Unofficial Hexus Brexit Straw Poll - In, Out, Undecided?

[Galant]

The problem is the leave campaign only got where it is due to Far Right Parties like UKIP and the National Front and so on. Now,there is a referendum,have you noticed everybody has gone quiet about them.

Do you HONESTLY think the people who voted for UKIP in their millions,are suddenly going to just change their strips??

There vote for out is going to come with some major concessions,which the leave campaigners are quietly brushing under the carpet.

The leave campaign keeps pushing the in campaign as some Euro conspiracy with terms like this:





This is THE SAME kind of attitude I have seen with UKIPers in Thanet and Rochester,areas which are not too far away from me. This is why I said I have not met any decent anti-EU people in real life or even read about any locally,since Euroskeptic lot are dominated by them lot.

None,of the leave people here want to appreciate this.

They expect the Far Right who supported their campaign in their millions to just quietly ditch their views.

It is very different for some of you if UKIP is something you only hear in the news,or there might be the odd person who you met who might be that way. Try being closer to where the action is!


http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...perverse-trust



You think some of that sentiment is hyperbole from the in campaign,right?

It isn't. You should read it.

Yeah, see, I've just read it but it's just another iteration of what I've written about above. I just spent a post trying to clearly articulate what I believe to be the centre of this referendum, specifically stating that it's not about any one 'issue', and then another post quickly adding that it's not about any one party or policy, and then out comes the same old stuff.

Perhaps I'm not conveying my point clearly but I feel, Cat, like you're not engaging with the point I'm making.

Stepping aside from all the propaganda and talking points flying about in the media, there is a much, much larger issue here, one that has been lingering for decades, awaiting a chance to be addressed, and that's what this referendum is about. It predates UKIP, it predates the recent immigration issue, the 'what do we do with Islam' debate, etc. The issue isn't even the economy, as (again) I've stated above. The economy is clearly an important part of society, but this referendum is not about the economy. What's it about?

The true issue at the heart of the EU referendum is a MASSIVE issue that is hugely significant. As Saracen has said above and elsewhere, "It's about a democratic mandate for a huge change in the way we're governed, and THAT getting a yea or nea from the people."

What I would hope, is to hear you talk about that question - about the changes in how our society might/could be/should be governed, and decidedly not about UKIP or any other political party, or the possible immediate effects on the economy (of which there's been plenty of talk already). I'd like to hear the central issue discussed.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I personally wouldn't consider UKIP or other parties on the far right to be racist, they're xenophobic IMO.

Riiight. But either way the leave campaigners will have to make concessions to their views and their platform - it is down to them and their supporters this referendum happened so concessions will need to be made.

Wasn't that down to the fact that those who wanted independent were relying on Oil prices being steady and not to drop as much as it did?

Secondly, I don't think Obama had the right to say that Britain should remain in the EU considering USA would never answer to anybody else. Brussels would implement a process and America would simply say "No."

I am still on the fence atm...

Its not even that. Before the Scottish Referendum together campaigners made a number of arguments showing the Scottish numbers would not add up,that it made too many assumptions and it could lead to very real problems.

It was all poo-pooed away as scare mongering.

Have you not noticed,the same kind of sentiment is going on here??

Plus regarding the US,it is a superstate of different states. Some have economic output which would rival or exceed many countries in the world. Some,OTH,are doing really poorly currently. The US probably sees a unified Europe as being a powerful partner against countries like Russia and China,or even countries like India if the latter exerts themselves in a disagreeable way in the following decades.

A fractured Europe would be something the US would not want to see,as it would essentially leave them as the only real Western superpower.


It is also significant that eight former US Treasury secretaries said the UK is better staying in than out and these are people who served either the Republicans or Democrats.

The typical leave campaign answer:

"Not content with doing down Britain's economy, No 10 are now soliciting help from across the pond," a Vote Leave spokesman said.

It makes me very worried,that if we do leave and the economic pain is high,whether it will be 4 million UKIPers we worry about or 20 milliion.

Yeah, see, I've just read it but it's just another iteration of what I've written about above. I just spent a post trying to clearly articulate what I believe to be the centre of this referendum, specifically stating that it's not about any one 'issue', and then another post quickly adding that it's not about any one party or policy, and then out comes the same old stuff.

Perhaps I'm not conveying my point clearly but I feel, Cat, like you're not engaging with the point I'm making.

Stepping aside from all the propaganda and talking points flying about in the media, there is a much, much larger issue here, one that has been lingering for decades, awaiting a chance to be addressed, and that's what this referendum is about. It predates UKIP, it predates the recent immigration issue, the 'what do we do with Islam' debate, etc. The issue isn't even the economy, as (again) I've stated above. The economy is clearly an important part of society, but this referendum is not about the economy. What's it about?



What I would hope, is to hear you talk about that question - about the changes in how our society might/could be/should be governed, and decidedly not about UKIP or any other political party, or the possible immediate effects on the economy (of which there's been plenty of talk already). I'd like to hear the central issue discussed.

But again until the leave campaign acknowledges how important the far right is to how we got here,or basically says in plain English what concessions they will be making to them, you cannot simply brush it under the carpet. Plus the Far Right preceded UKIP - the latter is just the PR friendly face of the Far Right. The same arguments that they were making were in full flow during the 1960s and 1970s too. The economy is of central importance on top of this as the Far Right have always done well during recessions.

Why do you think the referendum has only COME NOW,during a big recession and the Far Right gaining millions of votes?

There is a distinct lack of noise from the leave campaign about this.

Also,I have not seen any good so far arguments about Britain's new role as a standalone nation,despite countries forging together closer and closer ties everywhere else.

I want to know what the business plan for the leave campaign is - what steps are the economists of the new standalone UK proposing they do in the next 5 years?? What is their business plan or even a rough outline of what they will do say from 2016 onwards if we decide to leave the EU. Not the polished PR best case scenario one liners on their FAQ.

We aleady know,to a somewhat better degree,what is happening now and where it is heading. Since we are going into uncharted waters,where is the risk assessments in the worst case scenario from them when we leave the EU?

Edit!!

And as I said before many of us will need to agree to disagree. I don't think I can anything new about how I feel about his,and it will be just repeating the same things again and again.

Our viewpoints our fundamentally incompatible.

Many of you want to leave,I honestly don't see the point and I will probably never agree with you.

It might surprise you - but I was a bit more Euroskeptic myself,maybe 7 to 8 years ago. But as time progressed and I saw how much this issue was an important focal point for the Far Right,I soon realised they would be the ones calling the shots and I was correct. It would have consequences.

Moreover,as I repeated quite a few times,I think this referendum is a distraction for our political parties to be seen to do "something" and in the end won't really be the easy fix to all the problems which are affecting this country.

People will just get their pound of flesh,and that will appease them for the next few years,while the "Brexit re-adjustment period" or whatever the political parties will call it kicks in. Everything is greener on the other side.

[Corky34]

Riiight. But either way the leave campaigners will have to make concessions to their views and their platform - it is down to them and their supporters this referendum happened so concessions will need to be made.

I didn't even mention the leave campaigners or concessions.
I was merely pointing out that the far right (IMO) don't hate people because of their race, they hate anyone that's not them.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I didn't even mention the leave campaigners or concessions.
I was merely pointing out that the far right (IMO) don't hate people because of their race, they hate anyone that's not them.

Racial purity is a common theme on the Far Right - go onto Stormfront(or any of the other websites of a similar level) which is one of the major Far Right websites on the internet,and just see their attitudes about race and racial purity. These are very deep seated views which have been pandered about even a century ago by the forefathers of the modern movements about Eugenics. The modern Far Right movement around the world has made a lot of strides to try and shake off that image,by rebranding itself,which has been quite successful. There has been a lot written about it - I am sure you can find out more about it!!

But in the end whether you consider UKIP/Far Right xenophobic or racist, they are an integral part of the leave campaign in the UK and have been for decades. Concessions will need to be made.

We will need to agree to disagree - I don't want to have an argument for another 10 pages on whether the Far Right is "just" xenophobic or racist. They are just as bad as each other!!

[SeriousSam]

Cat

When I said no disrespect I meant it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion irrespective of it's validity. However, everyone also has to accept that "how" they express that opinion is important as well. Otherwise discussions end up being nothing more than "my dads bigger than your dad" childish ranting. So did I "phrase" my responses in such a way as to highlight that, i.e. make them emotively contentious... guilty as charged. Now judging by your response you found that tone irksome and perhaps to an extent upsetting. Well guess what... that is how the tone of some of your posts come across; certainly to me and potentially to others. Am I threatened by your views, not in the slightest. I've spent a lifetime living and working with some of the most bloody minded intellectual debaters you could ever meet; my family meal discussions make Hoyle vs. Ryle look like a picnic.

The problem with all this is that what is actually written becomes secondary to the perception of intent behind. So anything interesting a person may have to say is lost as the reader zeroes in on the parts which annoy them the most. Thus, when your initial foray into this discussion includes a rant about blame-gaming Europe as if this situation is a simple black and white discussion. Then I'm afraid that perceptually there is no difference between you and the vociferous members of UKIP you seem so annoyed by.

Now your perception of the debate may be framed from personal experience such that "blaming the EU" is central to the desire to leave. However, that doesn't make it true for everyone by any stretch. Ultimately I think that a united Europe including the UK is in all our interests, but at this point in time I believe we have a political system which is actually detrimental to the "health" of Europe. Hence, my reasons for leave are not based on some irrational antipathy towards Europe but rather not wanting to be subsumed into the aforementioned broken system. You can argue that it would be better to stay in and fix the situation, but my counter would be that they are so single-minded of purpose it is pointless.

Admittedly I don't know for certain that it is pointless, just as one cannot say for definite that it could be fixed. These things have to be judged as best as you can based on words and actions. Personally, as indicated in my previous post, it seems to me that the "EU leadership" are of the Rousseau mindset, i.e. sometimes the political elite have to force through change against the will of the people because they don't know what is best for them. Now whilst it may be true that there are circumstances when you have to push through policies which are unpopular because it is the right think to do. However, there are situations when it will just make things worse and this is one of them. If there is one thing guaranteed to provoke an aggressive response it is demeaning peoples sense of identity, particularly in regard to collective philosophy or beliefs.

At this point in time trying to politically / economically harmonise Europe is pretty much akin to trying to condense Christianity back into one set of interpretations. The philosophical and political differences between the countries at a gestalt level are both far too large and at times contrary to overcome. Yes we all need to work together as we face difficulties that affect us all. However, that doesn't always mean singular solutions for the entirety of Europe which is far too much the case presently. So until the upper political echelons in Europe grasp this fact I'd rather we as a country had the opportunity to choose our own way, even if it means hardship and mistakes on occasion.

[Corky34]

We will need to agree to disagree - I don't want to have an argument for another 10 pages on whether the Far Right is "just" xenophobic or racist. They are just as bad as each other!!

I wasn't disagreeing with you, i was just trying to point out that the far right are an equal opportunities hater/blamer, if it wasn't someones race it would their religion, or their social standing, or their wealth, their hair color, the car they drive, or any other reason that marks someone out as not "them"

[SeriousSam]

I wasn't disagreeing with you, i was just trying to point out that the far right are an equal opportunities hater/blamer, if it wasn't someones race it would their religion, or their social standing, or their wealth, their hair color, the car they drive, or any other reason that marks someone out as not "them"

Both the far left and right exhibit this type of behaviour, because their perception of reality is warped to such an extent that any differing viewpoint is "heresy" and those that hold them are an "anathema".

[Andy3536]

Worth a look:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politic...endum-36087583

Now even the US is wading into it. Funny that.

This is sounding more and more like the Scottish referendum(waits for mouldy Haggis to be flung in general direction now).

The article that i posted, was not just about the impending doom of the eurozone.

One of the things that the pro EU camp seem to ignore is the lack of democracy that that the EU has or is willing to let it's members have.
The article pointed out that austerity is unpopular in a number of the struggling countries, but despite that austerity is imposed upon them by the EU. Greece even had a referendum, voted against the bailout conditions, just to have tougher conditions imposed anyway.
It's a great organisation that bullys it's smaller members.

Don't just take my word for it.
Yanis Varoufakis, former Greek finance minister.

The European Union is a "monster", which is deeply contemptuous of the democratic process

And now the US are trying to do something similar, they're trying to get the UK to accept something, which they themselves would never dream of doing. Unbelievable hypocrisy.

I don't look upon the EU vote as vote to make sure we earn every penny that we possibly can. There are bigger, more important issues than money. I see it as an opportunity to rid ourselves of an undemocratic, bureaucratic system that is failing it's members both financially and democratically. And it will never change.
Why is it acceptable, for the EU to force austerity on Greece when the people voted against it? Why is it acceptable, for Germany to insist Greece uses it's bailout money to spend a fortune on military procurement from them at a time public spending is slashed?
What happens when such decisions are aimed at us?
The Dutch aslo recently voted against the EU - Ukraine association agreement, does anybody think that referendum will be listened to?
Why do people want to be part of such an organisation? I don't get it.

[Corky34]

I've never understood the claim that the EU lacks democracy, aren't all the MEPs, President of the European Council, President of the European Commission, and the President of the European Parliament all elected?

Yes Greece didn't get their way but when your dealing with 27 other states you have to get their support if you want them to vote your way, it seems like saying the UK parliament is undemocratic because they a majority vote for something you didn't want.

[Andy3536]

I've never understood the claim that the EU lacks democracy, aren't all the MEPs, President of the European Council, President of the European Commission, and the President of the European Parliament all elected?

Yes Greece didn't get their way but when your dealing with 27 other states you have to get their support if you want them to vote your way, it seems like saying the UK parliament is undemocratic because they a majority vote for something you didn't want.

What Greece were voting for was a way in which their government would be running their country. The EU decided that couldn't be allowed, fair?

The EU commission hold the majority of the power and make the important decisions in the EU. They are not elected. Even the president of the EU commission, who was 'elected' was done so in a farce.
Because alot of the Eurozone countries rely on German support, being the strongest econemy in the eurozone. When Germany put foward a candidate for president of the EU council, a staunch federalist. Natrally everyone in the EU gasped and said what a silly idea that was (a little paraphrasing, but you get the gist)
But as everyone knew the vote would follow what Germany wanted, Junker was the only name on the ballot paper. Democratic?

The MEPs that are elected, have very little power. There are now very large numbers of anti EU MEPs in position from right accross Europe voted for by the people. What have they managed to achive?
Have the EU decided to change their ways and become a better organisation? Have they tried to address the issues that have led to large numbers of anti EU MEPs being elected?

Now, i've never voted for UKIP, or Farage. But he does give an explanation of the EU commission that's worth a watch.


Then of course, there's the string of Democratic referendums held in many coutries that have simply been ignored by the EU. Is that democratic?

[TooNice]

Either way, we wouldn't have had 40 years of squabbles at home, and sitting on the fence at EU meetings like a disgraced uncle at a family party, not sure he really wants to be there, and everybody else knowing he's not sure. Nor are they.

If the "Stay" vote wins, how will it affect our involvement with the EU? For instance are will going to have to be more of a team player? Or is going to be status-quo albeit with everyone knowing why we are sitting at the table in the first place?

[Corky34]

What Greece were voting for was a way in which their government would be running their country. The EU decided that couldn't be allowed, fair?

It may not be fair but that's what Greece signed up for, to be part of a union of 27 other countries, if Greece didn't want that then they shouldn't have joined or bite the bullet and leave, it seems like saying just because, for example, i don't like paying council tax that i should be allowed not to pay it, that's not how being part of a community works though, that's not how the democratic process works, if you don't agree with something you either leave or attempt to sway that democratic process to support your position.

The EU commission hold the majority of the power and make the important decisions in the EU. They are not elected. Even the president of the EU commission, who was 'elected' was done so in a farce.

And from what i understand the EU commission is made up from 28 commissioners that are nominated by their member state, and all the EU commission does is propose legislation, implement decisions, upholds EU treaties and manages the day-to-day business of the EU, if you, as an individual, don't like the commissioner that your government nominated then exercise your democratic right and don't vote for that government into power.

Because alot of the Eurozone countries rely on German support, being the strongest econemy in the eurozone. When Germany put foward a candidate for president of the EU council, a staunch federalist. Natrally everyone in the EU gasped and said what a silly idea that was (a little paraphrasing, but you get the gist)
But as everyone knew the vote would follow what Germany wanted, Junker was the only name on the ballot paper. Democratic?

Again this is just my understanding so I'm happy to be corrected but from my understanding the president of the EU commission hold little practical power, i.e he can't force the 28 commissioners to change their stance on a subject.

The MEPs that are elected, have very little power. There are now very large numbers of anti EU MEPs in position from right accross Europe voted for by the people. What have they managed to achive?
Have the EU decided to change their ways and become a better organisation? Have they tried to address the issues that have led to large numbers of anti EU MEPs being elected?

If some MEPs haven't achieved much then i would say that's more a reflection on them than the democratic process, there's a lot of anti-austerity MPs that have been elected to our own houses of Parliament yet they haven't managed to prevent austerity, does that make our Parliament undemocratic?

Now, i've never voted for UKIP, or Farage. But he does give an explanation of the EU commission that's worth a watch.

I guess that video was the famous Farage rant of who are you, who are you, something more suited for the football terraces than the democratic process, and defiantly not a way to win friends and influence people.

Look I'm not saying the EU is perfect, it's not, but you get out what you put in and if we, as the people, keep electing governments and MEPs that either don't or can't do what we want then whose fault is that?

[Andy3536]

It may not be fair but that's what Greece signed up for, to be part of a union of 27 other countries, if Greece didn't want that then they shouldn't have joined or bite the bullet and leave, it seems like saying just because, for example, i don't like paying council tax that i should be allowed not to pay it, that's not how being part of a community works though, that's not how the democratic process works, if you don't agree with something you either leave or attempt to sway that democratic process to support your position.

This one could go round and round in circles, but i really doubt this is what Greece signed up for. It's also a great example of how the EU steps in to force national governments to run their finances exactly how the EU say they should. That's not something they signed up for, and not something they ever should be asked to do. Nor should they be forced to keep spending on military procurment from Germany using bailout money, from Germany that they now need to pay back.

And from what i understand the EU commission is made up from 28 commissioners that are nominated by their member state, and all the EU commission does is propose legislation, implement decisions, upholds EU treaties and manages the day-to-day business of the EU, if you, as an individual, don't like the commissioner that your government nominated then exercise your democratic right and don't vote for that government into power.

Hmm, yes it's really that easy? The simple fact is, there's little desire from most across Europe for closer and closer political integration, but the EU commission keep forcing it that way year after year. The will of the people is not important here. The fact is, these are teh people that hold the real power and make the decisions in the EU, those decisions are made without accountability to the people of Europe at all. All the leaders of the main political parties are pro EU aswell, so what change will that have?

Again this is just my understanding so I'm happy to be corrected but from my understanding the president of the EU council hold little practical power, i.e he can't force the 28 commissioners to change their stance on a subject.

Talking about the president of the EU commission, not the president of the EU council

If some MEPs haven't achieved much then i would say that's more a reflection on them than the democratic process, there's a lot of anti-austerity MPs that have been elected to our own houses of Parliament yet they haven't managed to prevent austerity, does that make our Parliament undemocratic?

So you give them little power, then blame them for not being able to do anything? If MEPs have little say in the direction of Europe, holding them accountable for it's direction seems wrong.
As for our parliament, Conservatives were voted in with a clear majority, so that makes their decisions democratic. Yes there are a few anti austerity MPs, but as they're still a minority, it's something that if you voted for you need to accept.

I guess that video was the famous Farage rant of who are you, who are you, something more suited for the football terraces than the democratic process, and defiantly not a way to win friends and influence people.

Look I'm not saying the EU is perfect, it's not, but you get out what you put in and if we, as the people, keep electing governments and MEPs that either don't or can't do what we want then whose fault is that?

No, it's not the same video at all.

The EU, if it ever wanted to work properly, needs to completly tear up it's structure and start again.

There's still also the idea, that on more than a few occasions referendums have been held at national level to reject one treaty or another. Which have simply been ignored.

[Corky34]

This one could go round and round in circles, but i really doubt this is what Greece signed up for. It's also a great example of how the EU steps in to force national governments to run their finances exactly how the EU say they should. That's not something they signed up for, and not something they ever should be asked to do. Nor should they be forced to keep spending on military procurment from Germany using bailout money, from Germany that they now need to pay back.

I would argue that's exactly what they signed up for when they joined the EU, something i personally don't think they should've done, and something that should've been refused by the EU for reasons that have since become clear.

Hmm, yes it's really that easy? The simple fact is, there's little desire from most across Europe for closer and closer political integration, but the EU commission keep forcing it that way year after year. The will of the people is not important here. The fact is, these are teh people that hold the real power and make the decisions in the EU, those decisions are made without accountability to the people of Europe at all. All the leaders of the main political parties are pro EU aswell, so what change will that have?

There may be no desire from most across Europe for closer and closer political integration now but that wasn't always the case, it's easy to join a club when times are good but you can't then complain when things go bad just because you didn't realise what you were getting into, or if things didn't turn out as you expected.

If the EU commission is forcing something year after year then (IMO) we only have ourselves to blame, we were the ones that put the governments in place that put forward an EU commissioner, in the UK we elected the Conservatives with David Cameron as PM and he nominated Lord Hill, maybe if we, as a population took more interest in EU politics each party would put who they'd nominate as EU commissioner in their manifesto, but they don't (afaik) because there's no interest in that sort of thing.

Talking about the president of the EU commission, not the president of the EU council

Sorry my mistake, i meant to say commission not council, I'll go correct it now.

So you give them little power, then blame them for not being able to do anything? If MEPs have little say in the direction of Europe, holding them accountable for it's direction seems wrong.
As for our parliament, Conservatives were voted in with a clear majority, so that makes their decisions democratic. Yes there are a few anti austerity MPs, but as they're still a minority, it's something that if you voted for you need to accept.

They have plenty of power, they're (afaik) the ones that either pass or block a proposal, just like in the UK parliament if you can get enough MPs to support your opinion you can prevent something from happening, just like when the UK parliament voted on whether to bomb Syria, the government wanted to but there was enough opposition to prevent it.

No, it's not the same video at all.

The EU, if it ever wanted to work properly, needs to completly tear up it's structure and start again.

There's still also the idea, that on more than a few occasions referendums have been held at national level to reject one treaty or another. Which have simply been ignored.

Apologies i tend to automatically dismiss what Mr Farage says as normally he uses a lot of hyperbole, rhetoric, and scaremongering, having watched it i would agree with what he said about the EU commission being the one that proposes and amends everything and that's not good, it's not undemocratic though as what they propose and the amendments they make are either rejected or passed by MEPs in the European Parliament, i say it's not good because (afaik) the majority of what is proposed by the EU commission is blocked by the European Parliament so in effect they make the EU commission inefficacious.

Maybe i look at the whole EU thing slightly differently, yes it's not perfect, yes it needs to change, but that change is only going to come (IMO) if we the people vote for MEPs and governments that support the change we want to see, if you or i believe MEPs should be able to propose legislation, make amendments, or that the EU commission doesn't reflect how we want things done then it's down to us to ask what our politicians views are on those subjects so we can make informed choices come election time.

[Andy3536]

Maybe i look at the whole EU thing slightly differently, yes it's not perfect, yes it needs to change, but that change is only going to come (IMO) if we the people vote for MEPs and governments that support the change we want to see, if you or i believe MEPs should be able to propose legislation, make amendments, or that the EU commission doesn't reflect how we want things done then it's down to us to ask what our politicians views are on those subjects so we can make informed choices come election time.

For the most part, i'm just going to agree to disagree....

But, as an optimist, you clearly believe teh EU can be changed if we stay in. If i believed that, i would be on the fence about this vote. But i don't.

Just look at the constitution, regected by France and the Netherlands. Imposed as the treaty of Lisbon.
It's the same thing, but don't believe me. Quote from Angela Merkel

The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact

She has also said that the EU is aloud to move at a different pace, but always heading towards closer Union.
Also, something from the EU visitor center in Brussels.

National sovereignty is the root cause of most of the evils of our time. The only final remedy for this supreme and catastrophic evil is a federal union of the peoples

I simply can't believe this institution will ever change for the good, so can't vote to stay in. It's that simple for me.

[Corky34]

But, as an optimist, you clearly believe teh EU can be changed if we stay in. If i believed that, i would be on the fence about this vote. But i don't.

I'm a long, long way from being an optimist, if anything I'd say I'm a pessimist, but I'm also pragmatist and as such i don't believe the EU, for all it's faults, is something that's done to us, something we don't have a say in, or something that's responsible for whatever predicament we may find ourselves in, ultimately (IMO) it's our politicians, from all sides, that are to blame, and also ours for not taking them to task over the EU.