A video on the Brexit and why the UK should leave.

[DarkCorp]

It is absolutely hilarious that the lefties here in the states are celebrating Brexit, only focusing on the point of power to the people without even realizing how xenophobia and nationalist sentiments were a major factor in pushing it through.

Ad yes, many are Berners.

 

[Izak]

I figured Brexit would appeal more to those on the right, especially considering Illuminati Confirmed! and Vergil are both American conservatives that seem to be quite happy with the result of the referendum and the whole thing with Obama and Clinton both saying they were disappointed while Trump was quite happy with the result.

 

[DarkCorp]

Well there are levels for both sides.

Funny thing is, Panders is so un-compromising in his platform that it is actually hurting his chances at winning. I mean we have Trump and Hillary. It really shouldn't be THAT hard to beat them by a mile. And don't bring up voter fraud as even john Oliver is laughing at those Berners for that.

That's why the reason for hilarity. The most extreme left candidate supporters are more worried about being proven right in regards to power to the people and less about how fucking flawed people can be.

Hence I am mostly a centrist that leans more often than not to the right. The only 'right', sentiments I have is foreign policy. Leftists would have us disarm and prostrate ourselves before the world thinking all will be forgiven. They will be the most surprised when other countries get some payback as when your at the top, there is nowhere to go but down.

Trump also supports gutting NATO, which is completely asinine in my view. He is willing to stand up to Russia and China only in the business sense while being all to willing to abandon our friends/allies militarily. I haven't seen such a zeal for isolationism since early 20th century America. Once your on top, you stay on top period. None of this Roman bullshit where we do our competitors job for them.

 

[Spacemunkey]

Was I taught incorrectly? Does democracy actually mean 'rule of the people that aren't allowed to change their minds'?

Voting on issues isn't a game demo where you get to try before you buy, the issue was put to the people and decided.

Let us say they would do a second one, more than 75% of the people would vote and more than 60% would want to remain in the EU.
People do mistakes. And people change their minds. Happens all the time. And it would still be democratic.

It would not be Democratic since the vote was already put out there and decided, since when is a democracy best 2 out of 3? Every big issue vote comes with buyers remorse, but what about those who still want to leave after the second vote, should they just sit down and stfu and accept the new vote?

 

[Throatpunch]

Voting on issues isn't a game demo where you get to try before you buy, the issue was put to the people and decided.

The people want a second referendum (including many leavers) so they should be given one. Fair and simple.

should they just sit down and stfu and accept the new vote?

Yes

 

[Crni Vuk]

It would not be Democratic since the vote was already put out there and decided, since when is a democracy best 2 out of 3? Every big issue vote comes with buyers remorse, but what about those who still want to leave after the second vote, should they just sit down and stfu and accept the new vote?

I am not sure about all definitions of a democracy ... but where exactly is it written that you can't have as many votes as the population/people want? Is this written in the constitution of the UK? Or are there some wikipedia definitions about democracy that says this? The only thing that is true, as far as I know, is that is nowhere said that the PARLIAMENT(!) has to follow those referendums. I will say this again, even THIS vote is NOT LIEGALY BINDING to the British Parliament! They are NOT obliged to do anything.
Parliament is sovereign and, if Brexit wins, Cameron will not be legally obliged to invoke the Lisbon treaty to start an EU exit. (...)
Albeit it is expected from them to follow the will of the people, no one said they have to. This is why we have parliaments in the first place and we give our vote so they represent us for a short period of time. To act in the way they see fitt, without preasure, fear or ties. A democracy does not mean that our prepresentatives, which we ellected by the way, have necessarily to follow the will of the people in every single matter. So I don't see why a second referendum would be un-democratic, when it doesn't affect the democratically ellected representatives in any way. - As far as I know the kind of democracy that we have in most European states anyway isn't the pure or direct democracy.

It's true, we usually don't hold votes and referendums for every shit all the time, because that would be not only unpractical but certain things need time and it simply looks stupid. And politicans - for good reason - should not be forced to change their opinion and stance on every subject every month, just to appease what is currently popular. But if a large part of the people, suddenly realize their mistake, I would say considering the gravity of this, it would not be undemocractic to yeah, vote again maybe. There is a good reason why certain decisions require a large majority to vote for it, like changes to the constituation for example.
I am usually not the most fond of Michio, but he has a point here, but this just by the way:


Look! I am even on your side on that. The people decided. And as much as I hate to admit it, there is probably no way back. But this is, as far as the EU goes, a precedence! No one, not you, or I or anyone here knows what will REALLY happen in 2 or 5 or 10 years from now. Will this be really the end of the EU? Will the UK even brake appart? Or will everthing simply work out somehow. No one knows. And this is one of the reasons why the pound is droping.
Even if it is very unlikely, even a second vote might happen.

However, you have yet to tell why it would be undemocractic. It would be unusual yes, and it would definetly seem very strange - for the UK. But, there is no definition that says it's not democratic ...

 

[Izak]

Voting on issues isn't a game demo where you get to try before you buy, the issue was put to the people and decided.

Should the hypothetically reluctant majority be saddled with this decision even if they don't like it? That doesn't seem very democratic to me.

but what about those who still want to leave after the second vote, should they just sit down and stfu and accept the new vote?

Generally the majority rules in a democracy, if the majority has shifted while the decision can still be changed why shouldn't it?

 

[Crni Vuk]

Generally the majority rules in a democracy, if the majority has shifted while the decision can still be changed why shouldn't it?

Depends. I would say it is a bit more complicated.

 

[Izak]

Depends. I would say it is a bit more complicated.

How so? Specifically when talking about a referendum, not about a representative democracy and all that stuff, in case it wasn't clear.

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

The people want a second referendum (including many leavers) so they should be given one. Fair and simple.

Yeah, if 10 million people vote for one politician and 11 million people vote for another, and 10 million petition for a revote, of course they will, they're going to keep trying to get their position done. Doesn't mean you keep on redoing the vote until you get your way, come on, this isn't the EU (anymore).

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

Putin in his SU speech, clearly stated that the collapse of the SU was a BAD thing. That losing its territories was a BAD thing. He clearly wants a stronger, bigger Russia.

Uh, you do realize rampant corruption, crime and poverty spread throughout Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union right?

Anyway, to the pro-European Army people here: Europe does not have any credible threats to it. All a European Army would be useful for would be starting quagmires in other countries and putting down protesters.

 

[Throatpunch]

Yeah, if 10 million people vote for one politician and 11 million people vote for another, and 10 million petition for a revote, of course they will, they're going to keep trying to get their position done. Doesn't mean you keep on redoing the vote until you get your way, come on, this isn't the EU (anymore).

A million/2 million+ Leavers realised they screwed the puppy and now have defected to Remain and want another.

Europe does not have any credible threats to it.

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

A army caused by intervention and would collapse as soon as they lose their main source of support (anti-western sentiment) and a army that's non-hostile and is owned by a government begging for peace after two decades of NATO moving against it. Also both are totally inept and couldn't sustain an invasion of Europe.

A million/2 million+ Leavers realised they screwed the puppy and now have defected to Remain and want another.

Yeah I seriously doubt that. It's probably two million people who voted remain and can't stop crying over how the new Rome fell before it began.

 

[Throatpunch]

Yeah I seriously doubt that. It's probably two million people who voted remain and can't stop crying over how the new Rome fell before it began.

You can doubt it, I am sure of it. Loads and loads of people are now seriously regretting their decision, probably over half the actual amount of people that voted Leave, so probably around 8.5 million people.

owned by a government begging for peace

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

Putin just admitted that the US was the only super power, stop chiding yourself on him.

You can doubt it, I am sure of it. Loads and loads of people are now seriously regretting their decision, probably over half the actual amount of people that voted Leave, so probably around 8.5 million people.

You can be as sure as you want, doesn't change that a majority of voters wanted to leave the EU.

 

[Throatpunch]

Putin just admitted that the US was the only super power, stop chiding yourself on him.

Does not matter, he is still going to push the limits by annexing territories and invading places.

You can be as sure as you want, doesn't change that a majority of voters wanted to leave the EU.

The key word there: wanted

 

[Crni Vuk]

How so? Specifically when talking about a referendum, not about a representative democracy and all that stuff, in case it wasn't clear.

Because you said, Generally the majority rules in a democracy. And I would say, yes and no. It depends about what type of democracy we are talking about. I am talking about legislature, governance and such. If we simply talk about the representatives, you are right. Than it is usually about the majority in votes. In a democracy like we have in Germany, the majority, of the population though, does not rule. Parliaments are sovereign bodies. There is no legal binding on what the majority wants or doesn't want. Infact now that I am thinking about it, the last time one party had actually the majority was ... uhm, I can't even remember it. Usually the parties simply stick together and form coalitions and they vote together for the cancellor and they chose the government. What we vote is how many seats each party gets in the Parliament. The population has actually very little say in what happens after the ellection. There is a bit more to all of that of course and I simplified it a lot. But I would say that it is equally complex in other nations as well. And Germany is definetly unique in some areas. For example we follow a federalists system. It's not so much that I disagree with you. I just think, that it is a bit more complex than just the majority. Like I said, it depends about what we are talking about, the type of democracy, the population, the representatives, the parliament or senate etc.

You can be as sure as you want, doesn't change that a majority of voters wanted to leave the EU.

I am curious though, pure speculation of course, but what do you think would happen if the new Prime Minister simply never sends a letter to Brussel and thus Article 50 never gets triggered?

Man, I can only imagine that this would lead to a very awkward situation. The EU can not force the UK out, and their population might change their opinion completely on this till October.

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

Does not matter, he is still going to push the limits by annexing territories and invading places.

He took territory from a country that just had a coup by a organization that has proven that it is aggressive and is expansionist. Maybe if he just invaded Germany you would have some credence to your claims of him pushing the limits, but the only group pushing the limits here is NATO because they're the ones going in, destabilizing countries, gaining new bases and members suspiciously close to a nation they hate and harassing other countries for membership.

The key word there: wanted

They voted a few days ago, no, they haven't changed their mind, it was three days ago. You don't have a new vote after an election because you think people might have changed their mind.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Why do you still act like as this whole vote had any legal binding? So far, the UK is STILL a member of the EU. Nothing has happend really so far.

*Bonus
I mean it's not over yet.

 

[Antiwarprofallout]

Well if they choose to ignore the vote, it just shows that the UK and the EU don't care about who they're supposed to represent, they don't care about democracy, and they're tyrannical. And that any of the countries that care about not being the puppets of tyrants should immediately force themselves out of the EU, before the EU actually has the power to stop them.