that's not my experience of people who support Remain and people who support Brexit. The former tend to be well-educated, moderate, well-informed people, the latter, irrational, impulsive, poorly-informed on the whole. That obviously can't apply to everyone - but then people look for reasons to support their pre-conceived opinions and nothing shakes that belief.

 

What you should understand is that remainers don't CHOOSE to oppose Brexit out of ideology, they do it out of practicality and an assessment of evidence. That is not in any way something that can be applied to Brexiters, most of whom having particular angry whinges about something, while remaining oblivious or unconcerned or both about the problems that exist due to Brexit.

 

That's a little harsh on brexiteers imo - I'm not one of them but I respect their opinion and argue it back 100% with my opinion trying to justify my opinions and trying to alay their fears which remainers haven't been able to do both now or during. The referendum campaign.

What you should understand is that remainers don't CHOOSE to oppose Brexit out of ideology, they do it out of practicality and an assessment of evidence. That is not in any way something that can be applied to Brexiters, most of whom having particular angry whinges about something, while remaining oblivious or unconcerned or both about the problems that exist due to Brexit.

 

Perhaps we have legitimate reasons to be angry, e.g. signing up to what we thought would be just a free-trade area, only to see it morph into an expansionist political entity. The Left usually have major issues with imperialism, but how is EU 'imperialism' different from, say, British Empire imperialism?

 

That's a little harsh on brexiteers imo - I'm not one of them but I respect their opinion and argue it back 100% with my opinion trying to justify my opinions and trying to alay their fears which remainers haven't been able to do both now or during. The referendum campaign.

 

I just wish I could convince people here that my objections to the EU are politically based, not the populist ones claimed here. The only EU immigrants I have ever complained about, are the convicted criminals who seek to avoid deportation by manipulating HR laws - ones that were intended to protect citizens from their governments, NOT criminals from the consequences of their actions!

Well that's fair enough!

Perhaps we have legitimate reasons to be angry, e.g. signing up to what we thought would be just a free-trade area, only to see it morph into an expansionist political entity. The Left usually have major issues with imperialism, but how is EU 'imperialism' different from, say, British Empire imperialism?

 

Because we democratically CHOSE to become members of the organisation WE HELP SET UP AND SET THE RULES FOR, and continue to vote for every change that was mutually agreed.

 

The other was military might imposing it's will and running weaker nations and lands against their wishes.

 

If you can't tell the difference between the two then it's not very flattering on your basic ability to understand simple concepts.

 

Unless you are just confused. Or just saying the first thing that pops into your head in attempts to provoke arguments.

 

I think that covers the options.

How many more times do you need to be told that there was plenty of information available at the time to make clear that the Common Market was more than a free trade area? How is the single market not a logical extension of the free trade area?

Because we democratically CHOSE to become members of the organisation WE HELP SET UP AND SET THE RULES FOR, and continue to vote for every change that was mutually agreed.

 

The other was military might imposing it's will and running weaker nations and lands against their wishes.

 

If you can't tell the difference between the two then it's not very flattering on your basic ability to understand simple concepts.

 

Unless you are just confused. Or just saying the first thing that pops into your head in attempts to provoke arguments.

 

I think that covers the options.

 

By 'we', you mean the gov't, *not* the electorate...

 

I'm not saying there's no difference in *methods* - just in aims.

 

How many more times do you need to be told that there was plenty of information available at the time to make clear that the Common Market was more than a free trade area? How is the single market not a logical extension of the free trade area?

 

There's a difference between info being available and it being *publicised*- that's my point.

 

IMO the very fact that people who could have voted in the 1975 referendum, are now the main core of brexiters, suggests very strongly that I'nm not alone in thinking that we were misled.

I think the concern is people in the U.K. Can see how their MPs stand up for them and change thing but this has been less clear voting in eu elections and only see the drawbacks such as social changes created by free movement between nations of differing development. The eu parliament is so bureaucratic and isn't reported on enough in th uk - apart from the negatives which have been hyped up in the uk press since 1992 and Boris Johnstons Times columns from the late 90s.

By 'we', you mean the gov't, *not* the electorate...

 

I'm not saying there's no difference in *methods* - just in aims.

There's a difference between info being available and it being *publicised*- that's my point.

 

IMO the very fact that people who could have voted in the 1975 referendum, are now the main core of brexiters, suggests very strongly that I'nm not alone in thinking that we were misled.

Who was supposed to publicise it? It was stated very clearly in Commons debates. The PM made it clear in a letter to the electorate. If that wasn't reported widely enough, whose fault is that? Besides, surely the oft-quoted words "ever closer union" in the Treaty of Rome are pretty clear.

Besides, surely the oft-quoted words "ever closer union" in the Treaty of Rome are pretty clear.

 

Yeah right, it means about as much as 'Brexit is Brexit' :rolleyes:

 

Yeah right, it means about as much as 'Brexit is Brexit' :rolleyes:

 

Ever closer union - means a union that is ever-closer.

 

Brexit MEANS Brexit, I think you mean - means a simplistic vote to leave means we can leave in any fashion that the Tory Government chooses to interpret what it means and somehow magically read the minds of everyone who voted Brexit and know instantly what reasons they voted for on every single topic related to every single Brexit topic which magically also happens to be exactly how the government interprets it. Whatever that is. It changes on a daily basis.

 

Simple enough......

By 'we', you mean the gov't, *not* the electorate...

 

I'm not saying there's no difference in *methods* - just in aims.

 

That's not what you said. The various governments were elected by us. How do you propose we deal with other countries? Phone them up individually? Send smoke signals? Morse code novels on every line in every agreement?

 

The British Empire walked in and took lands, killed the native inhabitants, and raided the natural resources without the need for elections of any sort whatsoever, be they British citizens or non-British. Now if any EU countries started invading us (there is precedent) then quite rightly we can a bit uppity about and forcefully express our displeasure. As I recall we were besties with Poland at the time. Oddly enough, Tezza May is also trying to be besties with Poland - for doing away with independent democratic legal systems that can be controlled by politicians. I wonder why that appeals so much to her.....

Ever closer union - means a union that is ever-closer.

 

Brexit MEANS Brexit, I think you mean - means a simplistic vote to leave means we can leave in any fashion that the Tory Government chooses to interpret what it means and somehow magically read the minds of everyone who voted Brexit and know instantly what reasons they voted for on every single topic related to every single Brexit topic which magically also happens to be exactly how the government interprets it. Whatever that is. It changes on a daily basis.

 

Simple enough......

 

But 'ever closer union' is just as vague. Do you really think voters in 1975 would have been as happy if they'd realized that that meant : open borders, our courts being overruled, our economic freedem being undermined, etc?

 

That's not what you said. The various governments were elected by us. How do you propose we deal with other countries? Phone them up individually? Send smoke signals? Morse code novels on every line in every agreement?

 

The British Empire walked in and took lands, killed the native inhabitants, and raided the natural resources without the need for elections of any sort whatsoever, be they British citizens or non-British.

 

At least in that scenario the threat is obvious, and resistance movements can organise - what the EU does is far more insidious, taking over by stealth while fooling people into believing it is benign...

But 'ever closer union' is just as vague. Do you really think voters in 1975 would have been as happy if they'd realized that that meant : open borders, our courts being overruled, our economic freedem being undermined, etc?

You mean those things that have only happened in the Daily Mail's imagination?

You mean those things that have only happened in the Daily Mail's imagination?

 

Whatever the currently approved EU euphemisms are, that *is* what is happening!

 

Whatever the currently approved EU euphemisms are, that *is* what is happening!

Have you really never heard of the word veto?

Have you really never heard of the word veto?

 

If it worked, we wouldn't be leaving the EU in the first place.

Yes we would because of the right wing press.

 

It works.

 

In more can't make it up news, the Daily Mail's front page is a snowflake, tantrum-filled cry of, I kid you not,

 

"Stop Sneering Blue Passports"

 

UNBELIEVABLE 😂😂😂🤣

Yes we would because of the right wing press.

 

It works.

 

In more can't make it up news, the Daily Mail's front page is a snowflake, tantrum-filled cry of, I kid you not,

 

"Stop Sneering Blue Passports"

 

UNBELIEVABLE 😂😂😂🤣

 

It's like they're trolling, and you're falling for it every time. :teresa:

I don't read that trash, so I don't fall for their right wing brainwashing,

But 'ever closer union' is just as vague. Do you really think voters in 1975 would have been as happy if they'd realized that that meant : open borders, our courts being overruled, our economic freedem being undermined, etc?

At least in that scenario the threat is obvious, and resistance movements can organise - what the EU does is far more insidious, taking over by stealth while fooling people into believing it is benign...

1. Yes

2. No it isn't. You are saying murdering swathes of native populations is preferable to democratic changes. You are wrong and your morality is deeply flawed. Before you say "misunderstanding what i say" if that isn't what you believe then correct your sentence, because mass murder and ethic cleansing is evil, and the other situation is at best just annoying to people like you.