Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[Eloquent pilgrim]

3 minutes ago, tebee said:

The government’s entire position continues to be the wholly illusory fantasy that it is possible to be both outside the EU and yet, in some magical way, to continue to enjoy most of the benefits of being a member.

 

It’s important to understand this central fact: Brexit is in many people’s view undesirable, but the form in which it is being pursued, even if it were desirable, is impossible.

 

Yet whilst pursuing a course which, to get anywhere near achieving it, would require maximum flexibility from the EU, goodwill has been shredded by bellicose rhetoric, accusations of punishment, and hostility and suspicion about ‘the other side’. Perhaps the most damaging aspect of the British approach has been the way that immediately after have reached the phase 1 agreement senior Brexiters, including David Davis, seemed to imply that they were not bound by it.

 

It is important to keep remembering what happened during the referendum, because the claims made during the campaign, and the claims made about the campaign since then, continue to structure the current debate.

 

It has become fashionable to say that both campaigns were equally dishonest, but that simply is not so. Leave mainlined on what even they admitted was a lie about the EU budget contribution and NHS funding, and another lie about impending Turkish membership of the EU.

 

And these were just the headline lies. Beneath them were a myriad of others, such as that future terms could be sorted out informally before Article 50 was even triggered so there was no danger of a cliff-edge fallout; that the Irish border would be unaffected; or that a good, quick exit deal was assured because ‘German car makers’ would insist on it as endlessly claimed by Brexiters, including businessman Peter Hargreaves who paid for a leaflet to be sent to every UK household at the start of the campaign urging a leave vote.

 

No one has ever been held to account for these and all the other lies told during the campaign. Since then, we’ve also learned enough about the conduct of the Leave campaign and possible Russian interference to, at the very least, place a cloud over the legitimacy of the result.

 

By contrast, Remain was certainly pedestrian and passionless, but its projections (based on assumptions and models, of course, but not lies) of the consequences were not ‘Project Fear’, as repetitively and routinely alleged, but attempts to counter the vague and unsubstantiated claims of Leave that all would be well, or even rosy, if we left. It’s notable that such claims have since been repudiated by many Brexiters, most recently Nigel Farage.

 

There are reams that could, have been, and will be written about all this. The outcome we know: a narrow victory for leave. The narrowness is important as it means there was never the unequivocal result subsequently claimed. That is why the Brexiters constantly talk about it having been the biggest vote in British history – meaning the total number of votes cast was the highest – as if that implied an overwhelming vote for Brexit. In fact, the most accurate way of describing the result would be that the country replied ‘we don’t really know’.

 

Moreover, the combination of Leave’s lies and their failure to specify what leaving meant in terms of the future means that there is not (as many Leavers seem to sense) any real mandate for Brexit, and certainly not hard Brexit. Many leading leavers campaigned on the basis of staying in the single market, for all that they deny it now. Others, like Michael Gove, talked ambiguously of being part of a “free trade zone that extends from Iceland to the Russian border” whilst making no budget payments and having no ECJ jurisdiction. If that meant anything, it meant being, like Iceland, in EFTA/EEA.

 

From these lies, ambiguities and confusions much has flowed. Crucially, the fact that Britain voted against being in the EU but not for anything else. The claims now made by Brexiters that the vote itself mandated hard Brexit (in the sense of leaving the single market and any form of customs union) is very easily disproved. If it were true, it would not have taken seven months of argument and speculation before this meaning was announced by Theresa May in her Lancaster House speech of January 2017.

tebee, would you be kind enough to tell me where this quote is from, because you have not named a source .... thanks 

[tebee]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Quite.

 

I'm so tired of the various excuses as to various influences....

 

It's not that hard to understand that a majority of the populace were finally given a chance to vote on the eu, and voted against it.

The problem is that the version of leave that was promised during the referendum campaign is not available in the real world.

 

So do we leave on much worse terms - which will only cause us to want to re-join - or pause and consider the options ?

 

[tebee]

11 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

This is the only FACT you need to concern yourself with is.

 

The UK IS LEAVING the EU.

 

Get used to it, stop your bleating and start making plans for what you need to do when this happens.

IF it happens it will be a disaster and soon reversed  

[The Renegade]

8 minutes ago, tebee said:

The problem is that the version of leave that was promised during the referendum campaign is not available in the real world.

Time for a stunning revelation tebee.

 

The only promise I listened to during the Referendum was

 

'' Leave means Leave '' I took that to mean in its entirety. Rip up the whole lot and start from scratch.

[The Renegade]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

IF it happens it will be a disaster and soon reversed  

Yes, it will certainly be a disaster for the EU, not so sure about it being reversed though.

[Grouse]

46 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The continentals cannot make beautiful wings - this idea will never fly! ✈️

Icarus gmbh?

[Kieran00001]

14 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Nope

 

What is causing the chaos is remainers.

 

Referendum - Vote to leave or vote to remain.

It was not a legally binding referendum

 

Since then, nothing but a hard or a soft boiled Brexit, which was not on the ballot paper.

 

Staying in the SM / CU was not on the ballot paper, remaining in either is not leaving the EU.

 

The ECJ was not on the ballot paper, now its instrumental to remainers.

 

It woz the Russians that done it. Ohhh no, wait a minute, it might have been Cambridge Analytica that done it.

 

Wah Wah Wah

Quote

52 - 48 is not decisive.

Quote

 In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. 

You can't blame Farage's pledge on Remainers.

 

Quote

Staying in the SM / CU was not on the ballot paper, remaining in either is not leaving the EU.

Quote

“The EU’s supporters say ‘we must have access to the Single Market’. Britain will have access to the Single Market after we vote leave”.

"Our trade will almost certainly continue with the EU on similar to current circumstances"

“there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market”

You can't blame the Leave Campaigns promises on Remainers.

 

Quote

It woz the Russians that done it. Ohhh no, wait a minute, it might have been Cambridge Analytica that done it

Quote

“When we said we’d hired Cambridge Analytica, maybe a better choice of words could have been ‘deployed’ there,” said Banks

You can't blame the Leave campaign financier's admission on Remainers.

 

Ever heard the expression, follow the money?  Banks tweeted on 17 July 2016 : “I am buying gold at the moment & big mining stocks.” 

[Grouse]

34 minutes ago, tebee said:

The government’s entire position continues to be the wholly illusory fantasy that it is possible to be both outside the EU and yet, in some magical way, to continue to enjoy most of the benefits of being a member.

 

It’s important to understand this central fact: Brexit is in many people’s view undesirable, but the form in which it is being pursued, even if it were desirable, is impossible.

 

Yet whilst pursuing a course which, to get anywhere near achieving it, would require maximum flexibility from the EU, goodwill has been shredded by bellicose rhetoric, accusations of punishment, and hostility and suspicion about ‘the other side’. Perhaps the most damaging aspect of the British approach has been the way that immediately after have reached the phase 1 agreement senior Brexiters, including David Davis, seemed to imply that they were not bound by it.

 

It is important to keep remembering what happened during the referendum, because the claims made during the campaign, and the claims made about the campaign since then, continue to structure the current debate.

 

It has become fashionable to say that both campaigns were equally dishonest, but that simply is not so. Leave mainlined on what even they admitted was a lie about the EU budget contribution and NHS funding, and another lie about impending Turkish membership of the EU.

 

And these were just the headline lies. Beneath them were a myriad of others, such as that future terms could be sorted out informally before Article 50 was even triggered so there was no danger of a cliff-edge fallout; that the Irish border would be unaffected; or that a good, quick exit deal was assured because ‘German car makers’ would insist on it as endlessly claimed by Brexiters, including businessman Peter Hargreaves who paid for a leaflet to be sent to every UK household at the start of the campaign urging a leave vote.

 

No one has ever been held to account for these and all the other lies told during the campaign. Since then, we’ve also learned enough about the conduct of the Leave campaign and possible Russian interference to, at the very least, place a cloud over the legitimacy of the result.

 

By contrast, Remain was certainly pedestrian and passionless, but its projections (based on assumptions and models, of course, but not lies) of the consequences were not ‘Project Fear’, as repetitively and routinely alleged, but attempts to counter the vague and unsubstantiated claims of Leave that all would be well, or even rosy, if we left. It’s notable that such claims have since been repudiated by many Brexiters, most recently Nigel Farage.

 

There are reams that could, have been, and will be written about all this. The outcome we know: a narrow victory for leave. The narrowness is important as it means there was never the unequivocal result subsequently claimed. That is why the Brexiters constantly talk about it having been the biggest vote in British history – meaning the total number of votes cast was the highest – as if that implied an overwhelming vote for Brexit. In fact, the most accurate way of describing the result would be that the country replied ‘we don’t really know’.

 

Moreover, the combination of Leave’s lies and their failure to specify what leaving meant in terms of the future means that there is not (as many Leavers seem to sense) any real mandate for Brexit, and certainly not hard Brexit. Many leading leavers campaigned on the basis of staying in the single market, for all that they deny it now. Others, like Michael Gove, talked ambiguously of being part of a “free trade zone that extends from Iceland to the Russian border” whilst making no budget payments and having no ECJ jurisdiction. If that meant anything, it meant being, like Iceland, in EFTA/EEA.

 

From these lies, ambiguities and confusions much has flowed. Crucially, the fact that Britain voted against being in the EU but not for anything else. The claims now made by Brexiters that the vote itself mandated hard Brexit (in the sense of leaving the single market and any form of customs union) is very easily disproved. If it were true, it would not have taken seven months of argument and speculation before this meaning was announced by Theresa May in her Lancaster House speech of January 2017.

Excellent analysis

[nauseus]

45 minutes ago, tebee said:

There is a significant difference between the world as leavers see it and reality - That is what is causing the chaos 

Or, there is a significant difference between the EU, and reality.

[HAKAPALITA]

Airbus factory, and the new planes suffer from Mice infestations.Why doesnt Boeing.?.

[Grouse]

34 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Quite.

 

I'm so tired of the various excuses as to various influences....

 

It's not that hard to understand that a majority of the populace were finally given a chance to vote on the eu, and voted against it.

Ultimately it was a protest vote by those not doing so well. The EU was the wrong target

[transam]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Excellent analysis

You wrote it...?

[The Renegade]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Or, there is a significant difference between the EU, and reality.

Funny you should say that. I was just reading this:

 

Quote

Fishmongers at the picturesque Vieux-Port area of Marseille are up in arms after inspectors fined them hundreds of euros for breaching EU rules by not displaying the Latin name of the fish on their stalls.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/23/french-fishmongers-furious-handed-eu-fines-not-showing-latin/

 

Apparently it is to do with this

 

Quote

EU regulation No. 1379/2013 

Which is great if you can read Latin ??

 

EU brilliance at its best ??

Edited June 24, 2018 by The Renegade

[nauseus]

39 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Nice cut and paste job tebee.

 

There is not a snowballs chance in hell that this came from you.

The bilk bulk seems to come from the Chris Grey blog! Nice piece tebee!

Edited June 24, 2018 by nauseus
bilk bulk

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, transam said:

You wrote it...?

Chris Grey posted it.

[Voodoochile]

Stop "drowning the fish" what caused chaos in Britain long before the brexit is mass Muslim immigration it is by far the biggest problem in Western Europe today. 

[tebee]

20 minutes ago, Voodoochile said:

Stop "drowning the fish" what caused chaos in Britain long before the brexit is mass Muslim immigration it is by far the biggest problem in Western Europe today. 

But most of our Muslim population originally comes from our colonies, so is nothing to do with the EU.

[Voodoochile]

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

But most of our Muslim population originally comes from our colonies, so is nothing to do with the EU.

 

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

But most of our Muslim population originally comes from our colonies, so is nothing to do with the EU.

The topic is about the chaos brexit has caused in Britain.

Who mentioned anything about the EU??

 

[tebee]

16 minutes ago, Voodoochile said:

 

The topic is about the chaos brexit has caused in Britain.

Who mentioned anything about the EU??

 

the Brexit in the title ? 

[nauseus]

29 minutes ago, tebee said:

But most of our Muslim population originally comes from our colonies, so is nothing to do with the EU.

Yes it is, if we stay in and people like Merkel keep throwing out invitations to everyone. 

[nauseus]

18 minutes ago, Voodoochile said:

 

The topic is about the chaos brexit has caused in Britain.

Who mentioned anything about the EU??

 

Brexit involves the UK leaving the EU. The chaos is caused by our membership of a chaotic club.

[Voodoochile]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

the Brexit in the title ? 

"Chaos in britain" "britain" that is what I was comenting about.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Voodoochile

[tebee]

Just now, nauseus said:

Brexit involves the UK leaving the EU. The chaos is caused by our membership of a chaotic club.

The Chaos is caused by not knowing how to leave without wrecking the economy .

 

The government’s  position continues to be the wholly illusory fantasy that it is possible to be both outside the EU and yet, in some magical way, to continue to enjoy most of the benefits of being a member - it ain't.

 

 

[Voodoochile]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

The Chaos is caused by not knowing how to leave without wrecking the economy .

 

The government’s  position continues to be the wholly illusory fantasy that it is possible to be both outside the EU and yet, in some magical way, to continue to enjoy most of the benefits of being a member - it ain't.

 

 

Could you name some of those benefits please?

[tebee]

1 minute ago, Voodoochile said:

Could you name some of those benefits please?

Single market.

Not having to run our own agencies 

 

Two to start.

[nauseus]

11 minutes ago, tebee said:

The Chaos is caused by not knowing how to leave without wrecking the economy .

 

The government’s  position continues to be the wholly illusory fantasy that it is possible to be both outside the EU and yet, in some magical way, to continue to enjoy most of the benefits of being a member - it ain't.

 

 

The chaos is due to an inflexible, political, project that has mutated out of the simply described "common market", as it was generally perceived to be in the UK in the 1970's. The protectionist single market and other evolved and tangled mechanisms of the EU make it difficult for any member to quit in an orderly way.

 

The chaos is also due to an EU that can't face losing its second highest net contributor, which would not only actually reverse the recent expansion and influence of the EU but, most importantly, set a precedent for other members to leave. That would be the end of the project.

 

I don't think anyone realised how difficult an exit would be, even the EU Commissioners themselves!  I expect the next EU Treaty to have Article 50 removed! Time to go.

[HAKAPALITA]

The chaos is due to an inflexible, political, project that has mutated out of the simply described "common market", as it was generally perceived to be in the UK in the 1970's. The protectionist single market and other evolved and tangled mechanisms of the EU make it difficult for any member to quit in an orderly way.
 
The chaos is also due to an EU that can't face losing its second highest net contributor, which would not only actually reverse the recent expansion and influence of the EU but, most importantly, set a precedent for other members to leave. That would be the end of the project.
 
I don't think anyone realised how difficult an exit would be, even the EU Commissioners themselves!  I expect the next EU Treaty to have Article 50 removed! Time to go.

If you understand the proven facts behind The Law of Diminishing Returns, its not hard to see why the idle cant prosper if youBrits leave.That includes the likes of Branson too.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[RuamRudy]

4 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

So I now have both yourself and Grouse telling me to read up on Transactional Analysis, the implication being that I have no knowledge of it, which is incorrect, as well as being off topic, but I did not instigate the discussion about it.

 

Can you tell me how it might reveal to me why some take the tone with me that they do, which is your second implication, so I hope you can.

 

Dr. Eric Berne who developed transactional analysis made special note of the complexities of human communication, highlighting the fact that facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice and body language are regarded as more important than the actual words spoken or written. He also said that external influences particularly from parents or other adults in parent-like roles, can be a great influence in early childhood.

 

So, considering that you know absolutely nothing about me, and cannot see any of my facial expressions or body language, I am genuinely interested to know how you feel you can use this extremely complex and interesting subject to make a judgement on me.

 

I won’t bother asking Grouse, because he just uses this type of ploy to try and insult or bait people, whilst staying under the radar of the moderators. I hope you are not stooping to the same dark arts, still at least you managed to spell Transactional correctly, which is more than our resident expert on the subject could do.   

There is an aspect to TA that is not covered in the article you quoted - that of the expected response from the person with whom you are having a dialogue.

 

Basically, whenever you are communicating with anybody, you subconsciously anticipate the type of response you will receive - and generally you tend to be correct in that assumption. So if you go in aggressively, you will most likely receive an aggressive response, but you tend to know that type of response will come - and that is the point I was making about how possibly you both were encouraging aggression through your posts, each of you ramping up the ante. 

 

There is another interesting aspect to the concept - where the response of the other person is not within the range of expected responses, like when you tell a joke and the person you told it to bursts into tears, or you shout aggressively at someone and they respond by laughing like a madman. These may be genuine responses from those who are a bit unhinged, but some people, savvy about the concept, use this technique to throw the other person completely. 

 

Anyway, again I go off topic. Back to the bedlam. 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Look at your keyboard. a and s are adjacent. Don't you think a typo is more likely? Do read up on TA, the word adult in this context will take on a different meaning. I appreciate that you think I am expert. Thank you. However I am a mere practitioner.

Yes the a & s are together, as is the u & k! But the e & u??

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

If you understand the proven facts behind The Law of Diminishing Returns, its not hard to see why the idle cant prosper if youBrits leave.That includes the likes of Branson too.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app