In the Aftermath Of Brexit, Brits Google About Irish Passport, Meaning Of EU, and Why it All Happened 693
As the world makes peace with the news that the United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union, people in the UK are increasingly trying to figure out what this means. Google noted on Twitter late Thursday that "What is the EU?" was the second top UK question on the EU since the news broke, with "Why did Britain leave the EU?" being the first. The questions also speak volume about the awareness of the issue among them. Understandably, some people also resorted to the search engine to look for Irish passports. "Getting an Irish passport" keywords saw a 100% surge.
So.. (Score:5, Funny)
Since Britain left Europe... does that mean it's a continent now?
Re:So.. (Score:5, Funny)
Since Britain left Europe... does that mean it's a continent now?
No, just incontinent.
Re: (Score:2)
They're working on it [youtube.com].
Re:So.. (Score:5, Funny)
It's a planet now, replacing Pluto.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't tell if you're attempting to make a joke
Really?
Re: So.. (Score:2)
I can't tell if you're attempting to make a joke by appearing stupid or not, but I'll bite.
Whereas I can tell that you're not attempting to appear as if you've got Aspergers...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it hasn't. It's had a referendum on leaving the EU, but there are still some legislative steps that would have to be taken. First, Parliament would have to vote on it, and like in the US, they're a lot of people with varying interests, some of them monetary. They could say, "Let's have another referendum, because the people voted wrong" or they could say, "No you stupid people, we're not going to do what you want".
This is the UK. They have a long histo
Re:So.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm assuming triggering Article 50 just got delayed by his resignation.
I think it got delayed because Boris Johnson and that other pro-Brexit guy whose name I don't remember say he shouldn't rush into it. "In voting to leave the EU it’s vital to stress that there’s no need for haste, and as the Prime Minister has just said nothing will change in the short term except work will begin on how to extricate this country from the supranational system. As the Prime Minister has said there is no need to invoke Article 50."
So the pro-Brexit guys are back-pedaling already because they aren't ready for Brexit? That's truly the funniest thing I've heard all day. "We want out. We want out". Holy shit! We won? Now what? Better start planning..... Sounds like the Conservatives just won another round in office.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think Bojo actually wanted to leave. It was a cynical power grab where he attempted to set a rabid dog (the great British public) on other people to get what he wanted. Only the trouble is, rabid dogs are man and this one just spun around and bit his arm off.
Re: (Score:3)
That "idiotic link" was a news photo from earlier today. It couldn't possibly be more topical and timely.
Just because you don't happen to like the Scottish lady's message doesn't mean it's not news. Although, to be honest, what her sign says isn't really news to anyone.
Re: (Score:3)
If Hillary goes to Scotland, congratulates Scotland on voting to leave the EU (which they didn't) and someone holds up a "Fuck Hillary" poster, then yes it would be news.
Scotland and...? (Score:5, Informative)
https://twitter.com/jk_rowling... [twitter.com]
Will the Kingdoms become Ununited, as Jasper Fforde shows:
http://www.jasperfforde.com/dr... [jasperfforde.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed that job sites and housing/rental sites covering Scotland and the EU are getting pretty slow now everyone is home from work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
While it wouldn't happen it would be fun to see the EU say to an independent Scotland that they wouldn't have to re-apply as they voted to stay in and they only left because England made them so they would be fast tracked in under the current agreement. Just a big middle finger to London.
Re:Scotland and...? (Score:4, Interesting)
Well, there's some interesting twists here.
Scotland's balance of payments is highly dependent upon oil prices, which are currently low. But when Scottish independence was on the table, there was talk of Scotland's financial sector relocating to London. But in a situation where Scotland was part of the EU but the rest of the UK was not, the shoe would be on the other foot. Many American companies maintain a presence in the UK to have a foothold in the EU; in a post-Brexit/post Scottish independence world the place to be would be Scotland, and the economic impact of that would be scaled by the relatively low population of Scotland - about 5.3 million. That's fewer people than live in Greater London (8.5 million).
Control (Score:3, Interesting)
Voters rightfully want to control their country's own destiny without having to cater to some international rule-making body a thousand miles away. I feel the same about the World Trade Organization. Why are THEY making decisions for Americans?
True, voters are not always rational (Iraq cough), but people naturally want control and would rather make their own mistakes than let some world body far away make them instead.
Re:Control (Score:5, Informative)
Voters rightfully want to control their country's own destiny without having to cater to some international rule-making body a thousand miles away....
Actually it's 199.26 miles [distance.to] genius ... now go get a snickers and stop being such a drama queen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Good riddance. The British have been sabotaging the EU since they joined.
Well, maybe Charles de Gaulle knew something the rest didn't when he said NON! (twice)
Re: (Score:3)
He also directly instigated US involvement in Vietnam by leaving NATO, so there's that.
Oh no, don't even try to offload that on France. De Gaulle just drew some obvious conclusions about the stupidity of fighting land wars in Asia and ended a futile involvement. The USA thought it knew better and walked right into that minefield having learned nothing from watching the French army play a game of Whack-A-Mole with Vietnamese insurgents for years.
Re:Control (Score:5, Informative)
I'm always amazed by Socialists/Globalists complaining about socialism failing. It's ALWAYS someone else's fault.
Maybe it's time to re-evaluate your college theory/fantasies?
You need to look up the word socialism. Just throwing that word randomly at things you do not like just makes you look stupid.
I understand the confusion. (Score:2)
You're using a non-English map. That's where lies your problem. On English maps, British Isles are about fifty miles East and South of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.
Re: (Score:2)
Or the same people wanting control half of the world [wikipedia.org], as many other imperial powers have done through millennia?
Or, looking at some other random place, having the continent where you live taken over by invaders (such as it happened to natives in the Americas [wikipedia.org]), and those same invaders subsequently claim that it was "destiny" for that to happen?
It's a sad, sad world where human egoism pr
Re:Control (Score:5, Insightful)
rule-making body a thousand miles away ... look on a Map? Bruessels and Strassbourg are not thousands of miles away from London.
Cough cough
same about the World Trade Organization. Why are THEY making decisions for Americans?
Erm? Because they are basically run by American Mega Corporations and their cronies?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Two things fat people like you don't understand:
Britain isn't England.
England isn't London.
So tell me, what do fat people like you understand?
Re: (Score:2)
How far away from Carlisle, Plymouth or Inverness are they, you stupid cunt?
412 miles, 374 miles, and 574 miles, respectively, you stupid cunt. For Brussels, anyway. Inverness is 788 miles from Strasbourg. All of these numbers are less than 1000. Happy to help, let me know if you want me to Google anything else for you, although it's actually not that difficult to do on your own.
Meanwhile, I live in a city that is about 2,000 miles from my national capital.
Re: (Score:2)
How far away from Carlisle, Plymouth or Inverness are they, you stupid cunt?
You really are very British.
Re:Control (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
True, voters are not always rational (Iraq cough),
You had to look at Iraq to give an example of irrationality? You couldn't look at our remaining candidates here in the US?
Re:Control (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel the same about the World Trade Organization. Why are THEY making decisions for Americans?
The WTO is the successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). This was an attempt to set international institutions in place to regulate international trade in order to make it easier to get trade moving. It was an attempt to provide an international framework in which countries could sort out their differences on trade matters peacefully without resorting to trade wars, protectionism, and to prevent a repeat of the same economic conditions that ultimately led to two world wars.
Does that answer your question?
Re:Control (Score:5, Insightful)
Voters rightfully want to control their country's own destiny without having to cater to some international rule-making body a thousand miles away. I feel the same about the World Trade Organization. Why are THEY making decisions for Americans?
People rightfully want to control their own destiny without having to cater to some rule-making body 10 miles away. Why is CITY HALL making decisions for me?
The answer is: Because it's a good idea to give up some control in exchange for better relations with your neighbors, and a neutral third party who can adjudicate disputes and define structures that pre-emptively eliminate them.
Obviously, it's important that you have a say in the rule-making body, but the UK did have a say in the EU's operations, and Americans do have a say in the WTO. And clearly, if the association with the rulemaking body in question is doing you more harm than good, then leave. But leaving just because you want to feel empowered is stupid, as is arbitrarily drawing the necessary boundary of control at the national level.
Re: (Score:2)
Voters rightfully want to control their country's own destiny without having to cater to some international rule-making body a thousand miles away.
Luckily, Brussels is only 200 miles away from London.
Re: (Score:2)
What was all that stuff in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan? A pub brawl?
Re: (Score:2)
What was all that stuff in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan? A pub brawl?
Of course not. Nobody was drunk.
If voting ever changed anything (Score:3)
Maybe those in power really do know what they're doing.
Re:If voting ever changed anything (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe those in power really do know what they're doing.
In this case, I don't think they did. Cameron gambled that he could appease his Eurosceptic Tories with this referendum, not really believing that it would ever pass. It was a major miscalculation.
Re: (Score:2)
That and to counter the rise of UKIP. He bluffed, and it was well and truly called, with brass bells on.
Boris seeing an opportunity for a coup and Corbyn making a very half-hearted effort on the other side may be the things wot tipped it.
"Getting an Irish passport" (Score:5, Funny)
Are you sure that's not an euphemism for for something immoral and/or illegal?
Re: (Score:2)
I am guessing that you don't think highly of the Irish...
Dual Birith Irish Citizens (Score:2)
I remember someone talking about wanting to migrate to the US and they had a dual Irish and UK citizenship and I was like, "Wow...you gain no real advantage with those two what-so-ever."
Well....now that person does! :-P
There are a ton-o-british people living in the EU that will soon need to apply for immigration where they did
WTBH? (Score:5, Insightful)
From TFA:
"What is the EU?" and "What happens if we leave the EU?" The former was the second top UK question on the EU after the results were officially announced.
Seriously, shouldn't they have been asking this before they voted?
Re:WTBH? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:WTBH? (Score:4, Insightful)
From TFA:
"What is the EU?" and "What happens if we leave the EU?" The former was the second top UK question on the EU after the results were officially announced.
Seriously, shouldn't they have been asking this before they voted?
If you think that's bad, read this and weep; "Leave voter regrets voting Leave when he realises it means we're now Leaving" [independent.co.uk]
Yes, people who voted Leave have been on British television saying how shocked and worried they are that Britain is actually leaving the EU. "I just assumed we would stay in and my vote wouldn't matter!", they said. You couldn't make it up.
Feasibility of a rerun? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's mostly anecdotal at this point but there already seems to be a lot of buyers remorse. Thoughts on the possibility they'll have a follow-up "are you really sure?" referendum or at least an election where one of the parties campaigns on ignoring the result.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Feasibility of a rerun? (Score:5, Interesting)
As for the do-over, despite the campaign on the UK Government's equivalent to change.org getting a huge number of votes asking for just this, the answer is "none". The guy at work (a Leave voter with buyer's remorse, as it happens) who brought this to our attention seemed to think it was asking the government to enact some provision of the official rules of the referedum concerning turnout levels and margins of victory. Turns out that was about on a par with the level of research many of the Leave voters with buyer's remorse presumably did; "none at all". A quick search with Google, a download of the actual legislation for the referendum from Parliament's website, a bit of reading (it's not a huge document) and it's pretty easy to see that this is a one-shot deal, in or out, and there is no such turnout/margin of victory clause. In fact the word "turnout" appears exactly twice, and one of those is to define the meaning of the word "turnout".
It's done. We're out, and we're now going to have to live with the consequences of that vote. From the state of the global markets and so on it also looks like quite a few people who are not UK citizens and didn't get a say in the matter are, at least to some extent, coming along for the ride. Sorry about that.
Re:Feasibility of a rerun? (Score:5, Informative)
It's done. We're out, and we're now going to have to live with the consequences of that vote.
I'll disagree with that bit. The referendum is not legally binding and until the divorce paperwork is done, the UK is a member even if the other members decide to treat us like a cheating spouse :)
With Cameron resigning, his successor will have 2 years before a general election, during which it may become very clear that the Conservative party is deeply fractured because of this key policy. Same with Labour.
Some time is needed for government-capable parties to re-group and win a general election. It would surprise me if no new-new-Labour or new-Tory party presented themselves on a platform of NOT going ahead with the Brexit. Either alone, or in an alliance between Greens, LibDems and new-new-Labour.
In the meantime, Scotland is getting ready for a break up. If the Conservative party wanted this to have England all to themselves, it's working really well, except for the sudden dip in the markets, possibly to be followed by recession.
It seems those outside disagree (Score:2)
I admit I lack knowledge of all this, comments from forums, FB, etc. seems to be those outside UK say it is dumb decision, those in UK say it is a smart decision.
A friend from UK posted this:
"Congratulations to my Brexit pals in the UK. A decision that came down to a number of factors, economy, immigration and The Big One -- the gulf between the Haves and the "Have Nots". Brexit will hopefully be a tsunami of political and social change that benefits the US. Because right now its politics as usual backed
Putin is happy and Texas gets a woody (Score:4, Interesting)
On a separate but related note: Texas secessionists are smart enough to understand what Brexit is and have been emboldened by it. Expect to hear more about Texit if Hillary becomes president. [nydailynews.com]
British equivalant of 1776 US revolution (Score:3, Insightful)
During the Cold War era there was a joke about a western visitor going through Poland/Hungary/East-Germany looking at the cars and noticing something weird. There were no steering wheels. When he finally asked about it, the answer was "The steering wheels are all in Moscow".
Similarly, the EU is now effectively run by unelected bureaucrats (aka "Euro-crats") in Brussels who were grabbing more and more power from elected governments. When people complained about local problems, they were told that no solution was possible, because they had to follow EU regulations.
Case in point, "record breaking floods" in recent years. The "Euro-crats" blamed them on "global warming", which was a lie. The true cause...
* before EU, British local authorities dredged local rivers and dumped the debris out to sea
* with EU regulations, that became a no-no, and the debris had to be stored on land. I.e. it became illegal to move mud from the bottom of the river to the bottom of the English Channel.
* England is crowded, and real-estate is insanely expensive.
* Dredging became insanely expensive
* Local authorities stopped dredging local rivers, because they couldn't afford the increased costs
* After several years of not being dredged, rivers started overflowing their banks every time they got hit with a moderate rainfall... well... like... dohhh.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone who could vote did vote. Maybe those who abstained are finally checking what all the fuss was about.
Re:Of course the spin is people are... (Score:4, Informative)
Turnout was almost 73% of eligible voters. That's a very large number.
Re:Of course the spin is people are... (Score:5, Interesting)
Turnout was almost 73% of eligible voters. That's a very large number.
That means 27% of people of voting age didn't bother to vote, and I'm quite willing to bet that this non-voting group was skewed towards the younger end of the spectrum. (#)
Thus, it's probably fair to say that if enough of those non-voters *had* actually bothered to vote, the result would have gone moderately but clearly the other way.
As it stands, this is all academic now. But let's bear these people in mind- those who had a reasonable opportunity to vote, but didn't bother- because they have no right- not now, not in ten, twenty, forty years time, not ever- to complain about the consequences of this decision or anything remotely related to it.
You didn't vote? Then you voted Leave. End of story. STFU.
(#) This is almost always true, but it's quite clear in this case that older voters were not only more anti-EU and likely to support Leave, but also more actively cared about it than younger voters' tendency to be more pro-EU but generally passive. An illustration of how those older voters skewed the debate was the endless stream of newspaper letters, commenters on Radio 4 et al explaining that "I voted for a common *market* in 1975, blah blah blah". To put this into perspective, anyone old enough to have had a vote in 1975 would have to be almost sixty at the very least today. Yes, those people making the most noise about Europe are those already approaching- if not well into- retirement age, with their careers behind them and a "Back to the 50s" post-war mentality. Yet the consequences of their choice will dictate the future of a 19-year-old student long after they die off in 15-30 years time.
Still, if that student couldn't be bothered to vote anyway, he can STFU too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
*grabs popcorn*
So the dog finally caught a car. Now we get to watch what happens when a bunch of idiots vote against their own best interests and have to face the consequences. Take this a preview of what's coming in November for the good ol' US.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm having a ball.
Re: (Score:3)
I thought we were an autonomous collective?
Re: (Score:3)
It is true that not all that could vote did vote. But I feel that vote is representative.
There are 63 million inhabitant, about 12 million below 18 years old and about 33 million vote expressed. So most people that could vote did vote, and the split was over a million people, about 4% of voters. In any election I followed, that would be considered a clear cut vote.
Re: (Score:3)
Not everyone who could vote did vote. Maybe those who abstained are finally checking what all the fuss was about.
"What is a horse?"
Answer: Something related to the stable door people have been discussing for the past several months. Both are too late for you to give a fuck about now.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also notice how the news reports are dancing around the fact that Brits (and a lot of other EU citizens) are getting fed up with the ultra-liberal "open arms" immigration policies of the EU. Everyone wants to help refugees in need. But that decency and generosity begins to wane fast when those refugees start trying to enforce Sharia, rape women, shoot up malls, traffic children, etc.
Why the upset? (Score:5, Interesting)
This was an advisory referendum only, with no force of law. The United Kingdom is not obligated to leave the EU.
Yes, a pro-separation change in government will soon take place. However, the more forcefully that the new government pushes for a full departure, the more forcefully Scotland and Northern Ireland will attempt to disentangle themselves from the United Kingdom.
Northern Ireland in particular might see a real increase in sectarian violence if EU separation is not handled with great care, so internal security and continental policy will become even deeper-entwined. These forces will certainly blunt immediate impulses towards separation.
The EU bureaucracy has allowed a large, hostile contingent to form in several European nations. Perhaps now an inward gaze, compelled by credible criticism, can form a more perfect union.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, that's true. But I'm not sure Parliament is ready to abandon any pretext of "democracy" by completely ignoring this referendum. As for what impact Scotland and Northern Ireland will have, well, I have no idea of that one. I don't recall too many Brits, outside of the usual hand-wringers in financial sector, giving much of a fuck when Scotland held a referendum for independence, though. So I doubt this will change any minds.
Re: (Score:3)
I also seriously doubt they will ignore it - Cameron is resigning after all. But the vote was still very close. It wasn't 80/20, 70/30 or even 60/40. It was very close. A case could be made for there not being enough of a mandate to make a huge change in the country prudent.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not sure Parliament is ready to abandon any pretext of "democracy" by completely ignoring this referendum.
The reality is that only 3.8% more people want to exit the EU than people that want to stay in the EU. When making decisions you have to factor in the opportunity costs, and with only a 3.8% preference for leaving I don't think it's worth the upheaval to change course. Something as major as this should require a supermajority vote. Here in the United States constitutional amendments require a 2/3 majority vote in both houses of Congress. Ratifying treaties requires a 2/3 majority vote of the Senate. Ratifyi
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Of course the spin is people are... (Score:4, Informative)
They're not searching for "what is the super bowl". Wait, did I have to explain that?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't eat every thing the media feeds you
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:4, Insightful)
Or its ignorant propagandized young people people who are still hopeful they are going to get something out of the 'promise of the eu' who don't realize that globalism while makes for nice feel good politics is really the underlying force behind the death of middle class and the expand wealth gap.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Those very same people voted overwhelmingly to remain in EEC in 1975 referendum after UK joined in 1973. Now they want out because they don't think it is still a good idea.
Re: (Score:3)
[The older generation] won't enjoy much of the economic progress that can come in the future. It is typical for the much older generation to vote in their favor which is usually not the best in the long run, whereas someone younger will vote in their best interest which includes the long term.
You are kidding yourself. Very few people, old or young, vote for anything but their own short term interest. And why you should think that young people would see the EU as advantageous to themselves either short or lng term I cannot imagine. Several I know are just angry at seeing jobs they apply for being given preferably to immigrants (because the bosses assume immigrants will be more pliable?).
Younger people tend to be more pro-EU because they see it vaguely as more one-worldish, whereas older people
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Insightful)
Aside from all the nonsense this election cycle, the sentiment in the world is the same among working-class people in the west - that the political elites have abandoned them. They are angry about immigration depressing wages, and they are angry about globalism wiping out jobs altogether.
These two things have been ignored by politicians for so long now, that people angry enough to elect idiots like Johnson and Trump in order to effect change.
They've made their own bed.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Insightful)
They are angry about immigration depressing wages, and they are angry about globalism wiping out jobs altogether.
And sadly because they are "too tired of listening to experts", they'll never know there is very little truth to that.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Insightful)
The creation a low-paying, 16-hours/day, 7-days/week job in Vietnam doesn't mean jack shit to somebody who used to have a moderately well-paying, 8-hours/day, 5-days/week job working at a factory in the UK or the US. There wasn't a net win globally; the third-worlder isn't all that much better off than before, and may actually be much worse off if they went from an agricultural job they had some control over their destiny to a dismal factory job where they have no control at all. Meanwhile, the first-worlders are much worse off, being unemployed and often unable to find employment due to widespread economic destruction affecting entire regions and even countries. The only ones benefiting are a very small ownership class reaping all of the benefits, who thanks to their political connections and ability to bypass taxation systems have tended to avoid contributing back much to society at large. Then there's the spin-off effect from the destruction of middle class jobs. Eliminating one middle-class job may make one ownership-class individual wealthier, but it also makes numerous other middle-class individuals much worse off economically now that they've lost much of the business of the other middle-class employee who lost his job.
People in the UK and the US are now voting based on their own personal experiences with globalization, with immigration, and with free trade. These experiences have been devastating. It's no wonder they've had enough, and are doing what they can to get some major changes going on.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Insightful)
the third-worlder isn't all that much better off than before, and may actually be much worse off if they went from an agricultural job they had some control over their destiny to a dismal factory job where they have no control at all
This is a first world perspective. Control and quality of life are not concerns until subsistence is no longer a concern.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:4, Insightful)
the third-worlder isn't all that much better off than before, and may actually be much worse off if they went from an agricultural job they had some control over their destiny to a dismal factory job where they have no control at all
Why did they switch from the former to the latter then? (And if it wasn't their own choice, what forced them to do it? Honest question, not rhetorical).
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:4, Interesting)
the third-worlder isn't all that much better off than before
Utter nonsense. Go look at some statistics on standards of living in various third world nations.
Oh, wait, that would require listening to experts. Never mind, go back to your echo chamber.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
People in the UK and the US are now voting based on their own personal experiences with globalization, with immigration, and with free trade. These experiences have been devastating. It's no wonder they've had enough, and are doing what they can to get some major changes going on.
Gradually/Marginally getting better != devastating
http://hdr.undp.org/en/countri... [undp.org]
http://hdr.undp.org/en/countri... [undp.org]
And yes, that accounts for income inequality. Is there room for improvement? Sure! Is it worth years of certain turmoil to try something else (what exactly??) that in all likelihood will be worse (using human involvement and history as a reference)? Not to me...and probably not most of the developed world either. But one way or another, parts of the population are determined to find out. Yeeeh
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, this is great information for America. We get to observe what happens when a stable western country with a large economy makes a drastic change driven mainly by xenophobia. Maybe the British economy crashes, maybe its all roses. All we have to do is watch...
(many probably won't watch)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, this is great information for America. We get to observe what happens when a stable western country with a large economy makes a drastic change driven mainly by xenophobia. Maybe the British economy crashes, maybe its all roses. All we have to do is watch...
(many probably won't watch)
Sadly, we won't see many real results until well after the 2016 election. So unless we fix our own xenophobic problems by ourselves, the world will be looking at the UK and USA for examples of what happens when you let xenophobia take over the country.
Re:A preview of President Trump's upcoming win. (Score:5, Interesting)
unless we fix our own xenophobic problems by ourselves, the world will be looking at the UK and USA for examples of what happens when you let xenophobia take over the country.
As opposed to examples of what happens when you let aliens take over the country? Or could we just ask the American Indians that question? Or see what happened to the Romans in the fifth century?
You are comparing military conquests with Hispanics migrating to the US or refugees migrating to the UK? Once Hispanics or Syrian refugees start killing tens of thousands of Americans or Brits per year, and setting up their own governments after conquering cities, your comparison would hold some weight. Until then it is xenophobic nonsense.
Re: (Score:3)
Should it not be the people employing the undocumented immigrants who are thrown in prison? If Americans weren't offering the undocumented immigrants money in trade for labour, they'd have much less motivation to escape the places that America has ruined.
BTW, in answer to another comment you made, Mexico does not have felons, just America and Nigeria officially have that class of people with their rights permanently restricted, often for political reasons, the rest of the world got rid of the idea of felons
Re: (Score:3)
I suggest you google it. You are wrong.
Who said anything about jobs? I specifically said "when it taxes a finite system of opportunities". That could include jobs or it could include taxes being allocated for different purposes than ideal, increased, and so on. Resources are not free nor are they un-exhaustible.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Probably because the "experts" have been so completely clueless over and over again that it's time to give your head a shake and stop listening to them.
exactly! shockingly, some people wrote some books and some were wrong. we should reject all human knowledge or expertise and revert to the rule of the biggest club. that will show them.
Re:LOL (Score:4, Insightful)
The EU is just enjoying its growing pains. The US had a similar, but far less civilized, debate about the same thing from 1860-1864. The "slavery" thing was a mere sideshow. The issue of states' rights was the main question, and more specifically, whether states had the rights to secede. Apparently the EU allows that without a fight. The US does not, but fought a very bloody war to make that determination.
Re: (Score:3)
The "slavery" thing was a mere sideshow
Hardly.
The reason the Union fought a war against the Confederacy was to ensure that the Confederate states remained a part of the Union, sure. So the war was about states' rights to secede.
The issue the Confederacy seceded over, however, was slavery. Sure, you can spin it as "states' rights to allow slavery or not", but still. That was the cause of the secession in the first place.
The war was fought over whether or not to allow the secession. The secession happened over whether or not to allow slavery.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes and the rest is Quebec.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you go to McDonald's to not have a burger?
Re:BBC (Score:5, Insightful)
Negotiations have already started. Not Article 50 negotiations, of course. Only the UK can invoke those. But as far as the 27 EU member states are concerned, the UK is overstaying its welcome from today onwards. They UK can legally stay as long as it wants, but politically it will be treated like a stranger.
It is already clear that if the UK wants continued access to the single market, it will basically have to accept all the things that voters hoped to get rid off with their "leave" vote, and get no say in the future decisions of the EU. Pay dues to the EU? Check. Grant foreigners freedom of movement? Check. Follow EU rules on marketability of products? Check. Get to vote on any of those rules? Nope. Some people are still delusional about this. They think the UK will get special treatment because at the moment it imports more from the EU than it exports to the EU, implying that the EU needs the UK market more than the UK needs the EU market. But that's a flawed argument. Almost half the exports of the UK are sold on the European market, but only 14% of the EU exports are sold in the UK.
Re:definitely due to the rise of the populist righ (Score:5, Informative)
Are you in the UK? Do you know what happens here? Do you know what the damnable muslims have done? They rape our women, they demand concessions like zero pork products in schools, which also means English children are forbidden to bring their own lunch with pork. No one is allowed to speak up against islam, but those days ended yesterday. A nice, healthy nationalism will emerge, where the English are in charge of their own destiny. No more taking in the sodden camel jockeys, who have paid nothing into the system, but live off the dole, take housing meant for the English, did I mention rape our women. buy old monument chapels and churches and use them for the Godforsaken worship of their false god, allah and his child-raping prophet, mohammed. Fuck them. This is England -- a white, northern European country that deserves to set her own agenda, not one of globalism from Belgium. Look at the EU. Immigration has destroyed the EU in the last couple of years. It's unsafe to walk so many cities now. muslim men demand no beer be sold within their sight, even though this is Europe, not Turdistan. Fuck the muslims. They have done more to ruin England and Europe in just a few years. Call me a bigot. This is England! You want to come here? Assimilate. Speak English, keep your head down, cause zero trouble, leave our women alone. This is England.
Swap out Jews for Muslims and you've got a rant there that Hitler would have been proud of. Only took 70 years, but of course most of the people alive when this kind of fascist nationalism grew into power in the 30s are dead now anyway, so no one really remembers anymore.
Re:definitely due to the rise of the populist righ (Score:5, Interesting)
Except for the fact that Jews weren't actually raping women and otherwise controlling and terrorizing the German public. Trying to equate the Muslim invasion of Europe with Jews in 1930's Germany is obvious antisemitism.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not quite sure why I am replying to such a racist rant, but I wanted to point out that the vast majority of Muslims in the UK are from South Asia [wikimedia.org]. This immigration had nothing to do with the EU, but was possible because of the Commonwealth.
Re: (Score:2)
very well said
thank you
Re: (Score:3)
All the British want is control of their borders. They are a nation after all.
As if Chancellor Merkel had any say in this at all.
Maybe you should be directing your derision at Martin Schulz, Donald Tusk, Mark Rutte, and Jean-Claude Juncker...
They (and their cohorts in Brussels) are the ones that control the EU policies on immigration.
FWIW, although the UK currently has an "opt-out" concerning Schengen so they actually have technical control over their border, they don't have an opt-out when it comes to actual granting of work visas to other EU citizens (which is what this is really a
Re: (Score:2)
Too right. Now we need to reverse course on electing muslims, killing immigration from the middle east, and returning England back to the English alone. Let the Scots go their own way, as Nicola Sturgeon will likely succeed this next time in having Scotland leave the UK. That's fine. Scotland is a serious financial drain on England anyway. The Scots don't pay for university, parking, dental work, anything. England pays for all of it for them. Read up on it. To have Nicola Sturgeon out of English politics will be a Godsend.
This is England! Up with Boris Johnson! Up with Nigel Farage!
As an English person who doesn't live in England any more and who has spent enough time living in the non-English speaking world to be de-sensitised to the kind of pedantry, squeamishness and prudery that make the English what they are, I say fucking keep the English in England and don't let any more of them out. The English are a bunch of cunts and idiots. The Irish, Scots and Welsh are better off without them.
Re: (Score:3)
It will be tremendous.