We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

EU In/Out? Is a referendum the best way?


spider9
Resolved

Likes # 0

I'd always thought we were a Parliamentary Democracy, and, as such, we elect paid representatives to take difficult decisions on our behalf.

Membership of Europe is a difficult , complicated topic, and most people (including myself) would be hard pushed to appreciate all the pros and cons - so the populace will now be bombarded by media propaganda aimed at the lowest common denominator, I suspect.

Loads of 'crazy' EU stories will emerge and be fed to the Great British public, with 'good' EU stories being more difficult to show. Hence the media barons will, once again, get their way and politicians can then 'blame' us if it turns out bad.

Weak leadership I'm afraid.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Surely this all comes back to the same subject that's being discussed here?.

When all this started at the very beginning, it was the 'Common Market' that was originally proposed as a trading barrier,and people were informed about this on those terms, but that as now gone into a far wider and perhaps more sinister political circle, now called the European Union. Two totally different things, unless I and other like minded people are wrong?.

It wasn't all that very long ago, when the likes of English was being dropped in favour of European, including having a one currency to perhaps confirm or force this issue. Some countries adopted the Euro, others didn't, and the UK was one of them. We only need to look no further than the countries that adopted the Euro, and those that didn't, to see who as faired the better. But again, no doubt someone will state that I am wrong there as well?.

Like this post
Quickbeam

Likes # 0

It strikes me that the strong 'we must remain in Europe' camp are clutching to the comfort of the status quo, because they know it, and fear the unknown.

Yet, there are prominent Eurosceptic politicians, senior civil servants, industrialists and professionals. Are these people also unqualified imbeciles like us ungrateful hoi poloi that are not capable of assessing and making decisions of great importance to the future of the country?

Or are they a forest of unacknowledged visionaries that the lovers of the status quo cannot see for the dead wood before their eyes?

This get out argument is not just the small folks rebellion because it's the flavour of the day.

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

Quickbeam

'cannot see for the dead wood before their eyes?'

At the risk of making this 'my dad's bigger than your dad', I'd have to say that there are plenty on the 'out' side who are blinkered to the truth. See spuds still claiming no-one mentioned a federal Europe when we joined as just one example.

Or Flakk999 talking about 'we have stood as our own country making our own laws for the best part of a thousand years'.

That ignores the fact that, in 1688, a foreign prince invaded this country and imposed his view of what the law sgould be.

But, of course, that's the one point that no-one wants to talk about. Being in the EU is not about a trading partnership and it is not about building a superstate with centralised control. It's about Europeans not killing each other and invading each other's territory.

After the dreadful events in former Yugoslavia it was essential to ensure that other former communist states did not collapse into anarchy. The expansion of the EU in 2004 was about stabilising the eastern edge of Europe.

Like this post
Quickbeam

Likes # 0

fm

As Asterix the Gaul once said of the Roman invaders, 'we'll never be in Concord over this'.

Like this post
spider9

Likes # 0

fourm member

Methinks you are flogging the proverbial deceased equine, as it is obvious "there are none so blind....".

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

spider9

It's a bit of a hobbby (dead?)horse of mine. Even scientists cling to discredited results.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

fourm member

"see spuds still claiming no-one mentioning a federal Europe when we joined a just one example"

It wasn't 'claiming' but a fact that the 'for' politicians at the time, and that included Ted Heath, the Common Market was going to be a simpler trading exercise between European or more so Continental countries, that were considered suitable to join by their contributions. There was no mention, or at least if there was, it was kept very quiet, that this would eventually lead to One State, One Nation or more probable one 'united' Federal State being governed by one.

Remember that it wasn't all that long that WW1 and WW2 had not long finished, and this was still very deep in the hearts and minds of those living in the UK or Great Britain. I am not sure about the other countries or peoples on the borders of Europe or further a field and what they were thinking or hoping. I do believe that some of the past eastern bloc or communist countries were not even considered, because at that time, they had very little to offer, and some still do not to this day. And on that basis alone, it was not imagined that 'we' as a UK nation was preparing to give the UK away, as the terms and conditions changed, and by those who were not elected by the mainstay of public to make those decisions on the public's behalf.

This thread is becoming rather 'political correct', because as already apparently being possibly stated or suggested by other members, 'its like not seeing the woods for the trees', and perhaps some people do not have memories that stretch far back to the original Common Market idea being proposed or considered?.

Like this post
Woolwell

Likes # 0

Part of the problem is that hardly anyone knows who their MEP is. The constituencies are large and cover areas that may not naturally relate to each other eg the South West stretches from the Cotswold's to the Isles of Scilly and includes Gibraltar. A proportional system is also used. It is difficult to work out what the MEP's achieve apart from costing money.

Like this post
Woolwell

Likes # 0

spuds - We were misled by the media as much as the politicians in the early 1970's. With hindsight it is obvious that those in power knew that we were entering more than a Common Market (even the referendum included the words Common Market). The rest is history.

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Woolwell

I don't think it was the media that was totally to blame, because they were only being primed by the politicians of the day, that wanted this to go ahead.

Whatever the case, it was the public that was being misled, by thinking that perhaps ditching some of our previous long term and reliable world-wide trading partners for a nearer home 'Cooperative' was going to provide cheaper and far better products on demand. As you rightly say- The rest is history.

Like this post

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

Best Christmas 2014 UK tech deals, Boxing Day 2014 UK tech deals & January sales 2015 UK tech...

IDG UK Sites

Chromebooks: ready for the prime time (but not for everybody)

IDG UK Sites

Hands-on with Sony's latest smartglasses

IDG UK Sites

The 13 most inspirational Tim Cook quotes