Euro Elections

[I1L2T3 10]

Just now, Tony said:

Democracy is often inconvenient. "Fighting" (what a silly but oft' used turn of phrase when we think about it) against it doesn't make you right, it just makes you anti-democratic. By all means put another point of view to finesse the outcome but if the demos is ignored and marginalised it doesn't ever end well.  It's remarkable that so many people are arguing against a democratic decision that was taken three years ago instead of implementing it to the best possible outcome, but that is the open society that we choose. 

 

We are all bound by some very basic tenets of modern civilisation which are simply not to be ignored, no matter how inconvenient or difficult they might be. Today it is the EU, a matter of little real significance to most people no matter how emotional they imagine themselves to be about it. Tomorrow it might be government of a very different stripe who has the precedent and instruction manual for doing as they like regardless of what citizens want. We sow the seeds of our future today, and none of us are entitled to anything more than we deserve from our peers. 

 

And yes, there are lots of snippets to quote above, starting with "there's no good Brexit". None of them are anything more than opinion. Democracy however, is absolute if it to mean anything at all.

Nope. There is nothing democratic about upholding bad decisions.

 

Brexit is a bad decision. Claiming that we should force it through regardless of any consequences is anti-democratic.

[Cyclone 10]

Fighting for or against something doesn't make you right or wrong.  It's definitely not anti-democratic.  The right to fight for or against an idea is the very basis of democracy.

 

It's remarkable that you consider it undemocratic to fight for something to change, as I just said, the very basis of democracy.

[Tony 10]

You are wrong.

[I1L2T3 10]

2 minutes ago, Tony said:

You are wrong.

Nope. You are.

 

The very definition of democracy is what the electorate want now. It’s a constant dialogue that doesn’t stop with certain events. The dialogue never stops.

 

Even governments with solid majorities have to pause to consider sometimes based on the national mood. 

[Tony 10]

You need to bring more than your opinion to this discussion. You are still wrong. 

[Cyclone 10]

10 minutes ago, Tony said:

You are wrong.

If it's undemocratic to change your mind (collectively as a country) then the referendum should never have been held as it was questioning a previous decision.

And of course many things that we take for granted now, like homosexuality not being a crime, well, that was a change of a previous decision, it was something that people had to fight for, the right to vote for women, had to be fought for and was a change to a previous decision.

Can you see how backwards you've got it, democracy requires that people fight for what they think is right.  Previous decisions have to be open to question and revision, that's a basic tenet of democracy.

5 minutes ago, Tony said:

You need to bring more than your opinion to this discussion. You are still wrong. 

Lol, ironic.

Go ahead then and bring something other than opinion to show why it's wrong to fight against a decision you disagree with. 

[I1L2T3 10]

9 minutes ago, Tony said:

You need to bring more than your opinion to this discussion. You are still wrong. 

It isn’t opinion. It is fact.

 

A democracy should be able to change its mind.

 

Are you disagreeing with that? Really?

[Tony 10]

It isn't at all undemocratic to change your mind. It is undemocratic to refuse to implement a democratic decision that was underpinned with express promises by the elected government and their successors. These are just the simple facts that are untarnished by opinions. The question was asked of a new generation and that decision was given and must be upheld. This is an absolute in our society and whether or not you or I agree with the decision and the promises to implement it, it must be upheld. 

 

Once it has been implemented by all means lobby to change it.

 

By the way, you'll note that I haven't said whether I agree or not with the Referendum outcome, just that the outcome must be implemented. 

 

Bringing us back on topic, the latest polls seem to indicate that the Referendum result is perfectly representative with the parties expressly for Remain languishing at the bottom of the polls for the upcoming EU election, barely mustering a quarter of the voting intention. You or I may not agree in whole or part, but these are the facts.

 

Quote

Nigel Farage’s Brexit party is on course to secure more support at the European elections than the Tories and Labour combined, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/11/brexit-party-may-get-more-eu-election-votes-than-tories-and-labour-combined-poll

 

[Cyclone 10]

You said it was undemocratic to fight against something, now you've changed it to "refuse to implement".  The public can't "refuse to implement", the public don't have the power to implement or not implement anything.

It also can't be undemocratic for MPs to vote as they wish, that's also the basis of our democracy, that our representatives go to parliament and try to represent us.  Democracy doesn't require them to vote in favour of something just because a plebiscite went narrowly in favour of a particular decision.

There is no reason (from a democratic point of view) that the outcome of the advisory referendum must be implemented.

 

And so far all you've given is your opinion, do you have anything else to bring to this?

 

It's disingenuous to pretend that the european election is a rerun of the referendum.  Every independent poll recently has shown that remain is now a more popular choice.

Edited May 12, 2019 by Cyclone

[tinfoilhat 11]

But it's too hard. We can't achieve what was promised by various leave campaigns. If we leave without a deal, we'll break up the country - and farage and his bunch of liars are totally fine with that. It's a toss up really, force through a referendum result and damage the country for decades (rees mogg says it could be 50 years before we see benefits) or ditch it. 

[Cyclone 10]

I'm not sure why I'm obliged to bring something more than opinion when that's all you appear to have.

 

Your position appears to be entirely illogical as far as I can see.

[Tony 10]

2 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Your position appears to be entirely illogical as far as I can see.

I know.