When will indyref2 happen?

[weegienative]

On 02/12/2018 at 18:21, welshbairn said:

Found George's reply I think here, bit long, haven't read it yet, or the original critique.

https://newleftreview.org/II/45/george-monbiot-environmental-feedback

I tried to find out how much Scotland relies on nuclear a few days ago, wasn't clear with electricity exports and imports but looked like about a third. If we want to go zero carbon in the next 5/10 years I think we'll struggle without nuclear or a truly massive step up in renewables and power storage. England wouldn't have a chance, their base level of renewables is far lower, mainly because they don't have much hydro. 

If there's going to be a truly grown up argument on renewable energy then some major flaws have to be addressed. Germany tried to do this previous and ended up having a feast and famine scenario, selling/dumping the excess energy and then importing during the shortfall periods.

[DublinMagyar]

Oh Christ, is here

[RedRob72]

Considering the result of the initial referendum has never actually been carried out then yes, it's quite undemocratic.
So what's the standard for referendums going forward? Don't get the result we want, fanny about and make a cluster f**k of it, have a re run of the referendum, get the result we want? Really? Is that the precedent you want to set? Dangerous.

The difference here is that the elected Parliament has found itself completely unable to deliver on the result. The problem being that leaving the EU has proved to be a FAR more problematic and complex issue that could ever have been envisioned by Politicians and the Public alike.
When the only alternative at present is to walk away without a deal (which very few people seem to want), I don’t think it’s undemocratic to ask the electorate to reconsider our withdrawal based on the current position, not at all. In fact, surely it’s the most sensible thing to do.

[weegienative]

3 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

 

The difference here is that the elected Parliament has found itself completely unable to deliver on the result. The problem being that leaving the EU has proved to be a FAR more problematic and complex issue that could ever have been envisioned by Politicians and the Public alike.
When the only alternative at present is to walk away without a deal (which very few people seem to want), I don’t think it’s undemocratic to ask the electorate to reconsider our withdrawal based on the current position, not at all. In fact, surely it’s the most sensible thing to do.

 

I think your attaching a greater level of trust and morality to the remain side of the conservatives (Theresa May included) than is deserved. The handling of this has been farcical and I don't for one minute believe this has been anything other than intentional in order to reverse the vote.

If you're familiar with economics you might have heard of this already, if not give it a Google. "Game theory". It'll quickly become apparent just how wrong the handling of this has been. 

We need to get out of the EU before it's too late.

[HTG]

30 minutes ago, weegienative said:

We need to get out of the EU before it's too late.

Pish.

[weegienative]

10 minutes ago, HTG said:

Pish.

“National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”

A quote at the entrance of the EU visitor centre.

[welshbairn]

40 minutes ago, weegienative said:

We need to get out of the EU before it's too late.

Too late for what? 

[weegienative]

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Too late for what? 

To have the ability to leave.

The ultimate goal of the EU is a federal state with no national sovereignty. Hence the willingness to import millions of third world migrants and promote the idea that any criticism of this policy is racist. 

The EU is constantly power grabbing. The current one being the Dublin rule being effectively over and a new central distribution of migrants to member states, all controlled by the EU.

 

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, weegienative said:

To have the ability to leave.

The ultimate goal of the EU is a federal state with no national sovereignty. Hence the willingness to import millions of third world migrants and promote the idea that any criticism of this policy is racist. 

The EU is constantly power grabbing. The current one being the Dublin rule being effectively over and a new central distribution of migrants to member states, all controlled by the EU.

 

The aim of the Brexiteers and the current Government seems to be stopping the flow of Northern European immigrants in favour of Third World immigrants. Does this disturb you or are you cushty?

[git-intae-thum]

17 minutes ago, weegienative said:

“National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”

A quote at the entrance of the EU visitor centre.

And the problem with that statement is.......?

Because given European history over the last millenia it appears a perfectly reasonable premise

 

[welshbairn]

1 minute ago, git-intae-thum said:

And the problem with that statement is.......?

Because given European history over the last millenia it appears a perfectly reasonable premise

 

The man who said that also said this a bit later.

Quote

Hitler is in effect a fanatical gangster who will stop at nothing to beat down all possibility of resistance anywhere to his will

 

[weegienative]

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The aim of the Brexiteers and the current Government seems to be stopping the flow of Northern European immigrants in favour of Third World immigrants. Does this disturb you or are you cushty?

The goal of brexiteers is to have the ability to make that choice.

Why is that an issue for you?

[weegienative]

4 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

And the problem with that statement is.......?

Because given European history over the last millenia it appears a perfectly reasonable premise

 

You see no issue with the EU wishing to do away with national sovereignty? Really?

FYI you might also want to check what the guy who made the statement's view on how to deal with Hitler in 1940 was before you go singing his praises too much.

[welshbairn]

Just now, weegienative said:

The goal of brexiteers is to have the ability to make that choice.

Why is that an issue for you?

The Government have had control over non EU immigration for ever, yet it has been far more than EU immigration, every year. 

[git-intae-thum]

2 minutes ago, weegienative said:

You see no issue with the EU wishing to do away with national sovereignty? Really?

FYI you might also want to check what the guy who made the statement's view on how to deal with Hitler in 1940 was before you go singing his praises too much.

...He was an appeaser.....as were half of the tory cabinet back in the day.

It does not make that particular quote any less of a truism.

 

[RedRob72]

I think your attaching a greater level of trust and morality to the remain side of the conservatives (Theresa May included) than is deserved. The handling of this has been farcical and I don't for one minute believe this has been anything other than intentional in order to reverse the vote.
If you're familiar with economics you might have heard of this already, if not give it a Google. "Game theory". It'll quickly become apparent just how wrong the handling of this has been. 
We need to get out of the EU before it's too late.

Game theory isn’t anything new my friend, but I think you’re over complicating things a touch.
If May has seen an opportunity to intentionally reverse the decision here (unlikely), then I’m not giving her enough credit. If she can counter the insensible decision to leave our biggest trading partner, then I’m all for it. Finally if she can remove the certainty that the U.K. will disband permanently following Brexit with Nationalists securing and winning a 2nd Ref in Scotland and the eventual unification of Ireland then she will have the support of most true Unionists.

[weegienative]

Just now, welshbairn said:

The Government have had control over non EU immigration for ever, yet it has been far more than EU immigration, every year. 

You are conflating policy and ability to create policy. The UK government are accountable in the sense they can be voted out every 4 years. If they have policies which people don't like we can do something about it. 

As stated previously there is a power grab going on currently under the guise of replacing the Dublin rule on asylum/immigration.

Look at the EUs behaviour, rhetoric and aggression towards Poland and Hungary following their commitment to controlling their own national borders.

[weegienative]

3 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

...He was an appeaser.....as were half of the tory cabinet back in the day.

It does not make that particular quote any less of a truism.

 

Who cares if he was Tory or Labour ffs? Stop being an SNP parrot. 

Of course the statement is not true. The sheer motivation behind the defeat of the Nazis was national pride. Being a proud citizen of a nation is not a bad thing. Why have you allowed yourself to be manipulated by propaganda as to think this is a bad thing?

[weegienative]

5 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Game theory isn’t anything new my friend, but I think you’re over complicating things a touch.
If May has seen an opportunity to intentionally reverse the decision here (unlikely), then I’m not giving her enough credit. If she can counter the insensible decision to leave our biggest trading partner, then I’m all for it. Finally if she can remove the certainty that the U.K. will disband permanently following Brexit with Nationalists securing and winning a 2nd Ref in Scotland and the eventual unification of Ireland then she will have the support of most true Unionists.

I wasn't trying to have a dig with the game theory thing, a lot of people won't have heard of it. May has played this completely wrong.

Do we trade with the US? How is this possible? We aren't in a federal union losing our sovereignty. 

Trade with the EU is mutually beneficial and will continue to exist regardless of Brexit. High tariffs would punish German exports (as an example) as much as they would ours.

But I'll put this to you, what is the future for this country if a democratic referendum isn't respected? What next? Do we do away with all votes? Do we just rely on those in high places telling the little people what's good for them? 

I don't think those calling for a second referendum quite grasp the consequences if this were to happen.

 

[NotThePars]

Genuinely think there’s a discussion to be had about how you move to reserve or limit the effects of Brexit without causing a betrayal narrative to take route and turn potentially 17 million people completely away from the democratic process. It’s easy up here to ignore that as we had the referendum in 2014 which galvanised debate and brought unprecedented levels of participation but its complicated down south because it’s clear that the option nobody expected to win, won. I don’t think it’s possible to move forward without some sort of serious change which either involves leaving the EU in *some* capacity or remaining with a serious re-evaluation of how UK politics and the economy operates.