EU Referendum - La Deuxième Partie

[kentonio]

Yes it was put to a vote, have you forgotten the parliamentary debate already? It wasn't out to a referendum of course, because in the normal way of things we're never stupid enough to hold referendums on anything important, otherwise we'd probably have invaded France by now.

[C0ckney]

come on ken, let's stop dancing round the obvious. brexit was put to a referendum, unlike the iraq war, and the people voted to leave the EU. if politicians try to weasel out of it, it may just shatter the illusion, and there will certainly be uproar. who could possibly claim while keeping a straight face that britain is a democracy after something like that.

[Bereta_Eder]

and there will certainly be uproar.

I think that's what it boils down to. With all the pro - eu marches, the comments in favor of the eu, the "schock" etc, one should not forget that 52% (well of the voting percentage) voted to go out, so if someone backs down using parlieamentary procedures, it might be technically legal, but it will cause an uproar and if the country is divided now, it will be shattered in two afterwards.
So unless a large chunk of the anti-eu crowd "magically" changed their minds overnight (and there might be a percentage sure), for societal peace I don't think it will be easy to reverse the result (or ignore it as the case might be)

[kentonio]

There has been a LOT of buyers remorse sine the vote. It's not complicated, just put it to a general election and if people still want to leave they can reinforce their decision and we can accept it. A single one off vote made on the basis of a campaign that told constant bare faced lies however, is not the shining example of democracy some people are making it out to be. If anything it's the clearest example yet of why we don't hold referendums on important issues.

[Bereta_Eder]

Perhaps, but there is no major party that is anti-eu.
So wether the labor or the tories win, they are both pro-eu, right?
people might, rightly, feel cheated...
at least that's how I understand it

[C0ckney]

the reason that we don't hold referenda on important issues, as the whining, caterwauling and desperate attempts to argue that the vote somehow doesn't count over the last few weeks have shown, is precisely because the plebs sometimes vote the 'wrong' way. elections and referenda are for giving the elite a thin veneer of legitimacy for their rule over us; they are not for challenging them.

a general election may yet be called (although i don't think it will), but given that all the main parties support remain, i don't see how that could legitimise changing the referendum result.

[BeBMan]

Edwards: Why the big secret? People are smart. They can handle it.

Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

As for the whole representative vs. direct democracy thing, I can see why ppl want to get more participation, but I'd absolutely disagree if in turn representative democracy is presented as some *evil* mechanism to control/oppress the ppl. Both methods have their pros and cons, but I don't buy a "the majority is always right" stance.

[Bereta_Eder]

well we can say "majority is always right - except for germany" so everyone is happy

[C0ckney]

I don't buy a "the majority is always right" stance.

i don't think that is the issue here. it's not a case of 'right' or 'wrong'. the people were asked a clear question and gave a clear answer. that answer must be respected. it is not possible to argue, as many have been doing since the referendum, that the people's will can be ignored because the losing side are unhappy with the result and retain any credibility.

[Dauphin]

A general election should be called, not to subvert the vote, but to give people a choice in how to Leave. In trite terms, if I lose the vote about where we eat dinner, doesn't mean I shouldn't get a say on what is ordered from the menu.

[BeBMan]

i don't think that is the issue here. it's not a case of 'right' or 'wrong'. the people were asked a clear question and gave a clear answer. it is not possible to argue, as many have been doing since the referendum, that the people's will can be ignored because the losing side are unhappy with the result and retain any credibility.

No problem with that, I absolutely think now that the ref has turned out a decision it should be respected. But more generally I doubt if holding refs is the best approach to all issues, esp. in an environment affected by ever more hysteric media coverage and demagogy.

[C0ckney]

A general election should be called, not to subvert the vote, but to give people a choice in how to Leave. In trite terms, if I lose the vote about where we eat dinner, doesn't mean I shouldn't get a say on what is ordered from the menu.

yes, i think that is a fair point. i doubt it will happen though because the tories have a wafer thin majority that they are unlikely to want to risk.

[C0ckney]

No problem with that, I absolutely think now that the ref has turned out a decision it should be respected. But more generally I doubt if holding refs is the best approach to all issues, esp. in an environment affected by ever more hysteric media coverage and demagogy.

i don't disagree with that. however, one could just as easily make the argument that all national politics is affected by hysterical media coverage and demagogy.

perhaps we could just get rid of countries altogether.

[BeBMan]

Sure it's not totally new. Though many articles these days make the point that populism, polarization and heavy partisanship seemed to have increased with the rise of social media in recent years, often with a negative impact on political debate.

[kentonio]

the reason that we don't hold referenda on important issues, as the whining, caterwauling and desperate attempts to argue that the vote somehow doesn't count over the last few weeks have shown, is precisely because the plebs sometimes vote the 'wrong' way. elections and referenda are for giving the elite a thin veneer of legitimacy for their rule over us; they are not for challenging them.

Bollocks, the reason we don't decide things by referendum is because we REALLY don't want to end up with referendums on things like 'Should all brown people be deported?' or 'Should we bring back public hangings for people who aren't sufficiently British'. The public can't be trusted with single issue votes because the public are largely wildly uneducated about the complexity and consequences of issues and can be relied on to make idiotic decisions based on emotional feelings that can change from one day to the next.

The whole point of a representative democracy is that we elect people who spend their time studying issues and getting advice from experts to try and formulate the best policy they can based on the general ideology of the people who elected them. All this waffle about elites and rulers is just camoflage for the public being too ****ing lazy to hold their representatives accountable for the most part, despite regularly having the opportunity to do so.