Brexit: Difference between revisions

From Future Of Mankind
← Older editNewer edit →
Daniel Leech (talk | contribs)
editors, Administrators
8,292 edits
Daniel Leech (talk | contribs)
editors, Administrators
8,292 edits
Line 69: Line 69:
<small>Related reading (not source): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_Brexit_on_the_European_Union Impact of Brexit on the European Union (Wikipedia)]</small>
<small>Related reading (not source): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_Brexit_on_the_European_Union Impact of Brexit on the European Union (Wikipedia)]</small>
<br><br>
<br><br>
=== Benefits of the EU-dictatorship ===
=== Benefits of the EU-dictatorship (appeal to egalitarianism) ===
European Union citizens have the right to free movement i.e. visa-free travel to other member states, settlement and employment across the EU. Free (within reason) to trade and transport goods, services and capital across supranational borders, as a supranational market, like one big country, with no restrictions on capital movements or incurred fees.  
European Union citizens have the right to free movement i.e. visa-free travel to other member states, settlement and employment across the EU. Free (within reason) to trade and transport goods, services and capital across supranational borders, as a supranational market, like one big country, with no restrictions on capital movements or incurred fees.  


Line 76: Line 76:
<small>Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_European_Union Citizenship of the European Union (Wikipedia)]</small>
<small>Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_European_Union Citizenship of the European Union (Wikipedia)]</small>
<br><br>
<br><br>
=== The straw that broke the camel's back ===
=== The straw that broke the camel's back ===
Since its founding, the EU has operated among an increasing plurality of national and globalising legal systems. This has meant both the European Court of Justice and the highest national courts have had to develop principles to resolve conflicts of laws between different systems.
Since its founding, the EU has operated among an increasing plurality of national and globalising legal systems. This has meant both the European Court of Justice and the highest national courts have had to develop principles to resolve conflicts of laws between different systems.

Revision as of 13:03, 7 March 2019

IMPORTANT NOTE
This article is not an official FIGU publication.


The United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, also known as the "EU referendum" and the "Brexit referendum", took place on 23 June 2016 in the United Kingdom (UK) and Gibraltar to ask folks if they wanted the country to either remain a member or to leave. The result was 51.9% in favour. Legally the referendum was non-binding, however the government of that time pledged to implement the result, initiating the official EU withdrawal process on 29 March 2017. The UK is due to withdraw its membership before 29 March 2019, allowing for two years of negotiation.

Membership of the EU and its predecessors has long been a topic of debate in the United Kingdom. The country joined what was back then the European Economic Community (EEC, or "Common Market") in 1973. A referendum on continued membership was held in 1975, and approved with 67.2% (17,378,581) Yes and 32.8% (8,470,073) No.

Source: 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum (Wikipedia)



Contact Report 655 excerpt

Source: Contact Report 655

English German
Excerpt from the 655th contact conversation from Thursday, the 30th of June, 2016, 1:57pm Auszüge aus dem 655. Kontaktgespräch vom Donnerstag, den 30. Juni 2016, 13.57 h

Billy:
Billy:
Quite. Now England has indeed said goodbye to the EU-dictatorship, but as I see it, on the one hand the Scots[1] and around 48 percent of the English are indeed crazy and pathologically dumb, that they continue to flirt with the EU-dictatorship and are willing to let themselves be subjugated by it and enslaved. Now on the other hand, the henchmen of the EU-dictatorship - namely with the might-greedy and reality-estranged-naive German Chancelloress Merkel leading the way as well as Juncker[2] and Schulz[3] - are attempting to terrorize England, so that Britain gets out as soon as possible from the dictatorship. And as for my assessment of the matter, now the whole smear-campaign against England by the criminal EU-dictators Juncker and Schulz, etc. as well as the EU-dictator Merkel, is driven out of sheer hatred and brainless revenge, in order to punish and drive England into hardship and misery. And thereby also playing with the deceitful idea, that by another and repeat vote sooner or later, England piles into the EU-dictatorship, just as that which the sick blockheads of Scotland indeed also strive for, which is why they secede from England and want to be independent. And what more is to be said, based on the fact that when the federal speeches are held in Germany, that neither Angela Merkel nor her like-minded hangers-on concern themselves with that which their opponents rightly state in their speeches and in accordance with the truth. So I was frequently able to observe on television, that for one thing the reality-estranged-naive Chancelloress and her subservient skulkers-in-at-the-back only grin stupidly and maliciously, babble with their peers or read newspapers, etc. Thus the rational ones who are familiar with thinking over the effective facts and also name them – such as Sahra Wagenknecht[4] at the forefront, born in 1969, who works as a German economist, journalist and politician –, has no chance to be able to get through with the power-obsessed ones and politically achieve something of value. Eben. Nun hat sich ja England von der EU-Diktatur verabschiedet, doch so wie ich die Sache sehe, sind ja einerseits die Schotten und rund 48 Prozent der Engländer verrückt und krankhaft dumm, dass sie weiterhin mit der EU-Diktatur liebäugeln und sich von dieser knechten und versklaven lassen wollen. Anderseits versuchen nun die EU-Diktaturschergen – und zwar allen voran die machtgierige und wirklichkeitsfremd-naive deutsche Bundeskanzlerin Merkel sowie Juncker und Schulz – England zu terrorisieren, damit Britannien so schnell wie möglich aus der Diktatur aussteigt. Und wie ich die Sache einschätze, wird nun die ganze Hetze gegen England durch die kriminellen EU-Diktatoren Juncker und Schulz usw. sowie die EU-Diktatorin Merkel aus blankem Hass und hirnloser Rache betrieben, um England abzustrafen und in Not und Elend zu treiben. Und dabei spielt auch der hinterlistige Gedanke mit, dass England durch eine weitere und wiederholende Abstimmung früher oder später neuerlich in die EUDiktatur einsteigt, wie das die kranken Dummköpfe Schottlands ja auch anstreben, weshalb sie sich von England abspalten und selbständig werden wollen. Und was weiter zu sagen ist beruht darauf, dass wenn in Deutschland die Bundestagsreden gehalten werden, dass weder Angela Merkel noch ihre mitstreitenden Trabanten sich darum kümmern, was ihre Gegner in ihren Reden richtigerweise und der Wahrheit gemäss ausführen. So konnte ich im Fernsehen des öftern beobachten, dass die wirklichkeitsfremd-naive Bundeskanzlerin und ihre ihr hörigen Hinten-hinein-Schleicher einerseits nur dämlich und hämisch grinsen, mit ihren Gleichgesinnten quasseln oder Zeitungen lesen usw. So haben die Vernünftigen, die nachdenkend mit den effectiven Fakten vertraut sind und diese auch nennen – wie z.B. an vorderster Front die 1969 geborene Sahra Wagenknecht, die als deutsche Volkswirtin, Publizistin und Politikerin arbeitet –, keine Chance, bei den Machtbesessenen durchdringen und politisch etwas von Wert erreichen zu können.

Ptaah:
Ptaah:
It is absolutely without question and without a doubt, that everything is indeed just as you say, and you rightfully highlight the politician Sahra Wagenknecht, because this woman in every respect sees the effective facts correctly and is also courageously committed in every wise. For this, however, she will be insulted in the wake of the stupidity of the reality-estranged-naive and power-crazed Merkel and her subservient vassals and through this attempted to bring into ridicule, as the Merkel henchmen twist and misrepresent the effective facts, in order to thereby confuse and to draw many to their side. But even those Scots, of whom you speak, are really dull with regard to the truth-recognition concerning the EU and are neither able to recognize nor to understand how dictatorially dangerous and devious the EU dictatorship really is. Regarding the EU itself, the dictatorial mightful ones are not capable of dealing with the fact that the majority of the English population recognized the European Union as a dictatorship and has voted in favour of a withdrawal from it. In fact, nothing better could be done and thus in some circumstances also the beginnings for it are created, that also populations of other countries which have joined the EU-Dictatorship, free themselves again from it, especially now if prudent rulers of these states take the necessary steps for a break with the EU-Dictatorship. With the whole thing also, fact is that already for some time now, large parts of the population of various EU-dictatorship countries regret the EU-membership and would like to pull out of the dictatorship, which however is prevented, unfortunately, by fools from the population as well as by the power-obsessed rulers. Es ist absolut fraglos und zweifellos, dass alles tatsächlich so ist, wie du sagst, wobei du die Politikerin Sahra Wagenknecht des Rechtens hervorhebst, denn diese Frau sieht in jeder Hinsicht die effectiven Fakten richtig und steht auch in jeder Beziehung mutig dafür ein. Dafür wird sie jedoch infolge der Dummheit der wirklichkeitsfremd-naiven und machtbesessenen Merkel und ihren ihr hörigen Vasallen beschimpft und dadurch lächerlich zu machen versucht, indem die Merkelanhänger die effectiven Fakten verdrehen und falsch darstellen, um dadurch viele zu irritieren und auf ihre Seite zu ziehen. Doch auch jene Schotten, von denen du sprichst, sind bezüglich der Wahrheitserkennung in bezug auf die EU wirklich dumm und vermögen weder zu erkennen noch zu verstehen, wie diktatorisch gefährlich und hinterhältig die EU-Diktatur wirklich ist. Bezüglich der EU selbst vermögen die diktatorisch Mächtigen nicht zu verkraften, dass das Gros der englischen Bevölkerung die Europäische Union als Diktatur erkannt und für einen Austritt aus dieser gestimmt hat. Tatsächlich konnte nichts Besseres getan und damit unter Umständen auch der Anfang dafür geschaffen werden, dass auch Bevölkerungen anderer Staaten, die sich der EUDiktatur angeschlossen haben, sich wieder von dieser befreien, besonders eben dann, wenn besonnene Regierende dieser Staaten die notwendigen Schritte für einen Bruch mit der EU-Diktatur unternehmen. Tatsache ist beim Ganzen auch, dass schon seit geraumer Zeit grosse Bevölkerungsteile diverser EU-Diktaturländer die EU-Mitgliedschaft bereuen und wieder aus der Diktatur austreten möchten, was aber leider von Dummen aus der Bevölkerung sowie von den machtbesessenen Regierenden verhindert wird.

Billy:
Billy:
Perhaps there comes a time, in which owing to bad advice the whole EU-Dictatorship goes down the drain and all its lowly-intelligent and simple-minded henchmen and advocates kick themselves with rage in their own bottom. But let's leave that, because I would like to address something another time, about which we have again also recently communicated... Vielleicht kommt eine Zeit, in der durch schlechten Rat die ganze EU-Diktatur flöten geht und alle ihre dumm-dämlichen Anhänger und Befürworter sich vor Wut in den eigenen Hintern beissen. Aber lassen wir das, denn ich möchte ein andermal etwas ansprechen, worüber wir ja auch kürzlich wieder kommuniziert haben...[5]


Relevant reading

non-FIGU sourced

Branding and wording choices

It has been argued that the 'Leave' brand was stronger and more effective than the 'Remain' brand. According to Mike Hind, a marketing professional, "The 'Britain Stronger In Europe' brand was stillborn. On the basis of preparation, presentation and messaging, it deserved the kicking it got.' Additionally behavioural practioner Warren Hatter argues that 'Leave' as a word places a lower cognitive load on observers than 'Remain a member of'.

Related reading (not source): 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum (Wikipedia)

Prospect theory

Economics writer Chris Dillow has argued that, amongst other factors, Prospect Theory may explain the surprising willingness of many voters to take a path widely viewed as the more risky of two (change vs status quo). In his words Prospect Theory 'Tells us that people who feel they’ve lost want to gamble to break even. This is why they back longshots on the last race of the day or why they hold onto badly performing stocks. The thing motivated many Leavers. People who had lost out from globalization, or felt discomfited by immigration, voted Leave because they felt they had little to lose from doing so.'

Related reading (not source): 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum (Wikipedia)

Existential drive

It has been claimed that Europeans can't understand the existential drive behind the British.

Democratic deficit in the European Union
The notion of a democratic deficit is the idea that the governance of the EU lacks democratic legitimacy. This led to an elected European Parliament in 1979, given the power to approve or reject EU legislation. Since then, usage of the term has broadened to describe newer issues facing the European Union. Voter turnout has fallen consecutively at the seven elections since the first in 1979 with turnout in 2014 at 42.54% of all European voters. The lowest of any national election in the 28 countries where turnout averages 68%.

Opinions vary as to whether the EU has democratic deficits or how it should be remedied if it does. Pro-Europeans reason the European Union ought to reform its institutions, making them more accountable to the tax payer, while Eurosceptics on the other hand reason the EU should experience a reduction in powers, rather than a further expansion, and subsequently often campaign for withdrawal altogether.

Source: Democratic deficit in the European Union (Wikipedia)

Related reading (not source): Impact of Brexit on the European Union (Wikipedia)

Benefits of the EU-dictatorship (appeal to egalitarianism)

European Union citizens have the right to free movement i.e. visa-free travel to other member states, settlement and employment across the EU. Free (within reason) to trade and transport goods, services and capital across supranational borders, as a supranational market, like one big country, with no restrictions on capital movements or incurred fees.

The right to vote in and run as a candidate in a local elections in the country where they live remains, but they have an additional right on top of what they already had, to "European elections" and the "European Citizens' Initiative". Consular protection in embassies of other EU member states even when an individuals country isn't represented there. The right to address the 'European Parliament', 'European Ombudsman', and other 'EU agencies' directly and in their own language, provided of course the issue raised is within that institution's competence. They get the legal protections of 'EU law', including the 'Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union' and its various acts and directives e.g 'protection of personal data', rights for crime victims, preventing and combating trafficking of human beings, 'equal pay', 'protection from discrimination in employment' on the grounds of religion or belief, sexual orientation and age. The EU also has its own 'European Ombudsman' office which can be approached directly.

Source: Citizenship of the European Union (Wikipedia)

The straw that broke the camel's back

Since its founding, the EU has operated among an increasing plurality of national and globalising legal systems. This has meant both the European Court of Justice and the highest national courts have had to develop principles to resolve conflicts of laws between different systems.

Source: European Union law (Wikipedia)

If the threats and senselessnesses of the EU-dictatorship are looked at, considered and analysed, in particular the threats and sanctions against Russia, and namely together with the United States - which of course has already fully grown into a serious international debacle - then comprehensive warlike machinations already threaten with the EU, the USA and Russia. And then only the EU-dictatorship carries the blame for this, which itself wants to incorporate the Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia, which is still advocated and striven for by the inexperienced Ukrainians, because they do not recognize the dictatorship-form of the EU.[6]

Source: Contact Report 611

At present, the European Union is a free association of sovereign states designed to further their shared aims. The United States of Europe is widely hypothesised, subsequently fictionalised and depicted as a theoretical future superpower, that will be as powerful, perhaps even more so, than the United States of America. Some commentators, such as T.R. Reid, Andrew Reding and Mark Leonard, have hypothesised that the power of this hypothetical United States of Europe will rival that of the United States of America itself, later in the twenty-first century. Mark Leonard cites seven factors behind his reasoning: Europe's large population, Europe's large economy, Europe's low inflation rates, Europe's central location in the world, the unpopularity and perceived failure of American foreign policy in recent years and certain European countries' highly developed social organisation and quality of life (when measured in terms such as hours worked per week and income distribution) which is comparable with that of the United States of America. Other commentators have claimed that the EU-dictatorship has been developing a sphere of influence, they're calling the "Eurosphere", which they postulate may one day rival the Anglosphere. Other commentators however have been more cautious with their assessments and seen it going another way, where instead a marriage and meshing of the values we share, may eventually give way to a world that is on the whole a more peaceful place to live, providing it drops the EU-"dictatorship" part of the arrangement.

Source: United States of Europe (Wikipedia)

Moving the goalposts

The reasons for the first member states to apply and be accepted, were primarily economic while the second enlargement was more political. The southern Mediterranean countries had just emerged from their own dictatorships and wanted to secure democratic systems through the EEC, while the EEC wanted to ensure the same thing' that their southern neighbours were stable and aligned with NATO. These two principal forces, economic gain and political security, have been behind enlargements ever since. However, with the much broader enlargements in 2004, public opinion in Europe has gradually turned against further expansion.

Source: Enlargement of the European Union (Wikipedia)

EU-dictatorship denying the antecedent (Rome wasn't built in a day)

Humans wanting to offer evidence has been the wrong way since time immemorial; therefore, it should never be declared that now this and that are to be proven. The human must always conduct a line of reasoning in all matters within themselves, specifically, through one's effective perceptions and cognitions, through one's thoughts and feelings as well as through one's deep reflections, from which cognizances and knowledge, experience and the essence of everything, wisdom, are gained. Wanting to prove (convince) something, is always wrong in every case if it concerns things that every human themselves must discover and recognise through one's own understanding and through one's own reasoning, from which then one's own inner line of reasoning emerges.[7]

Source: The Wrong Way (out of context)

Switzerland–European Union relations

The relations between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) are framed by a series of bilateral treaties whereby the Swiss Confederation has adopted various provisions of European Union law in order to participate in the Union's single market, without joining as a member state.

Source: Switzerland–European Union relations (Wikipedia)

Norway–European Union relations

The Kingdom of Norway is not a member state of the European Union (EU). It is associated with the Union through its membership in agreements in the European Economic Area (EEA) established in 1994, and by virtue of being a founding member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) which was founded in 1960, one of the two historically dominant western European trade blocs. Norway had twice considered joining the European Community and the European Union, but opted to decline following referenda in 1972 and 1994. The 'EEA agreement' grants Norway access to the EU's single market. From the 23,000 EU laws currently in force, the EEA has incorporated around 5,000 (in force) meaning that Norway is subject to roughly 21% of EU laws (2018).

Source: Norway–European Union relations (Wikipedia)

Further Reading

Links and navigationFuture f Mankind

Contact Report Index Meier Encyclopaedia
n A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

References

  1. ↑ Scots, Scottish of the country Scotland in the United Kingdom. The vote result was more in favour of remaining a part of the European Union than any other part of the United Kingdom.
  2. ↑ Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission
  3. ↑ Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament
  4. ↑ Sahra Wagenknecht, Member of the Bundestag, German left-wing politician, graduated economist and publicist.
  5. ↑ excerpt from Contact Report 655
  6. ↑ Contact Report 611
  7. ↑ The Wrong Way
Retrieved from "https://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/w/index.php?title=Brexit&oldid=29371"