https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49084605
Boris Johnson has been elected new Conservative leader in a ballot of party members and will become the next UK prime minister.
He beat Jeremy Hunt comfortably, winning 92,153 votes to his rival's 46,656.
The former London mayor takes over from Theresa May on Wednesday.
In his victory speech, Mr Johnson promised he would "deliver Brexit, unite the country and defeat Jeremy Corbyn".
Speaking at the Queen Elizabeth II centre in London, he said: "We are going to energise the country.
"We are going to get Brexit done on 31 October and take advantage of all the opportunities it will bring with a new spirit of can do.
"We are once again going to believe in ourselves, and like some slumbering giant we are going to rise and ping off the guy ropes of self doubt and negativity."
Any other comments would be editorializing...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:01PM (23 children)
How many fake deadlines have we heard already? It seems like dozens. Who cares anymore, the UK has lost all pretense of democracy in my eyes.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:57PM (21 children)
The UK is a constitutional monarchy. Democracy doesn't have anything to do with it. Why do people confuse the Western world and democracy all the time? The US isn't a democracy, either. It is a republic, with a democratic form of representation, which has little to do with a genuine democracy. I'm almost curious enough to search for all the nations with a democracy for a government. There may actually be one or two. Don't look to the old British Commonwealth nations - those are all subject to Her Majesty, by one means or another.
Democracy. At times, I get tired of hearing the word, because few people understand their governments, and how they relate to democracy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:04PM (10 children)
So when people voted for brexit that didn't mean it was supposed to happen according to the UK system?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:18PM (7 children)
What it meant was, the people were given an opportunity to feel important, while the politicians decided what they were actually going to do. Very much like the US, don't you see?
(Score: 2) by driverless on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:29PM (6 children)
Yup. Look up selectorate theory, in particular the nominal selectorate vs. the real selectorate. In the US case, for example, the nominal selectorate is the Republican rank and file, the real selectorate are the rich, and large corporates.
(Score: 3, Informative) by driverless on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:36PM (3 children)
Forgot to add: As the winning candidate, your primary task is to reward the real selectorate, the ones that count, and you can safely ignore the nominal selectorate, in the sense of not needing to give them anything except platitudes, since they don't count for much, thus "nominal" vs. "real".
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:30PM (2 children)
You set this up, didn't you?
https://fromarsetoelbow.blogspot.com/2019/06/selectorate-theory.html [blogspot.com]
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday July 25 2019, @01:01AM (1 child)
Naah, wasn't me, I fell asleep by the second paragraph.
If you want to read about selectorate theory, try "The Dictator's Handbook", although you need to beware of the authors' annoying habit of cherry-picking specific examples of autocratic rulers to illustrate their ideas.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday July 25 2019, @03:06PM
I was referring to the name of the site, more than anything. Arse to elbows? Fair enough, you didn't set me up, LOL.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:41PM (1 child)
Sounds reasonable, but I don't know why you single out Republicans. Democrats do the same thing but with a different set of favored multinationals.
(Score: 2) by DeVilla on Thursday July 25 2019, @08:41PM
I was assuming the idea was the republicans are in the white house right now and 4 years ago it would have been the democrats. Maybe I'm incorrectly assuming the post even handed.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:38PM
Well, it was a nonbinding referendum, so... yes, that was one of the perfectly legal and intended outcomes under their system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:13PM
I don't care your political leanings but in this day and age people vote how the powerful want.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Shire on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:39PM (3 children)
Not sure what you mean by "genuine democracy". Usually when only the voice of the populous is counted that's refered to as "mob rule".
The US is both a "Representative Democracy" and a "Constitutional Democracy" and this combination is called a "Constitutional Republic". The people have a voice both through voting and through their respective reprsentatives but it's not a "majority rules" government. The constitution is the law of the land and the government and the people are constrained by it.
It's pretty much understood that a "genuine democracy" is a disaster just like any form of socialism or communism. Rampant corruption exists in all human endevours, but systems reliant on pure democracy (again - mob rule), socialism, and communism lead to UNCHECKED corruption.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:49PM (2 children)
At the state level, at least for those states which allow it, the initiative process makes mob rule ever more important. This coupled with the Reynolds v. Simms decision, which destroyed the American concept of a senate at the state level, turned all the state senates into nothing more than a second house of reps, and thereby transferred almost all political power to the large cities in those states, another form of mob rule. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._Sims [wikipedia.org]
(*)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday July 25 2019, @05:16PM (1 child)
This is an interesting point, though it's important to note that many state Houses of Representatives were also not apportioned well at the time according to population. It's true that State Senates were more likely to be explicitly apportioned in some other way, but House districts often became very unequal over time due to people migrating within a state, and states often just avoided redistricting in order to keep incumbents and incumbent parties in power. If there's one thing to learn from that decision, it's that keeping bad districting in place for long periods of time was pretty common in many states.
Note that I'm not necessarily disagreeing that there might be valid alternative forms of governance/representation other than "One person, one vote" policy that the U.S. was suddenly thrust into with the Warren Court. And I definitely think there was some severe judicial overreach in the reasoning of these decisions. On the other hand, without this sort of reasoning, legislative bodies often devolve into representation of random interests which aren't necessarily representing "rural vs. urban" in a fairer way, but just serving the elected officials -- see, for example, the rotten borough [wikipedia.org] problem, which manifested in a different way in many state houses in the U.S.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday July 25 2019, @07:29PM
Those are valid points. In a lot of ways, we are in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation because so often those who run for office only have their own self-interest at heart, and those who fund those candidates definitely always only have their own self-interest at heart.
Being one of those in a rural area, I do feel left out of the process though and surely there must be a middle ground -- simply making senate districts conform to county lines (1 per county) would hinder the steamroller effect metropolitan areas have over the rest of the state. I live in WA and the I5 corridor from Olympia to Seattle (about 60 miles) has more than half the Senate votes here in a state of 66k square miles. Whatever Seattle decides it wants, the rest of the state gets -- no negotiating necessary. I think that is a recipe for instability.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:15PM
This sounds like some hipster high-schooler who just had their first civics class and wants to sound smarter than everybody else in the room.
It is correct that Britain and the US are not Direct Democracies, but nobody ever said they were. However, they are Democracies [wikipedia.org]. If you don't trust the "encyclopedia anybody can edit," just look at the etymology; "rule of the people" (as opposed to rule of religion, a dictator, or other)
As proof of Britain being a democracy, consider Brexit itself. David Cameron certainly didn't want it, so unless you think the Queen secretly wanted it and pulled a bunch of strings, it was the vote of the people (hacked, manipulated, or otherwise) which caused this situation.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:17PM (4 children)
"The problem with capitalism is that eventually everyone but the capitalists runs out of money." - Margaret Truther
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:22PM
Blaming capitalism for a bunch of government BS? God you people are easy to scam.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:55PM (1 child)
Sorry, little popgun - I didn't mean to trigger you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @01:05AM
Free Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange! UK: Strong support for Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning at Tolpuddle Martyrs Festival [wsws.org] and Indian auto workers speak out in defence of Assange and Manning [wsws.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 25 2019, @12:13PM
Given that nobody has "run out" of money, does that mean that everyone is a capitalist? At some point, you probably ought to wonder why the world is doing so well.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:45PM
when? [twitter.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:04PM (69 children)
Good luck with that.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:11PM (29 children)
Why do you idiots keep giving him free advertisement? I've been saying this since early 2016... Supposedly you hate Trump but your actions just help him become and stay president, I never knew he was running until idiots on this site informed me when they started ranting and raving about it.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:27PM (3 children)
Really. Much better to align Boris with Benny Hill.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by driverless on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:33PM (1 child)
Boris is far more dangerous than that. He comes across as a harmless buffoon, but he has the two very dangerous traits of thinking he knows how to do everything and refusing to listen to people who know far more than him about particular topics because he knows better. The one saving grace is that his my-way-or-the-highway style, combined with his ineptitude, will paralyse things within a few months of him coming into office and therefore limit the damage he can do.
(Score: 4, Touché) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:50PM
So you are saying he is a politician.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @06:29AM
I find that very insulting to the memory of Benny Hill. His humour may seem a bit dated and sexist now, but it was never nasty usually very funny, and by all accounts Benny himself was a true gentleman.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:29PM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:01PM (21 children)
Idiots on this site???? In my memory, it was the idiots on CNN, MSNBC, and half a dozen other MSM news outlets. The more they ranted and raved about Trump, the higher his ratings went. MSM could have just shut up about Trump, and let him dry up, and blow away. But, no, they had to run at the mouth, and thereby ensure his election.
I was pulling for Dr. Carson!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:07PM (6 children)
Even at the height of the hype train, Trump could still look like a sane alternative to complete madmen like Carson or Cruz. The Republicans did this to themselves.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:26PM
I don't think Trump was ever the saner alternative to much of anything. Most of his appeal is that he's not all that sane.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @04:05PM (3 children)
I've heard arguments against Carson that made sense, whether I agreed to them, or not. Your claim that Carson was/is a madman is somewhere out in the Twilight Zone. Of all the potential candidates in that election, Carson was probably the most sane, and most stable of the lot. And, I'm talking about BOTH parties here. You can argue politics all you like, but accusations of being mad, or crazy, should be reserved for those many SOB's who are definitely crazy. Like, Trump and Clinton, for instance. Cruz? Ehhhh - he has his faults, but he's not nearly as crazy as either Trump or Clinton.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @04:30PM (1 child)
Being crazy doesn't necessarily make him a worse choice than Trump or Clinton. But anyone that thinks the pyramids were grain silos is not playing with a full deck.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:06PM
Not to mention Ben Carson shilling for Mannatech: [sciencebasedmedicine.org]
Carson has not been all there since he quit brain surgery. Something wrong with his brain, something that turned him into a Black Republican. Kanye may have the same disease.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:22PM
Of course Dr. Carson was the most stable. He was asleep half the time, so he had slower reaction times to the news cycle's political crisis of the hour and less awake time to attempt something crazy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:25PM
And he will again when he runs against Pete Fruitijudge, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker or Beto O'Rourke.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:07PM (1 child)
Where do you think the MSM get their ideas?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday July 25 2019, @12:33PM
Themselves. Look at how rapidly various weird phrases spread about. My favorite was the "ultra-loyal" Republican Guard of the old Saddam Hussein regime of Iraq in the months prior to the start of the Iraqi invasion in 2003. Sure, the US-led force could roll over the mundane troops of that regime, but what would happen when they met these highly trained troops, ultra-loyal to Saddam himself? Turns out they would roll over those guys too. Ultra-loyalty didn't amount to much.
Maybe the phrase was coined in some ministry of information somewhere, but it spread because other talking heads were using the phrase.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:03PM
So, you cut your face off to spite the face?
I think that is a definition of an idiot - an American voter!
(Score: 4, Informative) by Arik on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:39PM (5 children)
Trouble is, all these party officials and media company employees and so forth live in a bit of a bubble, and they badly miscalculated which candidate was actually unelectable and which was only electable if running against the other.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:51PM (4 children)
And the DAILY "but her emails" stories? Were those part of the conspiracy too?
(Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:59PM (3 children)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:08PM (2 children)
Oh, how convenient.
Any and all counter evidence simply doesn't count. Let me know when you find a True Scotsman.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Arik on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:13PM (1 child)
I'm in that unpopular 'reality based community' so that's what would impress me. Not the ease with which you interpret my viewpoint as disingenuous, seemingly without any evidence or reason beyond the fact that it doesn't agree with your own.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:17PM
Here you see the sheeple gently grazing on the grass genetically altered to boost stupidity.
(Score: 3, Informative) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:55PM
Likely they either took their cues from HRC (or took marching orders directly) to elevate Trump. It was probably a good plan because she and her team must have (or should have) known how much people despised her. Wasn't enough though: people hated HRC so much they voted for someone they hated more. (wish I could remember who to attribute that to -- brilliant quip).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @04:30PM
You were? Have you actually seen this idiot in action? [cbsnews.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:02PM
Yeah, we can only have one idiot on this site, and the job is already taken. G'day, Runaway!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:20PM (1 child)
Yes I remember this too. "TRUMP" was trending topic anywhere that there was a trending topic. He was way behind in the polls and yet it was buzzfeed and other shitty news sites that wouldn't shut up about him. All these "influencers" seemed to have patreon at the time. I personally think that russians were paying irrelevant SJWs. If you look at the same people these days they're still humping that dead horse like they expect the money to fall from the sky again but it never does. Anita recently got laughed out of the room after trying to shake down cyberpunk 2077.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @01:47AM
Anita Sarkeesian’s Feminist Frequency Nonprofit Is Broke [hotair.com]. Needs a factcheck, domain's at least been around since 1995. It could just be a bunch of hot air, after all.
(Score: 2) by epitaxial on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:25PM (1 child)
Not a single day goes by where his name isn't mentioned on some unrelated topic.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday July 24 2019, @08:36PM
Six degrees of Trump.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:34PM (38 children)
unlike may, he's at least willing to say no
but then, I just read an article where they quoted Guy Verhofstad (leader of the eu brexit-committee) that any changes in the already trice rejected agreement from may where out, and only the political statement was up for changes
so it doesn't look like the EU is willing to negotiate for real, even with the actual treat of a no-deal
it's becoming a game of chicken at this point
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:42PM (35 children)
AFAIK, that's exactly right: the EU is done negotiating, no changes (beyond purely cosmetic) are possible. Take it or leave it.
Of course, the EU absolutely must play hard ball here. If they give the UK any sort of reasonable, amicable parting terms, that would encourage numerous other countries (Greece, Italy, Portugal, etc.) that are also wondering if the EU is really such a great deal for them. Politicians in general cannot stand the thought of reducing their own power, so this is not an option.
Really, the EU would be a great thing, if they had stopped at the common market stage. The unified currency, however practical, prevents weaker countries from devaluing their own currencies. It's like yoking Great Danes to Dachsunds: the different economies are just too out of sync for this to work very well.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 5, Informative) by aim on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:00PM (24 children)
That's quite obviously a british view, and it is opposed to everyone else's. The EU was created to prevent another great war on the continent, it is a political construct. It never was only about trade.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:03PM (14 children)
That is also at least one American's view - mine.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:27PM (10 children)
Unsurprising because you're fucking stupid.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:45PM (9 children)
No, actually, I'm pretty fucking smart. I can name all the bits and pieces of the human female anatomy. Lots of guys are fucking stupid, and don't know one bit from another. Many are so fucking stupid, they don't even know their own anatomies. Fucking is more fun when you're educated. Where are you in the fucking intelligence spectrum? Do you know your labia from your taint?
(Score: 5, Funny) by driverless on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:51PM
I know my arse from my elbow, does that count?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:02PM (4 children)
This is a weird sexual psychosis you've got. It does help explain the "fucking nazi retard" aspect.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:17PM (1 child)
Tain't me who brought it up, remember?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:27PM
I've heard of teabagging, but "taint me"? Gross.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:18PM (1 child)
Here's another post to mod flamebait, I know nazi retards have a lot of rage at that basic truth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 26 2019, @12:10AM
Complaining about partisan moderation? Are you going to claim that you don't engage in it yourself? If not, do you complain when the people on your side do the same?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:45PM
Why would I Kan Read need to know that? I's not like he's ever going to see any in his life.
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday July 25 2019, @05:27PM (1 child)
Let's not confuse terminology here. "Labia" is pretty formal language. "Taint" is weird slang that for some reason seems popular lately. If you asked "Do you know your labia from your perineum?" that would make more sense. Or, if you want to be vulgar, "Do you know your roast beef curtains from your taint?" at least it would demonstrate consistent type of language. Well, unless you're talking about labia minora, which seem to have a dearth of common slang synonyms. Which is really the problem with your post -- specificity. After all, "labia" is just a medical word for "lips." Technically, I assume you're talking about "labia pudendi," which are the "lips" located in the genital area. Most people also have labia on their faces too.
[/pedantry]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday July 26 2019, @12:41AM
Truth be told, I was about to type "cervix" where I put "taint". I thought that might require thinking too deeply for some of our fellow males, so I fell back to more shallow terms. ;^)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @01:44AM (2 children)
And my view as a European too. The dregs of national politics get sent to Brussels, which was ok while they couldn't make policy on much more than trade. But under the illusion that the EU is a semi-state in the process of creation, non-democratic nonsense gets washed over all aspects of the people's lives. I truly believe the EU as currently set up exists as a scheme to disenfranchise the population of the member states by the national governments. It is a danger for democracy. Several Central European nations that 30 years ago shook off the yoke of Russian domination are not willing to trade in their hard won freedom for dependence on Brussels, and by extension Washington. The British people voted to leave the EU for their own reasons. There are other nations in the EU that wouldn't think of letting their people decide on EU matters. I wish the British well on their course.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @02:33AM (1 child)
I suppose when leaving the EU doesn't magically bend the properties of capitalism to your liking, it'll be socialists next who are to blame. And so on and so forth.
It took humans a few thousand years to figure out that the priests were lying about the gods. Wonder how long the present scheme will last?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday July 25 2019, @11:55AM
Much longer. Mammon may be an evil God, but he's one you have direct evidence of...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Arik on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:34PM
Creating another imperial superstate in Europe is NOT a better way to prevent war - quite the opposite.
And this is not only understood in Britain. This is part of why the EU is deadset on making Brexit as ugly for the UK as they possibly can - because there are other nations lining up to follow them, and the EU would like to scare them away from that idea now.
Prediction; it won't work. Their only effective weapon was T. May, who appeared to be working for Brussels rather than her constituents at every turn. She's gone, they have no leverage over the UK, there's nothing they can do to 'punish' the UK for democracy that won't hurt their own constituents as much or more than the UK.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:59PM
The American experience on the topic of refusing to allow states to exit a union agreement is exceptionally bloody. Just an anecdote but I wonder if being too hardnosed on forcing union doesn't come with its own great war risk.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @04:08PM
...by handing control of the fucking continent over to the shitheads who lost both of those great wars...
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:02PM (1 child)
As if the war was not due to the machinations of international Jews in control of Poland, the British crown, the US stock market and Russia in the first place. Now the Jews set up the EU to finish off their project of complete domination of Europe, including bringing in millions of muzrats and monkeys to degenerate the Aryan race down to a mixed race with inferior intellect who can never oppose the Jew again.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:37PM
I thought that there was more internal evidence that it was the culmination of plans laid down by Hanoverian and various other 'Teutonic' noble families from the late 1600's/early 1700's onwards, rather than the Jews, the machinations of these Germanic shitheads in their quest to plant their scions of their houses as 'heirs' to as many other European royal dynasties I thought was well known....
Whatever route, the endgame was Deutschland über alles, and if not 'Über alles in der Welt' then at least 'Über alles' in Europe..
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Nuke on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:15PM
You mean like uniting the American colonies into the USA prevented a war breaking out between them?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @09:24PM
...true, but
...this isn't. While that may be true for the European Union as such (as established by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992), all of its predecessor unions (the EEC, the ECSC and EURATOM) were trade treaties only: borne out of the realization that if you supranationalize the warfare industry (coal, steel, and nuclear energy), one nation cannot use its leverage to wage war on a co-dependant.
The goal of the original European Communities was not to bring political unity, but to remove (national) political influence from critical industries. So yes, it is a political construct, but it was explicitly about trade only. Specifically, to separate industry and state.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Coward, Anonymous on Wednesday July 24 2019, @11:15PM
At the beginning, after WWII, was the Common Market. It was thought that having close economic ties would prevent a future war. There is no reason to think that closer political integration reduces the chance of war further. It probably increases the chance of war, because the reaction in many EU countries is a rise of nationalism.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 25 2019, @07:25AM
And that's how *exactly* it was sold to the UK public...it was always called the 'Common Market' during the propaganda campaign carried out back then, I can't remember much being said about the vote being for anything else other than that, joining a trading block.
I was too young to vote back then, but my parents both voted to join, I asked my late father a couple of years before he died why the hell he voted to do so, his response was basically it was sold to them as a glorified trade deal, and that, being a working man bringing up a family, this looked like the proverbial 'good thing' as far as future job security was concerned, all the 'community' and 'union' stuff might have been there, but was played down.
Having a very quick look through what material *is* still available online, he was right, the emphasis was all on 'Common Market', Business, markets for UK products, etc. etc. and it's obvious that even when they referred to it as the EEC, they loudly stressed the 'Economic' part, and quietly mumbled about anything else this deal may have meant..
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:16PM (2 children)
The Euro is one of the biggest problems with the EU. You can't have financial union without political union. No one in the US cares if money is flowing from New York to Alabama or the reverse, but people in Germany do care about whether their money is going to Greece. This is made worse by the EU not having a proper single central bank. As a customs union, it's fine, but as a unified currency, it's not.
The EU has also managed to create a system where cultural barriers to movement of people are greater than legal ones. This maintains the financial problems because people don't naturally move for better economic opportunities like they do in the US.
The EU is roughly the size and population of the US, and they tried to skip ahead to get the economic benefits of unification but while trying to pretend they can skip the political and cultural part. It kind of works as long as everyone is good at pretending, but it's always going to be a source of trouble.
Ironically, of course, whoever wants out first has the worst of both worlds.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:09PM (1 child)
The Euro covers a sub-optimal currency zone with huge imbalances being inevitable. It's a joke currency, a ponzi scheme that demands EU expansion while ripping wealth from poorer countries. Any country impoverished by their Eurozone membership leaving and defaulting on a large deficit would probably collapse the entire system.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @10:13PM
The idea of money is that you can spend it.
Competitive devaluation may be a way of exploiting the weak in your own country, but it is a very short sighted solution to anything.
We in the UK are stuffed, partly because we did not join the Euro, and are victims of our own politicians stupidity. For money to work, you have to be
able to use it to trade. Its not the Euro that is ripping money from the poor countries - its their own politicians - but, with the aid of liars like
Boris, they blame it on the EU. Imbalances are caused by lying about your productivity. Its not the Euro that stuffed Greece - it was corruption.
Brexit is a wonderful thing - for a small bunch of rich crackpots (Boris, Rees Mogg and his Moggies, Farago etc - who, incidentally, all have
homes in FRANCE in preparation for the forthcoming disaster). The rest of face a rapid descent into poverty and starvation.
The EU is not "playing hardball" - it is attempting to explain the concepts of reality to people like Boris. A truely pointless waste of time,
but someone has to do it.
Your post shows that you have swallowed the Boris lies, hook line and sinker. You might want to read a bit more widely.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Webweasel on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:38PM (3 children)
Which is exactly why we need to leave.
No deal, give them the finger and walk away.
Customs can be handled by software. Fuck northern Ireland.
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 2) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:41PM
Wow. Just.... wow.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @08:12PM (1 child)
Now this is a Brit I'm proud to call my cousin.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Wednesday July 24 2019, @08:48PM
Just say, "Hey there, Uncle Dad!"
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Interesting) by quietus on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:49PM (2 children)
Ofcourse the EU is not done negotiating. The EU has already "won" in the sense that the locus of financial power is relocating from London to a triangle between Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt. What's left is to make the transition as comfortable as possible.
There could be some opportunities there for the UK, if they would take their own negotiating team seriously, and give it serious political support. The negotiations weren't so drawn out because of inherent complexity (that's something for the transition period, now): but David Davis having spent only about 5 hours total in Brussels over the whole 2 year period, according to the Financial Times, and continuous artificial political hubbubs about non-issues like the Divorce Bill and the timing, did.
That's not going to change suddenly. Which is a pity really, as the same issues will simply return post-Brexit, and have to be negotiated anyway. Brexit will not stop suddenly, even after a hard Brexit: in fact, it will only then start in earnest.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @06:14PM
Wrong [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:48PM
Wrong again [duckduckgo.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by aim on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:56PM (1 child)
Essentially, the UK is threatening suicide if it doesn't get what it wants, and it is incapable of saying what it actually wants.
The EU is just as tired of the whole game as the UK public, and it's the UK that has everything to lose, but - and that's a citation from a top EU official - it's the unprepared UK negotiators running around like headless chicken.
Seriously, what is there to be negotiated?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by driverless on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:42PM
Exactly. The UK has been frantically swapping out weapons in an attempt to shoot itself in the foot with maximum damage, and it expects the EU to step in and do something? The EU has quite rightly stepped back and said "not my problem". Which is correct, the UK dug itself into this hole, and it's insisting on keeping on digging. It's not the EU's problem if the UK doesn't want to stop digging.
I have a pro-Brexit friend who keeps whining about the EU needing to do something. It's really weird, he voted to create this mess and now he expects the organisation he voted against to fix it for him?
(Score: 1, Troll) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:18PM (8 children)
How does an Anglo-Saxon NATO member state elect a Prime Minister named Boris? Voter apathy.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:04PM (2 children)
Same way they elect a Muslim as mayor of their capital?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:08PM (1 child)
By buying up a lot of the real estate in the place putting them in a position to vote their own man in?
Who owns London today?
Why wage war when you can just buy your enemies lands.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday July 24 2019, @03:36PM
Economic invasion - beats tanks and guns.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @02:20PM (1 child)
Boris the American. Americans got themselves out from under British rule, so they're hiring an American to get Britain out from under EU rule. Makes perfect sense.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @07:51PM
Worked out well for the UK last time. More American than Elizabeth Warren [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 24 2019, @04:17PM
First, 'Anglo-Saxon NATO member state' ?...the Celtic population of the UK would like to have words....so would the Norse..so would our 'peacefuls'...and our Slavs
Second, Elect?...we didn't elect the fecker...
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:50PM (1 child)
His first name is Alexander.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday July 24 2019, @08:47PM
Even the Moose and Squirrel know that Boris and Natasha work for the other side...
🌻🌻 [google.com]