(June 16, 2016 at 12:04 pm)paulpablo Wrote: My reasons are that I think the smaller and more concentrated the government organization is the more the government will have the peoples interest at heart.

Really? You think that Johnson, Osbourne and Farage give a damn about the interests of the people? The main reason that the Brexit campaign exists is because a few rich people were worried about losing money and power given the introduction of new protections for workers and improvements to tax-avoidance legislature. A vote for Leave is a vote against the best interests of the UK and its citizens. For once, this is a political no-brainer.

Quote:I think the USA is able to unify easier than the whole of Europe because of geographical, language and cultural solidarity for the most part.

It's largely for historic reasons and inflated senses of patriotism that Europe has a different model. However I personally think that's a bit of a red herring. After all, the US gains its strength by being the 'cultural melting pot', diverse with culture and language, unified (in theory) by common purpose. I see no reason, other than tribalism, why that can't be applied globally.

(June 16, 2016 at 1:02 pm)Ben Davis Wrote:

(June 16, 2016 at 12:04 pm)paulpablo Wrote: My reasons are that I think the smaller and more concentrated the government organization is the more the government will have the peoples interest at heart.

Really? You think that Johnson, Osbourne and Farage give a damn about the interests of the people? The main reason that the Brexit campaign exists is because a few rich people were worried about losing money and power given the introduction of new protections for workers and improvements to tax-avoidance legislature. A vote for Leave is a vote against the best interests of the UK and its citizens. For once, this is a political no-brainer.

Quote:I think the USA is able to unify easier than the whole of Europe because of geographical, language and cultural solidarity for the most part.

It's largely for historic reasons and inflated senses of patriotism that Europe has a different model. However I personally think that's a bit of a red herring. After all, the US gains its strength by being the 'cultural melting pot', diverse with culture and language, unified (in theory) by common purpose. I see no reason, other than tribalism, why that can't be applied globally.

I don't know if David Cameron has the interests of the people at heart either.  My decision isn't based on the people who are at the forefront of the the campaigns, simply about the practicality of a smaller government.

And you have considered all of the economic implications, of course. You know all about the ties and subsidies that would be cut in the case of Brexit.

(June 16, 2016 at 1:09 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I don't know if David Cameron has the interests of the people at heart either.  My decision isn't based on the people who are at the forefront of the the campaigns, simply about the practicality of a smaller government.

We know he doesn't, generally, as demonstrated by Austerity, back-door privatisation of health care & education and his European 'trade renegotiations' but the topic here isn't general UK politics but specifically should the UK maintain its current political associations with the EU or move to a different model. In that respect, we need to consider which position will leave the UK in best shape and that means, amongst other considerations, understanding the motives of those heading the campaigns. As much as I despise Cameron, remaining in Europe is in our best interests, irrespective of who's running the campaigns but the Stay option is highlighted even more by the selfish motivations and lack of foresight of the Leave campaign leadership.

On the subject of small government, yes they're bureaucratically more simple therefore less costly to run, decisions can be made more swiftly thus delivering change more efficiently and individual members of government have more authority therefore greater accountability however they've proven to be a poorer model than gestalt governmental agencies because typically, they make more, poorer decisions faster and wield less effective power in modern global politics.

(June 16, 2016 at 1:02 pm)Ben Davis Wrote: It's largely for historic reasons and inflated senses of patriotism that Europe has a different model. However I personally think that's a bit of a red herring. After all, the US gains its strength by being the 'cultural melting pot', diverse with culture and language, unified (in theory) by common purpose. I see no reason, other than tribalism, why that can't be applied globally.

That would be brilliant if it could be applied but unfortunately I don't see it happening anytime soon - Maybe it's my natural pessimism or the fact I have seen lots of hatred during the short period I have remained alive on this planet. I actually believe independentism and separation of territories is more likely than unification.

Coming from a Portuguese person I can tell you I'm against the EU but my experience is probably different than British people - I'm not against the EU because of immigrants or some sense of nationalism, I'm against the EU because I see it as another oligarchical institution designed to serve the interests of the same old group of people. This is the exact same idea I have of most western politicians and governments. Do you honestly believe the average politician genuinely cares about issues like poverty, inequality, lack of stability and labor rights?

I remember all the austerity measures that started back in 2008 and were imposed by the EU. I believe that those who came up with the EU idea had something brilliant in mind but unfortunately there are secondary interests from third parties ruining what was supposed to be better for all of us. 

Do you want to know what most people around me think when they think of the EU? Austerity, unemployment, poverty, etc - This is why there is a small but growing left-wing faction that is anti-EU, not everyone who is anti-EU needs to be a racist and a nationalist. I honestly want to be pro-EU, but I just can't.

The average person doesn't think excessively about global politics - The average person wants a decent job, a decent life and a bit of freedom. That is all most people request from institutions like the EU. The quality of life in western countries will most likely get worse in the next decades. I simply do not see the EU surviving for very long and I believe this is the most realistic prediction, whether people think it is good or not.

I won't comment on Brexit tough, I'm not british and it's not my business to say if it's better or not for the UK to leave - Tough personally if the UK wishes to leave, so be it.

I'm interested to know whether we will actually leave if the vote goes that way. Has this actually been stated? Or will it just be "taken under advisement" by the government?

Frankly, I'm concerned about the general public being directly responsible for a decision like this. I used to wonder why we didn't have referendums about everything. Now I can see a big reason why not, forgetting practicalities.

The tyranny of the majority is never so clear as when one starts to wonder whether or not they belong to it.

(June 16, 2016 at 3:38 pm)Dystopia Wrote: Coming from a Portuguese person I can tell you I'm against the EU but my experience is probably different than British people - I'm not against the EU because of immigrants or some sense of nationalism, I'm against the EU because I see it as another oligarchical institution designed to serve the interests of the same old group of people. This is the exact same idea I have of most western politicians and governments. Do you honestly believe the average politician genuinely cares about issues like poverty, inequality, lack of stability and labor rights?

Once again, I don't know why I have to stress this over and over, the EU is the sum of the national governments. If it seems like an oligarchy, and it does, it's the national politician's fault. The EU isn't an independent body making independent decisions.

So it's our fault for not holding our national politicians accountable for their fuckups or wilfully detrimental decisions at the EU level.

Voting right wing populists into office certainly isn't the way to do it, since they're not working for the people either. They're working for their own glory by selling fear and resentment to credulous and frightened people. If you scratch the surface of any of these nationalist parties, there's nothing, virtually a void. They have no plans for a globalized economy and how to deal with the effects thereoff, they have no employment plans, they have no plans for foreign policy. All they have is scapegoatery and the myth of leaving the EU to retreat behind the national borders. And nevermind all the subsidies that most countries get from the EU pot, nevermind reinstated duties that have detrimental effects to exports and imports alike. Nevermind that even more international corporations would outsource their business if all of the economical benefits of the European market were gone.

The whole leaving the EU movement, as bad as it is in it's current state, and I'm the last to not admit it, is simplistic down to the level of sheer and undiluted moronism.

(June 16, 2016 at 3:46 pm)robvalue Wrote: I'm interested to know whether we will actually leave if the vote goes that way. Has this actually been stated? Or will it just be "taken under advisement" by the government?

Frankly, I'm concerned about the general public being directly responsible for a decision like this. I used to wonder why we didn't have referendums about everything. Now I can see a big reason why not, forgetting practicalities.

California allows citizens to make laws via referenda. It makes a clusterfuck of state law.

(June 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: California allows citizens to make laws via referenda. It makes a clusterfuck of state law.

Switzerland fairs pretty well with it. Citizens, surprisingly so, often vote for what seems the less popular option. But, then again, the Swiss have that kind of system for a very long time and are conditioned to make up their minds. It's also what I would call, a very silent country. I would be hard pressed to say who's ruling there right now.