calm down love.

There's a chance there are caricatures on both sides of this fact free debate.

We both know that.

If you've got an argument to make then great, let's hear it and debate it. There is no need for the other crap, besides which you're confusing me with Tony...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

 Predicted I think that both what Awol says about the EU and what chrisp65 says about the Tory party are true. It's a referendum that asks people which of these two groups do you think would be easiest to beat in a fight. Personally, I think the EU is so chaotic it's easier to influence than the Tory party and therefore easier to fight against, so I'll vote them in charge. It's a pretty close run thing. I'd vote out of the EU if I thought it would work, but I'd also have to vote out of this UK - that's where the problem lies; it's a choice between two plates of warm brown crap and the question is which one do you think you'd be able to persuade to add most salt?

 

The difference is you can change what we have in the UK through the ballot box. He's not to my taste but it's hard to argue Corbyn doesn't represent a genuine break from the political consensus.                                          No one would've predicted such a sharp differential in UK politics 5 or even 2 years ago. Corbyn is living proof that Parliamentary Democracy can work and his election as Labour leader proof that people can effect change in a system that is ultimately answerable to them, whereas in the EU institutions that's a complete pipe-dream. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Awol said:

I'm pretty sure Michael Collins, Ghandi and George Washington weren't wringing their hands about the current account deficit and implications for trade block protectionism while asserting the sovereignty of their people. 

I'm not sure there's value in making any sort of comparison between the campaign to leave the EU and those for Irish/Indian/American independence.

Edited by snowychap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'm not sure there's any value in making any sort of comparison between the campaign to leave the EU and those for Irish/Indian/American independence.

If you want to remove that paragraph from the context it was set in (reinforcing a broader point) and then assert it no longer makes sense.. Sure, you win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the RMT have gone with the Out campaign

 

As they are smaller than Unite II'd imagine Corbyn will still dance to the Unite tune , but it might get akward for him if a few more side with Out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Awol said:

If you've got an argument to make then great, let's hear it and debate it. There is no need for the other crap, besides which you're confusing me with Tony...

I'd written a similar response and then decided life is too short to squabble on the internet.

Look, if my views or lack of passion for the freedoms Westminster offer aren't your cup of tea, I won't be offended, do feel free to use the ignore function.

But genuinely, whilst your contributions are obviously considered, I think they are easily countered. There is no more fact to debate in your understanding of freedom than in my half arsed contradictions and counters. If you want to post up grand eloquent speeches on the freedoms hard won by Ghandi or Robert The Bruce and now offered to us by Westminster, that's fine, that's an interesting perspective. Personally, I'm not convinced. Whilst I'm not convinced, I think the majority of voters could be.

One thing is for sure, after the referendum, life will carry on, and I will have about as much influence on Westminster as I have on Brussels. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Awol said:

At its heart the argument is about democracy, a subject so fundamental to our future governance that (IMO) it can only be made by the people. 

Do we wish to continue the direction of travel into a post democratic era through the EU, or not?

That might be the case for some people, but I strongly suspect it isn't the case for many. I respect that some people may feel strongly re the democracy part. others will feel strongly one way or the other about the impact on jobs, or on trade or on immigration or on regulation or whatever.

Some people will just think "I don't want to lose the ability to bring back loads of cheap fags and booze from France or Spain"

Personally I think the democracy defecit thing is massively overplayed, though true.

In the UK my vote means cock all in national elections. Zilch. I live in a safe seat place. The MP even if I voted for him, he doesn't do what constituents want, he does what Cameron wants. With EU elections, we get PR and the Euro MPs seem to often also act along party lines, rather than constituents. We had a fantastic one here but he got booted out last time because he was a Lib Dem and they were given a kicking. He was superb, though. But democracy got rid of him.  The house of Lords isn't democratic. So in my experience it;'s not like the UK on it's own is any kind of panacea or better model. It isn't. people in glass houses... edit - i.e. as Chris said " One thing is for sure, after the referendum, life will carry on, and I will have about as much influence on Westminster as I have on Brussels "

.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â