Brexit Referendum Superthread

Professor Moriarty

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Not really. Every new treaty has to be ratified by member states. Nobody was railroaded into ever closer union. They all signed up for it.

I believe one country even had two referendums on a EU treaty before they signed up.

djpbarry

Fratton Fred wrote: »

it is irrelevant if this myth about blindsided exists or not. It is open to interpretation and if one state reads it one way and the rest another, then that state has two choices, fall in or leave.

Only two choices? Really? There isn't a whole spectrum of other options in between "Do whatever everyone else wants" and "Leave"? Because I could have sworn that, up to last year, the UK was somewhere between those two positions, just like every other member state.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

very legitimate and very laudable. Is it still relevant though?

Putin just nabbed himself a bit of the Ukraine and the war in Yugoslavia was only two decades ago, so I would say yes.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The eu, as in the commission, the actual people who sit, year after year, in Brussels and actually operate this thing called the european union...

...are powerless to do anything without the consent of the member states.

steddyeddy

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I always thought that sort of "we superior protestants" thing was confined mostly to local politics in Northern Ireland and Scotland, but the man who came third in the race to be PM after Cameron came out with this:

In fairness it would be truer to say it's confined to unionism. Gove's a typical unionist. He said this about the Good Friday Agreement:

He also complained that the deal "uproots justice from its traditions and makes it politically contentious" and that it "demeans traditional expressions of British national identity".

and

The British justice secretary previously also expressed repeated concerns about the "erosion" of Northern Ireland's British culture.

It comes with the territory that unionists think their religion and nationality superior. It allows them to consider parts of Ireland, Spain and Argentina British despite geographic location. For someone who complains about immigrants he has no problem with British immigrants creating colonial disputes in other countries.

First Up

Fratton Fred wrote:

very legitimate and very laudable. Is it still relevant though?

It was very relevant when included in the preamble to the Treaty of Rome almost sixty years ago. The only people who quote it now are those trying to mis-represent it.

Fratton Fred wrote:

oh please, enough of this "We are all part of the eu" fanboy ism.

The eu, as in the commission, the actual people who sit, year after year, in Brussels and actually operate this thing called the european union.

The member states run the EU, not the Commission. A bus driver operates a bus. He doesn't decide where it goes.

Zubeneschamali

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But this is all absolute bollox anyway, discussing religion in a thread about Brexit is as relevant as discussing it in one about horse racing.

I think one benefit of the UK being in the EU is that one time Archduke Otto, crown prince of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, ejected Ian Paisley from the Parliament for heckling the Pope by denouncing him as the antichrist.

You don't get that kind of action at Westminster anymore.

catbear

Following the price hikes in the shops my weekly bus pass just went up 9%!

Chip, chip, chip away.

Fratton Fred

First Up wrote: »

The member states run the EU, not the Commission. A bus driver operates a bus. He doesn't decide where it goes.

Then why so much emphasis on what Jean Claude Juncker says?

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

It comes with the territory that unionists think their religion and nationality superior. It allows them to consider parts of Ireland, Spain and Argentina British despite geographic location. For someone who complains about immigrants he has no problem with British immigrants creating colonial disputes in other countries.

that's pretty poor to be honest. I would have expected better from you.

First Up

Fratton Fred wrote:

Then why so much emphasis on what Jean Claude Juncker says?

Emphasis by who?

Zubeneschamali

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Then why so much emphasis on what Jean Claude Juncker says?

Even a faceless bureaucracy that we all hate because it is so faceless needs a face.

Professor Moriarty

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Then why so much emphasis on what Jean Claude Juncker says?

He is President of the European Commission. It is the most powerful position in the EU.

First Up

Professor Moriarty wrote:

He is President of the European Commission. It is the most powerful position in the EU.

The most powerful position in the Commission. The member states make the decisions.

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

that's pretty poor to be honest. I would have expected better from you.

You keep saying that without dealing with what I'm saying. Historically unionists haven't been a force for good. It;s easy for you to say otherwise because you come from a country that didn't suffer because of it.

Professor Moriarty

First Up wrote: »

The most powerful position in the Commission. The member states make the decisions.

He is, of course, answerable to the member states via the European Parliament, but no other politician has as much power within the EU as the President.

AnGaelach

First Up wrote: »

The member states run the EU, not the Commission. A bus driver operates a bus. He doesn't decide where it goes.

The European Commission is the agent which drives forward integration. It's the "Guardian of the Treaties" and is the one which proposes legislation (which is never anything but grinding inexorably towards "ever closer union").

Your argument only stacks up if the bus driver is the one proposing what paths to go down and your only answer is "yes" or "no" (and if it's a no he'll just stop the bus, back up a little bit and ask you again).

First Up

Professor Moriarty wrote:

He is, of course, answerable to the member states via the European Parliament, but no other politician has as much power within the EU as the President.

The Parliament and the Council of Ministers. Juncker does not call the shots.

Professor Moriarty

First Up wrote: »

The Parliament and the Council of Ministers. Juncker does not call the shots.

Well, for instance, he is Head of the EU civil service and represents the EU abroad. Furthermore, he can fire a commissioner and refuse to sign any given policy. Within the political structure of the EU, he is the most powerful politician. Essentially, nothing gets done without his approval.

oscarBravo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Well, for instance, he is Head of the EU civil service and represents the EU abroad. Furthermore, he can fire a commissioner and refuse to sign any given policy. Within the political structure of the EU, he is the most powerful politician.

OK, but look at what you've written, and ask yourself: just how powerful a politician does that make him, in real terms?

Professor Moriarty

oscarBravo wrote: »

OK, but look at what you've written, and ask yourself: just how powerful a politician does that make him, in real terms?

Thankfully, not as powerful as his title suggests. He is the most powerful politician within the EU political structure though, and to assume that he is irrelevant would be a mistake.

His position is akin to that of Michael D and Sir Humphrey's love child.

Fratton Fred

steddyeddy wrote: »

You keep saying that without dealing with what I'm saying. Historically unionists haven't been a force for good. It;s easy for you to say otherwise because you come from a country that didn't suffer because of it.

It's the typical roping in of places like the Falklands and Gibraltar, typical case of not looking at facts, just seeing what you want.

murphaph

Fratton Fred wrote: »

yes, I appreciate that.

that is why I used the word Visibly, as in it is easily visible.

Studying the funding of a niche agency, or the balance sheet of a business is not as visible as a bloody great big sign next to a motorway.

To be honest you'll almost never see an EU flag on a German infrastructural project sign either but I'd wager most Germans feel their country has benefited from being an EU member.

AnGaelach

murphaph wrote: »

To be honest you'll almost never see an EU flag on a German infrastructural project sign either but I'd wager most Germans feel their country has benefited from being an EU member.

Half of Germany's economy is derived from exporting, of course they'll see the EU as beneficial considering it removes barriers to trade in those markets.

Fratton Fred

AnGaelach wrote: »

Half of Germany's economy is derived from exporting, of course they'll see the EU as beneficial considering it removes barriers to trade in those markets.

And there is a belief they are atoning for their past.

Calina

Fratton Fred wrote: »

why does it?

for the vast majority of people, a banks passporting rights and Euratom are completely irrelevant. A restriction in the amount of fish they can land does.

I think it would be more accurate to say that they think bank passporting rights and Euratom are completely irrelevant. However, they are likely to find out that perhaps they weren't so irrelevant at all.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe, but being an island plays a significant part in both our mentalities. We see borders as being easily defined by bits of water and within those borders, everyone is more or less the same nationality. Our outlook is very different to people who live in mainland europe.

Our outlook is different to the UK outlook - Ireland is clearly more open to Europe and the EU and pathetic and all as our language skills are more of our teenagers are learning French and German to senior level than in the UK, and frankly it has nothing to do with borders being defined by being an island. We in Ireland had a very clearly marked border for a long time. I recall the customs checks and border checkpoints. You'd have to be English to assume our view of borders was the same as that of a country that doesn't have an international one on its island. I'm aware quite a few Scots would like one, however.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He is President of the European Commission. It is the most powerful position in the EU.

I'd argue it isn't the most powerful although it's highly influential. I'd suspect that more influence lies with Donald Tusk though, the President of the Council.

Professor Moriarty

Calina wrote: »

I think it would be more accurate to say that they think bank passporting rights and Euratom are completely irrelevant. However, they are likely to find out that perhaps they weren't so irrelevant at all.



Our outlook is different to the UK outlook - Ireland is clearly more open to Europe and the EU and pathetic and all as our language skills are more of our teenagers are learning French and German to senior level than in the UK, and frankly it has nothing to do with borders being defined by being an island. We in Ireland had a very clearly marked border for a long time. I recall the customs checks and border checkpoints. You'd have to be English to assume our view of borders was the same as that of a country that doesn't have an international one on its island. I'm aware quite a few Scots would like one, however.



I'd argue it isn't the most powerful although it's highly influential. I'd suspect that more influence lies with Donald Tusk though, the President of the Council.

Well, the Wiki page for the Commission President states that it is the most powerful position in the EU. Plus he is elected for 5 years whereas the Council President is elected every 2.5 years. But there is no doubt that Tusk is a very powerful figure.

It will be interesting to see how much trust they and Barnier are given over the next two years. It can't be just Merkel driving the negotiations but neither can 27 countries instruct a negotiating team. IMO, they'll have to be given a great deal of autonomy.

Fratton Fred

Calina wrote: »

I think it would be more accurate to say that they think bank passporting rights and Euratom are completely irrelevant. However, they are likely to find out that perhaps they weren't so irrelevant at all.

Maybe, I highly doubt it though.

Calina wrote: »

Our outlook is different to the UK outlook - Ireland is clearly more open to Europe and the EU and pathetic and all as our language skills are more of our teenagers are learning French and German to senior level than in the UK,

I'd be interested to see if that is actually the case.

Calina wrote: »

and frankly it has nothing to do with borders being defined by being an island. We in Ireland had a very clearly marked border for a long time. I recall the customs checks and border checkpoints.

and yet people presumed that because this is all the island of Ireland, it should be the one state. Why is that?

You'd have to be English to assume our view of borders was the same as that of a country that doesn't have an international one on its island.[/quote]

why?

Calina wrote: »

I'm aware quite a few Scots would like one, however.

this is very petty. did you think that would upset me for some reason?

murphaph

AnGaelach wrote: »

Half of Germany's economy is derived from exporting.

Like Ireland and several other countries (most?) in the Union.

AnGaelach

murphaph wrote: »

Like Ireland and several other countries (most?) in the Union.

Do you think I was trying to say it was bad or something? I was pointing out that the reason the Germans like the EU is because they have a huge gain from it.

steddyeddy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe, I highly doubt it though.



I'd be interested to see if that is actually the case.



and yet people presumed that because this is all the island of Ireland, it should be the one state. Why is that?

You'd have to be English to assume our view of borders was the same as that of a country that doesn't have an international one on its island.

why?



this is very petty. did you think that would upset me for some reason?[/quote]

I think they presume it should be one state because it would be if not for British involvement. I remember you saying yourself you had disregard for Irish people supporting Scottish independence. Same thing except democracy is involved in the latter.

Lemming

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'd be interested to see if that is actually the case.

Several of the major universities in Ireland insist (or did last time I checked at any rate .. ) on having a second language (Irish does not count) in addition to the points requirement in any given year/CAO round in order to qualify for admission, which creates an impetus for students to study a foreign language. To be clear Fred, the second language is a general blanket requirement for entry regardless of your desired course. Whether or not most of those students not taking foreign languages at third-level are fluent and comfortable in everyday usage of said language is another matter.