Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

Why is stating, or in this case, agreeing with a fact "anti-British"? surely you are not such a delicate little flower that a truth offends you?

I am no more "anti-British" than I am "anti-Thai" or "anti-French" but complaining about the lack of democracy in others while you have the House of Lords as a part of your system of government is patently absurd.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

It's not HER deal Swim, it's the deal the EU crafted and had her present to parliament.

Play acting nothing more. All one huge pantomime to fool the unsuspecting masses.

And that's because the EU have no intention of allowing us to Leave. May is doing what she has been told to do by her EU masters. Corbyn likewise is doing what he has been told to do. Where do you think his latest pantomime act of refusing to talk unless "no deal" is off the table, comes from?

The EU is petrified of the UK leaving. They will go to any length to prevent it happening.

We are witnessing the takeover of our government by EU powers. It is so important to them that we stay that they don't care that we can see them visibly taking control of May and Corbyn and the media here.

People should be waking up by now.

We stand on a precipice.

The total loss of democracy and the take over by a foreign dictatorship.

A NO DEAL is THE ONLY way out of this.

Whatever the cost it HAS to happen as soon as possible.

We must take the pain, deal with it, adapt, in order to be free of this foreign power and loss of democracy.

The longer we allow the EU to mess with this whole process the less chance we will ever have of leaving.

Time for someone to step up and take action imho. There must be some groups out there who know what is really going on. Can't believe they will just sit back and watch the EU destroy democracy.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

Are you a Russian?

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

It may keep us on our toes, but it isn't helping the country at the moment.

What we need is what we had in the 1950s, when everyone pulled together for the common good.

I believe the rot set in in the late '60s and, of course, the '70s, when unions became stronger and tried to take over the country.

We all know what happened then. They destroyed our common interest in the country's well-being and split the country irrevocably.

I'm afraid that continues today, though the unions are nowhere near as powerful, but they don't need to be: they've put in place an 'us and them' attitude which will be difficult or even impossible to change.

Look at Parliament. Neither of the two main parties is showing any unity, let alone any capability! All they can do is attack each other.

The country's had it.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

Surely then, and I say this to you with the greatest of respect Swimmy, by dismissing the thought of leaving without a deal, you shouldn't have bothered voting Leave . Because by doing so, surely you should have been prepared to back your democratically held vote by being fully prepared to fight against anything that the EU and their remain supporters threw at us in order to stop us leaving? surely again, you should be ready to accept even the worst scenario such as a no deal, in order to ensure we do leave.

Remainers are throwing every weapon they possess in order to thwart Brexit. The threat of us leaving without a deal is the one powerful weapon left that Leavers have. Yes, the economies of both, the UK but especially the EU, would suffer, but if that is the choice, then they only have themselves to blame for their attempt at sabotaging the democratic will of the British people to Leave.

We should be prepared to use every choice left to us in order to leave, no matter what happens.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

Hi

I have to disagree.

Totally happy to Leave, I am not going to change my mind on that one.

An explanation of my views.

I do not hate anyone.

Hate clouds your views, you become irrational and make mistakes.

I do not hate the EU or any EU Worker here.

I do loathe Juncker and Co, and Merkel.

Loathing is different to hating.

Loathing means you keep your wits about you and do not make mistakes, you are determined to win.

I have had to sit at a table next to him, when he was on expenses, listening to him going on about how he was treating us as fools.

A No Deal is what he wants, putting us at a huge disadvantage and unnecessary suffering.

I would not give him a penny, and a No Deal is exactly what he wants.

I treat Juncker the same way that I treated ISIS.

They are not going to win and we have to be rational about it.

The EU is not going to suffer more than we are, simple maths.

They lose 13%, we lose 40%.

It is worse than that, we lose services, our biggest export.

Juncker is a drunkard, and an insufferable bully.

He treats staff like crap, it was so, so, tempting when he was in full flow about us to hit him.

This was not what you payed me for.

Merkel is much cleverer, she has done her sums, Germany will make more from no deal than it will from a deal.

She is never offensive, unlike Juncker, treats staff with respect and to be blunt, she has outplayed our idiots.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

If we achieve a no-deal Brexit, we wouldn't give him any money, so why does he want a no-deal Brexit?

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

Swimmy, I have never once said I "hate" anyone.
I despise the institution of the EU and what it stands for, and have in some posts printed the words "the hated EU", but unfortunately in your reply to me, you started off by stating "I don't hate anyone' which could insinuate that I do, (just wished to make it clear).

Just been reading a couldn’t-be-closer-to-the-truth article in the Spectator that says it as it is. I know it looks rather a long read, but please do as it reveals exactly what is happening in British society today.

QUOTE

It’s the casualness with which they’re saying it that is truly disturbing. “I’m beginning to think that Brexit may never happen”, said VINCE CABLE on Sunday morning TV, with expert nonchalance, as if he were predicting rain. He echoed Newsnight’s Nicholas Watt, who a few days earlier informed viewers that there is talk in ‘some quarters that ‘Brexit may not actually happen’. Leaving the EU? ‘I think that is very much open to question now’ said LORD HESELTINE last month, with imperious indifference. He could have been asking a minion to pass the butter.

They say it matter-of-factly, sometimes a little gleefully. As if it wouldn’t be a disgrace., a black-mark-against-the-nation disgrace, if Brexit were not to happen.
As if failing to act on the wishes of 17.4 million people - the most populous democratic demand in the history of this nation - wouldn’t represent one of the worst snubs to the democratic ideal in the modern era. This is the bottom line: if Brexit doesn’t happen, then Britain’s claim to be a democratic nation will be called into question. Our democracy will be compromised, perhaps beyond repair.

That politicians can breezily flirt with the idea of reneging on the wishes of 17.4 million people tells us what a dire state the democratic ideal is since the referendum. A time of legal challenges by filthy-rich business-people and chattering-class rage against ‘low information’ voters has left not just Brexit beaten and bruised, but democracy too. When people say, ‘Yeah, that Brexit thing, it might not happen, and it’s probably just as well’, I hear, ‘Democracy is a mistake’ To try to block Brexit is to display an alarming disregard for what is perhaps the most important idea of the enlightened era: that the people should shape the political fate of their nation.

Cable says Brexit is just too complicated. ‘The problems are so enormous. He said on Sunday. He echoes various experts, or what Plato had the honesty to call philosopher-kings, people who believe their cleverness makes them better at political decision-making than the plebs. Brexit is ‘hideously technical’, experts say. ‘The British people have unleashed a process potentially as complex as it is unpredictable’, they whine, and so perhaps we should call it off, others say. Others say Brexit was based on lies - about NHS funding, immigration numbers, a future of milk and honey etc - and that’s why it shouldn’t happen. It would be mad to let Britain be shaped by a referendum result that was the handiwork of myth-making demagogues.

Bless them, they think these are original arguments, when in fact such haughty disdain for the demos and its political choices is as old as democracy itself. In the 1840’s, when the Chartists demanded the vote for working-class men, they were told they lacked ‘ripened wisdom’ and thus were ‘more exposed than any other class to the vicious ends of faction’. That is, they were easily bought off by demagogues. When women demanded the vote, they were told that an ‘excess of sympathy in their mental constitution’ meant they lacked ‘logical power and judicial impartiality’. In the Brexit era, that is said about all voters, female and male, which is a progress of sorts, I guess. Brexit has brought out ‘the lowest human impulses’, says IAN MCEWAN. Cheers Ian.

That the arguments against Brexit - the masses fell for misinformation, it was a ‘howl of rage’, etczzzzzzz - sound so similar to old arguments against democracy is not a coincidence. Because the railing against Brexit is fundamentally a railing against the idea that we should entrust the political future to ordinary people - which is otherwise known as democracy.

Some angry Remainers say: ‘Are you saying we cannot argue against Brexit? Doesn’t democracy mean being free to express political opinion?. Of course! People absolutely have the right to weep and wail and take to the streets over Brexit. To say they hate Brexit and wish it would die in a ditch. To exaggerate the impact Brexit will have on the economy and political stability. My personal view is that such Remoaning adds enormously to the gaiety of the nation. It’s cute and hilarious that people who call themselves progressive should now devote their lives and Twitterfeeds to bitching about the demos. But here’s the thing: if you’re using your clout or influence or money to ensure that Brexit doesn’t happen, then you aren’t engaging in democratic decision. You’re saying you know better than the masses. You are thwarting the democratic process.

We have to get real. If Brexit doesn’t happen, democracy will be gravely wounded for a generation. The people will receive loud and clear the message that they don’t really matter. Sure, we’ll still have General Elections and pick our MPs, but the Brexit betrayal would rankle for decades, a sore on the body politic, a niggling reminder that when democracy returned a result that the political class didn’t like, Britain flinched, and turned its back on democracy. Brexit must happen. It simply must. Because 17.4 million people want it, and democracy needs it.

UNQUOTE.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

I can't agree with this for one instant.

A "No Deal" is what they fear the most.

No Deal mean we are out. Completely.

No more chances to try and concoct more fake deals that keep us in by stealth. And of course no £39 billion.

I'm starting to find your current BrExit stance somewhat dubious.

Any genuine Leaver would welcome No Deal at this point because it is patently obvious that without it we are NEVER going to leave.

Re: Brexit - Can you ever please both sides?

The solution for remainers were there for the taking in 2017. All they needed to do was vote for the Lib Dems in the general election.

But they didn't .... they voted Labour or Conservative instead and in doing so aligned themselves with leave campaigns.

The reasons that I heard from the remainers was because the manifestos were more than just Brexit... but then moving on a few months, labour and their remain back benchers called for a vote of no confidence in the Tories to force a general election. The reason was to try and overturn the referendum result (nothing much else really) and with Labours manifesto in tatters, do these people know what they would be voting for ?

The hypocrisy ....