Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Jizique

Lumen wrote: »

I have never heard or read a British person describe the EU as an "empire".

Can you cite examples?

Did Johnson not liken it to the third Reich? Or was it Jeremy Hunt at last years conference?
Or was it both?
Any number of English UKIP supporters have used this analogy

Peregrinus

Lumen wrote: »

I have never heard or read a British person describe the EU as an "empire".

Can you cite examples?

Comes up all the time in Brexiter discourse:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/29/the-eu-is-an-empire/

https://twitter.com/addicted2newz/status/1305134444165181440?s=20

https://twitter.com/VeteransBritain/status/1265659000412090368?s=20

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1303820758364434433?s=20

https://twitter.com/JackSLBath/status/1172987274214236161

https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1183297267668832256?s=20

Lumen

OK, I guess I should not have underestimated the insanity that exists in the world.

Still, the traditional Eurosceptic view of the EU is of a headless bureaucracy. That's what they find so frustrating, that it doesn't fit with the toff dom-sub mentality.

Peregrinus

Lumen wrote: »

OK, I guess I should not have underestimated the insanity that exists in the world.

Still, the traditional Eurosceptic view of the EU is of a headless bureaucracy. That's what they find so frustrating, that it doesn't fit with the toff dom-sub mentality.

They don't think it's headless. They think it's headed by Johnny Foreigner, which is unacceptable.

(Nor is it much of a bureacracy. The entire staff of the Council and the Commission, who between them administer all the business of the EU in every policy field, is a smaller number than the number of people the UK alone is hiring to deal with just the customs paperwork that will result from Brexit.)

steddyeddy

Lumen wrote: »

I have never heard or read a British person describe the EU as an "empire".

Can you cite examples?

Are you joking? I heard it all the time while living in England.

McGiver

Jizique wrote:

Or was it Jeremy Hunt at last years conference?

Hunt likened the EU to the USSR. Extremely ignorant or vicious and insulting. Especially if you're coming from a country that is in the EU but that was once a Soviet satellite and was invaded by the Soviets 52 years ago.

Hermy

And not only is the EU an empire - the UK is a vassal state of that empire apparently.

Peregrinus

Well, Brexiters do have a long tradition of being especially cloth-eared. The "empire" comparison is a case in point. Ireland has been, at different times, a dependent country within the British empire, and an independent country within the EU. We know the difference. Brexiters who equate one status with the other display, at best, profound ignorance.

ancapailldorcha

Lumen wrote: »

OK, I guess I should not have underestimated the insanity that exists in the world.

Still, the traditional Eurosceptic view of the EU is of a headless bureaucracy. That's what they find so frustrating, that it doesn't fit with the toff dom-sub mentality.

The traditional view of the Conservative party is that it upholds law and order, promotes equality of opportunity and prudently manages the economy. As we can see clearly, traditional opinions of Eurosceptics and Conservatives have been thoroughly supplanted by rabid nationalism.

McFly85

Peregrinus wrote: »

They don't think it's headless. They think it's headed by Johnny Foreigner, which is unacceptable.

(Nor is it much of a bureacracy. The entire staff of the Council and the Commission, who between them administer all the business of the EU in every policy field, is a smaller number than the number of people the UK alone is hiring to deal with just the customs paperwork that will result from Brexit.)

There were definitely Brexiters complaining that the EU was a mountain of bureaucracy, which I always thought was a mad thing to complain about. Who cares about the day to day process of an organisation that you have no direct involvement in, especially because most of the time they’re working to ensure that you have as little bureaucracy to deal with if your daily life as possible?

Anyway, if no deal happens, they’re going to have to become big fans of bureaucracy really fast!

Peregrinus

McFly85 wrote: »

There were definitely Brexiters complaining that the EU was a mountain of bureaucracy, which I always thought was a mad thing to complain about. Who cares about the day to day process of an organisation that you have no direct involvement in, especially because most of the time they’re working to ensure that you have as little bureaucracy to deal with if your daily life as possible?

Anyway, if no deal happens, they’re going to have to become big fans of bureaucracy really fast!

Even Brexit with the deal they want involves a huge increase of bureaucracy and bureaucratic requirements in the UK.

(Those new lorry parks? The requirement for a permit to enter Kent? They're not happening to demonstrate that the UK is ready for a no-deal Brexit if need be; they are happening because they will be needed under the FTA that the UK is seeking.)

johnnyskeleton

McFly85 wrote: »

There were definitely Brexiters complaining that the EU was a mountain of bureaucracy, which I always thought was a mad thing to complain about. Who cares about the day to day process of an organisation that you have no direct involvement in, especially because most of the time they’re working to ensure that you have as little bureaucracy to deal with if your daily life as possible?

Anyway, if no deal happens, they’re going to have to become big fans of bureaucracy really fast!

I suppose it again comes back to the central Brexiteer premise that if they leave the whole thing will crumble and that they can lead a new Europe of laissez faire economics, laissez faire regulation and lasissez faire free trade. Didnt quite come to hand for them though

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

They don't think it's headless. They think it's headed by Johnny Foreigner, which is unacceptable.

(Nor is it much of a bureacracy. The entire staff of the Council and the Commission, who between them administer all the business of the EU in every policy field, is a smaller number than the number of people the UK alone is hiring to deal with just the customs paperwork that will result from Brexit.)

Love that.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'm not sure how highlighting cruelty to animals is a brexiteer trait and I agree it would be sensible to stick to established standards.

As Peregrinus has pointed out, the EU has no jurisdiction over national governments' handling of (in this case) animal cruelty. So the Spanish are free to traumatise bulls in the name of tradition; the French are free to eat protected bird species in the name of tradition; and the British are/were free to breed mutant dogs in the name tradition.

But where new processes are put in place, or where the EU deals with non-EU countries, it lays down guidelines and imposes rules. These are thrashed out between the member states with contentious, tradition-busting measures sometimes fudged for the sake of overall progress; and then a single common policy is put in place, published for all the world to see and understand, and - depending on the circumstances - occasionally adopted by at least part of the rest of the world as A Good Idea.

The Pet Passport Scheme is a perfect example of how things work. The UK unilaterally introduced this so that the Nigels of this world could take their emotional support ferret to Brussels for the weekend and bring it back to England without quarantine. The EU saw that this system worked quite well, addressing both the question of freedom of movement for people-with-pets and also the problem of puppy farming/dog trafficking. Having been beta-tested in the UK, then refined by "Brussels" several non-EU countries now use exactly the same protocol and their efforts are recognised by the EU, allowing for the easier immigration of people-with-pets from all over the world.

Except, come 01-01-2021, from the UK. Now, if Boris and Dom want to take Larry with them to their lovers' nest on the Côte d'Azur:

A current EU pet passport issued in the UK will not be valid for travel to the EU from 1 January 2021.

Before your dog, cat or ferret can travel to the EU for the first time after 1 January 2021, you’ll need to take the following steps.

You must have your dog, cat or ferret microchipped.

Vaccinate your dog, cat or ferret against rabies - your pet must be at least 12 weeks old before it can be vaccinated.

Your pet must have a blood sample taken at least 30 days after its primary rabies vaccination (from a current series of vaccinations). Your vet may recommend a booster rabies vaccination before this test.

Your pet’s blood sample will be sent to an EU-approved blood testing laboratory.

Wait 3 months from the date the successful blood sample was taken before you can travel.

The vet must give you a copy of the test results and enter the day the blood sample was taken in an animal health certificate (AHC).

You will not be able to travel with your pet if you have not completed these steps.

If the blood test result is not successful, you’ll need a repeat vaccination and another blood test taken at least 30 days after the repeat vaccination.

Find out more about rabies vaccination boosters and blood tests.

As long as you keep your pet’s rabies vaccinations up to date, you will not need to get repeat blood tests for repeat trips to the EU.
Get an animal health certificate (AHC)

You must also take your pet to your vet no more than 10 days before travel to get an AHC. (The AHC needs to be signed by an official vet. Check with your vet that they can issue AHCs for pets.)

You must take proof of:

your pet’s microchipping date
your pet’s vaccination history
a successful rabies antibody blood test result

Your pet’s AHC will be valid for:

10 days after the date of issue for entry into the EU
onward travel within the EU for 4 months after the date of issue
re-entry to Great Britain for 4 months after the date of issue

(source DEFRA)

This throws travelling English pet-owners back into the 1980s, and is the kind of utterly stupid and pointless taking back of control and escaping from Brussels bureaucracy that epitomises Brexit; and it'll be repeated across hundreds of sectors.

But "we knew what we were voting for" ... supposedly.

ambro25

CelticRambler wrote: »

(...)

The Pet Passport Scheme is a perfect example of how things work. The UK unilaterally introduced this so that the Nigels of this world could take their emotional support ferret to Brussels for the weekend and bring it back to England without quarantine. The EU saw that this system worked quite well, addressing both the question of freedom of movement for people-with-pets and also the problem of puppy farming/dog trafficking. Having been beta-tested in the UK, then refined by "Brussels" several non-EU countries now use exactly the same protocol and their efforts are recognised by the EU, allowing for the easier immigration of people-with-pets from all over the world.

Except, come 01-01-2021, from the UK. Now, if Boris and Dom want to take Larry with them to their lovers' nest on the Côte d'Azur:

(...)

Might have mentioned this before, but our 11 year-old British dog is now officially French (notwithstanding his Luxembourgish residency and annual registration tax). Well, according to his brand new pet passport anyway. Had a good LOL at the name of the French registry, iCAD ("identification des carnivores domestiques") administered by the French Ministry of Agriculture.

Another example beginning to trend on Twitter right now, is about British seed exporters warning NI customers that they won't be accepting orders and shipping seeds beyond end December, because no PSC.

Lemming

McGiver wrote: »

Hunt likened the EU to the USSR. Extremely ignorant or vicious and insulting. Especially if you're coming from a country that is in the EU but that was once a Soviet satellite and was invaded by the Soviets 52 years ago.

Another frequent abbreviation - for Lumen's educational benefit - alluding to notions of empire that one might lamentably find thrown out with gleeful abandon by Brexiteers is "EUSSR"

Peregrinus

Lemming wrote: »

Another frequent abbreviation - for Lumen's educational benefit - alluding to notions of empire that one might lamentably find thrown out with gleeful abandon by Brexiteers is "EUSSR"

Yes. Again, all you would convey by making this comparison is the fact that you know nothing whatsoever about the USSR.

ancapailldorcha

McGiver wrote: »

Hunt likened the EU to the USSR. Extremely ignorant or vicious and insulting. Especially if you're coming from a country that is in the EU but that was once a Soviet satellite and was invaded by the Soviets 52 years ago.

On that note:



The gentleman facepalming is Vytenis Andriukaitis who was born in a Soviet gulag.

The British public have consistently failed to attribute any value to the EU beyond the material benefits of being in the single market and all the while have sent far right provocateurs to Brussels for no other discernible reason that to troll the European Parliament. Their own politicians not once made a positive case for continued membership once the 1975 referendum was won.

paul71

McGiver wrote: »

Hunt likened the EU to the USSR. Extremely ignorant or vicious and insulting. Especially if you're coming from a country that is in the EU but that was once a Soviet satellite and was invaded by the Soviets 52 years ago.

Absolutely, my wife who is Czech and has been largely ambivalent was disgusted by this comparison. At the time I remember her saying it to her parents, 2 people who spent 40 years under communism and saw the Warsaw pact send 5000 tanks into their country in 1968. Their reaction was bewilderment and disbelieve.

Indeed the USSR sent tanks in to steal their country EUSSR sent Irishmen to steal their daughters, Empire indeed.

Igotadose

In other news, Barnier being a bit optimistic today, per Tony Connelly:
"Agreement on EU-UK relationship 'within reach' - Barnier"


https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1021/1172897-brexit/

Sam Russell

Igotadose wrote: »

In other news, Barnier being a bit optimistic today, per Tony Connelly:
"Agreement on EU-UK relationship 'within reach' - Barnier"


https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1021/1172897-brexit/

He also said the so-called level playing field was a key European demand.

"It's a matter of the integrity of the single market and fair competition. Our UK friends say they want to maintain the highest standards. If that's the case why don't they commit to them? We don't need words. We need guarantees."

I think that says - no compromise from the EU - or alternative compromises that are not of any importance to the EU.

Professor Moriarty

Igotadose wrote: »

In other news, Barnier being a bit optimistic today, per Tony Connelly:
"Agreement on EU-UK relationship 'within reach' - Barnier"


https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1021/1172897-brexit/

Or piling on the sugar to avoid being blamed when the inevitable happens.

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think that says - no compromise from the EU - or alternative compromises that are not of any importance to the EU.

Fish.

The UK agree to LPF, the EU compromises on fish.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Fish.

The UK agree to LPF, the EU compromises on fish.

Fish is too big an issue for France unless it is a small fish compromise - maybe a sprat deal. It would be a good deal for the UK for a status quo deal on fish (if that can be dressed as a win), otherwise they will be eating mackerel fingers and battered pike with their chips and beans.

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

On that note:



The gentleman facepalming is Vytenis Andriukaitis who was born in a Soviet gulag.

The British public have consistently failed to attribute any value to the EU beyond the material benefits of being in the single market and all the while have sent far right provocateurs to Brussels for no other discernible reason that to troll the European Parliament. Their own politicians not once made a positive case for continued membership once the 1975 referendum was won.

Yes indeed, always talking about profit and loss and how much money they can make out of it. More like they joined a money making scheme than a community or union of people.

A lot of the Brexiteers openly sneer at the idea of EU citizenship and we know what they think of freedom of movement. (They don't actually seem to like people : they are obsessed with trade, money and goods).

ancapailldorcha

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes indeed, always talking about profit and loss and how much money they can make out of it. More like they joined a money making scheme than a community or union of people.

Much of the discourse in 2016 on both sides reflected this. The remain campaign was organised around convincing people of the economic damage leaving would cause. Not once did they highlight precedents of Britain leading the club, the benefits of free movement or ways Britain could make the EU better.

Strazdas wrote: »

A lot of the Brexiteers openly sneer at the idea of EU citizenship and we know what they think of freedom of movement. (They don't actually seem to like people : they are obsessed with trade, money and goods).

I don't think it's that. I think there's a generational element to it. Holidays aside, older folk tend not to use free movement the same way youngsters do with things like Erasmus, Interrailing as well as moving abroad for work. Therefore, they simply do not value it as highly if at all and some may even have derived a bit of Schadenfreude from depriving them of their rights to free movement.

listermint

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Much of the discourse in 2016 on both sides reflected this. The remain campaign was organised around convincing people of the economic damage leaving would cause. Not once did they highlight precedents of Britain leading the club, the benefits of free movement or ways Britain could make the EU better.



I don't think it's that. I think there's a generational element to it. Holidays aside, older folk tend not to use free movement the same way youngsters do with things like Erasmus, Interrailing as well as moving abroad for work. Therefore, they simply do not value it as highly if at all and some may even have derived a bit of Schadenfreude from depriving them of their rights to free movement.

Except of course they are the single largest single country grouping having citizens abroad in the EU region out of all EU members. And they say poles are all over. They haven't a patch on the British.

Sam Russell

Strazdas wrote: »

Yes indeed, always talking about profit and loss and how much money they can make out of it. More like they joined a money making scheme than a community or union of people.

A lot of the Brexiteers openly sneer at the idea of EU citizenship and we know what they think of freedom of movement. (They don't actually seem to like people : they are obsessed with trade, money and goods).

The EEC was formed to combat war and promote peace, and also to combat food shortages and promote sustainable food supply. Promotion of democracy and human rights are also cornerstones of the European project, together with closer union.

The British were major players in the slave trade, and exploiting their workers in their satanic mines, mills and factories.

I think that is a fair summary of the ideals of both sides.

Lumen

Lemming wrote: »

Another frequent abbreviation - for Lumen's educational benefit - alluding to notions of empire that one might lamentably find thrown out with gleeful abandon by Brexiteers is "EUSSR"

For the sake of clarity, I wasn't disputing the allusions, metaphors, and synonyms for empire, I was saying that I hadn't heard British people use that specific word in describing the EU. e.g. "reich" may mean empire (I'm not German so I'm unfamiliar with the probably rich layers of idiom) but to the average English person, "empire" has largely romantic historical connotations (and it's not necessary here to go into the many obvious deficiencies and blindspots of the English system of history education).

Anyway, I don't want to labour the point too much.

Strazdas

Sam Russell wrote: »

The EEC was formed to combat war and promote peace, and also to combat food shortages and promote sustainable food supply. Promotion of democracy and human rights are also cornerstones of the European project, together with closer union.

The British were major players in the slave trade, and exploiting their workers in their satanic mines, mills and factories.

I think that is a fair summary of the ideals of both sides.

The whole 'we joined a mere trading zone' ties in to all that. Almost if they are rejecting all the values and ideals of the EU (perversely, they view this as "ever closer political union") and saying they basically just want to flog goods to the EU and don't even want their migrant workers.