ChatterBank3 mins ago
What Do Our Ardent Brextremists Think Of This U-Turn By One Of Their Erstwhile Supporters ?
There are some interesting Tweets and other opinions throughout the article.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Brexit "puritanism"//
A rhetorical device, Jim. And a deliberate misrepresentation of the original issue.
It was a binary decision, possibly the first since 1630 (Although there were a few "Puritans" around at that time. That was King v Parliament, wasn't it? In the nature of that debate no peaceful method of resolution.) Cameron "once in a life time", leaflet, all - repeat all- remainer propagandists, telling us fools the dire consequences of "Leave". No confusion in their minds about what "Leave" meant, was there?
A simple question to an honest man: do you, or do you not remember that discourse?
A rhetorical device, Jim. And a deliberate misrepresentation of the original issue.
It was a binary decision, possibly the first since 1630 (Although there were a few "Puritans" around at that time. That was King v Parliament, wasn't it? In the nature of that debate no peaceful method of resolution.) Cameron "once in a life time", leaflet, all - repeat all- remainer propagandists, telling us fools the dire consequences of "Leave". No confusion in their minds about what "Leave" meant, was there?
A simple question to an honest man: do you, or do you not remember that discourse?
Of course I remember some of that discourse. But much of it was based either on things that turned out to be wrong or indeed downright lies -- and in this case I am not referring to the Leave campaign, but to Cameron, who assured us that he would immediately trigger Article 50 Notification and would then also carry out the withdrawal negotiations himself. In the event he resigned the morning after, and couldn't have lawfully given notification anyway, as R (Miller) v SSExEU established. What was said in the campaign was therefore almost instantly nullified in major ways by what came immediately after it.
You will, I hope, forgive me for using such a rhetorical device, therefore, to refer to people who continue to ignore such details.
You will, I hope, forgive me for using such a rhetorical device, therefore, to refer to people who continue to ignore such details.
o god who was it who said
there is no political independence without economic independence
He'll doubtless be tarred as the face of the Vichy British ere long.
yes ! Klaus Barbie as Gove as - the Butcher of Bolton or Blackheath. or the secret silent slasher of - - - - somewhere!
Ee, I made me mind up about everything in 1967, changing your mind is the sign of a traitor. quisling ! 1967 that is nothing ! I came out of my muvvuz womb shouting lee- bair - tay !
And so on until the sandman comes around or t'firkin's empty
yeah duggie lets drink the firkin firkin dry !
your swiggette first !
there is no political independence without economic independence
He'll doubtless be tarred as the face of the Vichy British ere long.
yes ! Klaus Barbie as Gove as - the Butcher of Bolton or Blackheath. or the secret silent slasher of - - - - somewhere!
Ee, I made me mind up about everything in 1967, changing your mind is the sign of a traitor. quisling ! 1967 that is nothing ! I came out of my muvvuz womb shouting lee- bair - tay !
And so on until the sandman comes around or t'firkin's empty
yeah duggie lets drink the firkin firkin dry !
your swiggette first !
Leaving the EU was promised, but the date on which it was to occur was not. Not that the process should be delayed indefinitely, if it is to happen, but there is no special reason for it to happen this Friday, or indeed to have happened a little over a week ago.
In the meantime, it has been stressed several times that many of the chief campaigners for exiting the EU assured us of, and were insistent on, the idea that a new deal would be reached with the EU before leaving (rather than afterwards). At any rate, I would be interested to see pointers to prominent Brexit supporters demanding specifically a "No Deal" exit.
In the meantime, it has been stressed several times that many of the chief campaigners for exiting the EU assured us of, and were insistent on, the idea that a new deal would be reached with the EU before leaving (rather than afterwards). At any rate, I would be interested to see pointers to prominent Brexit supporters demanding specifically a "No Deal" exit.
Why do the things you mention justify a probably lengthy delay or even cancellation of our leaving, Jim?. How does Mr Cameron chucking his toys from the pram justify that? He'd made no prior arrangements for a Leave vote and was not indispensable to the process. How does the legality of the process justify that? The legalities have now been formalised and passed by Parliament.
It's constant smoke and mirrors being used to disguise the fact that electorate chose to leave and the dilution of that decision has been ongoing for almost three years. There are no "alternate forms of Brexit". They all involve remaining coupled to the EU in some way and some of the options are arguably even worse than remaining (if such a thing could be imagined). The electorate voted for a change not a different version of what they already had with a few of the headings changed.
It's constant smoke and mirrors being used to disguise the fact that electorate chose to leave and the dilution of that decision has been ongoing for almost three years. There are no "alternate forms of Brexit". They all involve remaining coupled to the EU in some way and some of the options are arguably even worse than remaining (if such a thing could be imagined). The electorate voted for a change not a different version of what they already had with a few of the headings changed.
It does sorry me when rational people like NJ speak fondly of extremism or Puritanism. Maybe tongue in cheek, I don’t know.
Then we have a poll suggesting a large proportion of Britons favour a strong ruler who would not be averse to “breaking the rules”. Of course you never know how much is words being put in peoples’ mouths or ideas in their heads by the questions.
Then we have a poll suggesting a large proportion of Britons favour a strong ruler who would not be averse to “breaking the rules”. Of course you never know how much is words being put in peoples’ mouths or ideas in their heads by the questions.
"It does sorry me when rational people like NJ speak fondly of extremism or Puritanism. Maybe tongue in cheek,"
It was. Those seeking a proper Brexit are neither extremists nor Puritans. They are simply seeking what they were told they would have.
"At any rate, I would be interested to see pointers to prominent Brexit supporters demanding specifically a "No Deal" exit."
We were told that a mutually agreeable leaving agreement would be sought. We were also told that leaving with no deal was preferable to leaving with a bad one. I naturally assumed that any deal which was acceptable to the EU would be to the UK's considerable disadvantage. It seems I was right because the only deal on offer has been soundly rejected and is, in fact, absolutely appalling. So I think I am entitled to expect that the country would leave, by default, with no deal as the unamended legislation dictates.
It was. Those seeking a proper Brexit are neither extremists nor Puritans. They are simply seeking what they were told they would have.
"At any rate, I would be interested to see pointers to prominent Brexit supporters demanding specifically a "No Deal" exit."
We were told that a mutually agreeable leaving agreement would be sought. We were also told that leaving with no deal was preferable to leaving with a bad one. I naturally assumed that any deal which was acceptable to the EU would be to the UK's considerable disadvantage. It seems I was right because the only deal on offer has been soundly rejected and is, in fact, absolutely appalling. So I think I am entitled to expect that the country would leave, by default, with no deal as the unamended legislation dictates.
The whole Brexit process has been cocked up. That's a given, I think. The problem seems to be that we all agree that it's been cocked up but not *why*, or how to fix it. There's very little justification for carrying on regardless, however: it is worth pointing out, once again, that a "No Deal" exit doesn't in itself represent a destination anyway. One way or the other we have to come to some form of mutual arrangement with our nearest neighbours, one that satisfies, or at least equally hurts, both sides.
But enough of my pretensions of Churchillian wisdom. The only thing I will say more, for now at least, is that Brexit is not killed off by revoking Article 50. There is always the option of starting again, in the future -- as long as you have politicians, and a country, fully committed to, and more-or-less united on, both the objective and the method for achieving it. Until that is achieved, then there are far too many people trying to steer the UK in far too many different directions for this to end happily.
But enough of my pretensions of Churchillian wisdom. The only thing I will say more, for now at least, is that Brexit is not killed off by revoking Article 50. There is always the option of starting again, in the future -- as long as you have politicians, and a country, fully committed to, and more-or-less united on, both the objective and the method for achieving it. Until that is achieved, then there are far too many people trying to steer the UK in far too many different directions for this to end happily.
One isn't interested in a continuous stream of revoking and restarting until remoaners get their way. There's never been a reason to delay or to revote. And as for having a deal before leaving, it was dependent on reaching an agreement: no one is ever going to agree continuous membership because the other side of the table are not being reasonable. In any case, one can view the "no-deal" scenario as being the agreed deal.
It might have helped had they not wasted so much time trying to agree compensation from us for leaving, and causing Irish border concerns, but instead concentrated properly on future relationship, including trade agreements. That Canada+++ thing looked a potential starting point had both sides filled in more details.
It might have helped had they not wasted so much time trying to agree compensation from us for leaving, and causing Irish border concerns, but instead concentrated properly on future relationship, including trade agreements. That Canada+++ thing looked a potential starting point had both sides filled in more details.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.