As an English European, this is the biggest defeat of my political life
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
The refugee situation is unlikely to change from the current status quo. Britain is already hosting fewer refugees than almost any other country in central or southern Europe.
That's what is going to change. That is the primary motive for exit.
Not being able to control your borders is giving up a sovereign right typically by conquered peoples. That's how the British see it and they are probably right in my view.
Thinking otherwise is like believing that other people are able to move into your house without asking but you know, it's 'your' house on paper. That's something only an intellectual of the worse kind could believe.
It will? Enlighten me, how will this take place?
> That is the primary motive for exit.
No, that was the primary motive for voters to vote for 'exit', unfortunately that is also the one thing that most likely will remain just as it is today.
What will change is that the UK (or England, or whatever will be left of it) will be further marginalized, both on the European and the world stage.
> Not being able to control your borders is giving up a sovereign right typically by conquered peoples. That's how the British see it and they are probably right in my view.
Sad.
We should not this is the best possible outcome. It can get much, much worse.
Here's Leave talking about immigration: https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/746034966371381248
https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/745238693707943937
Here's an article talking about their focus on immigration:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36375492
This was acknowledged by some within Leave camp. (Twitter is impossible to search, so I'm struggling to find the tweets now)
It's been rolled back after the vote: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/25/leave-campai...
https://twitter.com/Lucyvfreeman/status/746613321646870528
https://twitter.com/Alison_McGovern/status/74662854792670003...
Sadly, UK newspapers pushed this lie pretty hard: https://twitter.com/BBCKimGhattas/status/747042626235310081
I had avoided all media coverage of the run-up and binned all the flyers that came through the post. I tried to be as independent of mind as possible.
I chose to leave because it was an opportunity that will likely never again occur. It provides a choice for the future, of staying out or rejoining. I could not commit my children to staying in the EU when there is no clear statement on what the EU will be 50 years from now.
I voted remain, but my parents and sister both voted leave.
The argument my father gives is that the EU is an undemocratic organisation built in the image of benign dictatorship, which is not interested in listening to a populace who cannot be trusted. After all it was they who supported a Germany that took us into fascism and a european / world war. In addition Germany is not interested in self-governance as for the same reason the people cannot be trusted. He cites this article (Paywall, but has a share token so I don't know what that will mean):
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/with-that-x-in-the-box-we-...
My mother, I think was influenced by my father's view and, as an elderly person, like many others, have some romantic notion of self-determination. I think she thought it was a bit of a protest vote and she said it Cameron's fault for calling the damn referendum, which was a huge mistake.
I can't speak for my sister as we are like chalk and cheese.
Both my parents are intelligent, articulate, middle class retired social worker and University lecturer. They are in no way racist or xenophobic or stupid or working class or ignorant and I am actually surprised my mother voted with Farage, however I don't think they see it like this.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11975706
I've lived in England up until just recently and am working class so I have a better handle on this than the majority of people who are downvoting my comments on the subject.
Seems like in reality most people don't actually want to hear an opinion they disagree with. I hate to say it but even Reddit is able to grok some of this better than HN. I know a lot of people here do essentially understand it but they are being drown out by concernmongers. Funny that this was such a shock to the system and yet few people on social media were representing themselves as 'Leave' supporters. I wonder why that could be. <= That's sarcasm.
Free speech actually really does mean different opinions. Not just the ones you agree with and find sensible.
Britain gets similar deal as Norway has. Not in a EU, but member of EEA (European Economic Area ) and EFTA (European Free Trade Association). There will be free travel, Britain will still pay for EU. Britain can even be participatory member in many EU institutions.
The only difference is that Britain has no vote. Since Britain has always been the one to rebel against and drag it's feet in EU, this might actually speed up decision making in EU.
Whilst it is in the interest of the EU to have a trade agreement with UK, the UK does not have a strong negotiating position.
Why would EU member states do anything to help a country that is destabilising the entire EU project.
Excellent choice, my dear Britons, excellent choice.
I said "it's in the interest of the EU to keep the UK in its area of influence." and I don't remember the EU voting to kick out the UK, but quite the other way around.
The EU will work towards keeping the UK close and rebuilding any lost synergies. The problem (for the UK mainly) is that they won't do it at any cost. That means no sweeteners at all. The UK can take it or leave it, but they will not be getting anything better than what they had - and they will keep all the obligations they had (free movement of people and other regulations they wanted to "take back").
Unfortunately that might just grow UKIPs electoral base as they'll feel legitimized to keep blaming the EU for any UK issues. This is what happens when you (Thatcher - if you don't know her just remember she was Pinochet's friend) create a non-working class with nothing to lose that lives out of benefits and then you proceed to destroy state education - you initially get them to vote you in exchange of your charity, until they feel entitled to charity and someone really populist comes around and channels their anger "because you threaten to reduce benefits or the immigrants are taking them... and their jobs, which hasn't existed since the 80s".
The UK is dangerously steering towards a fascist state and the only way to stop it is to improve education, which no recent government has been taking seriously.
Note: In case someone is looking for a flamewar, I'm not saying everyone that voted Leave falls into the demographic described above, but it is a very important demographic inside the UK and especially in North England, Wales and other impoverished areas.
> Unfortunately that might just grow UKIPs electoral base as they'll feel legitimized to keep blaming the EU for any UK issues.
How would the UKIP be blaming the EU once the UK is out? Whatever the deal the EU offers, good or bad, it's a deal which will be accepted by the UK, a sovereign state. It will not be imposed. Hard to see how they can blame the EU for defending their interests, since I assume the UK will be doing the same.
The only possible explanation here is that the EU is able to force the UK to accept a "bad deal". But that directly contradicts the UKIP narrative, that "the UK is a strong nation, and all regions around the world will be ready to sign deals with it".
There's a UKIP MEP right now on Twitter blaming the EU because his toaster doesn't work properly. This is not a joke, this is actually happening.
The UK will keep being in the EU's are of influence, whether we like it or not.
It's not help. It's for the benefit of everyone. The whole point of EU is that it's not zero-sum game.
Britain's negotiation position is weakened, but other EU countries want to get access into British markets just as much as Brits want to get into EU markets.
The EU isn't in the greatest shape either.
In the past, it was always Britain vs. Germany and France because Britain was the problem child. As from now, Britain has more possibilities to align closer to Germany OR France -- which may possibly divide the partners, especially because German-French relations have been strained in recent years. The time of Mitterand and Kohl holding hands like lovers has gone.
This does not make any sense to me.
Does anyone else think that way? I think you are just freely fantasizing.
And even if the UK does get the same deal as Norway, that means they'll have to abide by EU policies and regulations, but they won't get a vote in the matter - that's not going to be very palatable to the UK.
There are attempts to anthropomorphize the situation to sell the news. There is no indication whatsoever that this narrative is true.
In the end it's just another negotiation to get things going. Interests and offerings determine the positions. Working together gets UK and EU into where they both want and expands the pie.
70% of British parliament and even bigger percentage of those who are negotiating deal with EU voted against Brexit.
A clean deal with the UK, which means tabula rasa, out of the EU and then a deal on equal footing, is the only acceptable deal. That could mean indeed a deal as Norway has, with the same rights and obligations. But I would argue that this is worse than what the UK had up to now.
But what I was essentially arguing with my comment is this comment of yours:
> There are attempts to anthropomorphize the situation to sell the news
It is a matter of being "pissed off", in the sense that this has a big weight in the negotiations: the EU needs to make clear that there is no free lunch.
Remain: Pros: Free trade with Eu, cheap flights, move around Europe for jobs.
Cons: no control on immigration, cheap labor stealing jobs, shitty eu rules.
Leave: Pros: Control over pound. Control on immigration. Control on governance.
Cons: taxes on eu trade, can't move freely for jobs.
But the Uk was kind of special. They didn't have the euro. They weren't part of schengen zone. Apart from influx of immigrants they had a good deal right?
Is the biggest leave argument the proposal to control who enters the border and not pay EU fees? That is a legit argument.
The UK, on the other hand, ... I don't even know what the UK is doing. Are they even going to follow through?
My impression is that the UK is going to drag its feet for years to come and not activate article 50 in a long time, until your internal political climate either forces a new referendum or general elections [1]:
> Some, however, have warned Britain “may never” trigger the formal divorce process because the tight deadline for talks puts the leaver in a weak position. “I personally believe they will never notify,” one diplomat said. “The moment you push the button you’re in a stupid negotiating position.”
In the meantime, the UK's role in the EU has been permanently damaged, and some important decisions are being taken [2]:
> As shockwaves from the Brexit vote continued to spread, EU officials also said on Sunday the bloc was preparing to move its European Banking Authority from London, setting up a race led by Paris and Frankfurt to host the regulator.
[1], [2] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/europe-leade...