Area for all other political discussion
:sunglasses: 50 % :thumbsup: 50 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts LikeBB
#574806
It's common to hear Brexiters these days who oppose a further referendum on leaving the EU say that a new referendum must not take place because to do so would "endanger democracy".

I don't think that this arrant, scaremongering nonsense is called out nearly enough. It is absolute bollocks. Fantastical, panic-spreading guff.

The UK is not going to turn into North Korea overnight if there is a further EU referendum.

A referendum IS democracy. How on earth can democracy be endangered BY democracy?

Everybody still gets a say (if the franchise is not so shamefully gerrymandered the way that it was in 2016 - that really was an affront to democracy).

It goes without saying that Corbyn never challenges this crap, but neither do other politicians, of all party affiliations.

It is unadulterated shite, and it's high time people started to call it as such.

Your views, please.
 
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#574808
The whole Brexit mess is indicative of a very limited reading of democracy on the part of most people.

1) Another referendum is not inherently undemocratic
2) 'Victory' in a referendum does not entail scorched earth re: the 'losers'
3) Post-factum bullshitting about motivations and reasons is dangerous to democracy
4) Democracy is forever a balancing act of virtue and ignorance
5) Democracy isn't just about voting, or just about majorities, or even just about issues. It's, imo, a far broader set of assumptions, standards and meanings that govern much more than 'which rosette do you want your twat-in-chief to wear?', and the language of betrayal, traitors, stabs in the back et al is anti-democratic.

Let alone there are different types and referenda are inherently tricky with our set-up

BUT NO WE VOTED FOR PRECISELY THIS YOU COMMIE HATER etc etc
 
By spoonman
Membership Days Posts
#574939
I'll try and make a rough comparison here to a fringe movement within Irish Republicanism called "legitimisim". If you're not familiar with it, then I'll try not to drone on too much about it and just get to the main points...

* The 1918 UK General Election was the last to include all of Ireland, with Sinn Fein winning 73 seats. However they had a policy of abstention from Westminster and instead formed the First Dail Éireann in Dublin following from their manifesto commitment. All MPs elected to Irish seats in the 1918 election were invited to this parliament, but only those elected as Sinn Fein members attended, and thus a "revolutionary" government was formed which sought to achieve international recognition.

* Ultimately the Irish Unionists weren't that pleased by what took place, especially those in Ulster. They & Westminster refused to recognise the rival Dail in Ireland. This led to the Anglo-Irish War which then came with the partition of Ireland. The first elections for these two separate jurisdictions (named at the time Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland) were held in May 1921 - members of the Dail decided that both elections would be used to elect a new Dail (Second Dail Éireann). The Southern Ireland election was a piece of piss for Sinn Fein as they won but all four seats uncontested (the remaining four won by unionists representing Trinity College, again unopposed) while winning five in Northern Ireland. Again only Sinn Fein members entered the Second Dail, 125 of them in total.

* Negotiations between King George V and the Second Dail saw a truce coming into effect in July 1921. Further negotiations took place between the Second Dail and Lloyd-George's government, with an Anglo-Irish treaty agreement coming in early December the same year. About a month later the sitting Dail voted to accept the treaty somewhat narrowly, 64 to 57.

* That set a chain of events of a major fall out between pro-treaty and anti-treaty factions, many anti-treaty members accusing the pro-treaty supporters in the Dail of having broken their oath to the Irish Republic under the threat of war with Britain. This led to the Irish Civil War of 1922/23.

* Over time some of the anti-treaty republicans came to accept a truce with the new Irish Free State, most notably Eamon De Valera whom left Sinn Fein in 1926 to form a new party to be elected and take up seats in the Dail of the Irish Free State, whom by the late 1930's was able to push forward a new constitution establishing the Republic of Ireland. Defections, capture & convictions by British & Free State authorities and others in exile meant that the few remaining members of the Second Dail, whom they regarded as never having been formally dissolved, declared that they had transferred their deemed authority to the IRA Army Council.

* Under this "transfer" it is held that the elections to the Second Dail Eireann were the last legitimate elections to be held in Ireland, though this never stopped the signatories of this declaration from standing in elections up until 1938 themselves, sometimes winning seats. Essentially, the IRA Army Council deemed themselves to be the legitimate government of the Irish Republic (not to be confused with the Republic of Ireland - insert Life Of Brian reference here). Because of further splits down the line in 1969 & 1986, along with statements made at the time of the sole surviving member of the Second Dail (Tom Maguire), this line of Republican Legitisism follows the line that at present the Continuity IRA Army Council is the representative government of Ireland, backed politically by Republican Sinn Fein (though there are lines within the "Provo" Sinn Fein that would still regard the Provisional IRA Army Council as being the heirs to the Second Dail).

Bit more detail on Wiki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_republican_legitimism

So to cut a story short, Irish Republican Legitimism believes that there has been no proper democratic elections in Ireland since 1922 and there will be none until they regard their goals as being fully met and until then, Ireland is under a temporary but indefinite military rule. That doesn't account for their announcement being retroactive, nor understand that within almost all of Ireland they're as popular as a hot dog & bacon sandwich stand at a Bar Mitzvah (they get the rare local councillor elected, but that's about it).

Anyway. The point is that those that decry that holding either a second referendum on the matter of the UK exiting the EU or not, or what type of exit deal should be sought, on the basis that it would "endanger democracy", be undemocratic or any claim on a similar vein, are IMO following along similar lines to that of the Irish "legitimates" mentioned above in that they fell that until the result of the 2016 referendum is carried out to their satisfaction then no further referendum or election that is UK-wide is legitimate. But of course, this ignores several conventions regarding democratic processes not just in the UK but also across most developed nations.

* A democratic decision is always subject to potential future review because circumstances in the future can significantly change from what was agreed at the time, and those agreeing then often accept that it may need to be revisited. Elected parliaments do this all the time, wherever it is a change of external circumstances that mean the original agreement can not be fulfilled either technically or in spirit, or that evidence and experience since the original agreement shows that it deserves being revisited. As an example, around 3-4 years ago a Swiss referendum passed a law to restrict immigration from EU nationals into Switzerland immediately rang alarm bells in their Federal Government because of the "guillotine clause" in the bilateral arrangements Switzerland has with the EU. In the end, within the terms that the Swiss government is obliged to act on a federal referendum passing, they did the absolute legal minimum to meet the wording of the referendum, annoying the SVP (who sponsored it) and fellow nativists as not being in the "spirit", but opinion polling recently on the matter among Swiss voters now sees the original referendum result as a mistake.

* The legalese that is bundled into formal acts that pass parliament, international agreements etc. demands that the language bound in them are specific to a very high degree lest there are any challenges to them. Back in June 2016 the UK was asked wherever it should withdraw from the European Union - it did not ask the electorate how the UK should then conduct its relationship with the EU after withdrawal. Anyone claiming that "everyone" or at least "nearly everyone" that voted leave knew what they were really voting for beyond what was asked in the referendum question is talking bollocks. That includes Theresa May. Such language and behaviour may be acceptable in the spivs, dodgy businesspeople and conmen and conwomen that dominate the modern Conservative party and the leeches that suck its blood, but in continental Europe that shit tends not to fly too well. Especially in Brussels.

* We'll not even go over several other points that have already been made plenty of times - questions surrounding the activities of prominent "leave" campaigners that are still under investigation by the NCA, attempts by May's government to use Henry VIII powers to bypass parliament until the Supreme Court put a stop to that, the abusing of centuries-old protocols in the House of Commons, the unwillingness of Brexshitters to own their mess and blame everyone else for it etc. etc.

* Finally, democracy is a living thing, and like all living things it evolves. It has not stood still in Ireland since 1922 and it has not stood still in the UK since 2016. People, businesses, authorities etc. can change their minds and local, national and international laws accommodate for this and so they should be. It's one of the reasons why the likes of myself alongside many others are strongly against international trade deals that allow corporations to sue governments because of decisions made by elected administrations on behalf of their electorate could risk such corporations' "future profits", to be decided by a commercial court of arbitration that isn't accountable to the electorate of any country involved. The sad irony is that many of the proponents that talk of leaving the EU to "regain sovereignty" would only be too happy to hand it and more to foreign corporate behemoths. And that includes the charming but vapid & soulless c*nt at the head of it that in his celebration of the 2016 referendum joked about it having been achieved "without a single shot being fired" when a few days prior an MP had been shot dead because of her stance in the said referendum. In many cases that would have had him ostracised from mainstream politics. But we're stuck with a parliament that is either understandably scared for their safety, or is a nasty enough bit of shit themselves to giggle quietly under their breath. Edgy.

Fuck, that's 'nuff for now. :evil:
 
By Snowflake
#578019
Still this group seem to have our backs. Apparently during the Peterborough By-election the sight of people photographing their completed ballot papers was something they had only ever seen in Kazakhstan 'many years ago' .

Image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rough.html

https://democracyvolunteers.org/
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Membership Days Posts LikeBB
#578021
And Dr Ault leaps to the conclusion that "this can, in some cases, point to a contract being fulfilled or an inducement having been given".
No other evidence, one wonders if he was given the Hitler-woman ambush treatment.

Farage is just spouting shit, but the foil-hatters will lap it up.
Mr Farage told MailOnline today: 'It's just endless isn't it. There's more and more and more of it.

'I think there is something inherently wrong with the entire postal voting process in this country.

'I think it's open to corruption, bribery intimidation, abuse. We've seen so many cases now where again and again we find - particularly in the inner cities - postal voting is producing the wrong results.

'And I'm afraid Peterborough looks like another one of those rotten boroughs.'
Evidence? No need, it's a 'sincerely held belief' which as we know trumps actual evidence every time.

Ault also comes up with this guff:
Democracy Volunteers sent a team of four experienced observers to observe 23 of the polling stations used in the by-election. They watched as about 700 of the 27,000 who voted at a polling station cast their vote and witnessed so-called ‘family voting’ – where more than one person goes into the same voting booth – in half of the stations.

The practice has in the past raised fears that voters were being told by other family members where to put their cross. Mr Ault said: ‘To the great credit of the polling staff, this was challenged persistently whenever it occurred. It is everyone’s right to vote in private.’
'Has raised fears..." What utter bollocks. They saw only 700 out of 27,000 votes cast - 2.5% - and of that small sample an unspecified number took someone else into the booth with them, and in every case they were challenged.

It is my sincerely held belief that Dr Ault is a twat and Nigel Farage is a mendacious, scheming, slimy cunt.
Zuriblue, oboogie liked this
 
By MisterMuncher
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#578164
On Peterborough: Continuity UKIP are a new party who have somehow managed a very impressive result in a by-election somewhat against the grain. Why in fuck are the press et al working on the assumptions they're the victim of this notional fraud rather than the beneficiary? I mean their finances are obviously and patently dodgy as all fuck.
Tubby Isaacs liked this
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#578219
As an example, around 3-4 years ago a Swiss referendum passed a law to restrict immigration from EU nationals into Switzerland immediately rang alarm bells in their Federal Government because of the "guillotine clause" in the bilateral arrangements Switzerland has with the EU. In the end, within the terms that the Swiss government is obliged to act on a federal referendum passing, they did the absolute legal minimum to meet the wording of the referendum, annoying the SVP (who sponsored it) and fellow nativists as not being in the "spirit", but opinion polling recently on the matter among Swiss voters now sees the original referendum result as a mistake.


The anti-FM lobby is trying to organise a second referendum to ask whether this parliamentary compromise is what you really want. No one on either side is screaming about it being an affront to democracy. Maybe Switzerland has a maturer understanding that referendums run in parallel with the realities of representative democracy? Likewise, Ireland's second vote on the Nice(?) Treaty was about presenting an amended version of the elected government's central strategic aim that could command a majority (tighter assurance about NATO and abortion policy staying national satisfied enough voters to switch). Referendums are not government by opinion poll.
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:55 am
On a tangent, the Brexit Party have blown it with Asian Brexiters.
When you haven't English nativist nationalist emotion to sustain your decision, its easier to see what a pratt you've been.
Tubby Isaacs liked this
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#578221
Abernathy wrote:
Mon May 13, 2019 10:00 pm
It's common to hear Brexiters these days who oppose a further referendum on leaving the EU say that a new referendum must not take place because to do so would "endanger democracy".

I don't think that this arrant, scaremongering nonsense is called out nearly enough. It is absolute bollocks. Fantastical, panic-spreading guff.

The UK is not going to turn into North Korea overnight if there is a further EU referendum.

A referendum IS democracy. How on earth can democracy be endangered BY democracy?

It goes without saying that Corbyn never challenges this crap, but neither do other politicians, of all party affiliations.

It is unadulterated shite, and it's high time people started to call it as such.

Your views, please.
No leadership to call it out. No one apart from Kippers and their Tory allies wanted the first referendum and it is the same noisy minority propagating nonsense about anti-democratic second refs. If its too much hassle for Bristol Brenda to take part than bollocks to her, we know which way she voted anyway. Blair's analogy of the house survey still holds water.
Abernathy liked this
By Andy McDandy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#578229
Too many MPs are content with membership of the club, and aren't prepared to gamble losing their seat vs doing the right thing.

So they'll take their darts and tankards, but wont risk them on Bully's EU speedboat.
 
By Abernathy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts LikeBB
#578279
Andy McDandy wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:00 pm
So they'll take their darts and tankards, but wont risk them on Bully's EU speedboat.
Excellent metaphor. Likely to be understood by fewer and fewer people other than we dwindling band of geriatrics as the years go by, though. Alas.
Last edited by Abernathy on Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
By Watchman
Membership Days Posts
#578291
Snowflake wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:21 am
Still this group seem to have our backs. Apparently during the Peterborough By-election the sight of people photographing their completed ballot papers was something they had only ever seen in Kazakhstan 'many years ago' .

Image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rough.html

https://democracyvolunteers.org/
To be honest, I can't really see any of this lot facing of some AK47 toting Kazakhstani warlord
 
By Bones McCoy
Membership Days Posts
#578298
Snowflake wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:21 am
Still this group seem to have our backs. Apparently during the Peterborough By-election the sight of people photographing their completed ballot papers was something they had only ever seen in Kazakhstan 'many years ago' .

Image

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rough.html

https://democracyvolunteers.org/
Worst Inbetweeners remake - ever.
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Not big, not clever, but made me chuckle. https:[…]

The Brexit Party

Prediction of local news on day one. Village fete[…]

Local journalism at its best

I was having similar thoughts as Jesy from Little […]

Boris Johnson

https://twitter.com/MoS_Politics/status/1172977063[…]