BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
What upsets me is you falsely calling the EU a dictatorship, and yes, that's Trumpian. Stevo, you do understand there's a difference between dictating and a dictatorship, I assume. (Try a dictionary, if you're not sure.) You're absolutely free to define 'dictatorship' how you want to, but a) don't be surprised if other people don't accept your redefinition, and b) that they're not going to argue with you using your definition.
Seriously, if you are going to call the EU a dictatorship because it (democratically) formulates and enacts laws, then enforces those laws (which is what the UK parliament does too, centrally), and accuse me of whataboutery because I call you out on your re-definition of 'dictatorship', then there's no discussion to be had.
You voted to remain, despite thinking it was a dictatorship? Seriously??0 -
Anyrjsterry said:
Which bit in particular?TheBigBean said:
I meant on the subject of Brexit.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Can you point me to the logical discussion? It sounds like a nice idea.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
This is Trump-level logic. Congratulations, Stevo. You're passing into the "words mean what I want them to mean" universe. Kinda makes logical discussion impossible.
Stevo implied the EU was a dictatorship. I asked him to give evidence.
He said it's centralised. I pointed him to the OED of a dictatorship, and the similarities of UK and EU democratic structures: not perfect, but no democracies are.
Stevo says I'm agreeing with him, and his 'centralisation' is the main point, but it doesn't matter anyway, as we're leaving.
I'm accused of whataboutery.
I think that's a fair summary. Still no evidence of dictatorship, unless words mean just whatever people want them to mean.0 -
Why would anybody dispute that it is centralised. What form of government isn't? Its a matter of opinion whether the degree of centralisation is too great or not. There's also a high degree of devolvement (not quite the right word) as until recently it accommodated two fundamentally different systems of Law without issue.Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
Directives only apply to members, who all have democratic representatives in the EU Parliament and membership of the Council. Dictating implies that directives are imposed without any influence from member states, which is obviously not the case.
There's plenty of stuff wrong with the EU - CAP, apparent remoteness from individual voters, toothlessness when it actually needs to deal with a member breaking the rules... Loads of stuff - it's just not like a centralised dictatorship.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
TheBigBean said:
Anyrjsterry said:
Which bit in particular?TheBigBean said:
I meant on the subject of Brexit.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Can you point me to the logical discussion? It sounds like a nice idea.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
This is Trump-level logic. Congratulations, Stevo. You're passing into the "words mean what I want them to mean" universe. Kinda makes logical discussion impossible.
Stevo implied the EU was a dictatorship. I asked him to give evidence.
He said it's centralised. I pointed him to the OED of a dictatorship, and the similarities of UK and EU democratic structures: not perfect, but no democracies are.
Stevo says I'm agreeing with him, and his 'centralisation' is the main point, but it doesn't matter anyway, as we're leaving.
I'm accused of whataboutery.
I think that's a fair summary. Still no evidence of dictatorship, unless words mean just whatever people want them to mean.
Try the last 1482 pages.
I dare say if you had said to Richard Feynman "Hey, dude, sum up your argument about the universe and particle physics in less than 200 words!", he might have given it a go, but then he had a brain the size of the universe. And even then his précis would have been of no practical use, even if he did make you go wow. I haven't got a brain the size of the universe, so am happy to focus on something like, say, the meaning of the word 'dictatorship'.
I'm still of the opinion that Brexit is terrible decision, and that this government is a mendacious shambles. But I'm not expecting to change anyone's mind at this point.0 -
This is great stuff 👍
You are seriously saying that you think that is what makes a dictatorial regime? So every lawmaking body in the world, is a dictatorial government?Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
This is great stuff 👍0 -
Trying to explain away a joke only thick people think is funny is only going to make you look thick.
Meanwhile on not-stupid land, this is a fair summary. Former editor of the FT
0 -
Technically yes. It does seem to upset some people though.kingstongraham said:This is great stuff 👍
You are seriously saying that you think that is what makes a dictatorial regime? So every lawmaking body in the world, is a dictatorial government?Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
This is great stuff 👍"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I think you're getting a bit emotional about this Brian. So what if it is - or isn't? Doesn't change what is happening, its too late for that.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
What upsets me is you falsely calling the EU a dictatorship, and yes, that's Trumpian. Stevo, you do understand there's a difference between dictating and a dictatorship, I assume. (Try a dictionary, if you're not sure.) You're absolutely free to define 'dictatorship' how you want to, but a) don't be surprised if other people don't accept your redefinition, and b) that they're not going to argue with you using your definition.
Seriously, if you are going to call the EU a dictatorship because it (democratically) formulates and enacts laws, then enforces those laws (which is what the UK parliament does too, centrally), and accuse me of whataboutery because I call you out on your re-definition of 'dictatorship', then there's no discussion to be had.
You voted to remain, despite thinking it was a dictatorship? Seriously??"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
Says a man so intelligent he gets all his evidence from Twitter. If only we still had the roll eyes emoticon....rick_chasey said:Trying to explain away a joke only thick people think is funny is only going to make you look thick.
Meanwhile on not-stupid land, this is a fair summary. Former editor of the FT"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo_666 said:
I think you're getting a bit emotional about this Brian. So what if it is - or isn't? Doesn't change what is happening, its too late for that.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
What upsets me is you falsely calling the EU a dictatorship, and yes, that's Trumpian. Stevo, you do understand there's a difference between dictating and a dictatorship, I assume. (Try a dictionary, if you're not sure.) You're absolutely free to define 'dictatorship' how you want to, but a) don't be surprised if other people don't accept your redefinition, and b) that they're not going to argue with you using your definition.
Seriously, if you are going to call the EU a dictatorship because it (democratically) formulates and enacts laws, then enforces those laws (which is what the UK parliament does too, centrally), and accuse me of whataboutery because I call you out on your re-definition of 'dictatorship', then there's no discussion to be had.
You voted to remain, despite thinking it was a dictatorship? Seriously??
Yes, Stevo. You're making stuff up. You're obviously not stupid. So why did you vote to stay in a dictatorship? You seem to have nailed your colours to the mast that the EU is a dictatorship (with your curious redefinition). It's an odd cross to die on. But carry on arguing that, if you want to.
The Second World War happened, but, as far as I'm aware, we're still allowed to consider how we got there, if only to try to stop it happening again.
To sum up for you: the Tories have a majority of 80, and the EU is a dictatorship.0 -
Reports of 20-30 rebels preparing to vote against the Internal Market Bill. Also reports that Sunak, Raab and even Gove (although also denied) have expressed their unease at this move. Must we wait until January?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
Reports of 20-30 rebels preparing to vote against the Internal Market Bill. Also reports that Sunak, Raab and even Gove (although also denied) have expressed their unease at this move. Must we wait until January?
If the Guardian report is accurate, then this is up there with the shenanigans of proroguing parliament: ministers ignoring legal advice, and (potentially) the justice secretary and attorney general breaking their oaths of office.
"The remarkable admission by Brandon Lewis, secretary of state for Northern Ireland, followed the resignation of the most senior legal civil servant and has raised questions over the future of justice secretary, Robert Buckland, and attorney general, Suella Braverman, both of whom have taken oaths to uphold the rule of law.
"Their positions were put in the spotlight after the departure of Sir Jonathan Jones, who is understood to have become exasperated that ministers intended to ignore his advice that any changes to the new internal market bill would likely be illegal.
"The Guardian understands the government sought independent legal advice from a leading barrister, whose advice chimed with that of Jones, but their opinions were overridden by ministers."
I wonder if anyone will be brave enough, if it's feasible, to involve the Supreme Court. Given the admission of the illegality of it, it does seem that the Government is inviting a challenge.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/08/senior-tories-urge-ministers-to-scrap-illegal-brexit-rule-plan0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Technically yes. It does seem to upset some people though.kingstongraham said:This is great stuff 👍
You are seriously saying that you think that is what makes a dictatorial regime? So every lawmaking body in the world, is a dictatorial government?Stevo_666 said:
I gave my case as to why its centralised and nobody seems to dispute thst part. EU directives can be dictating to other states - unless they wield a veto on something then it's highly likely there are decisions imposed on member States against their will.rjsterry said:
These are all answers to other questions. This was nothing to do with leaving or otherwise. The allegation was that the EU was analogous to a Stalinist dictatorship. God knows why you are bothering to support such an absurd argument, but you suggested that because members have to follow the laws passed by the Parliament, this is like a dictatorship. States have democratic input into the formulation of those laws, and always have the option to leave if they find the EU laws intolerable, so not like a dictatorship at all.Stevo_666 said:
As I said to RJS, you're not disagreeing with my points. Your reply is a long bit of whataboutery (same for RJS, surprise surprisebriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Fair enough. It's patently obvious that EU decision making is centralised - in the three main EU bodies of the European Parliament, European Council & European Commission.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Can you describe how it is not?briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Rick walked straight into that one. Best quote it for posteritycoopster_the_1st said:
You have just described the EU political class. Well done for finally getting it!rick_chasey said:
(A lesson in why centralised dictatorial decision making usually ends in disaster, fyi)
Can you describe how the EU is a centralised dictatorial decision-making organisation?
Yes, but as I asked first, you go first.
Many EU decisions are issued as directives, with which member states are obliged to comply and pass the regs into national law. even where they did not agree with them. That fits the bill as the dictating element.
Your turn...
So, any laws that Westminster passes, but, say, Scotland doesn't like, classes Westminster as a dictatorship? OK, but I think you're into redefining words Let me help you out with the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:
"A system of government by the absolute rule of a single individual; a state ruled by a dictator."
Do I really need to illustrate why that is neither the case in the UK, or the EU? You might pick fault with the precise mechanics of the democratic mechanisms within the EU, but if you call them a dictatorship, then similar democratic faults in the UK would put them in the same category.
Can we vote in elections for EU and UK politicians? Yes. Do those people have the power both to appoint people to draft policy who aren't elected? Yes. Can the elected parliament dismiss the unelected officers. Yes. The EU Parliament can dismiss the Commission.
Can Parliament dismiss Cummings?
https://www.dw.com/en/what-are-the-powers-of-the-european-parliament/a-4295011# )
Nor do you rebutt the centralised point in any way.
And as I said to RJS, bit late really as we've left already.
Meaning of the word dictate when I checked just now: to state or order authoritatively. EU directives seem to fit the bill.
(Brian take note also since you claimed I didn't know the meaning).
Sorry if criticising the EU upsets you.
This is great stuff 👍
You'd say that the Johnson government is a dictatorial regime then? Sounds bad.0 -
So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?0
-
I am not supportive, just not as surprised and shocked as you. If you are stood in Cummings shoes then once you give up on the future relationship then you may as well junk the bits of the WA you do not like, or the whole thing which I imagine is where we are heading.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
I said it before and will say it again, the UK has assumed the persona of BoJo. So yes we will be seen as incompetent, lazy and untrustworthy but that will pass when he is no longer PM.
Do you think the EU is surprised? I suspect not and that the deafening silence tells you they had been planning for this.0 -
I'm not surprised I'm more seriously p!ssed off about it.surrey_commuter said:
I am not supportive, just not as surprised and shocked as you. If you are stood in Cummings shoes then once you give up on the future relationship then you may as well junk the bits of the WA you do not like, or the whole thing which I imagine is where we are heading.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
I said it before and will say it again, the UK has assumed the persona of BoJo. So yes we will be seen as incompetent, lazy and untrustworthy but that will pass when he is no longer PM.
Do you think the EU is surprised? I suspect not and that the deafening silence tells you they had been planning for this.
Just because I expect it doesn't mean I can't get annoyed by it.
This attitude is how the populists get you, SC. They lean on grinding down expectations.
For a nation that apparently sells itself on the rule of law and has in the past used treaties and international for its own leverage, it's mad behaviour.
Surely even the most ardent Brexiters must recognise that their project shouldn't have to break the law to be done?
And even if they don't like the WA and sympathise with the reasons behind, why can't they blame the gov't for signing up to it to begin with?
Why is doing it this way around acceptable on any level?
Do they not see the end game here? And if not, why not? This is the behaviour of despots and extremist politics.
0 -
Usual remoaner hyperbole.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
The EU have not kept to their side of the WA.
This is about the UK protecting its interests and its internal market0 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54073836
In case it's not clear to the thickos.Northern Ireland Secretary admits new bill will 'break international law'0 -
It's the natural end point of signing up to something that wasn't what they said they were signing up to, and not allowing time to scrutinise it, and highlight exactly the problems that were always there. It's where lying and deceit gets you.
It's a terrible situation to get into.
But I'm not shocked.
When the supporters of the party will be happy that the government is breaking its own word, and international law because it makes you angry and it annoys the EU, regardless of the consequences for the country, what can you do?0 -
That's how they get you, seriously.kingstongraham said:It's the natural end point of signing up to something that wasn't what they said they were signing up to, and not allowing time to scrutinise it, and highlight exactly the problems that were always there. It's where lying and deceit gets you.
It's a terrible situation to get into.
But I'm not shocked.
When the supporters of the party will be happy that the government is breaking its own word, and international law because it makes you angry and it annoys the EU, regardless of the consequences for the country, what can you do?
It's in the fascist playbook. They grind down expectations and count liberal shock as a victory. And then you're at the whim of how benevolent or not the lot at the top are.
0 -
I mean, does the UK not export law all over the place? I thought one of the UK's entire USP's was it's adherence to the rule of law? The entire economy is based on the idea that the UK adhere's to the rule of law.0
-
I know that. But knowing that, then what?rick_chasey said:
That's how they get you, seriously.kingstongraham said:It's the natural end point of signing up to something that wasn't what they said they were signing up to, and not allowing time to scrutinise it, and highlight exactly the problems that were always there. It's where lying and deceit gets you.
It's a terrible situation to get into.
But I'm not shocked.
When the supporters of the party will be happy that the government is breaking its own word, and international law because it makes you angry and it annoys the EU, regardless of the consequences for the country, what can you do?
It's in the fascist playbook. They grind down expectations and count liberal shock as a victory. And then you're at the whim of how benevolent or not the lot at the top are.0 -
usual bedwetting whiner leaver hyperbolecoopster_the_1st said:
Usual remoaner hyperbole.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
The EU have not kept to their side of the WA.
This is about the UK protecting its interests and its internal marketmy bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
Explain to a simple former remoaner like me - why did the government sign the agreement?coopster_the_1st said:
Usual remoaner hyperbole.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
The EU have not kept to their side of the WA.
This is about the UK protecting its interests and its internal market0 -
Mostly based on a time when they wrote the rulebook to suit and were not shy to enforce it.rick_chasey said:I mean, does the UK not export law all over the place? I thought one of the UK's entire USP's was it's adherence to the rule of law? The entire economy is based on the idea that the UK adhere's to the rule of law.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
It has to come down to the MPs not agreeing to pass a bill that breaks international law, based on undoing an agreement they all signed up to supporting only months ago.0
-
The Secretary of State for NI stood up in the House of Commons and confirmed the Government intended to break the law.coopster_the_1st said:
Usual remoaner hyperbole.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
The EU have not kept to their side of the WA.
This is about the UK protecting its interests and its internal market
There's no hyperbole here.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
tailwindhome said:
The Secretary of State for NI stood up in the House of Commons and confirmed the Government intended to break the law.coopster_the_1st said:
Usual remoaner hyperbole.rick_chasey said:So am I right in thinking that people here are actually supporting the UK breaking international law? Law that they signed up to about 9 months ago?
The EU have not kept to their side of the WA.
This is about the UK protecting its interests and its internal market
There's no hyperbole here.
And the health secretary is saying he's "comfotable" with that. How have we come to this point? At least I'd hope that someone who both helps enact laws and whose oath is to uphold laws would feel discomfort at the prospect.0
