Author Topic: Brexit.  (Read 551827 times)

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5760 on: December 14, 2018, 12:56:14 AM »
I'd warn as well that the Brexit referendum proves that the prospect of a unification referendum in the North is an extremely worrying one.

Such a poll should not be held unless and until opinion polls show a consistent, clear majority in favour of unification. A clear majority means minimum 55-45.

The threat to peace would be too great, and peace is much more important than a united Ireland.

A 51-49 majority in favour of unification would be a nightmarish prospect which would all but condemn the North to another outbreak of bloodshed.

In practical terms, can you outline for me why a 51-49 result would result in bloodshed/carnage and a 55-45 result wouldn't?

At what point in between do unionists change from being hell bent on carnage to deciding they'll just have to accept it?

I can't tell you for certain that a 55-45 result wouldn't result in bloodshed, no more than I can tell you with 100% certainty that 50% +1 would result in bloodshed.

I can't see into the future.

What I can say is that based on a reading of history and an understanding of the siege mentality of Unionists/Loyalists, the holding of a referendum on Irish unification, in a scenario where it would be clear from opinion polling that there would be a wafer thin margin either way, is likely a recipe for serious unrest and could well result in a re-outbreak of violence and killing, and it could be extremely vicious.

For me the Brexit referendum is also a good demonstration of why the holding of a referendum where the result is likely to be very close, is a bad idea. Britain leaving the EU is an emotive issue for sure, but it pales in comparison to the visceral nationalistic emotions that would be stirred on both sides by a referendum on Irish unification.

Therefore, I feel it would be extremely unwise to hold such a referendum unless there was evidence to demonstrate that the pro-unification position had a clear and consistent lead.

The 55-45 margin is my personal call on where the line of that margin lies.

In any such future referendum, it would be better to have a clear result. 55-45 is a clearer result than 51-49. Again, I can't say with certainty whether a clear result would eliminate the prospect of violence - but it would likely lessen it.

The Good Friday Agreement was clearly a very positive development in terms of securing peace. But the principle of consent, while laudable as a principle, has stored up what is effectively a timebomb given that the long term demographic appears to be slowly but inexorably moving towards a Catholic/Nationalist/Republican majority.

How the switching of the majority to the minority and vice versa is handled vis a vis a referendum will be of huge importance in terms of staving off a potential return to violence.

It must be handled with the utmost care and the utmost respect, because the potential is there for disaster.

People shouting for a referendum now flies in the face of that.

As does Brexit.


The lessons of the past are already being unlearned.

Agree with bold.  Though, as some earlier posters mentioned, I think it does no harm to mention it from time to time, to 'normalise' it.

As for the figure, I don't think it will make a blind bit of difference what the majority is (certainly within the limits we are discussing).

So I think we have to accept that 51-49 or 55-45 (or 60-40 for that matter), there will still be a cabal of uber-staunch reprobates who will cause bother when it doesn't go their way.

We can't be beholden to them though.


EDIT.

Just re-read your post there and realised that the only half attempt at an answer to my questions could be boiled down to 'cos I think so'.

The rest is nothing more than a bunch of very noble platitudes and regurgitations of old chestnuts about respect etc...
There's every reason to think the way I do.

The only reason you wouldn't is if you buy into the old misty-eyed romantic nationalist bullshit, ie. a united Ireland any which way and to hell with the consequences.

If opinion polls put the numbers in favour/not in favour of unification at basically 50-50, and the result was on a knife edge, the division and hatred that would be stoked up by a referendum would be nightmarish. There would likely be violence before, during and after the poll.

It would be utterly irresponsible to hold a poll which would be a carte blanche for the headbangers to cause violent mayhem.

If you had a period of, say, two years where opinion polls were consistently showing 55-45 or more in favour of unification, a border poll would become inevitable because of the clear and consistent majority in favour, the result wouldd become inevitable, and the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community would at least have time to come to terms with what was happening.

Time, acceptance and respect are the keys to unification ever happening.

There may well be some Loyalists who would still be intent on violence with a 55-45 result for unification, or 60-40, or an even greater margin. It could be that no margin, no matter how big, would make certian people accept that being taken out of the United Kingdom in a referendum was legitimate. But the greater the margin, the less would be the legitimacy of any violence in the eyes of the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community as a whole. I think that's unarguable.

I'd like to see unification but I'd be more than prepared to wait an extra 30 or 40 years for it to happen if it meant there was a better chance that people wouldn't be killed.

Here's another thing. When people voted for Brexit they didn't know what they were voting for. Those who would vote for a united Ireland might think they would know what they would be voting for. But would they?

Because there would be those who would expect all the trappings and official culture of the 26 county state to be immediately extended to the six counties - the tricolour to fly over City Hall in Belfast etc., that unionist culture be basically be obliterated. That we'd "stick it to them once and for all".

Then, there would be those, like myself, who would be prepared to see a united Ireland as being effectively the creation of new state rather than it merely being a case of the six counties being subsumed into the Republic. A new state with a new flag and a new anthem etc., with Britain having some say over the six counties in a similar way to how the Republic has some say over the North now.

There would be hard united Irelanders and soft united Irelanders. The hard united Irelanders mightn't particularly like the ideas of the soft united Irelanders, never mind the ideas of those who opposed a united Ireland. The united Ireland that occurred in practice would likely not be the united Ireland they imagined.

Don't know how you reconcile the earlier 'I can't see into the future' statement with the bit in bold.  It would seem that this is a selective ability.

Anyway.  Your last few paragraphs are again a regurgitation of old tropes which are endlessly thrown around here.  There's nothing new in any of it.  It's a very foolish person who would think that a new Ireland would be merely an enlarged version of the 26 counties.  It doesn't need repeated.

And I can't agree that we need to wait until we see a clear majority before conducting a poll.  You've yet to produce any tangible evidence as to why we should wait.  Your 55-45 figure is unbelievably arbitrary - at very best!  What's to say that when we get to 55-45, some don't just decide that it would need to be 60-40?  It's just another makey-uppy figure after all with no logical basis other than 'I think it sounds right'.  It doesn't matter if we waited until it was 99-1 - you still couldn't guarantee that a reaction from the lunatic fringe of loyalism/unionism wouldn't get someone killed.

On the other hand, we have an international agreement made between both sides, and voted for by a huge majority of the population.  An agreement which has formed the basis for the running of this annexe for two decades and indeed, which might be the only thing saving us from being torn out of the EU against our will by a bunch of racists from Eton.  The figure in this agreement is 50% +1.  It's not hidden, it's been front and centre for 20 years.  It has been discussed to death in the media and frankly, Unionism has had more than enough time to come to terms with it.  For those reasons, I say we stick with the figure we have.  But... if we're going to have to change it,  we're going to need a more solid justification than 'Go 55-45, I reckon that sounds about right'.

« Last Edit: December 14, 2018, 01:08:59 AM by Franko »

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2061
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5761 on: December 14, 2018, 01:19:53 AM »
I'd warn as well that the Brexit referendum proves that the prospect of a unification referendum in the North is an extremely worrying one.

Such a poll should not be held unless and until opinion polls show a consistent, clear majority in favour of unification. A clear majority means minimum 55-45.

The threat to peace would be too great, and peace is much more important than a united Ireland.

A 51-49 majority in favour of unification would be a nightmarish prospect which would all but condemn the North to another outbreak of bloodshed.

In practical terms, can you outline for me why a 51-49 result would result in bloodshed/carnage and a 55-45 result wouldn't?

At what point in between do unionists change from being hell bent on carnage to deciding they'll just have to accept it?

I can't tell you for certain that a 55-45 result wouldn't result in bloodshed, no more than I can tell you with 100% certainty that 50% +1 would result in bloodshed.

I can't see into the future.

What I can say is that based on a reading of history and an understanding of the siege mentality of Unionists/Loyalists, the holding of a referendum on Irish unification, in a scenario where it would be clear from opinion polling that there would be a wafer thin margin either way, is likely a recipe for serious unrest and could well result in a re-outbreak of violence and killing, and it could be extremely vicious.

For me the Brexit referendum is also a good demonstration of why the holding of a referendum where the result is likely to be very close, is a bad idea. Britain leaving the EU is an emotive issue for sure, but it pales in comparison to the visceral nationalistic emotions that would be stirred on both sides by a referendum on Irish unification.

Therefore, I feel it would be extremely unwise to hold such a referendum unless there was evidence to demonstrate that the pro-unification position had a clear and consistent lead.

The 55-45 margin is my personal call on where the line of that margin lies.

In any such future referendum, it would be better to have a clear result. 55-45 is a clearer result than 51-49. Again, I can't say with certainty whether a clear result would eliminate the prospect of violence - but it would likely lessen it.

The Good Friday Agreement was clearly a very positive development in terms of securing peace. But the principle of consent, while laudable as a principle, has stored up what is effectively a timebomb given that the long term demographic appears to be slowly but inexorably moving towards a Catholic/Nationalist/Republican majority.

How the switching of the majority to the minority and vice versa is handled vis a vis a referendum will be of huge importance in terms of staving off a potential return to violence.

It must be handled with the utmost care and the utmost respect, because the potential is there for disaster.

People shouting for a referendum now flies in the face of that.

As does Brexit.


The lessons of the past are already being unlearned.

Agree with bold.  Though, as some earlier posters mentioned, I think it does no harm to mention it from time to time, to 'normalise' it.

As for the figure, I don't think it will make a blind bit of difference what the majority is (certainly within the limits we are discussing).

So I think we have to accept that 51-49 or 55-45 (or 60-40 for that matter), there will still be a cabal of uber-staunch reprobates who will cause bother when it doesn't go their way.

We can't be beholden to them though.


EDIT.

Just re-read your post there and realised that the only half attempt at an answer to my questions could be boiled down to 'cos I think so'.

The rest is nothing more than a bunch of very noble platitudes and regurgitations of old chestnuts about respect etc...
There's every reason to think the way I do.

The only reason you wouldn't is if you buy into the old misty-eyed romantic nationalist bullshit, ie. a united Ireland any which way and to hell with the consequences.

If opinion polls put the numbers in favour/not in favour of unification at basically 50-50, and the result was on a knife edge, the division and hatred that would be stoked up by a referendum would be nightmarish. There would likely be violence before, during and after the poll.

It would be utterly irresponsible to hold a poll which would be a carte blanche for the headbangers to cause violent mayhem.

If you had a period of, say, two years where opinion polls were consistently showing 55-45 or more in favour of unification, a border poll would become inevitable because of the clear and consistent majority in favour, the result wouldd become inevitable, and the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community would at least have time to come to terms with what was happening.

Time, acceptance and respect are the keys to unification ever happening.

There may well be some Loyalists who would still be intent on violence with a 55-45 result for unification, or 60-40, or an even greater margin. It could be that no margin, no matter how big, would make certian people accept that being taken out of the United Kingdom in a referendum was legitimate. But the greater the margin, the less would be the legitimacy of any violence in the eyes of the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community as a whole. I think that's unarguable.

I'd like to see unification but I'd be more than prepared to wait an extra 30 or 40 years for it to happen if it meant there was a better chance that people wouldn't be killed.

Here's another thing. When people voted for Brexit they didn't know what they were voting for. Those who would vote for a united Ireland might think they would know what they would be voting for. But would they?

Because there would be those who would expect all the trappings and official culture of the 26 county state to be immediately extended to the six counties - the tricolour to fly over City Hall in Belfast etc., that unionist culture be basically be obliterated. That we'd "stick it to them once and for all".

Then, there would be those, like myself, who would be prepared to see a united Ireland as being effectively the creation of new state rather than it merely being a case of the six counties being subsumed into the Republic. A new state with a new flag and a new anthem etc., with Britain having some say over the six counties in a similar way to how the Republic has some say over the North now.

There would be hard united Irelanders and soft united Irelanders. The hard united Irelanders mightn't particularly like the ideas of the soft united Irelanders, never mind the ideas of those who opposed a united Ireland. The united Ireland that occurred in practice would likely not be the united Ireland they imagined.

Don't know how you reconcile the earlier 'I can't see into the future' statement with the bit in bold.  It would seem that this is a selective ability.

Anyway.  Your last few paragraphs are again a regurgitation of old tropes which are endlessly thrown around here.  There's nothing new in any of it.  It's a very foolish person who would think that a new Ireland would be merely an enlarged version of the 26 counties.  It doesn't need repeated.

And I can't agree that we need to wait until we see a clear majority before conducting a poll.  You've yet to produce any tangible evidence as to why we should wait.  Your 55-45 figure is unbelievably arbitrary - at very best!  What's to say that when we get to 55-45, some don't just decide that it would need to be 60-40?  It's just another makey-uppy figure after all with no logical basis other than 'I think it sounds right'.  It doesn't matter if we waited until it was 99-1 - you still couldn't guarantee that a reaction from the lunatic fringe of loyalism/unionism wouldn't get someone killed.

On the other hand, we have an international agreement made between both sides, and voted for by a huge majority of the population.  An agreement which has formed the basis for the running of this annex for two decades and indeed, which might be the only thing saving us from being torn out of the EU against our will by a bunch of racists from Eton.  The figure in this agreement is 50% +1.  It's not hidden, it's been front and centre for 20 years.  Unionism has had more than enough time to come to terms with it.  If we're going to change that it's going to need a more solid basis than 'I reckon that sounds aboout right'.
Using the word "tropes" doesn't confer your post with any insight.

I've already said I can't see into the future with certainty. Nobody can.

The "tangible evidence" is history. The history of the six counties is an extremely dark one, marred with appalling sectarian murder. Very recent history. It's an extremely unwise thing to go poking those ghosts for kicks before they've even rested. If they are going to be poked, people need to be as sure as they can be that they won't come back to bite.

Yet we have a generation now who don't remember the Troubles, so don't remember the horrors of it. And we have a generation in loads of countries who are seemingly entirely willing to reawaken old prejudices and hatreds, and new ones, based on ignorant populist nonsense. We live in an unheroic age. There are plenty of gullible, stupid young men around who might be only too willing to be "heroic" in the name of a "glorious cause".

These are very dangerous forces and it seems far too many people don't understand what they're playing with.

The margin needs to be clear and it needs to be consistent. 10 is a clear margin and well outside the margin of error. 1 or 2 is not.

Brexit is not an excuse for a border poll based on absolutely wafer thin figures in favour of unification at best, and which could easily restart violence.

Brexit is a lesson against holding such a poll.



« Last Edit: December 14, 2018, 01:26:06 AM by sid waddell »

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23447
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5762 on: December 14, 2018, 07:53:35 AM »
https://www.ft.com/content/5a649ddc-ff0a-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

During more than two hours of talks over dinner, EU leaders agreed to scrap plans for a formal process to provide reassurances to Britain until Mrs May decided what she wants.“This debate is sometimes nebulous and imprecise,” said Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president. “When it comes to the future relationship, our British friends need to say what they want, rather than asking us what we want.”
When it comes to the future relationship, our British friends need to say what they want, rather than asking us
Michel Barnier, EU chief Brexit negotiator, claimed that Mrs May was not seeking reassurances but was reviving old ideas rejected during Brexit negotiations. One EU diplomat briefed on the talks said Mrs May was “unprofessional”.Another EU diplomat claimed that there was even a suggestion that it might have been better if Mrs May had been ejected from Downing Street in this week’s abortive coup by Tory Eurosceptics. “She didn’t know what she wanted,” the diplomat said. Mrs May insisted during her presentation that she could change the “dynamic” at Westminster and overcome a wall of hostility in her ruling Conservative party towards her compromise plan.She urged the EU27 to offer a legal tweak that would, in effect, put a one-year time limit on the Irish backstop, which is seen by Eurosceptic MPs as a “trap” to keep the UK in a permanent customs union.But her presentation, which also included a suggestion that the non-binding political declaration on future UK/EU relations should be given a legal footing as an annexe to the legal withdrawal treaty, went down badly.“It was Salzburg all over again,” said another EU diplomat, referring to the acrimonious summit in September.
Lookit

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2010
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5763 on: December 14, 2018, 08:03:26 AM »
I'd warn as well that the Brexit referendum proves that the prospect of a unification referendum in the North is an extremely worrying one.

Such a poll should not be held unless and until opinion polls show a consistent, clear majority in favour of unification. A clear majority means minimum 55-45.

The threat to peace would be too great, and peace is much more important than a united Ireland.

A 51-49 majority in favour of unification would be a nightmarish prospect which would all but condemn the North to another outbreak of bloodshed.

In practical terms, can you outline for me why a 51-49 result would result in bloodshed/carnage and a 55-45 result wouldn't?

At what point in between do unionists change from being hell bent on carnage to deciding they'll just have to accept it?

I can't tell you for certain that a 55-45 result wouldn't result in bloodshed, no more than I can tell you with 100% certainty that 50% +1 would result in bloodshed.

I can't see into the future.

What I can say is that based on a reading of history and an understanding of the siege mentality of Unionists/Loyalists, the holding of a referendum on Irish unification, in a scenario where it would be clear from opinion polling that there would be a wafer thin margin either way, is likely a recipe for serious unrest and could well result in a re-outbreak of violence and killing, and it could be extremely vicious.

For me the Brexit referendum is also a good demonstration of why the holding of a referendum where the result is likely to be very close, is a bad idea. Britain leaving the EU is an emotive issue for sure, but it pales in comparison to the visceral nationalistic emotions that would be stirred on both sides by a referendum on Irish unification.

Therefore, I feel it would be extremely unwise to hold such a referendum unless there was evidence to demonstrate that the pro-unification position had a clear and consistent lead.

The 55-45 margin is my personal call on where the line of that margin lies.

In any such future referendum, it would be better to have a clear result. 55-45 is a clearer result than 51-49. Again, I can't say with certainty whether a clear result would eliminate the prospect of violence - but it would likely lessen it.

The Good Friday Agreement was clearly a very positive development in terms of securing peace. But the principle of consent, while laudable as a principle, has stored up what is effectively a timebomb given that the long term demographic appears to be slowly but inexorably moving towards a Catholic/Nationalist/Republican majority.

How the switching of the majority to the minority and vice versa is handled vis a vis a referendum will be of huge importance in terms of staving off a potential return to violence.

It must be handled with the utmost care and the utmost respect, because the potential is there for disaster.

People shouting for a referendum now flies in the face of that.

As does Brexit.


The lessons of the past are already being unlearned.

Agree with bold.  Though, as some earlier posters mentioned, I think it does no harm to mention it from time to time, to 'normalise' it.

As for the figure, I don't think it will make a blind bit of difference what the majority is (certainly within the limits we are discussing).

So I think we have to accept that 51-49 or 55-45 (or 60-40 for that matter), there will still be a cabal of uber-staunch reprobates who will cause bother when it doesn't go their way.

We can't be beholden to them though.


EDIT.

Just re-read your post there and realised that the only half attempt at an answer to my questions could be boiled down to 'cos I think so'.

The rest is nothing more than a bunch of very noble platitudes and regurgitations of old chestnuts about respect etc...
There's every reason to think the way I do.

The only reason you wouldn't is if you buy into the old misty-eyed romantic nationalist bullshit, ie. a united Ireland any which way and to hell with the consequences.

If opinion polls put the numbers in favour/not in favour of unification at basically 50-50, and the result was on a knife edge, the division and hatred that would be stoked up by a referendum would be nightmarish. There would likely be violence before, during and after the poll.

It would be utterly irresponsible to hold a poll which would be a carte blanche for the headbangers to cause violent mayhem.

If you had a period of, say, two years where opinion polls were consistently showing 55-45 or more in favour of unification, a border poll would become inevitable because of the clear and consistent majority in favour, the result wouldd become inevitable, and the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community would at least have time to come to terms with what was happening.

Time, acceptance and respect are the keys to unification ever happening.

There may well be some Loyalists who would still be intent on violence with a 55-45 result for unification, or 60-40, or an even greater margin. It could be that no margin, no matter how big, would make certian people accept that being taken out of the United Kingdom in a referendum was legitimate. But the greater the margin, the less would be the legitimacy of any violence in the eyes of the Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist community as a whole. I think that's unarguable.

I'd like to see unification but I'd be more than prepared to wait an extra 30 or 40 years for it to happen if it meant there was a better chance that people wouldn't be killed.

Here's another thing. When people voted for Brexit they didn't know what they were voting for. Those who would vote for a united Ireland might think they would know what they would be voting for. But would they?

Because there would be those who would expect all the trappings and official culture of the 26 county state to be immediately extended to the six counties - the tricolour to fly over City Hall in Belfast etc., that unionist culture be basically be obliterated. That we'd "stick it to them once and for all".

Then, there would be those, like myself, who would be prepared to see a united Ireland as being effectively the creation of new state rather than it merely being a case of the six counties being subsumed into the Republic. A new state with a new flag and a new anthem etc., with Britain having some say over the six counties in a similar way to how the Republic has some say over the North now.

There would be hard united Irelanders and soft united Irelanders. The hard united Irelanders mightn't particularly like the ideas of the soft united Irelanders, never mind the ideas of those who opposed a united Ireland. The united Ireland that occurred in practice would likely not be the united Ireland they imagined.

Don't know how you reconcile the earlier 'I can't see into the future' statement with the bit in bold.  It would seem that this is a selective ability.

Anyway.  Your last few paragraphs are again a regurgitation of old tropes which are endlessly thrown around here.  There's nothing new in any of it.  It's a very foolish person who would think that a new Ireland would be merely an enlarged version of the 26 counties.  It doesn't need repeated.

And I can't agree that we need to wait until we see a clear majority before conducting a poll.  You've yet to produce any tangible evidence as to why we should wait.  Your 55-45 figure is unbelievably arbitrary - at very best!  What's to say that when we get to 55-45, some don't just decide that it would need to be 60-40?  It's just another makey-uppy figure after all with no logical basis other than 'I think it sounds right'.  It doesn't matter if we waited until it was 99-1 - you still couldn't guarantee that a reaction from the lunatic fringe of loyalism/unionism wouldn't get someone killed.

On the other hand, we have an international agreement made between both sides, and voted for by a huge majority of the population.  An agreement which has formed the basis for the running of this annex for two decades and indeed, which might be the only thing saving us from being torn out of the EU against our will by a bunch of racists from Eton.  The figure in this agreement is 50% +1.  It's not hidden, it's been front and centre for 20 years.  Unionism has had more than enough time to come to terms with it.  If we're going to change that it's going to need a more solid basis than 'I reckon that sounds aboout right'.
Using the word "tropes" doesn't confer your post with any insight.

I've already said I can't see into the future with certainty. Nobody can.

The "tangible evidence" is history. The history of the six counties is an extremely dark one, marred with appalling sectarian murder. Very recent history. It's an extremely unwise thing to go poking those ghosts for kicks before they've even rested. If they are going to be poked, people need to be as sure as they can be that they won't come back to bite.

Yet we have a generation now who don't remember the Troubles, so don't remember the horrors of it. And we have a generation in loads of countries who are seemingly entirely willing to reawaken old prejudices and hatreds, and new ones, based on ignorant populist nonsense. We live in an unheroic age. There are plenty of gullible, stupid young men around who might be only too willing to be "heroic" in the name of a "glorious cause".

These are very dangerous forces and it seems far too many people don't understand what they're playing with.

The margin needs to be clear and it needs to be consistent. 10 is a clear margin and well outside the margin of error. 1 or 2 is not.

Brexit is not an excuse for a border poll based on absolutely wafer thin figures in favour of unification at best, and which could easily restart violence.

Brexit is a lesson against holding such a poll.

Not sure why you felt the need to pick on the word tropes there?  The bit I've highlighted is not disputed by anyone (a little adjective-laden though).  Nor is it news to anyone.  Why do you keep saying things like this, in post after post, as if you are offering some new perspective on the issue?  Also, holding a poll on the reunification of the country is not 'poking ghosts for kicks'.  Language like that does your argument no favours.

Anyway.  We need to be sure that we are talking about the same thing.  The reality is that a border poll probably won't be held until there is a clear and consistent majority in favour of unification.  It's likely going to take many months/years of opinion polls showing this before the British Gov't will be forced into agreeing to letting it happen.  I don't like this, but I can live with this.  I don't think it needs copper fastened though.

If however, you are talking about moving the goalposts and renegotiating the GFA so that, in the event of such a poll, the bar for change is set to 55-45 then my original point stands.  IMO You haven't come up with anything convincing here to back up such a viewpoint.

You've said there might be violence, but you can't be sure how much, and you can't be sure that, even if the bar is set at 55, there won't be violence anyway, but there might be less.  So I ask - how much violence is acceptable?
The next statement is that "10 is a clear margin and well outside the margin of error. 1 or 2 is not".  Again, this is undisputed, but completely arbitrary.  So is 8.  But 10 just sounds like a nicer number doesn't it.

Your second last paragraph is, again, not disputed (or mentioned) by me.  I'm not sure why you felt the need to mention it.

Brexit is not a lesson against holding a poll with potentially tight margins, the lesson in the Brexit poll is not to to hold such a vote *without clearly defined outcomes*.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2018, 08:05:08 AM by Franko »


seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23447
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5765 on: December 14, 2018, 08:34:40 AM »
https://www.ft.com/content/18a45078-fe0a-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Voters decided by a small margin to leave the EU. Their judgment collided with that of most MPs. What we have seen since is a perpetual political dance around the consequences. Erstwhile Remainers — Mrs May most prominently — have promised to “make a success” of an enterprise they know can only end in failure.

https://www.ft.com/content/18a45078-fe0a-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e
The prime minister’s red lines were drawn not as a framework for a coherent negotiating strategy but with the political objective of shoring up her credentials with the Brexiters.What left Mrs May’s deal with the EU27 dead on arrival is that, unavoidably, it exploded the pretences of the Brexiters

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/13/next-brexiteers-jacob-rees-mogg-erg-can-do-next/
Brexiteers might not have to wait long before events give them a new opportunity to move against Mrs May. If European leaders refuse to give the reassurances on the backstop the Prime Minister seeks, and has promised her party, Liam Fox has indicated that the Cabinet could refuse to allow her deal to be put to Parliament
.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/13/civil-war-breaks-among-tories-chancellor-branded-moron-calling
Another senior Brexiteer added: “We need to polish up the language around no deal and turn it into something that sounds attractive rather than frightening. No deal isn’t a cliff edge - it’s a get out of jail free card.”


https://www.ft.com/content/5a649ddc-ff0a-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

During more than two hours of talks over dinner, EU leaders agreed to scrap plans for a formal process to provide reassurances to Britain until Mrs May decided what she wants.“This debate is sometimes nebulous and imprecise,” said Jean-Claude Juncker, European Commission president. “When it comes to the future relationship, our British friends need to say what they want, rather than asking us what we want.”
When it comes to the future relationship, our British friends need to say what they want, rather than asking us
Michel Barnier, EU chief Brexit negotiator, claimed that Mrs May was not seeking reassurances but was reviving old ideas rejected during Brexit negotiations. One EU diplomat briefed on the talks said Mrs May was “unprofessional”.Another EU diplomat claimed that there was even a suggestion that it might have been better if Mrs May had been ejected from Downing Street in this week’s abortive coup by Tory Eurosceptics. “She didn’t know what she wanted,” the diplomat said. Mrs May insisted during her presentation that she could change the “dynamic” at Westminster and overcome a wall of hostility in her ruling Conservative party towards her compromise plan.She urged the EU27 to offer a legal tweak that would, in effect, put a one-year time limit on the Irish backstop, which is seen by Eurosceptic MPs as a “trap” to keep the UK in a permanent customs union.But her presentation, which also included a suggestion that the non-binding political declaration on future UK/EU relations should be given a legal footing as an annexe to the legal withdrawal treaty, went down badly.“It was Salzburg all over again,” said another EU diplomat, referring to the acrimonious summit in September.


Funnymoney 4 minutes ago
This is the most dramatic act of self destruction a developed country has embarked on in modern times. Slow motion nation wreck
Lookit

HiMucker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1912
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5766 on: December 14, 2018, 10:07:02 AM »
I've given ye the broad plan for an All Ireland political entity on this board many times over the years.
An Irish  Confederation with 2 semi autonomous Regions -the present 6 and 26 Co areas.
The IC would have a new flagship and anthem while the 26 Co region could keep the Tricolour answer AnabhF.
A slimmed down Dáil and Northern Assembly would run internal affairs in their areas.
6 Cos Residents would be entitled to dual citizenship as now - if Britain still exists by then of course.

A lot of that sounds fairly reasonable as a starting point Rossfan.
I actually think people in the south would find it more difficult to leave behind symbols than northern nationalists, and maybe Rossfans point above demonstrates that. Most nationalists I have spoken to would be in favour of a new anthem and new flag. I wouldn't be in favour of the 26 holding on to the Tricolour and Amhrán na bhFiann  and Ireland as a whole having a new anthem. That just seems partitionist to me.

Fionntamhnach

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2608
  • "If I won the award for laziness, I'd send somebody to pick it up for me."
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5767 on: December 14, 2018, 10:11:51 AM »
Twitter thread from an Aussie working at Politico.

Quote
Ryan Heath @PoliticoRyan
#Brexit #thread
1/ If you don’t follow Brexit every day, here’s some advice. Let go of any illusions that this drama is about trade protocols, residency rights or the status of the Irish border. Brexit is the story of a proud former imperial power undergoing a mid-life crisis

2/ The rest of the world is left listening to Britain’s therapy session as they drone on about their ex-spouse, unable to see, admit or address their own flaws.

3/ The promise of Brexit was that it would make Britain feel big again. “Britain is special,” the Brexiteers assured British voters, who cast their ballots accordingly. But Brexit has proven that for the first time in modern history, Britain is small.

4/ The false comforts of a nuclear submarines and a U.N. veto (and, ironically, EU membership) tricked Britain into thinking it knows how to negotiate with a much larger partner: it has no clue how to conduct diplomacy as the newly minted club-less middle power that it is.

5/ Accustomed to issuing colonial diktats and chucking liberal bombs into the EU pond, knowing it would only ever be treated like a naughty child, the country has no idea about the give and take of real negotiations.

6/ Britain couldn’t even hire its own trade negotiator: the shortlist consisted of an Australian, a Canadian and a New Zealander. That is not the start of a joke. That is the joke.

7/ Britain’s political and journalistic classes are simply unused to having to consider the opinions of others. It’s no wonder the rest of the country is clueless about what they’ve walked into.

8/ I wish I could say this was surprising (i guess the depth of the mess is), but I’ve spent my life in the shadow of Britain’s identity complex: as an Australian who worked for the U.K. government, the EU and now as a journalist covering Brexit. So, no real surprise

9/ While many Brits have strong emotions about the EU, they rarely have a strong understanding. I feel like a kindergarten teacher nearly every time I speak on the issue

10/ But while Britain’s media were the original misinformation machine about the EU, long before we had Macedonian troll factories and Russian bots. Other Britons don't deserve a free pass: millions consumed those fibs + spineless politicians avoided hassle of correcting them

11/ Given we blame Greeks for blowing up their economy and hold accountable big-spending governments for saddling future generations with excessive debts. It’s time Brits reckoned with what they sowed through 45 years of shallow EU debate.

12/ It is Britain’s unique ignorance that makes Britain so boring. Nothing tells the story better than the sad stop-start diplomacy of Theresa May. The prime minister is an appropriate leader for a shrinking Britain — vague, inconsistent and improvised

13/ May’s frequent mad dashes across Europe underline how the U.K. lost the negotiation before it had begun. She flies across the Continent with fanfare, but only driven by domestic pressures — not a desire to find common ground with those on the other side of the table.

14/ Meanwhile, EU negotiators have laboriously and quietly toured every capital, building up their united front before the talks started. Chief negotiator Michel Barnier could find himself locked in a thousand black cars, and it wouldn’t matter: He’d step out smiling every time

15/ Britain’s political contortions are symptoms of an almost willful lack of understanding: The U.K. doesn’t know what it wants from the EU, and doesn’t really know what it wants from getting out.

16/ Britain for decades demanded and won special deals from the EU as a member, and now it thinks it deserves another favor on the way out. How dare the Iittle Irish stand up for themselves and disagree: don’t they know who we are?

17/ Today Britain wants things it already has (frictionless trade with the EU), without continuing to pay the price other EU members pay to have it (the legal, economic and political constraints that come with EU membership).

18/ Balancing competing interests is difficult enough for individual countries. Look at U.S. Congress, the German federal system, or even the mighty French presidency trying to cope with the yellow vest street protest movement. Doing the same across 27 countries is much harder.

19/ 28-way negotiations take time, and any sudden sharp policy change has the potential to disrupt the EU’s equilibrium. The deal on offer is the best London is going to get — simply because it is the best Brussels is going to be able to offer.

20/ And yet, cheered on by two ex-U.K. Brexit negotiators who barely bothered to show up in Brussels and negotiate, British politicians are lining up like whiny children to demand the remaining 27 EU countries make amendments to the Brexit deal.

21/ Britain has a lesson to learn. What a global power can pass off “exceptionalism,” for a medium-sized country simply comes across as ingratitude. Full article on @POLITICOEurope https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/ #EUCO #BrexitDeal

https://www.twitter.com/PoliticoRyan/status/1073226614773829632
Putting internet gobsh*tes in their place since 1999.

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23447
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5768 on: December 14, 2018, 10:26:04 AM »
Twitter thread from an Aussie working at Politico.

Quote
Ryan Heath @PoliticoRyan
#Brexit #thread
1/ If you don’t follow Brexit every day, here’s some advice. Let go of any illusions that this drama is about trade protocols, residency rights or the status of the Irish border. Brexit is the story of a proud former imperial power undergoing a mid-life crisis

2/ The rest of the world is left listening to Britain’s therapy session as they drone on about their ex-spouse, unable to see, admit or address their own flaws.

3/ The promise of Brexit was that it would make Britain feel big again. “Britain is special,” the Brexiteers assured British voters, who cast their ballots accordingly. But Brexit has proven that for the first time in modern history, Britain is small.

4/ The false comforts of a nuclear submarines and a U.N. veto (and, ironically, EU membership) tricked Britain into thinking it knows how to negotiate with a much larger partner: it has no clue how to conduct diplomacy as the newly minted club-less middle power that it is.

5/ Accustomed to issuing colonial diktats and chucking liberal bombs into the EU pond, knowing it would only ever be treated like a naughty child, the country has no idea about the give and take of real negotiations.

6/ Britain couldn’t even hire its own trade negotiator: the shortlist consisted of an Australian, a Canadian and a New Zealander. That is not the start of a joke. That is the joke.

7/ Britain’s political and journalistic classes are simply unused to having to consider the opinions of others. It’s no wonder the rest of the country is clueless about what they’ve walked into.

8/ I wish I could say this was surprising (i guess the depth of the mess is), but I’ve spent my life in the shadow of Britain’s identity complex: as an Australian who worked for the U.K. government, the EU and now as a journalist covering Brexit. So, no real surprise

9/ While many Brits have strong emotions about the EU, they rarely have a strong understanding. I feel like a kindergarten teacher nearly every time I speak on the issue

10/ But while Britain’s media were the original misinformation machine about the EU, long before we had Macedonian troll factories and Russian bots. Other Britons don't deserve a free pass: millions consumed those fibs + spineless politicians avoided hassle of correcting them

11/ Given we blame Greeks for blowing up their economy and hold accountable big-spending governments for saddling future generations with excessive debts. It’s time Brits reckoned with what they sowed through 45 years of shallow EU debate.

12/ It is Britain’s unique ignorance that makes Britain so boring. Nothing tells the story better than the sad stop-start diplomacy of Theresa May. The prime minister is an appropriate leader for a shrinking Britain — vague, inconsistent and improvised

13/ May’s frequent mad dashes across Europe underline how the U.K. lost the negotiation before it had begun. She flies across the Continent with fanfare, but only driven by domestic pressures — not a desire to find common ground with those on the other side of the table.

14/ Meanwhile, EU negotiators have laboriously and quietly toured every capital, building up their united front before the talks started. Chief negotiator Michel Barnier could find himself locked in a thousand black cars, and it wouldn’t matter: He’d step out smiling every time

15/ Britain’s political contortions are symptoms of an almost willful lack of understanding: The U.K. doesn’t know what it wants from the EU, and doesn’t really know what it wants from getting out.

16/ Britain for decades demanded and won special deals from the EU as a member, and now it thinks it deserves another favor on the way out. How dare the Iittle Irish stand up for themselves and disagree: don’t they know who we are?

17/ Today Britain wants things it already has (frictionless trade with the EU), without continuing to pay the price other EU members pay to have it (the legal, economic and political constraints that come with EU membership).

18/ Balancing competing interests is difficult enough for individual countries. Look at U.S. Congress, the German federal system, or even the mighty French presidency trying to cope with the yellow vest street protest movement. Doing the same across 27 countries is much harder.

19/ 28-way negotiations take time, and any sudden sharp policy change has the potential to disrupt the EU’s equilibrium. The deal on offer is the best London is going to get — simply because it is the best Brussels is going to be able to offer.

20/ And yet, cheered on by two ex-U.K. Brexit negotiators who barely bothered to show up in Brussels and negotiate, British politicians are lining up like whiny children to demand the remaining 27 EU countries make amendments to the Brexit deal.

21/ Britain has a lesson to learn. What a global power can pass off “exceptionalism,” for a medium-sized country simply comes across as ingratitude. Full article on @POLITICOEurope https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-britain-small-boring-and-stupid-theresa-may-eu-withdrawal-deal/ #EUCO #BrexitDeal

https://www.twitter.com/PoliticoRyan/status/1073226614773829632

I really like that thread. really on the ball

This is also top notch

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/


the money shot for Ireland

"And finally, the solidarity of the club members will ALWAYS be with each other, not with you. We have seen that over the backstop issue over the last 18 months. The 26 supported Dublin, not London. They still do. Nothing the Prime Minister now bids for will change that.
This may the first Anglo-Irish negotiation in history where the greater leverage is not on London’s side of the table. And the vituperation aimed at Dublin politicians tells one just how well that has gone down with politicians and apparatchiks who had not bothered to work out that this was no longer a bilateral business, and are now appalled to find they are cornered"

Lookit

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2061
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5769 on: December 14, 2018, 10:52:28 AM »
Theresa May and Celtic have something in common.

They both repeated their autumn Salzburg humiliations last night.

But there are also key differences.

The Norway option came good in the end for Celtic, and kept them in Europe.

It won't for May.

Celtic ended up reaching the last 32.

May could end up losing the whole 32.

Orior

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10069
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5770 on: December 14, 2018, 12:03:42 PM »
Theresa May and Celtic have something in common.

They both repeated their autumn Salzburg humiliations last night.

But there are also key differences.

The Norway option came good in the end for Celtic, and kept them in Europe.

It won't for May.

Celtic ended up reaching the last 32.

May could end up losing the whole 32.

I'll give you 6 out of 10 for that.
Cover me in chocolate and feed me to the lesbians

sid waddell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2061
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5771 on: December 14, 2018, 12:33:58 PM »
Theresa May and Celtic have something in common.

They both repeated their autumn Salzburg humiliations last night.

But there are also key differences.

The Norway option came good in the end for Celtic, and kept them in Europe.

It won't for May.

Celtic ended up reaching the last 32.

May could end up losing the whole 32.

I'll give you 6 out of 10 for that.
6 out of 9, surely?

screenexile

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10591
  • Up The Screen!
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5772 on: December 14, 2018, 01:18:12 PM »
Nebulous means nebulous!!

RedHand88

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1609
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5773 on: December 14, 2018, 01:25:27 PM »
Theresa May and Celtic have something in common.

They both repeated their autumn Salzburg humiliations last night.

But there are also key differences.

The Norway option came good in the end for Celtic, and kept them in Europe.

It won't for May.

Celtic ended up reaching the last 32.

May could end up losing the whole 32.

Did you write that yourself?

seafoid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23447
    • View Profile
Re: Brexit.
« Reply #5774 on: December 14, 2018, 01:36:43 PM »
Nebulous means nebulous!!
the sun is shouting and roaring about Juncker insulting May . ~It is all a big distraction from the fact that the UK is goosed.
Lookit