Best reasons for BREXIT

Skip to: New Posts  Last Post
Page:  Next »
Posted by Dennis
11/21/2017 3:25 pm

I think the year 2016 was memorable not because of Trump's election in America, but rather because of BREXIT. What would you say are the strongest reasons for BREXIT? 

Posted by AKG
11/21/2017 4:23 pm

Wait by memorable do you mean in the good way or the bad way?

Posted by Jeremy Taylor
11/21/2017 5:04 pm

The strongest reasons were continuing to believe in the nation-state as the best means of political organisation for Britain.

It is often not realised, by Europhiles and Eurosceptics alike, that the EU is more or less dedicated to becoming a quasi-superstate. It was never just about a bit of free trade and cooperation. This has been the case since the days of Monnet and Schuman, when intergovernmentalism was repudiated in favour of supragovernmentalism. Monnet's Action Committee for a United States of Europe was a pivotal pressure group in the first fee decades.  The Eurocrats hit upon the Monnet method, which is to be somewhat discrete about the final goal but to aim for piecemeal accumulation of more and more power and responsibility in Brussels. And they have followed this method. Brussels now has vast powers and competencies. At least 60% of British laws and regulations originate there and it claims responsibility over everything from social to energy policy. It is always insatiable for more integration. Brexit did nothing less than save Britain.

I encourage those interested to do real reading into the history of the EU and Britain's relationship to it. The best work I know is Booker and North's The Great Deception. There are few other works as detailed on this topic. Hugo Young's This Blessed Plot is worth a read too. He is a Europhile but he unwittingly reveals important truths about our relationship with Europe.

Posted by Dennis
11/21/2017 6:33 pm

I said memorable, because the consequences of such a thing are huge. Jeremy, thanks for the response. I'll order those books ASAP.
(1) Do these books speak about the relationship Britain had with the Commonwealth prior to joining the EU? I ask this, because, it's somewhat of an odd thing to see how Britain got into a relationship with the
EU, and thereby locked out their 'friends in time of need' (WW2 brothers in arms). I almost never hear about this backstabbing of sorts, from either side of the campaign. The only person who ever makes a brief passing mention is perhaps Nigel Farage. Has something happened that this curious historical fact is ignored or overlooked?

(2) Would you say that it's justified to fear technocrats in the EU (and in general)? If so, why/why not? 

Last edited by Dennis (11/21/2017 6:44 pm)

Posted by seigneur
11/22/2017 4:41 am

Jeremy Taylor wrote:

It is often not realised, by Europhiles and Eurosceptics alike, that the EU is more or less dedicated to becoming a quasi-superstate.

Actually, Eurosceptics (on the continent at least) have known this since day one. That's why they are Eurosceptics. And Europhiles tend to be aware of it too - by way of having to deny it a lot, if not by any other means. And those Europhiles who have come to the realization, tend to see it as a positive thing, that's why they are called Europhiles.

Both Europhile and Eurosceptical positions are most readily available in current news.

By the way, by what reasoning does this topic belong to the Practical Philosophy section? I always saw this forum as over-differentiated. There should be max three sections, for example

- Greetings + FAQ (Questions about forum policies and tech issues)
- On topic (Philosophy and Religion related to Classical Theism)
- Off topic (Chit-Chat)

And no subforums. When someone posts in a subforum, it goes unnoticed because there's no way to see it up-front. The Latest function here is mostly empty because there's not much activity here.

And I'm taking a wild guess here: On this platform, the sections cannot be reduced without losing the discussion threads in them. I hope I'm wrong.

Posted by Jeremy Taylor
11/22/2017 5:27 am

I had in mind British Europhiles and Eurosceptics. The British have never understood the EU properly, even most of its supporters. Even British governments have always been confused by the European project because they never really understood its ends. You are correct those on the continent have a better understanding.

Dennis, I will respond to your comment as soon as I am able.

Posted by seigneur
11/22/2017 5:28 am

And what does it mean to say "Best reasons for BREXIT"? Does it mean something like how it can be seen as a good and positive thing for UK? Or does it mean best explanations to the fact that UK leaves EU?

If the latter, we have had a thread about it. On the top political level, the continental coalition kicked UK out because they could not put up with Cameron's behavior any longer. That's the explanation. It is spelled out clearly enough in the immediate official statement

We now expect the United Kingdom government to give effect to this decision of the British people as soon as possible, however painful that process may be. Any delay would unnecessarily prolong uncertainty. We have rules to deal with this in an orderly way. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the procedure to be followed if a Member State decides to leave the European Union. We stand ready to launch negotiations swiftly with the United Kingdom regarding the terms and conditions of its withdrawal from the European Union.[...]

As agreed, the “New Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union”, [i.e. yet another package of UK exceptions that Cameron was negotiating] reached at the European Council on 18-19 February 2016, will now not take effect and ceases to exist. There will be no renegotiation.

That's the diplomatic equivalent of "good riddance".

Last edited by seigneur (11/22/2017 5:28 am)

Posted by Dennis
11/22/2017 7:25 am

Take your time Jeremy, thanks.

@seignur, I mean both. I want to see why one thinks that Britain should have the left the EU, and then how it is either a positive/negative thing. 

Posted by seigneur
11/22/2017 7:49 am

Dennis wrote:

@seignur, I mean both. I want to see why one thinks that Britain should have the left the EU, and then how it is either a positive/negative thing. 

I hope my stance is clear. It was a negative thing to take UK along in the first place. It should have been foreseeable that nothing good was to come of it. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to voice my opinion.

Posted by Dennis
12/10/2017 11:11 pm

Some people seem to think that leading BREXIT'ers like Farage want to make lives for immigrants and other races harder. But this I think seems to be a complete misnomer, IIRC, he wanted a level playing field across the globe, so that Europeans don't specifically get privileged over Non-European immigrants. There doesn't seem to be anything racist about this, how someone can take this to be racist is beyond me. So, Jeremy, I note that you don't say this in reply to your interlocutor her, but that's again a reason for my puzzlement, why?  Does this issue get swept under the rug in British politics or is there some other contrastive explanation going on? Just wanted to bump this, answer at your pace.


Page:  Next »

Main page
Desktop format