They will pay more than before to access EU market and theyll still need to abide to EU rules to do so. Northern Ireland and Scotland voted to stay. There's already initiatives for Scotland to leave and for North to join Republic of Ireland. This could end up the stupidest move England made in a long time.

Considering the growth of anything EU has been in stagnation since 2006, there's no economic reason for the UK to still be apart of it. It'll open up a lot more avenues to trade with non-eu countries.

loads of plusses and minuses to follow in due course, however a lot of it'll take 10+ years to be take into effect.

So nothing to worry about just yet. I'll carry on drinking my tea and enjoying all my English goodies.

You'll stay in EU market, pay patritipation and play by same EU rules (open borders for workers and all). The only difference will be that you won't have a say in any decision made by EU. WP

50% of the rules were made by EU that pretty much forced the UK to follow it, discussions raised in the past were always voted for by all the other countries part of the EU and then only if it was successful, then it was implemented, now the UK have the ability to make their own rules and stand on their own two feet again instead of being forced to follow certain principles.

Of course you need to abide rules of the union you're in. Britain will remain defacto EU member and it will follow all the rules regarding free passage of capital and workers, that's a fact. You might wonder why is that so? Well you see, after Thatcher raped british industry Britain now doesn't make anything but financial services. Britain can't eat, wear, drive or clean toilets with financial services and on the other side, citizen of EU and EU companies now can't use British bank services, or it will be more expensive. Take a few years for that to sink in, I'm sure imigrans will somehow be blamed even for your retarded populations votes

Where is your fair share of refugees? Did you take your fair share of refugees, Croatia?

Every refugee who who asked for asylum was given asylum. Very few asked for it tho. Are you suggesting we should imprison people who don't want to stay here?

Croatia took in 400k Bosnian refugees while we were at war 1991-1995. Considering we have a population of little over 4 million, that's like Britain taking in 6 million.

britain does'nt take it 6 million, it takes in 3 million and 3 million emigrate which is near enough even each year, the population would be 45 million is nobody was allowed in

emigration is whatever nobody mentions

Couldn't be more wrong.

It's very difficult to challenge such a well-researched, cogently stated position. Ironclad argument there. Oh wait, you've just presented a conclusion with absolutely no support, nevermind. Overwatch flag explains a lot.

You wouldn't know if my opinion was well-researched or not. I would only provide evidence for someone who wouldn't make such assumptions, as I don't want to waste my time on Anons like yourself.

And how much did their say matter when they were a part of it? :P

They have 73 out of 751 seats in the EU parliament. Only France and Germany have more, cos they have greater population

Sure, but how many of the votes they did went their way?

I like the idea of the EU but it's just messed up and going the wrong way



.. also too much scaremongering gets people's backs up which is kinda sad...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36505735 trade imbalance Sir James Dyson talks about is very interesting so there is no chance of being taxed as we import much more than export. Also if some countries throw their dummies out China will just step up and become a huge trade partner with UK instead

We maybe be seen as a tiny country but we are 3rd ranked for importing German goods (mainly cars I suspect!) http://www.worldstopexports.com/germanys-top-import-partners/ they need us more than we need them so all this talk about paying more to access euro markets will only backfire imho

I see Switzerland withdrew their application to EU 1 week before UK referendum vote http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/680342/Sw...in-vote-EU

However let's rejoice and all live happily and help EU make the world a better place, trade, jobs, alliances and positive relationships and we all prosper!

What people don't know is with the UK leaving the EU, it opens up massive gateways to trade with all other bigger partners than have to worry about appeasing all the European countries.

People are just scared of change, change is good in this instance and at the moment no one knows how this is going to affect UK and EU as whole. It'll just take some time that's all.

What massive gateways? And what is there to trade?
The companies still had THE freedom to trade with whom they wanted before, right?

The vote is ofcourse a result of EU costing too much and ofcourse The immigration and border problems that EU has huge problems with.

Yeah they had the freedom to trade with whoever they wanted, however massive profits were split into countries part of the EU, kind of like a taxation of some sorts where now if they choose to do business elsewhere they could and if they also wanted to reinvest it back into the country and also bring back a lot of the industries that were lost. That might takes years but it'll be something to look forward to.

Overall the EU has become a massive bleeder of funds and since 2006 has made a lot of countries question if it's feesable to continue in the direction it's currently going, hence why now a lot of the other countries are going through the same motion of wanting to exit the EU.

There's still shit tons of speculation on what's going to happen and people are already starting to write up petitions to have another vote.

however massive profits were split into countries part of the EU, kind of like a taxation of some sorts

You mean import duty?
I'm not quite sure how that is divided between EU. Can't find any data about it.

But if you look at it from customer/business point of view, the import duty will remain but will be managed solely by UK instead.
A new tax will most likely be added to imports from EU which apparently makes up the majority of goods and services which will increase the cost of everything. That also goes for parts that are not manufactured in the UK but are needed to assemble products that UK then exports.

EU has trade agreements with non EU countries which might be better for smaller members where size does in fact matter. A union as large as EU has leverage for negotiations. UK is strong on it's own.. no doubt about that, but can it do better? If not, prices will increase.
At least UK has a better chance regarding free trade with Canada, thats a start.. i'm quite curious how all of this unfolds.

Would you agree to be castrated for a bigger salary lets say 30% more? (I don't know if the idiot does understand the analogy)

(I don't know if the idiot does understand the analogy)

Ehm.. i've kept my comment impartial and just stated facts, no need for name calling.
Every person has his own point of view. I don't know yours, i don't know your story.
My guess would be that you're saying, if UK stayed in EU it wouldn't have a future and is money really worth that.

If so, i'm curious to know, which parts are supposed to be fatal?


But if you're talking about how EU is draining the life force out of UK .. then please.. do not reply and just move along.

On scaremongering, 100% right. A lot more people wanted to leave the EU before the tories sent out those leaflets out to our door at our cost telling us how it's a bad mistake to leave the EU.

I feel sad if our english friends leave us, I am strongly convinced they are making a huge mistake. It might indeed also push forward Scotland and North Ireland independances in order to stay in UE.

Economic reasons aside, I am very concerned to see nationalisms rising all over, in difficulties we need more solidarity not isolationism. :(

But this vote isn't mandatory only advisory, they might decide to ignore its result even it would be hard to.


Side note: David Cameron is an idiot.

relations btw nations is not made with feelings but real life facts.

EU is a dictature driven by Washington and Bruxel. The financial place the City of London has nothing to fear from a brexit.

UK never was in the EU fully. And im not even talking about financial place the City of London.

EU should never have added countries with so much lower and different life style.

France is closer to Spain Italia and other latin countries in terms of culture.

Thats just how we are.

EU will collapse just like USSR collapsed.

Your sentimentalism is quite a caricature of a brainwashed "citizen". Talking about isolationism (another novlangue term used to cricticise without arguing) while EU and USA is making us isolated. Not to mention EU is a racial project. Its about gathering white people together. While for exemple they are not allowing us anymore to make commercial things with some countries. France has high links to Africa and south america, + part of south Asia.

isolationism is a precise term, allow me to requote:

"Isolationism is a category of foreign policies institutionalized by leaders who asserted that their nations' best interests were best served by keeping the affairs of other countries at a distance."

Perfectly suits the situation, thank you for trying.


I am not happy with several european positions, But I prefer to make it change rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Looks like you dont understand how the Europena union gouvernance work. It IS a GOUVERNANCE. You get it? Its not normal relations between sovereign countries.

e: Check out what USA did with the GLADIO link to kick communists parties out of Italia. You wil understand what is going on in France now. That is, only if you care about France which is your country too.

It wont take you long since you have internet.

Italians are well aware of that. This is also why we have very strong links with italians, we, the french people. We also have very strong links with countries very close to us, Spain, Belgium, Swiss, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. That and MANY other countries.

Its not about stoping relations with other EU countries, its about having normal and balanced relations. We are still going to have strong relations with Germany and all the other EU countries you know.

I was like you when i was 16, i thought EU was peace and love.

I am not naive, and I am probably older than you. And I feel more European than French, I am not into patriotism. I like my country, but not at the expense of others. I traveled a lot and links between people are everywhere, you just have to find them and make them grow rather than exacerbate the differences.


I am not convinced you even understand your own arguments. Gouvernance is mainly by the Council of the European Union, which is composed by European ministers with a rotation for presidency. Not some Illuminatis.

Since years in every European countries governments facing internal problems are just saying "hey it is not our fault, it is European fault !" which is a blatant lie but a convenient excuse.

Here is the result.

Illuminati?

You are close to a Godwin point.

you should be ashamed to feel more european that French but thats your problem, you decide to be a collabo.

Btw since you think i'm racist let me tell you : I am only half french myself and i know the difference btw patriotism and nationalism which you seem to allegedly mix.

you also think because we want to leave EU = we are racists. just wow.

EU is led by non ellected people. Not even our representative decide that.

you are happy that EU is destroying what people died for here in France? im talking about the national Council for France's resistance (CNR). yeah you are more than happy to see supra national network destroying what made the 30 glorious after ww2.

Oh and btw im not saying we want to leave EU because it will be better JUST for us. It will be better for EVERYONE.

you think EU is peace? Have you seen what the USA is doing in Ukrain? you want to be part of that? You though EU was peace? EU is war.

So you are not racist but you want EU. Tell me. Whats the point of EU? Why ally with white countries? Why not with mediterranean countries? Just take a map and read the great history of France and tell me we are closer to Lithuania than to Algeria.

e: even at the very start of EU general De Gaulle which is world wild praised said it was meant to fail, because its led by USA and not european countries.

Btw you might have 2-5 years more than me but that doesnt mean you are smarter. With your condescendant and unargumented posts.

nationalism = my country is better than any other.
patriotism = my country is respectful of any other countries. I am loyal to my ancesters and people who fought for what my country is, its history, be it good or bad parts, they are all parts of us.

You lake fundamental values, you should read Simone Weil : "L'enracinement", written during WW2 and published after her death, explaining why France failed vs Germany. Oh and yes she is jewish but she is very much tell us to have roots.

kapiter alias Mr. ragequit you are definitly a CHARLIE.

wow :) :) :)

You're building your own conclusions from assertions I never said nor even think.

Feel free to continue this paranoid nonsense, I pass. Or ragequit if it makes feel you happier :)

Dude, are you for real? You're escalating with every reply.

1) "Collabo"? Are you using Nazi-occupation metaphors for EU citizens? Top-of-comparometer-stuff right there.

2) Be cool and read. No-one called or "thought" you're racist, there are no race-issues involved here. (Let's keep it that way.)

3) "Non ellected" ? Allow me to refreshen your memory: It's called "European Parliament" for a reason.

4) 2013 CNR founding day became national holiday in France. 2015 members of CNR became enshrined in the Pantheon. What does that even have to do with EU???

5) How exactly is Russia's aggression in Ukrain a proof of "EU is war?" Neither of these countries is in the EU, you know. And wtf is "USA" doing in this sentence? I hope this was a brain-fart, or else you watch too many Truthers-videos.

6) Well, you tried to be "friends" with Algeria, turns out to be, they didn't want your friendship and 300.000 Algerians died to free their country from France-ship. But sure, before reaching the hand to Germany or UK why not Morroco again...

7) Can you please explain how USA leads the EU? One concrete example please. It's been a few decades now. No problem to find plenty of US legislation in EU by now, surely!
Maybe guns, or death penalty, or 1bn $ election campains, or GMO food, or junk medicine sold as cancer cure, or no-insurance-for-poor or 50k$ tuition fees, or...?

8) Not really sure, why you think patriotism and EU go against each other. Do you think patriots don't like to travel without visa, sell products abroad with less tax, eat olives, pasta and beer in top quality or enjoy freedom of work/settle/invest on the whole continent?

9) Lastly, do I understand, that you use "Charlie" as a slurword? So you don't feel pitty for the french authors that were massacred? Please elaborate.

He's will probably not defend once challenged properly, at least he didn't do me. Don't waste your time typing for him

Another liberal scum.
The quota law referring to so-called "refugees" aka profiteering invaders supposed to be voted unilaterally, when this was not being possible the EU bureaucrats CHANGED IT to "majority". Of course that Western countries applauded the initiative in order to get rid of some of the African invaders. As the representatives of one single country cannot be a majority bye bye independence.

nationalism is on the rise because of the elephant in the room noone is talking about, the refugee crisis, and the refugeecrisis is also the reason brexit happenend, but yeah, youre just another guy who likes to talk around such things, youd be a welcome figure in german politics

eh

it's good and bad. it remains to be seen what the consequences will be.

people wanted to be in charge of their own country. too bad leaving the leftie union means voting for other idiots (UKIP, Putin).

I want to get off 2016's wild ride.

gl

It's good for us, the EU has not been fair to Britain and we were the second largest contributors. Soon Netherlands, Italy, Spain and Portugal will leave too. Maybe it'll collapse.

No, they wont leave. Its likely GB will lose more members than EU :)

We'll see!

You can't count only in term of budget, you shall also add all incomes generated by services, financial & industrial activities while being in UE market.

You will probably better measure it when going out :)

Indeed, France is giving 22 billion to EU and we are getting 14 billion in return this is just robbery. Same from UK and Germany.

Meanwhile Poland that is giving next to nothing is getting +16 billion from us. +16 bilion and allowing high contigent of US military forces and bases (thanks to their hate of Russia says oncle Sam). Notice that every countries before getting in EU are getting in NATO. Look at all the ex USSR countries rating the NATO and then enetring the EU. This is just wrong. USA strategy to contain Russia, everyone knows that.

Think about that next time you see people/media telling you EU financed this or that in your country = hyppocrisy propaganda and lies.

People are now more and more aware of all this thanks to internet. This is why we have terrorism now, they want laws to filter and have full control over internet. thats what they are doing right now in France.

Don't worry, every EUR we got from EU got stolen, wasted, sent back or spent on aquaparks and sidewalks.
It's fine.

plz send more

18-24 years old voters (64% stay)
65+ years old voters (58% leave)

So hillbillies and pensioners decided. It sounds a lot like election in Croatia :)

Yeah it seems as if more young people have voted to remain in the EU here, I guess I'm one of the exceptions. They say "old people shouldnt be able to vote because dead soon etc", but they mostly don't even know the history of the EU and have no idea about the treaties and legislations. They are generally not making an informed decision :P

Hope youre not refering to Boris Johnson's huge stack of lies and false myths, this guy is so full of shit.

Boris Johnson is the english Donald Trump, which says a lot.

I'm generally a Labour supporter so no, I didn't listen much at all to anything Boris Johnson said.

Unfortunately, he is now comforted and appears like the winner.

gl with that creepy dude :(

Yea he is a buffoon, also he was the mayor of London and London voted overwhelmingly to remain in EU.

oh well.

Young people are socialist human trash for the most part I guess.

BRICKIT

If it leads to more genuine freedom, then good. If it doesn't, then bad but at least the idea of protectionism will prove harmful sooner on a smaller territory.

Arguments invoking some loss of free trade opportunities, while the EU has been a tarrif fortress against the rest of the world, are laughable.

The end of the EU is nigh. GL all.

Maybe. Don't forget Obama was against UK leaving the EU and for a good reason at that. UK was a puppet country of the US. The US lost any influence they had in the 'union' and that burns their ass, and it rightfully should. There is nothing stopping the EU now for lifting sanctions off the Russian Federation. No one really understands what a blow to the NATO this is. Also Germany and France have already expressed their disgust with the UK decision to leave the EU. So did the US. It is going to be interesting to see how things develop now. The ones that voted to leave the EU were lied to. Things are obviously coming out as they are, finally and it's not a pretty picture for the UK. Scotland is leaving them and so is Ireland while the Northern Ireland is more than happy to join Ireland.
One more thing to consider is who will take point when it comes to leading the country now? UK is very much in a weak state, the EU will not consider them as a 'player' in any negotiations as they have lost all leverage they had. One that might be elected to run the country in this state, might as well be someone who was pro EU and that is when things will get a lot more complicated.
Things might take a different turn very early on and the UK might 'reverse' their decision. Nothing is gained by UK leaving the EU, they won't notice the prosperity they were promised, quite the opposite. And this very much could bring Europe to brink of war within the next 5-10 years. Expecting France and Germany to carry all the negative financial burden could very well prove too much for them and could also decide to leave the EU.

I think that's part of the problem, no? UK voters, whether correctly or not, felt UK was "carrying a burden" by being in the EU. Now only France and Germany are the major two economies left to support some of the problems some member nations have caused by their own internal issues.

There is a similar sense in the US where the individual states do not agree with federal policies being dictated from Washington. The states want more freedom to self-determine their own policies. For the UK, and many states, the perception is that they gain very little from that relationship.

I'm not saying whether that perception is correct or not. Just that this boils down to a principal-agent problem and the "agent" (in this case, Brussels or Washington) does not benefit the principal.

it sucks for me, as my business imports equipment from Italy...

bedise some import tax, what else will change? ... i do not think alot will change.

we use £ in the uk and italy uses euros

£/euro exchange rate has fallen significantly today

every time this happens buying a new batch of stock represents a price increase to us on equipment which is already perceived by our customers to be expensive but has fairly low margins to us, so we have to take the hit.

That's only temporary :)

maybe but whilst deflated it costs us money and we are a medium sized family company i.e not a load of cunts

also trading regulations within the EU that exist help us remain competitive by making it illegal for manufacturers to refuse to sell to you, it's pretty complicated and i'm not going to go into detail but without it there would most likely be problems.

refusing to sell, w00t? ... how can basic human will be illegal, if some1 is saying, i do not like jamiro, hence fuck you u cant buy baftas here. I am very surprised over this law. I am probably over simplifying it? But interesting idd.

Are you manufacturing gaming chairs?

it's in the ventilation/ac sector

selling gaming chairs will always be the dream though, maybe gaming ventilation could be something we could branch out into

how about gaming chair featuring ventilation?

or ventilation featuring a gaming chair

haha

eu seems like a bad idea because it was mainly a tool to fight against soviet union, now with ussr long gone its policies are way over the board so to speak,

russia has nothing against europe, seriously we cant even get our own economy going let alone influence others countries economies.

a europe without eu will be a much more balanced place in the sense that each country will decide for themselves what they want to do with their budget and not spend it on economic enslavement of lesser countries.

"it was mainly a tool to fight against soviet union"

what

NATO, EU... all the same shit.

When they found Hitler's dead body he had a small piece of paper in his pocket.
It was his TODO list.

1. Create EU, lol

Until the EU stops being a dictatorship of belgian (=french) buereaucrats and gets some semblance of democratic structures I cannot blame anyone for not wanting to be part of it.

If you think it is ruled by one nation you are wrong, it is ruled by people thinking nations are like hostels, they hate nations. They are a hyperclass.

do you even know how it works? of course not

watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szIGZVrSAyc from roughly 30 minutes on. Context: The younger person was greek's finance minister for maybe 6 months last year before resigning.

Such a shame! :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7OEvo-GjUg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnqr1FDK8QI

megalol

cuntface.jpg

[img1]

Fixed

It's a shame really. The biggest cities (London, Manchester etc) voted to remain in the EU. As did most people of a younger generation.

I mean the EU isn't perfect, but it's probably better than the incoming shit storm. I guess we will wait and see.

Also there is a petition gaining ground to make London an independent state. That would be interesting :P.

I'm from London as well, I didn't cast my vote because I couldn't be sure which way to vote, but as soon as it hit that we were out I did feel a bit sad :( Pretty sure having independent states isn't going to fly though.

That's good, wish more people would stay away from voting when not sure (or care).

It is going well for Switzerland though, so see no reason that it would be different for UK. Think Norway is not in EU either if I'm not mistaken.

That's good, wish more people would stay away from voting when not sure (or care).

Yea, I completely agree, I really don't think anyone should cast votes unless they can present well researched arguments with a strong belief in their accuracy and without bias. Unfortunately, when you come down to asking people what their real reasons are for voting in any particular direction for anything up for debate, it usually comes down to stupid shit that has nothing to do with the real issues e.g. Women voting for Hilary Clinton purely for being a woman and not actually looking at how awful her record is on sticking to anything she's ever said and objectively being totally full of shit, or Donald Trump as a better example.

The problem with with this particular vote is the fear of the unknown, there are certainly pluses and minuses on both sides, and with so much mud being flung from both sides, it's hard to know whose presenting the truer and better picture. I'm happy I stayed away because I personally would've felt like I had blood on my hands if I woke to the news this morning, not that I think we're doomed or anything but I can see problems down the line:

1. The EU could rape us to make us an example for anyone else even thinking of leaving the EU.
2. I can no longer just hop to any country in the EU without a visa.
3. Buying things online from anywhere in the EU(which I sometimes do) are likely to be taxed, who knows how heavy those taxes will be.
4. Large companies and the big banks in Canary Wharf which generate a lot of the GDP of this country could relocate to other countries.

The pros I personally see:

1. We get back our sovereignty to some degree, how much will depend by how much the EU will fuck us now, but to some degree we can call our own shots.
2. We can control Immigration to more reasonable levels and use a points system like Australia - I'm the last person to hate on immigrants as I believe they are often the hardest working people in this country but I do believe the levels we have now are unsustainable.
3. Cooller

It is going well for Switzerland though, so see no reason that it would be different for UK. Think Norway is not in EU either if I'm not mistaken.

Yea, those countries are doing well. Australia is another country (Although I know it's not European) which is independent without any union and has been flourishing. I hope we can do as well as them. I'm cautiously hopeful.

you could have at least voted C O O L L E R !

Very glad, was up all night following it, it was like watching a game of tower defence seeing the numbers go up and down and preying you made it through against all odds.

Brits are not against the Europe, its just being part of it was like being told "do you want a hunk of shit with that ice-cream", and then when you said no, it was like, "what you don't like ice cream, everyone likes ice-cream what's the matter of you!"

Some people just didn't get the fundamentals. Worse of all, many people were happy to eat that ice-cream regardless.And call you names for not eating it too. It was so fucked up.

And then we had people like OBAMA and the EU making threats.
If you don't do this, we will do this, and this will happen. Does anyone else think the USA would have even voted for the same thing?

And so the whole thing felt rotten, and I think people were sick of it.

There is NO REASON why we can't have a great relationship with Europe, but not have it cost us so much, not just in terms of money, but eroding the souls of people along the way.

IMO the EU is finished, this isn' a Britain thing, much of Europe has had enough of being normalised.

And its not just the poor.

Swansea where I come from voted out, even wales as a whole vote out, and we actually benefit financially from being in the EU, as we're kinda poor compared to England. But even that wasn't enough, and I feel very proud my fellow welshies decided to bite the hand that 'fed' it, because it shows they know they can do better. And we can, we just need the right leaders, instead of complacent nobodies who were happy to get by. As long as you have a country that still believe, anythign is possible, it when they no longer belive are you fucked and that is what the EU will do to you. They'll make you stop caring/fighting.

If the EU want to make us pay to show your other member states what will happen if they think about going then go ahead. Trust me, you'll lose that game too and expose yourself further. It backfired here even with Beckham, Obama, Branson, Dead Politicians being used for guilt and fear. It just doesn't work. On top of this ,elevating people as racists instead of discussing the truth, ended up making and more and more people angry. Where they wanted out. Nothing was worth this.

IMO much of Europe is not happy and this will show them that you can actually have an important vote to change and it doesn't have to be corrupt and you have a choice.

IMO the only future in Europe is a civil war. Maybe such a bad thing needs to happen to reset some rules.

Good luck.

/Pulls up the drawbridge and opens the popcorn.

you fought the Nazi Germany in WW2. Now you are the Nazi. How do you feel about that?

Leftist media propaganda at its best
only the poor and lower classes believe in the "brown ppl steal our jobs"
generally the European Union didn't bring just positives in terms of economic benefits.
If you honestly believe the main reasoning is immigrants then you obviously are one of those "moderate to far lefties"

I'm not sure where you are getting at with this. I'm in no way implying that immigration is the problem here. It shouldn't be. It's the lower class old farts who voted to leave the union. Check the polls. Everyone above 50+ voted to leave the EU. Makes sense, let the young work for our sorry asses, let the young go to war for our sorry asses. The none-working force should not be allowed to vote. Basically, THEY believe their jobs are being stolen by the brown people while they don't recognize how well they, themselves, are actually doing.

There is no way to see the age of voters. Anything that says about ages is just bs. Voters ages were not disclosed because the actual ballot papers did not have any info about ages, they are completely anonymous with just a "stay" or "leave" option.

Its based on polls not votes. Companies that do these kind od pre election polls gather all sorts of info about people they inquire.

I don't know how it is outside of poorland but polls are a joke.
It's always the same.
Young, open-minded, cultured, educated people from big, modern, fucking futuristic cities are voting for the "correct" answer ;)

If you honestly believe the main reasoning is immigrants then you obviously are one of those "moderate to far lefties"

lots of righties (in the uk) seemed to believe that as well. And most of them voted out

I didn't say you needed a civil war, I said I think its coming.

Actually I know its coming, I just wanted to see what it was like to be humble.. Feels horrible BTW.

Europe is doing fine. Veeery far from civil war.

I think that the number one enemy of Europe right now is the liberal trash. The fight against the African hordes would be in vain if these traitors keep bringing them here. Only armed resistance against the liberal elites and the mass media can turn things back. Don't let yourselves be deceived. They are weak. They are pacifists who think that flowers can beat guns. Let them use flowers then and let the strongest prevail. One liberal trash of the elites was stabbed in the UK these days and the entire liberal elite is scared, this is why the hesitation from their part to ignore the Brexit vote. They are a womanized class in search for a man to rule them. This is weakness. This site is also mostly youngsters who went through the propaganda machine of multiculturalism that is running wild across most universities since the Jews started to fund them in the 50s. They like to talk tough and pretend to be smart but they are milk drinkers. I would not have high hopes from this site to convince people about the justness of the UK independence vote. You are wasting your time here.

I hope for your own sake that you do know there are a few lefties that don't mind cracking a fascist skull or two or cutting a couple of nazi throats right? Some of them are "even" women...

both sides had bitter campaigns, no doubt about it.

if it 'backfired' in the sense that people voted to leave 'because im going to do what the opposite of the establishment and celebrities tell me to do, i'll show them!' then those people shouldn't be voting at all if this is their only reasoning.

what a surprise JamJam thinks we need civil war in Europe. Do you think most of europe is destitute or something?

Congrats Britain!

aint congrats nothing, briton is now poorer then france, and will loose 600 billion a year in tax, things keep going the way the ftse was going

never mind crying about 300m, of loose change briton has to give the EU

lol what? Where do you get these facts? From the Sun newspaper by anychance?

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22poorer+t...+france%22

some parts are poorer then poland

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-26179...t-off.html

You're basically comparing parts/regions of wealth in the UK to whole countries such as France and Poland where both of those countries also have cities/regions/towns that are piss poor.

As for the drop in the exchanges, that doesn't mean jack shit in regard to "UK BEING POORER THAN FRANCE" Those are just clickbait bullshittery post titles when they're purely reporting on the highs and lows of the economic infrastructure.

It's pretty much how when Trump gets elected as president for the USA shit will crumble slightly and you'll see bullshit titles pop up on the demise of democracy and reason in USA.

its where most of the tax comes from the goverment has to spend on the country each year, by taxing corporation profits

128 billion pound loss in a day is a bad sign for next years budget, which is normally 1.3 trillion

less money, everything is going to be worse off and britain is poorer then france

We're still not poorer "then" France.

will be if the pound goes back to normal, weaker pound will have a few extra exports to balance the books

stronger pound, means corporations just buying more stocks using the currency exchange rates

and nothing will have changed

Dude, there is no poorer thAn poland in the scale...

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-repor...are-dumber

The world gets smaller, people get scared and attach themselves to some notion of region based pride. History repeats itself. Let's hope that this time it doesn't end in a war, or that if it does, there's some sort of combat robot with the exact same controls as Quake so we get to stay behind our monitors.

will it have aircontrol?

No, it needs to be vq3 movement, because otherwise there wouldn't be enough soldiers.

fuck it then, cya in the trenches m8

Nations are natural. It's part of humanity.

Dunno about nations as political institutions, but the romanticised notions of a national identity we're seeing these days are pretty much a 18th/19th century development. I'll bite though, why is a nation state a natural form of government? Personally I've always felt nationality is just another us vs them mechanic.

haha what a bunch of idiots. from contributing nothing to eu (aside from pakis, hi draven) and reaping most of the benefits they decide to shoot themselves in the foot.

only time i was happier was when twin towers crashed.

you sound lovely.

lmao are you here on this website to just spit ill informed information? You clearly have no idea on how the EU operates and how/what the UK has contributed since joining it in '73.

I mean let's be honest, I don't think I've ever seen you write anything intelligent that could contribute as a positive on this website, regardless of the topic being discussed.

At least provide us with some solid ideas and/or facts.

just typical esdf :P

Just a typical cunt

i'm not going to explain economy to a kid who still rides elephants to school.

anyway, good riddance.

Oh you're so well informed but hey, you're just a little shit poster who has to satisfy his desires and urges to just bash on the keyboard and throw out a few words with no meaning.

So throw some more insults and quips at things you have zero clue about, makes for nice reading before bed.

We could all come and give you a hug because you've clearly lacked the affection from your parents, it's okay. We understand.

wow, didn't know riding elephants is such a big trigger to south africans. at least that should be pretty standard and affordable to everyone there.

taking the bait DREJK style there!

I forgot there was an option to just ignore/block shitnoobs like that cuntbucket. R.I.P ESR 2016.

chill elephantinho.

EU is just another layer of bureaucracy that can be bought by corporations. The smaller and more decentralized a government is, the more it cares about individual people. In theory.

EU is a layer of bureaucracy to keep European countries cooperating peacefully and have a strong united voice on the world stage.
without European unity we'll become just pawns for Russia/USA/China to maneuver in their geo-political wars.

anyway, EU needs to rethink their goals and recalibrate its aproach on certain subjects (migrants crisis..), otherwise you throw everyone in the direction of pandering demagogues and far right crazies who are not afraid to tackle those subjects, no matter how crudely.

I don't think you need EU for the countries to cooperate peacefully among themselves. It is 2016 and Europe is literally the oldest part of the civilised world. It is not like Germany will invade Poland ever again.

We do need an united front for negotiations with Russia/USA/China but it should not come at the expense of pointless regulations and monetary inflexibility. ECB is manipulating the market and Bank of England wants to manipulate it a bit differently. Why not? That won't make Russia invade.

you can't have cooperation in a single market without rules and a body to enact/enforce them at transnational level.

separate treaties between each combination of countries in Europe would result in more bureaucracy than the EU could possibly churn out.

also Russia would surely advance into Europe using salami tactics and their big gas leverage. do you really want to reach that point of no return?

I'm not sure if that's true, dividing people is also effective in keeping them politically inactive. But let's assume it is.

It's hard to stretch the theory up to reality if there are only two main layers in question, your country and the EU. At that point, the particulars of those two matter much more than such theory.

Surprised they had the guts, but then again, seeing how EU went from "more democracy, less bureaucracy, free market" to "quotas, relegations and restrictions" in less than 10 years, not to mention the immigration propaganda and pretending there are no problems related, its not as shocking.

Good ol' times when EU was actually teaching the post-communist countries how to be real democracies. It has no credibility to teach anyone anything now since it let Greece take advantage of us instead of kicking them out like they deserved. Because guess why, German and French banks would lose money on that.

Here's what Britain thinks of the EU...

I don't see the drama. What's wrong with smaller more manageable countries? I don't get the big deal. It's not like the EU wasn't extremely bureaucratic.

Theres no drama, its just globalists being hysterical.

U just think large political units are a bad idea. Look at how undemocratic countries like Russia and China are. Even the US.

I don't get what's so bad about small and local. Look at Norway. If Norway was and overlarge country, I bet it would be more of a mess.

It was a joke. Too bad it was so close, should have been like a minimum of 60-40, either way. There should be a re-voting tbh.

I don't see the drama. What's wrong with smaller more manageable countries? I don't get the big deal. It's not like the EU wasn't extremely bureaucratic.

congratulations people of UK making a great decision!

I honestly wish the US would break up. We'd probably be more democratic. And less war too. Taxes would probably be spent on more useful things then perpetual war.


On a side not, I noticed the same thing thats going on with this is exactly how people that promote secession in the US are treated.

If you are a secessionist that doesn't like how your government is ran and think it's way to bureaucratic and doesn't work for the people, then your automatically for some reason labeled a racist. Or a confederate sympathizer.

Don't really see what's so bad about small countries. Iceland is small and easily threw out there corrupt bankers. That's hard to do with a large country of 300 million plus people. If I live in California, do you know how hard it would be for me to do a protest at wallstreet when it's thousands of miles away?

Or just limit the size of the federal govt and give tax revenues back to the states... No need for secession. Federal govt still important for natl defense, large scale science and infrastructure investments, and enforcing interstate laws. Otherwise, top down dictation to all states just pisses off some while benefiting others. If you disagree with your state's policies/taxes, move. Tiebout efficiency.

I'm the opposite of libertarian. I won't debate with you ayn rand loony shit.

Do you think the US government will stop outsourcing jobs to the third world for cheap lab-our exploitation?

do you think the US government will ever stop the permanent war state that we've had since the founding fathers? You know, back int he 19th century when we killed off indians and stole their territory? Or that we have military bases all over the world and are engaged in a perpetual racist war in the middle east?

It's ironic how programmed americans have become to hate secession despite the fact every 4th of july they celebrate the signing of the declaration of Independence... which is a secession document.

As a black man, do you think I don't see how hypocritical it is when they say the US saved blacks during the civil war, only to establish jim crow afterwards and now have implemented jim crow 2.0, which is the prision industrial complex? which incarcerates more blacks then what the confederacy ever did.

I think a seceded northwest would do just fine being out of the US. We could spend our taxes on healtcare, education and other needs instead of killing people all over the world.

You mean to reply to someone else? I'm no libertarian... if that's what you took away from my comments, you're very confused about things.

which incarcerates more blacks then what the confederacy ever did.

is along side of

there are more human trafficing today than ever
there are more abortions today than ever
there are more people wearing skinny jeans then ever

It is , without dramatic retort, a incorrect statistic considering different scale of populations and their properties

Yes, lets create Department of Federal Expense Reduction and employ another 10k useless mother fuckers there. Once the fascists (corporations + bureaucrats) take over, any well meant initiative will be just turned around and fight against people while pretending to fight for them.

I've been thinking about a concise way of advertising public choice economics and you knocked it out of the park for me ;D That's exactly it - an explanation for how it pays for state agents to fuck up what they're attempting to solve, even if the initial intentions were noble.

Actually I stole that from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

secession + logical consistency = libertarianism

Libertarianism has nothing to do with secession. It is about maximizing personal liberties - freedom to do X and freedom from Y. That does not depend on whether a portion of a nation secedes or not.

How can you respect individual rights and at the same time stop a group of people from peacefully leaving a political unit?

Plus, let's find a few quotes from the renowned libertarians:

"I think the founders of this country believed that states should be able to secede. They went together voluntarily, it's a voluntary contract and they should leave. But, of course, that principle was destroyed with the Civil War." Ron Paul

“Once one concedes that a single world government is not necessary, then where does one logically stop at the permissibility of separate states? If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as in a state of impermissible ‘anarchy’, why may not the South secede from the United States? New York State from the Union? New York City from the state? Why may not Manhattan secede? Each neighbourhood? Each block? Each house? Each person?” Murray Rothbard

"No people and no part of a people shall be held against its will in a political association that it does not want." Ludwig von Mises

"We must promote the idea of secession. Or more specifically, we must promote the idea of a world composed of tens of thousands of distinct districts, regions, and cantons, and hundred of thousands of independent free cities such as the present day oddities of Monaco, Andorra, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Greatly increased opportunities for economically motivated migration would thus result, and the world would be one of small [classically] liberal governments economically integrated through free trade and an international commodity money such as gold. " Hans Hermann Hoppe

Agree with them or not, libertarians kind of gravitate toward support for secession, which would be weird if personal liberty had nothing to do with it.

If by some fantastic change of opinion everyone suddenly became libertarian, there would be no need for secession. It is only a means to an end. Libertarianism's end is not secession. It's maximizing personal liberty.

Those quotes are in the context of a govt that is not libertarian and the argument is that people (or groups of people) should be able to self-determine their own gov't.

"If by some fantastic change of opinion everyone suddenly became libertarian, there would be no need for secession."

That would be the end-game of secession. Everyone concludes that private property cannot be legitimately infringed upon and hence the state is no longer justified.

If you look at definitions, it becomes obvious that a state cannot be libertarian.

Libertarianism is a political philosophy that treats defensive violence as the only justified kind of violence. State is an institution that grants itself a territorial monopoly on legal use of initiatory violence (legal by its own decree). Therefore, these two concepts cannot be a feature of any entity at the same time.

Your view that libertarianism is about maximizing personal liberty leads you through a problematic path. For example, a voluntary association that requires its members to give away 50% of their income to the association is entirely compatible with libertarianism as long as the membership is voluntary. On the other hand, if there is a state that only demands a head tax of 10$ per year but puts you in prison if you disobey is not compatible with libertarianism, unless you agreed to this arrangement. If you measure the extent of personal liberty by the amount or share of income you're keeping, the latter case would come out ahead, but would involve an infringement on property rights, whereas the former case would not.

Therefore, support for secession all the way down to the individual level (from the most oppressive or the least oppressive state) follows directly from libertarian principles.

I think the voluntary versus forced association example still works with my definition. If the association is voluntary, that's liberty. If forced, not. Liberty need not depend on taxation if it is done without coercion.

"I think the voluntary versus forced association example still works with my definition. If the association is voluntary, that's liberty. If forced, not."

OK, full agreement there and that is how I'd classify it, too. I often find myself discussing this issue with advocates of minimal states who do not think this voluntary vs forced association is the dividing factor and they pick a more murky distinction like low vs high taxes instead. At first I thought this is your view as well, because of the remark about a more or less libertarian state.

My point then boiled down to saying that if an association is voluntary, it stops being a state despite engaging in activities that we nowadays ascribe to the state (income tax, regulations, etc.) and from what I see you agree with that.

"Liberty need not depend on taxation if it is done without coercion."

I'm not sure how to interpret you here. Do you mean that you can have taxation in a voluntary association? If so, then I agree, with a provision that in this case this stops being taxation, since taxation is an involuntary transfer of money/property. In this scenario it would more aptly be called contributions or premiums because of a bilateral agreement to pay. (incidentally, using such words as substitutes for taxation has become common practice for state officials because it sounds easier on the person being taxed ;p)

On the other hand, your point can also be understood as saying that the act of taxation does not preclude from having liberty. Here I would disagree, because, given the definition of what constitutes liberty which we both accept, I cannot think of a way of squaring the absence of involuntary interactions with something that by definition isn't voluntary. If that was your point, I'd like you to elaborate on that.

I meant what you said about how some think libertarianism is based on how much you are taxed. Taxes are a means to an end and not necessarily anti-libertarian if they are voluntary.

OK, I get it. But how can taxes be voluntary? Can you give an example?

hehe i read a tweet about misplaced nationalism and a tanking economy having less than stellar results in the past

Isn't Norway not in the EU? They're getting by just fine. Even Australia isn't in a political union and doing better then most.

Norway is part of EFTA, basically respecting EU regulations without having a voice in crafting them. also Norway and Switzerland are quite exceptional in that they have unique sources of wealth production that would be endangered by full EU membership.

if UK left the EU to join EFTA, that would be completely stupid..

Also Switzerland which should be prime example.

https://twitter.com/SimonNRicketts/status/746270320714219520

http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/06/...ends-tech/

some people pick a side of an argument just to see what happens :D

Maybe Poland and Hungary will be next.

No way!

they're the 2 countries that keep telling the EU to go fuck themselves over this immigration shit.
They're also both hyper nationalistic.

No, the government here isn't nationalistic. They're a run-of-the-mill gang of thieves and busybodies that one should come to expect at the helm of the state, but instead of using the happy gay kumbaya message, they use the "we're patriots and we can use the thieving machine to make life here great" message.

Is the current Polish government anti putin?

They've been anti-Putin long before opinion molders from the EU and USA decided that it's time not to like him. After all, a huge chunk of their electorate has a gut feeling that Smolensk was orchestrated by the state of Russia because Kaczynski was unrelenting against Putin or something like that.

And now, in 2016, a half-wit like Schultz is saying that the current Polish government has been edging towards Russia because of some irrelevant constitutional court debacle and the public opinion in the West buys it :D There are good reasons to hate that gang, but being for the current opressors of the Russian society ain't one of them.

Our current minister of national defense thinks Russia is a terrorist state, take a wild guess.

It's funny because we're chummy with Orban's Hungary, and they're chummy with Putin's Russia, so pro-EU drones automatically assume we're chummy with Russia by proxy and we're spearheading a revival of the CCCP. No. There are a lot of different goals and political lines intertwined there. Best way to put it... it's complicated.

It depends on what will make them look worse at the particular situation. One day they suck Putin's dick, the other day the will invide Russia screaming BOGURODZICA DZIEWICA! KYRIE ELEISON!

you don't want the happy gay shit. dudes will be in the ladies room soon.

how the fuck you are so good at english?

Thanks ;) other than school (which was good in comparison to the Polish standards of that time but certainly not great) I've had 1 hour per week private tutoring from age 10 till 18, so that definitely helped. Other than that I've been grinding Top Gear, nba.com, books, articles, podcasts, etc. Since the smartphone and mobile internet era, almost everytime I don't speak Polish I listen to something in English.

dat top gear / nba vocabulary

How many Poles who learn English out of a textbook or BBC do you think would understand this or this? ;)

<0.1%

Yeah, my guess would be similar.

At least 20% would understand it almost all of it, or all of it. At least my friends who got 80% in Lithuanian school exams certainly would. Unless the Polish system is 5x worse than the Lithuanian one, I don't see why the first video is a problem (didn't watch the second one).

I have a new found respect for you Gienon, you're not like the majority of the ignorant shitposters on this website.

<3 Linguistics.

what language do you speak in africa? how do you communicate with elephants?

/o\ you're trying far too hard...but please... never stop

im not from africa (c) draven

the fuk u just call me , cunt ?

Thanks but you forgot to mention 2200 ELO, man ;/

I'm confused, did he study English or Linguistics

well done. I've had 12 hour per week lan tutoring from 12 till 18, so that definitely helped... for my Q3 skill.. :) sad and fun at the same time :))

it's not sad you're a legend m8 <3

thanks :))

I've met a lot of polish tourists and I can confirm that most speak very little or no English at all. I'm talking about relatively young people, <40. I was always curious about English programs in your schools

It really isn't bad, but most of teenagers pay little to no attention in class.

Class isn't how you're supposed to learn foreign languages

Good argument against government schools ;)

Well, I was being cheeky. You do need to learn foreign languages in school, and you definitely need to learn other things. Just that you need to complement that with using the language (or the other way around) to get much use out of it.

That is true but we doesnt want the leave the EU because of this!!! We just dont want the imigrants in our country.

https://imgur.com/gallery/1TCxMOV? :)

It almost beats the original :))

Cleaner air?

Hilarious when the Soviet Union fell apart, everyone in the West cheered and thought it was a step forward to humanity.

When Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, that was viewed as terrible.

Now if you support the UK leaving the EU, your some sort of racist.

Mostly because the USSR was a brutal, oppressive government killing millions it suspected of being against the revolution. Liberal western democracies, for all their failings, will always be superior for their respect and dignity of the individual.

Yes, and it's a shame Crimea is now a puppet if Putin with no ability to self-determine.

Liberal western democracies, for all their failings, will always be superior for their respect and dignity of the individual.

Yeah dude, like in Germany where they suppressed the news reports of women being assaulted during the new year celebrations, or in Sweden and Netherlands where police arrest randoms for shit like having a cartoon pig hat at a rally or tweeting about refugee problems, or in France where there's a massive media blackout about protests and rioting due to work law changes.

Totally unlike communist censorship, praise democracy.

Did you just compare an Orwellian genocidal regime to... local crimes... Are you okay? Have you read anything but the back of a book?

the progress of todays modern society in this regard is that in most cases you don'get killed for having a wrong opinion ... the regime will only make sure you are unemployable and it will isolate you socially for having the wrong opinion ... thats the progress in the modern society we have today, opinions are still suppressed, only the method of siliencing someone has changed. Killing is the wrong thing to do, you can only build a martyr, but silentcing someone by making him an social outcast gets rid of the problem without all the negative sideffects

Exactly.

"Toronto / Canada". Have you experienced communism in any meaningful way? I did. It wasn't an Orwellian genocidal regime.

Do you think a posteriori knowledge is necessarily required to understand, and criticize the philosophical grounding of a political perspective? Especially when there is sufficient historical context? Do you understand the consequences of such a perspective?

im fairly sure historical context is a posteriori

I think you've missed the point?

What I'm challenging is his point that the validity of an assessment requires you to have direct (first hand) experience...

I think you could have made the point without this, and I'd likely agree with it. However the way you typed it you misuse a posteriori knowledge as first hand experience, even though it means any kind out experience of the outside world. Meaning, it includes reading about USSR, because that's something humans got by describing the real world.

You're attempting to make a philosophical argument, and I'm not sure if it is necessary.

Well, your post was quite unclear otherwise.

Okay... :)

You disagree? I mean, you could have used the word potato there as well.

You sound like someone that just finished their first semester of college. Grow up a bit :)

I thought you disagreed what a posteriori meant for a moment, that's why I kept on replying.

I don't think correcting this term is meaningless nitpicking, given that it's a very important philosophical distinction that more people should know about. Or are you one of those people who think a discussion that goes into philosophy should be dropped, so that we make sure we don't understand the underpinnings of the topic?

Considering most people on this forum detest philosophy, any mention of it and they'll just +back.

Better rely on shitty assumptions and your own amateur philosophy, I guess.

I'm pretty you need to re-read what I said, I've not once mentioned my viewpoint on philosophy, it's a general thing I've noticed over the years on this website form various individuals.

So you can take your arrogance elsewhere.

I didn't say you were doing that, sorry if I was unclear. I was talking about the most people in the forum you referenced.

To be fair, if you use the term "a posteriori knowledge" to discuss the "philosophical grounding" of a thing, then you should not be surprised if your conversation partner takes it as you wanting to start a philosophical discussion.

Also, most people on this forum detest literally everything, so that is not really an argument :p

It's not really a philosophical discussion to point out the incorrect use of the term. It's almost a dictionary thing, you check what philosophers call a posteriori, and that's it.

A philosophical discussion would be if he contested it and argued for it, or cited some philosopher who did. I don't know of much disagreement over the term in this specific sense, though.

A philosophical discussion would be if he contested it and argued for it, or cited some philosopher who did.

That would be a philosophical argument. Argument, debate and discussion are not the same things.

There are philosophical thinking methods that involve asking questions, like what xero did. Using a term incorrectly in such a discussion does not change the nature of the discussion.

The word discussion is broad, and I used it in a different sense than you did, so I'm not going to argue it. My point was that my correction of the term (not what he typed!) wasn't even me doing philosophy. It was just me talking what the term is generally accepted to mean.

Unless there's unlikely disagreement, it doesn't even have to lead to philosophical discussion. I think that's a decent delineation for what is not doing philosophy, but even if you don't agree with the semantics, I think the difference is still there.

As you point out yourself, his own question was much more philosophical in nature.

As you point out yourself, his own question was much more philosophical in nature.

That was my point all along, hence I replied to stphn who implied that xero detests philosophy. Anyway, I think this is cleared up now.

I implied that the general consensus of this website detests philosophy, not any specific individual, not once did I mention anyone's name.

Ofc you don't have to experience something first hand to criticize it. However, your understanding of communism comes from extremely biased media sources and biased western education system. Communism is in no way ideal. From a theoretical stand point its an economical and moral philosophy, which like any other competing philosophy has its principles, which aren't fundamentally evil or wrong. How you perceive it is entirely up to your own internal value system and the cultural background you come from.

Capitalism, in many places on earth, is equally, if not more fucked up than commonusim ever was. You don't see the west demonizing capitalism and neoliberalism based on Puerto Rico

> Ofc you don't have to experience something first hand to criticize it.

So, you realize a lot of political, historical, and political-historical (never mind the arts) narratives are void if you necessarily need first hand experience to criticize something, right? Do you understand the magnitude of the effect of your proposition if it were true?

Read again that sentence you quoted. I said you don't need to experience it first hand

Ahh, my apologies.

I don't think it is required, but I do think it helps. First-hand experience is best when trying to understand something and deconstructing a concept, and even though I hate communism with severe passion (my family suffered heavily because of it) calling it "genocidal" and, thus, dismissing any comparison to the culture of censorship and shaming that seems to be the main brainwave in the core EU is just damn wrong.

Since you're not here to experience it, or weren't here when communism reigned, the parallels with what I said and the mass information blackouts and promotion of the destruction of local identity that are becoming more pronounced nowadays here might not seem logical or apparent to you.

I agree with what you said but imo the alternative to 'destruction' of local identity is not nationalism. Yugoslavia wars were not so long ago, but apparently already erased from the common mind.

The better alternative would be a strong EU that allows local diversity. Which means it should not be governed by Germany alone and should allow financially less significant members to have more influence.

That's why I am sad that the UK went full retard, they were the only real contender to Germany in this matter.

I do remember the Yugo wars from my childhood, reading about them and watching it in the news. It was a very fundamental and character defining series of events for me as a human being (along with the horrible shit going on in Chechnya). Also, I'm inclined to agree. I like the idea of an EU in principle, but then I read about shit like the "European Super Country" and quotes from Juncker like this one -

"Too many politicians are listening exclusively to their national opinion. And if you are listening to your national opinion you are not developing what should be a common European sense and a feeling of the need to put together efforts. We have too many part-time Europeans."

and all I can think is how I absolutely hate the way it is going right now and how that's unnervingly like communist propaganda.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some massive ultra-conservative POLAND STRONK fanatic, I want cooperation and making good with the neighbors, but that just won't fly until the EU objectives and methods change. People will only take so much shit. CCCP was more oppressive and in-charge, didn't stop it from eventually collapsing. Will take much less for the EU.

The way things are, we're heading towards a series of civil uprisings and perhaps a continental east vs west war.

I'm also taken aback by what's going on with the UK, that came off as a bit of a shock to me. Hopefully they can yet steer the boat back before they drift into the reefs.

Well people are protesting. A sizable portion even understands that things that you mentioned + mass surveillance will beat any remains of freedom. So yes, that is different from USSR, where you wouldn't be delegitimized and made irrelevant, you would be disappeared or made an example of.

Sure, spread of information thanks to the internet changed the game, but the goals remain, and the means are equally underhanded and reprehensible, if less obviously destructive.

In fact, I think I hate today's facetiousness and double-standards even more.

What exactly was the states founded on? The whole US expirment was founded on the death on millions if indians. Then you stole there lands. Ironic that and american is preaching mea bout the evils about the USSR when his country was founded on genocide.

The difference being that when shit was happening to slaves or native Americans, people in the US could and did speak out. They had the ability to protest, to change their political leaders, and eventually force change. If the USSR still existed, you wouldn't see this happening in Russia.... oh, wait...

This is the typical and classic Soviet complaint, trying as hard as possible to worm out of accepting any responsibility or anything. At the first criticism you cry "but in America they kill n***ers". Or Native Americans, etc.

The Soviet Union killed and deported millions of its own people, probably some of your own relatives and mine, and yet you still jump to criticize some foreign country because you can't face yourself. Nothing that happened in North America in 1650 or 1820 in any way excuses or has anything to do with the Russian empire, USSR or Russia.

stage 3

can someone approve my image thanks

You're welcome.

You do realize the US was founded on genocide, right?

Or that countries like the UK used to colonize much of the world and left a trail of millions dead.

Many other countries governments also have political assassins. It wasn't just the USSR. Unless your ignorant of history.

No human history is immaculate because it involves humans. Humans are hardly perfect, well behaved creatures. The colonization of the new world was indeed grotesque. And maybe by some sick fortune the US was able to form that established a govt ruled by laws written by people (not kings or tyrants).

I'm not saying it was perfect but the aim here is the key difference, in my opinion. The elevation of the rights of man.

Does US democracy have respect for minorities today? Did they have respect for Native Americans back in the 19th century when they were being killed?

Minorities in the US today are just used for cheap ass exploitation. Probably the same for EU.

If you mean the laws, yes, it does. The founding documents and many subsequent laws you will find ways that the "tyranny of the majority" is limited. But this is always going to be a difficult balance. By definition a minority (whether by race, sex, orientation, religion, language, national irigin, etc.) Is out numbered by the majority. Finding a balance and a way to ensure the majority cannot strip the rights of the minority (which is the purpose of the Bill of Rights) but also so that people can govern themselves.

As for the people, that's another issue and will not change over night. People are irrational and emotional. But US history, despite the serious failings, should give you optimism that progress can and will be made.

Fuck the founding fathers. fuck every last one of them :) grow the fuck up and stop deifying political figures. Are you in grade school? You think as a black man I'm going to speak well of the white elite ruling class of the colonies (which were what the founders were, regardless of this "we the people" bullshit. it was written exclusively by the slave owning aristocrats, not by the common folk) did you know that part of the reason for the US revolution was to keep slavery going? or that most African americans fought for the British? Or the fact the British didnt want the 13 colonies to expand it's territory, which ended up happening right after the US revolution? The founding fathers started the genocidal manifest destiny that spread across the continent. Manifest Destiny today has been upgraded to the american exceptionalism bullshit that we have today. You know, the US has the given right to police the world and slam it's values on everyone, because it's exceptional?

and history shows that empires naturally fall, no matter how hard you may try to say otherwise :)

have a drone dropped on your family, and see how you react to that. i'd love to see how american react to a destabilized country where things are in such a state of chaos. The US does this on a regular basis to other countries. Have your country destroyed by war and see how you like it, selfish shithead. Your a white male looking at your profile. You don't have to worry about getting phony charges thrown your way and end up incarcerated for decades. Or live in crushing poverty in the segregated disgusting ghettos.

At least you got bigger dicks.

I chuckled. Thank you Jamerio o/

Fascist is, I believe, the term of choice. I mean, fuck, I don't have an opinion one way or the other about England (let's be real here) taking off from the EU, but just trying to talk about it to some people on the 'net, discussing the why's and how's, got me branded as, and I quote "fascist asshole", "fucking Hitler worshiper", "Putin bot" and, my favourite, "ISIS agent".

I mean... people need access to better condoms. Too many mistakes out there.

I mean... people need access to better condoms. Too many mistakes out there.

pro birth control = anti christian = atheist = communist = stalinist

filthy commie

Wont read any post cuz i dont wanna commit but what a good thing.

Thank you enlightened citizens of Britain. Don't bend on the insane anti-brexit propaganda the press is trying to put on. Whatever's bad for standard media is good for the people. Never forget that.

Thank you Malcolm X for warning us and making this possible. I hope many countries will follow the British example.

" Whatever's bad for standard media is good for the people. Never forget that"

it's a nice quote but way too vauge to apply to this, the most popular media outlets and newspapers in the UK were heavily pro-exit and spouted as much crap as the 'remainers' did

So it's the end of Wales as a freeloading country living off of Europe, and the beginning of Wales as a certified third world country.

my thoughts are with the sheep

I am not suprised motherfuckers

What does the eu have to gain with all the immigration that's happening?

cheap labour or re asylum seekers the sense of moral self satisfaction from helping people fleeing from war

Dunno much about other countries, but in the NL there's something called "vergrijzing." Basically the percentage of retired people vs the percentage of working population is steadily increasing, because back in the fifties and sixties generally speaking families had more kids than since the seventies and eighties. Due to the way our health care system works this will have some pretty severe consequences for our country, so young people coming in would actually be a god send for us.

But ofc, those people are different and that's just scary

When I was living in Utrecht, it blew my mind that there were hardly any adults and when I say adults I mean like older families with kids etc. Massive european student hub, loads of young families <30 years old but never actual old people.

So I'd agree with you on that, an influx of youth that actually want to work and contribute would be awesome for you guys in the netherlands.

Nothing.
Just good old destroy christian culture because there's nothing worse than that.

Lots of immigrants. Soon they can't enter UK for free healthcare and free housing \o/

You really think that UK will be able to cherry-pick what they like when making contracts with the EU? I can't believe how delusional so many people nowadays(?) are when it comes to world politics.

Did I say that anywhere? lol

Isn't that what Johnson promised? Keeping all the advantages of the EU, e.g. cheap workers to boost the local economy, without any of the downsides, e.g. unwanted immigrants.

I assume you informed yourself before making your vote lol

zzzz ofc we won't keep the advantages of the eu if we leave. I'm not even a Boris Johnson fan at all.

UK must accept freedom of movement to access EU Market

Pick one.

Fuck the EU market?

BRITS are tired of muslims fake-refugees wich mostly are 20-30yo healthy men with iphones6s)) also they tired to gief moneys for "EU" label on their country, in 2014 it was 11.3 bln €. Most benefits of eu-supernational government belong to GERMANY: they produce goods and other eu deindustrialized countrys buy zis shit. EZ money! GJ BRITS, u can rule ur own country again not being merkel slave any more

FUCK YOU BREXIT
FUCK YOU TO HELL DAMN YOU

thank u for ruin my plans to move to UK

i hate you leave voters, i signed that petition i want a recount

give me a revote

stupid racists bigots =[

you got upto two years to move, be quick or you'll miss out and have lots more work to do in order to realise your dream

also "racist bigots" lol hello poland??

so you don't want to interview me for esr anymore then?

i still interview you i hold nothing against you i am fine now

i am happy as can bee =]

In the end, if it doesn't work out like they expect, can't they just rejoin in 10 years?

I still don't see what's so bad about this considering certain countries like Norway and Switzerland are not part of the EU. These countries are doing just fine. And I can see it also being that certain brits voted for this because they don't like the EU bureaucracy.

I really like this article by Australian Journalist John Pilger on this whole brexit thing: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/24/a-blow...to-europe/

see this

what a surprise that the collection of illuminati conspiracy theorists and NEETs that make up ESR have raging hardons about an imminent (in their minds) EU collapse

prime example below \/\/\/

brexit was a hologram

if anyone looks like a lizard person its nigel fucking farage, to be fair

That's the fluoride talking. You need to buy a water filter

But that won't help with the mind control chemicals in chemtrails.

picture censored by zionist admins

Great decision, the fear campagin from the government should raise suspicions in anyone with some idea about tirany. Globalization is the goal of fat rich powerful people to keep the cattle controled. It also destroys cultures by mixing everything which ends in a turd society without identity.

Globalization is the goal

oh no, globalization in a world ever more connected.. how did it come to that?

of fat rich powerful people to keep the cattle controled.

you're saying this like it's something about to happen.. leeel
go back at any point in recorded history and tell me when/where it wasn't like that?

Globalization is not only about connecting. It's also about unifying. That's where destroying our civilization comes into play o/

Obviously it's happening, slowly but surely.
Sending shitload of brown people into EU costs a lot of monies.

No, youre connected when for example you play from your house and your friend is in his house, its called the internets. Globalization is about forcing you to accept your friend playing next to you right in your house, smelling his farts and hearing his burps.

Huge difference.

keep the cattle controled

Never change m8, you're the best fucking political analyst ESR has ever seen

GODSPEED ENGLAND NOW ITS YOUR TIME TO RISE

just england though eh? you sound very informed

It was pretty much only England that voted to leave, excluding the City of London of course, which is pretty much a state in its own right anyway. Most people think London is London, not true, City of London has its own rules.

ok?

I think its funny that a nation thats colonized half the planet at soms point is zo scared of immigrants.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Major Banks allready set on leaving London little export and zoon high taxes on import

The first sentence i dumm :0

Nothing really big will happen in the long run because of this, but the UK has fucked themselves for decades to come.

We'll see :)

Think for a second, if youre country cant survive by itself youre already fucked. This is the first step that any sane country should take towards long term viability. I thought the yes would get better difference. UK people has a good history of being hard to be treated as cattle, even with the heavy attack on their bodies hormonal system and the fear campaing they still lost.

BPA + SOY + ETC = hormone disruptors = low testosterone
MERCURY = VACCINES + SEA FOOD + BORKEN TERMOMETERS AND LIGHT = GAY = http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101201/full/news.2010.641.html

"When the people fear the government, that's tyranny; when the government fears the people, that's freedom."

UK votes Hillary/Trump over EU. Enjoy.

Yeah, joining a country with 19 trillion dollars in debt and even more corrupt than the EU would be a good idea.

Will this be the end of the EU? Or is the talk about that just hyperbole?

It probably was the first milestone in that direction.

Highly unlikely. However, its the end of UK

It actually is likely unless something changes. Holland and Italy are calling for a referendum already, which is dangerous for the EU as both contries are able to manage on their own.

I personally think brexit will prove further that the current EU lacks strong political personalities who could deal with serious issues.
Juncker, Mogherini and co., thats only the tip of the iceberg, the whole Brussels is nowadays full of discarded, untalented politicans who refuse to take responsibility for anything.

I'm fully aware of the flaws EU has, but I actually think this will be a wake up call for EU to get back on the course and Britain will end up a tragic hero, eating shit for the benefit of other EU members :)

The course of EU is, was and will be IV Reich o/

Holland

Unless something drastically changed in the last 24 hours, one opposition party is calling for a referendum as they've been doing for years. They're just our particular flavor of cryptofascists and cryptofascists do what cryptofascists do.

e: to illustrate why I call them cryptofascists, their party leader proposed "re-education" camps at a certain point.

Geert Wilders cracks me up sometimes.

which is dangerous for the EU as both contries are able to manage on their own.

only just read that part, lmfao, NL economy is pretty much completely dependent on foreign trade

I am very pleased with the result, I voted out and no regrets here.

We'll have people panic, we'll have instability, we'll have to deal with people that think we made a bad choice but it really warms my heart when I hear and see the euro whiners complain as they realise their dreams to take take take from Britain have gone up in smoke.

We took the power back and we'll grow stronger for it.

Well done leave voters - well done.

"their dreams to take take take from Britain have gone up in smoke"

do you genuinely believe this?

we don't need more dizzles, that much I do know.

you better find a time machine and go back then, people breed

people like dizzle shouldn't be allowed to breed though

dizzle is cmss, what a relief he doesnt count as eu anymore

and your credit rating just went to shit. Enjoy going slowly but surely back to the stone age. UK was one of the poorest and economically least developed countries before it joined the EU, well time to go back, all good things come to an end, if 50% of your population are kind of loony and with one foot in the grave.

51.9%..... unfortunately!

Yet we're the only European country economically strong enough to have a free healthcare system.

No? That's just plain wrong lol

All I read was "I don't have a clue what I'm talking about, so I'm just typing this random blah blah blah."

.

one blunder Brexit after another xD

Iceland so ruthless, just kicked them when they're down

England deserved it, as soon as they found out they had iceland their fans were phoning in talksport (1089) and cheering!

I was like, they got 8-10% of their country there and will be going for it, plus Gylfi Sigurdsson single handedly kept us (Swansea) in the premier league this year with his play.

I'm not surprised at all, especially after seeing the smug bastards in this country tell us we'll REMAIN IN.



Britain is such a united country!

brexiting with style :))))))))))))))))))))

seems like england misunderstood the whole concept

Good riddance, Brexit's result is based on the unsatisfied, uneducated and old, which is the majority of the UK. But Brexit just made the average EU woman hotter.
Now we have to make sure those incested horsefaces get kicked as soon as possible like Brussels wants, because right after Brexit's result got official those subhumans started to delay the exit negotiations and now whine in petitions for a second referendum. Get the fuck off my EU-lawn, gg no re.

from The Guardian :)
FULL-TIME: England 1-2 Iceland
It’s all over! England have been eliminated from Euro 2016 by Iceland. For the second time in a week, England suffer an ignominious exit from Europe.

I don't follow football a lot, but this I found not very surprising. Like, when's the last time England has actually done well at a Euro/World Cup?

1960?

Kicked out of Euro by fkn Iceland
Lost their AAA rating
Banks/financial sector fleeing to Frankfurt
Barclays/RBS stocks down 30%
Pound down 10%+
Scotland to leave UK and Ireland to be reunited
Boris to become PM

Basically at this rate UK will be Somalia in 1 year

All of that pales in comparison into giving away your country away and having the mojo sucked out of your country and people for some apparent trade deals.

The EU lost the game of poker with us when it came to controlling us.

Money and Trade are bound by one simple rule. Money Talks.

its better for the UK to be out of EU anyway, we were only ever a pain in the side for them, they tolerated us for the money.
now they can have the best of both worlds.
And so can we.

I just spent 500 quid on a racing drone from france, I don't give a fuck if its in the EU, they had good stuff I wanted for a good price, I suspect I wont get an email tomorrow saying you're not in the EU tomorrow, I don't want your money you dirty limey!

They want my money.
I want their goods.
If they don't I can order it from China for 20% less as they have warehouses in the UK which allow them to get around the VAT.

Anyone in the EU who makes that harder to happen is going to get shit from all its member states.

Good observation qtip, now I'll make mine...
DONALD TRUMP

Good luck )

Ireland to be reunited

wish people would stop saying this, it wont happen

Brexist Vol. 2

I think the most interesting aspect of the whole ordeal is the genuine lack of respect for democratic principles. After the majority spoke in favour of leaving the union we have a petition garnering 3 million votes, multiple calls for a second refendum, the democratically elected leader of the labour party facing a coup and complete apprehension to push through the clear message of the people and begin the initiation process of leaving.

This is my biggest problem with the political and financial class that rules us - the feeling that we have no power over what happens to us. This was also a big factor in why the leave vote was successful, people want control over what happens to them. The union seems to have the ultimate aim of disolving sovereignty by first pooling laws across the continent. Eventually, a full political union is the only way to navigate the many problems that consildating multiple nations brings with it. All of this is a direct hit to the democratic principles that we built our socities on in my opinion. As a last fuck you to the systems that control us I can at least be proud of my country, however misguided it ultimately may be.

Politicians are either corrupt or complete pussies and not willed or capable to fight for the citizens they ought to represent.

A large portion of the citizens is (politically, at least) uneducated or simply too dumb to foresee the consequences of anything more complex than "what happens if I bang my head against the wall?".

A functioning democracy requires educated citizens. But higher educated people are harder to control and to manipulate. That's why it won't happen, on the contrary.

tl;dr 5 frags behind on ztn with 1 minute to go and the opponent keeps running gg

Almost certainly there are large swathes of the electorate that are uneducated to some extent, though even educated people are unable to foresee the consequences of this decision. What is important is that many people feel the consequences of being a member of the union, educated or not, and have done now for years.

That's why the biggest failure of the two campaigns and politics in general is to assume that by telling people what they need to think, they will get the result they require. We don't want to be told what to do or think. It's even insulting to those people who we would label as being uneducated.

I can't shake the feeling that some people blame EU for stuff local government is responsible for. I know we get lots of recommendations and "orders" from Brussels which we then... ignore.
But certain recommendations regarding health care and retirement did get implemented tho. And when politicians noticed that those changed weren't popular they've quickly started blaming EU for them.

I agree with you but we get a lot of regulations and directives that we have to implement. The fact that we do not have control over certain aspects of our economy lies directly with our EU member status. Migration is the other main topic where there are no easy answers. As much as detractors want to label those who oppose migration as xenophobic, that's a huge disservice to 17 million people.

It's almost funny that the exact same thing is happening in Germany too. People vote against the system because they feel angry and helpless, being told to shut the fuck up by their arrogant rulers. I wonder if politicians really changed or if it is the citizens that somehow developed a different perspective on their rulers.

Maybe the internet plays a big role here, being able to hear and spread information and opinions easily within seconds. State media here became (or maybe it always has been, but now we notice it..) worthless. They don't spread obvious lies but heavily filter information.

All our major newspapers align with their own political bias with some, particulary the more right wing press, going as far as to outright tell their readers who to vote for. Other instituitions such as the Guardian are more sly about it and report unfavourable aspects of the leave side continously while only feigning some degree of objectivity through a few journalists. The internet is fantastic in that we can solicit all of the information and decide for ourselves. Unfortunately, I think the way information is presented by mass media still has a real effect on the general population for both sides of the debate.

The 'leave' campaign was based on propaganda and straight out lies, which they are now distancing themselves from. The under educated and educated based their opinion on false information, and many voted accordingly. I am quite certain if there was a new vote in the light of this news, there would be a swing in the opposite direction. Promises were made by 'leave' and they're already running away from it. A shame. I agree that it's morally correct to honour a vote, but it's also morally correct to ensure that information given to the electorate is accurate and not misleading. In the current situation it's only fair to have a second referendum.

Meta is talking it.

I don't know how many people you spoke to personally but everyone I had spoken to had their mind made up without the influence of either campaign. That's my point, the spokespeople for the campaigns lamented it as a failure or manipulation of communication and taking that attitude degenerates the rationale of the electorate. We could look at either camp and anaylse their faults and pretend like we haven't got the right result here but that's foolish. Democracy is ruled by the majority. You can't keep going until you get the answer you want and you are then subverting the very fabric of what gives you the ability to vote.

The 'leave' campaign was based on propaganda and straight out lies.

The REMAIN IN campaign said there would be world war III if we VOTE OUT, and that was said by our prime minister! which should give you an indication of what everyone else said.

The REMAIN IN campaign used the death of a politician, to imply if you vote out, they are the same as her killer.

The REMAIN IN campaign used her death place to place REMAIN IN propaganda saying VOTE IN.

The REMAIN IN (GVT) spent 9 million quid on REMAIN IN leaflets in the run up, with totally biased literature.

The REMAIN IN had added advantage by keeping the registration open for two extra days for a 2 hour glitch, which added another half a million voters who were more biased towards remaining in.

The REMAIN IN campaign used a series of high profile people like OBAMA, BECKHAM, CANEY, BBC, MANY MANY LOCAL MP's, all part of the gravy train to tell people who to vote for.

The REMAIN IN (George Osborne- Chancellor) said there would be emergency budgets and pension cuts straight after a BREXIT.

The list goes on and on. So its pointless making out 17+ million were duped. Both sides knew there was BS in both their camps. That;s what politics is.

Even now REMAIN IN are trying to manipulate the outcome, by pushing fear and calling for a second referendum, by saying they've lied about this and that when its still so easy to decide on whether they have failed to deliver on policies or not.

Most people in this country were sick of being dictated to by brussels and having endless parts of our country ravaged by foreigners which were lowering living conditions for the rest of us as the UK had constant influx of people from poor parts happy to work here for peanuts cos they could go home rich people. That's not a lack of education, that's just a fact.

Zero hour contracts were a reality, many people were better off on benefits as jobs paid so shit so it wasn't worth them working.

The people voted out by over 1.2 million in spite of such manipulation and scotland REMAINING IN across the board (who they are not indicative of the rest of the UK)

BREXIT promised a brighter future by leaving, its too early to judge them on it, way way too early.

Suggesting you have another vote is like playing poker, losing then wanting to play it again without putting another stake in until you win.
Politics is riddled with false promises, at least give them time to try and bring them to fruition.

A deal is a deal. Its done.IF BREXIT fail to deliver, people will have a choice to judge them then, not before.

But by calling people who voted out stupid and uneducated and wanting to vote again, you really do yourself no favours.

I'm glad we're out, I would rather try for a better future and fail, than subscribe to this ENDLESS erosion and feeling that something isn't right.

The EU had their chance to re-negotiate terms, they told us its our way of the highway. So its the highway.

Younger people are apparently angry at older for voting out, forgetting only 36% of them bothered to vote!

Its all comes down to...

A) Both sides talked shit in the run up.
B) Those in the know knew a recession was due long before brexit.
C) The REFERENDUM is the vote which counted/final.
D) Its too early to say VOTE OUT have failed.

So what you see now is nothing but sour grapes and a demonstration of utter contempt for the basic fabric of our society from people who've had the momentum for years.

Now its our turn :)

^this

/edit: and, on a side note, i find it pretty fucking funny that the sour-grape left are calling for a second referendum with 60% vote minimum as long as there's a 75% turnout. that makes every general election since 1992 void since those elections don't meet that criteria either.

the person who made the petition (before the referendum happened) was pro-leave.

requiring a super-majority for taking irreversible actions which significantly affect the whole country does not mean that the same criteria have to be met for general elections, nevermind after the fact.

yet the people who are signing it (even though a lot of them aren't from the uk which should void it) are obviously remainers.

brexit is not an irreversible action. we can always re-enter if the shit hits the fan (it won't) we would 'just' need to join the euro and enter the schengen zone. it was funny to see remainers say this as a bad thing (which it is) when it was campaigning how brilliant the eu was in the first place.

general elections also affect the whole country. a requirement for a super majority should be irrelevant in any type of democracy because say, for example, if 55% wanted out and 45% wanted in, the remain camp would have won despite the majority saying otherwise.

Any economic damage done is irreversible. The UK wont have its special privileges or rebates and it will be required to join the Euro. These are all irreversible (not to mention the possibility of Scotland leaving).

if 55% wanted out and 45% wanted in, the remain camp would have won despite the majority saying otherwise.

Thats the whole point of a supermajority... You just stated what it means without making any kind of argument because your assumption is that a direct democracy is best.

you are saying that like we haven't already lost through less trading outside the eu for many years and allocatively inefficient immigration into the uk. but i do concede that yes, no rebates (which were useless anyway because it makes the assumption that europe knows what's best for the uk) will indeed occur.

a direct majority is indeed the best one because it is the only FAIR one. a supermajority is nothing more than a hedge to try to protect those who lose. the problem with the supermajority is that if the results fall between 50% and the lower level of supermajority then democracy will not have been served because now a minority are dictating what the majority will have to do.

you are saying that like we haven't already lost through less trading outside the eu for many years and allocatively inefficient immigration into the uk

My argument is assuming that leaving the EU will be bad the UK, which is the consensus among economists and other experts.

a direct majority is indeed the best one because it is the only FAIR one. a supermajority is nothing more than a hedge to try to protect those who lose.

It's a hedge to maintain the status quo, which is a good thing because stability is good for a modern first world country. It's a choice between keeping things the same (a UK which is one of the biggest economies and banking industries in the world, and one of the most desirable places to live) versus uncertainty.

there are also experts and economists who disagree with that. the bottom line is that you cannot just desperately protect the status quo on the grounds of reducing uncertainty otherwise there would be no point in holding referendums whatsoever.

why not make the supermajority 99-1? why hold referendums in the first place if the status quo is desired? no one knows what's going to happen in the future and there is also an element of uncertainty in staying in the eu (especially given the refugee crisis etc). likewise with general elections, the economics behind a country choosing one party over another is also irreversible because of the trickle-down effects over the years and one party taking over the deficits and problems of another after inheriting their problems.

we had a referendum to join the eu in the 70's, despite the status quo being that we weren't in it in the first place. what makes this any different?

Just because there are two options doesn't make them equally likely.
The fact that there exist economists who disagree with the majority doesn't mean we should just throw up our hands and go with our guts.
The fact that both options (leave or remain) have uncertainty doesn't mean anything unless you can argue that they are in some sense equally uncertain.

likewise with general elections, the economics behind a country choosing one party over another is also irreversible because of the trickle-down effects over the years and one party taking over the deficits and problems of another after inheriting their problems.

Because at some point a country has to run itself and choosing a government has to be done. You keep taking my arguments and pushing them to absurdity. The tangible differences between different governments are usually not huge (compared to say, leaving the EU) and their actions are limited by fixed term times. This analogy doesn't really make sense because remaining in the EU is a perfectly viable choice while not electing a government isn't.

I am not saying the end goal of politics should be to maintain the status quo which is obviously stupid. I'm saying that given the UKs place in the world, a referendum which proposes to make significant, irreversible changes (particularly when they effect potentially many future generations) should be biased towards maintaining stability.

the point you're missing is that there was also an equally huge uncertainty with entering the eu in the first place, more so than not entering, yet we still had the referendum to do so with 50/50 split, which was fundamentally fair.

the idea of democracy is that we are provided all the information that we have and, as a public, make judgements based accordingly. with all the economic consensus etc, plus a bias in using tax payer money to fund leaflets as to why we should stay in the eu etc, surely that was already a bias enough to push the people into voting remain when they did otherwise?

'while not electing a government isn't'

i personally mostly disagree with this, people in impoverished areas in other parts of the world have instead used 'extra-legal' processes to live their lives. of course, it would be a lot harder for the uk to do this, but that is a tangential discussion.

i fundamentally disagree that anything should be biased towards maintaining stability. that makes the assumption that more stability is a better thing on the grounds of lower uncertainty. different people have different tolerances of acceptable uncertainty and 51.9% think that the uncertainty of leaving the eu, despite being higher, is worth more than the relatively lower uncertainty of staying in the eu, which is the polar opposite of the 48.1%.

the point you're missing is that there was also an equally huge uncertainty with entering the eu in the first place, more so than not entering, yet we still had the referendum to do so with 50/50 split, which was fundamentally fair.

Where did I say that the the referendum in the 70s should not have required a super majority?

I agree it's sour grape and futile but do you honestly believe that the 'leavers' wouldn't have been signing it or some other petition if they had lost?

indeed they probably would. i wouldn't be among them because i respect and want democracy to be upheld because doing the opposite sets a more dangerous precedent. i also wouldn't expect democracy to not be upheld accordingly.

People who voted for staying have a legitimate right to try to use all democratic mechanisms that could let them get what they want. With the decision being this important and vote being so close, they have even more legitimacy in trying to change it. When a country makes a decision that 48% of the people don't like, and when that decision will have a massive impact on their lives you expect em to just bend over? I don't think there is a possibility for a new referendum, but if I was British i wouldn't be able to live with myself if I didn't try to exploit all democratic means to try and stay in EU

Absolutely employ the democratic ways in which you can oppose something you don't believe in. However there comes a time where you have to accept the fact that we live in a democracy and if we want to inhabit a world where our votes can actually effect our lives then we have to accept majority votes that sometimes we don't like. I don't think there's a possiblity for another referendum either, it was a huge drain on everyone and I honestly believe we have passed the point of no return.

It's all now about how we negotiate our continued relationship with our neighbours and that's where the people who lost out on the vote should concentrate their efforts. We have a general election coming where we have the possiblity of voting in a new party/leader based on their policies of renegotiation.

In the interest of actually dealing with the shitstorm on the horizon we need the country to approach some sort of unification. That seems really hard now, especially with the vote being close as you said. Now the two main British parties are eating themselves alive and the home nations have never been more at odds. It's crazy. The resulting prosperity or stagnation of Britain could have huge implications for us and the EU.