It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Can you blame me for being a tad cynical?
History shows that nationalism and tribalism almost always create huge socio-economic setbacks. If the EU is indeed plagued with many weaknesses, the reason many have cited for voting "leave", our duty is to advance its political structure into a better, corrected version of itself. That is what progress is all about. By nostalgically returning to some delusion of a past "golden age", no progress is made whatsoever. Going back to square one, in this case, only means that others are simply taking an even stronger lead.
And that's what's indeed happening. Despite journalists telling us lies to the contrary, other parts of the world are rapidly growing. But with America plunging itself in isolation, and now the UK freezing the prospect of progress for the duration of all those years it'll take to sort things out with Brexit, the North-Atlantic West is left in shambles.
Brexit is the result of anger as well as cowardice. If jokers such as Farage had never brought the issue up in the first place, very few in the UK would have even considered the option of a Brexit. It wasn't until the political balls started rolling that suddenly everyone started to voice an opinion in the matter. And while that may feel like the ultimate democracy, it isn't, for the urgent need for a Brexit was fabricated by political agendas and not by an actual need of a country still very prosperous. Yet suddenly people got angry, what with all those dangerous immigrants and the uneven displacement of British money to the European mainland and all, fears that are often born from incorrectly interpreted statistics or just age-old cases of protectionism and whatnot. By the same token, "we're pulling out and let the rest of Europe deal with the problems since they're literally located closer to them" is, for obvious reasons, a cowardly attitude.
Where was Enlightenment when we needed it? Instead, the entire Brexit debacle was built on furious newspaper headlines, cheap demagogy, unrestrained fears and a nationalistic pride which is perfectly meaningless in the 21st century. You cannot artificially wrench back the impact of globalisation and all of its consequences to where it was before WWII. You can, of course, organise your political institution in accordance with this delusion, but then the future will evade you and leave you behind in a cold isolation, with nothing but a meaningless pride for a warm blanket.
But there's good news too. Within the first 24 hours after the referendum, Donald Trump and Sarah Palin sent the UK their warmest regards. Well, ain't that the blessing you've been waiting for. Ricky Gervais was also verbally generous when he wrote, "At last we can now return to the good old days of isolation, rampant xenophobia and our poor, dying young in terrible hospitals." Hyperbole aside, I must agree with Gervais. "The good old days". That's what it's mostly about, isn't it? What better way to face the future, than by returning to "the good old days", when in almost every single facet of our lives, we were facing terrible hardship. I wish my British friends here the best of luck, for you will need it. The screws holding your fine country together have been severely loosened by Brexit. And while some may see that as an opportunity for dismantling the entire structure, eliminating the weak parts and re-assembling the pieces into something far better, I see more cause for fearing that the slightest misstep in the immediate future will render Britain a chaotic mess.
Of course. That is always the case. But good intentions can be inspired by false premises.
When I saw an elder, possibly retired man in the streets of London, wearing an obvious "LEAVE" sign and handing out flyers, it never even crossed my mind to think of him as a bad, anti-social, racist or crazy person. I imagined him as a grandfather, wanting nothing but the best for his offspring and theirs, pursuing a single no-doubt very convincing line of thinking that deemed Brexit the best future possible for them.
Furthermore, I myself am no stranger to weaker moments of thinking in absolute terms, of letting fear be my guide, of wishing that we could isolate ourselves from the rest of the world, preventing foreign threats of terrorism, for example, from reaching us. But almost instantly I recall that domestic threats outweigh the possible foreign ones, that my country cannot rely entirely on itself anymore, and suddenly I remember why I detest nationalism, isolation and so on.
The problem with our current democratic models is that we hand over all responsibilities to politicians who, for better or worse, ultimately just do what they want, or do what higher (and hidden) authorities want, or nothing at all. At least in one regard, I say "well, done, Britain!", and that is the fact of a referendum. That said, the choice should never have been a binary one and the minutiae of each possible choice should have been clarified and stated much more concretely and explicitly beforehand. People have now voted for a slogan rather than for a program, for elusive promises rather than for a detailed checklist of things to come. And of course, I will admit that it would have been near impossible to provide these things since the EU itself wasn't being very cooperative either. But then still, the referendum arguably came too soon, with an impulsive and reactionary attitude, which is never a good thing since this will influence the lives of so many! Even Ireland's referendum on the subject of looser abortion laws seemed much more thought-through, much better explained. Whether my assumption of causality is correct or not, I cannot help but think that that also explains the clearer result of that referendum, versus Brexit's, which almost fails to stand statistical error tests. A little over half wanted Brexit, a little less than half did not. I wouldn't call that a success. If just a little over half of my students actually liked me, I wouldn't quite feel welcome in class. For something as radical as a Brexit, I would have demanded at least a two-thirds majority.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1046627/Brexit-news-Nadine-Dorries-Theresa-May-no-confidence-letter-latest-Marc-Francois-Rees-Mogg
If this is accurate then it all kicks off on Monday!
My gut feeling is Labour are going to use Brexit as the means to win power. May will fall, there will be a no confidence motion in the new leader-led Conservative government, a general election will follow, Corbyn will win (!) and he'll renegotiate a new deal with the EU which will include a new customs union arrangement. Corbyn's deal will probably be another fudge but by that time most people (remainers and leavers) will be so fed up with Brexit they'll just say "just resolve the issue and move on."
I think there is a strong mood for change. People want austerity to end, people want Brexit to end/be resolved. Labour may ruin the economy but democracy is about change. You can't have the Tories in power for ages. Time for the other lot to screw it up for a while!
I respect your opinion, and you do make some valid points.
The problem we have in the UK is several-fold. The two biggest(not necessarily mine) although I do agree with some aspects.
The public services are being are being crushed under the weight of a burgeoning population, and are basically unable to cope with wave after wave of economic migrants. Whether it's the NHS, social housing, public schools, you name it, they are all struggling.
Now the cat is out of the bag when it comes to migration now, but a cap is necessary and simply has to be done. We are only a small island.
Another huge one is the European Court Of Human Rights. On paper, this is a wonderful idea. In practice, it has proved to be a dangerous problem for the UK. Several times we have opted to deport foreign nationals, who have been convicted of terror links or inciting hatred. The EU court has overturned these time and time again, so we are stuck with them at the British tax payer's expense, no less.
There are others of course. The EU President having too much power for an un-elected official. The prospect of an EU army. The EU interfering with countries budget's (Italy being the latest).
Now, there are a lot of good things about the EU too, and I wish there was a way for Britain to press for reforms rather than leave, but unfortunately Juncker, Merkel and others won't allow it.
I don't think Britain will actually leave anyway. Brexit will drag on and on until there is a second referendum.
A lot of hardcore Brexit Tory voters may ditch voting for the Conservatives if they don't deliver a proper Brexit. This might help Labour win the next General Election. Labour want a GE, not another vote. Another vote may not resolve the issue. If 'leave' win we're back to square one! If Labour win it's a new scenario - they'll renegotiate Brexit. Sure, it may end up as a disaster or a fudge but it's basically Brexit attempt 2. If attempt 2 fails I think most people won't care that much. They'll be bored too much by then.
Life will go on more or less the same if we stay or leave. Well, just my opinion. The bottom line is all the EU countries that trade with us will still trade even if we leave with no deal. They won't ignore a market place of over 60 million people (the population of the UK). We have to be realistic. Capitalism doesn't care about Brexit. It will carry on! We'll cope. More countries in the world trade under World Trade Organization rules. If we become another member of that club, big deal. Who cares! We'll survive. The city of London will still trade stocks and shares, our service industries will keep going, we'll still export/import goods.
It’s pretty hard for Britain’s friends, here in Australia, to make sense of the mess that’s being made of Brexit. The referendum result was perhaps the biggest-ever vote of confidence in the United Kingdom, its past and its future. But the British establishment doesn’t seem to share that confidence and instead looks desperate to cut a deal, even if that means staying under the rule of Brussels. Looking at this from abroad, it’s baffling: the country that did the most to bring democracy into the modern world might yet throw away the chance to take charge of its own destiny.
Let’s get one thing straight: a negotiation that you’re not prepared to walk away from is not a negotiation — it’s surrender. It’s all give and no get. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate Britain’s EU membership, he was sent packing because Brussels judged (rightly) that he’d never actually back leaving. And since then, Brussels has made no real concessions to Theresa May because it judges (rightly, it seems) that she’s desperate for whatever deal she can get.
The EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project. Its position, now, is that there’s only one ‘deal’ on offer, whereby the UK retains all of the burdens of EU membership but with no say in setting the rules. The EU seems to think that Britain will go along with this because it’s terrified of no deal. Or, to put it another way, terrified of the prospect of its own independence.
But even after two years of fearmongering and vacillation, it’s not too late for robust leadership to deliver the Brexit that people voted for. It’s time for Britain to announce what it will do if the EU can’t make an acceptable offer by March 29 next year — and how it would handle no deal. Freed from EU rules, Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. So why on earth would it not work just as well for the world’s fifth-largest economy?
A world trade Brexit lets Britain set its own rules. It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards. That means no border controls for goods coming from Europe to Britain. You don’t need to negotiate this: just do it. If Europe knows what’s in its own best interests, it would fully reciprocate in order to maintain entirely free trade and full mutual recognition of standards right across Europe.
Next, the UK should declare that Europeans already living here should have the right to remain permanently — and, of course, become British citizens if they wish. This should be a unilateral offer. Again, you don’t need a deal. You don’t need Michel Barnier’s permission. If Europe knows what’s best for itself, it would likewise allow Britons to stay where they are.
Third, there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare. And with a foreign worker’s tax on the employer, to make sure anyone coming in would not be displacing British workers.
Fourth, no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. If Britain was getting its fair share, these would balance out; and if Britain wasn’t getting its fair share, it’s the EU that should be paying Britain.
Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland. Britain wouldn’t be imposing tariffs on European goods, so there’s no money to collect. The UK has exactly the same product standards as the Republic, so let’s not pretend you need to check for problems we all know don’t exist. Some changes may be needed but technology allows for smart borders: there was never any need for a Cold War-style Checkpoint Charlie. Irish citizens, of course, have the right to live and work in the UK in an agreement that long predates EU membership.
Of course, the EU might not like this British leap for independence. It might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. The worst it can get? We’re talking levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound (which would have the added bonus of making British goods more competitive everywhere).
UK officialdom assumes that a deal is vital, which is why so little thought has been put into how Britain might just walk away. Instead, officials have concocted lurid scenarios featuring runs on the pound, gridlock at ports, grounded aircraft, hoarding of medicines and flights of investment. It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum.
As a former prime minister of Australia and a lifelong friend of your country, I would say this: Britain has nothing to lose except the shackles that the EU imposes on it. After the courage shown by its citizens in the referendum, it would be a tragedy if political leaders go wobbly now. Britain’s future has always been global, rather than just with Europe. Like so many of Britain’s admirers, I want to see this great country seize this chance and make the most of it.
Tony Abbott served as Prime Minister of Australia from 2013 to 2015
The European Court of Human Rights is not (repeat: NOT) an EU institution. Not a single bit about that "problem" will change by doin' Brexit. The Human Rights court is an institution of the Council of Europe (founded several years before even the Treaty of Rome, and not to be confused with the "European Council" as top-level EU institution).
ALL nations that have at least part of their area in Europe (such as Russia and Turkey), except the shining beacon of democracy named Belarus, are members of the Council of Europe and signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights, and therefore subscribe to the European Court of Human Rights. The EU as such is also a member of the Council of Europe, but no more than that.
Now it may be up to you guys if you really want to be among the renegades who willingly ignore human rights, but Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with that. You'd have to get out of the Council of Europe and terminate the Convention on Human Rights to be with your Belarussian (and non-European) brothers in spirit. Worst reason to support Brexit, if there ever was a good one.
I wasn't aware of that @j_w_pepper . Thanks for the information. I always assumed/was led to believe it was an EU institution.
[/quote]
Well, thanks for being receptive. Although we won't come to terms regarding the other arguments regarding Brexit, either. But starting with obvious errors is not a bad thing, is it?
PS: Sorry if this has formatting problems regarding the quote. I noticed but haven't managed to sort them out for some reason. But the message should be clear anyway.
Anyway I much prefer discussing Bond with you, as I have all the way back to the IMDB boards. So I shall leave Brexit talk here unless asked something directly.
You beat me to it, @j_w_pepper! I was about to point that out! Mixing the two up in Constitutional Law would have resulted in a mark of zero, as one of my lecturers used to say. It is a common mistake, however, albeit a fatal one.
I would also add that the UK was the first signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, although it was one of the last to formally bring the Convention rights into domestic law with the Human Rights Act 1998 which cane into force in October 2000.
https://independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nadie-dorries-slams-brexit-deal-leave-remain-jk-rowling-a8639216.html
Er... What did she think would happen ? Not that's it's not the first stupid thing she says or does (a MP taking part in I'm a Celebrity ? That has to take the cake), but still...
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/18/brexit-transition-could-be-extended-to-2022-says-barnier
!!!!!!!
It seems clear EU will screw the UK for having the temerity to want to leave. If we leave with no deal we don't have to pay the EU a single Euro! Ha ha @ Barnier!
from your decision to leave. Feel free to take them or leave them. But there won't be any solution that is anywhere close to what the lying Brexiteers have promised the voters. You can't have a better outcome than Norway, Iceland, or Switzerland. Which means still paying, but no longer deciding - like it or not. And it's always been clear as light for all that were watching and/or listening. It has zilch to do with "screwing" the UK, but it certainly has to do with not rewarding a nation that leaves over those that never joined, but cooperated - and payed for that - nevertheless.
Wishful thinking by the Brexit lunatics.
There is no support for Rees Mogg and his putrid desire to destroy Britain and return us to the dark ages. The Brexiteers in parliament are gutless, clueless wonders. They had their chance to implement Brexit and they came up with absolutely nothing. This is because Brexit offers no positives. It has no upsides. Any conceivable form of Brexit is self evidently worse than the excellent free trade terms we have now as full members of the EU.
Now the Brexit jokers have finally realised this, they've all jumped ship and are blaming May. They really are a despicable bunch of low life's.
I am no fan of May but at least she's tried to salvage her country from this shambolic disgraceful mess. Johnson, Davis and Mogg make her look like a political titan.
I am also well aware that people voted leave for a huge variety of reasons. Very many of them were die hard leftists like Cornyn- the sort of deluded old socialists like Scargill who always seem to manage to do right's work for them.
People do the wrong things with good intentions all the time. The path to hell is patched with them after all.
However, I am doubtful we are going to have a second referendum or stay in the EU. We will leave and have to accept the inevitably less influential and relatively powerless role of an EU satellite, at least for a decade or so.
May be by then we will vote to rejoin or things will have calmed down and we accept we are a small second tier power on the periphery of Europe - sort of where we were in the 16th century.
Nadine Dorries is the stupidest active MP, bare none and all parties included.
What May has negotiated is actually Brexit - it's just the Brexiters can't face up to the reality that Brexit is sh*t and bad for Britian. The lying Brexit MPs who were in govt have all jumped ship and left May carrying the can.
I have a lot of sympathy for May considering she was a remainer?! I take my hat off to her as she is carrying out the peoples vote.
True, but she is clearly in a no win situation.