The Remain Argument

Scroll to see replies

You are missing my point. You are proposing that we should simply go along with the EU because any bad things can be undone or avoided. This is obviously untrue but even if it were true why would you try to entice people into such a position? The OP is about the disingenuous nature of the Remain arguments and you are proving it.

The Remain camp don't just use negative arguments and fear, when these don't work they use subversion. Why on earth cant you just say "lets remain, give up self government and throw in our lot with the EU" instead of all these creepy arguments?

Who is being disingenuous now?

You are talking like this is a fact. It's far from that. There is a difference between political union (and it's not even clear what this would entail exactly in an EU setting) and a federal EU government that makes the House of Commons and the House of Lords obsolete (which I assume you are referring to when you say giving up self government). So the only one being disingenuous here is you.

Reply 61

gladders

newpersonage is scaremongering. Let's end the discussion here.

Reply 62

newpersonage

Original post by inhuman

Ah, but what do you believe? You are clearly a Remain supporter. What sort of union do you want? You have already done the "it will never happen" bit, now tell us what you are campaigning for.

Reply 63

newpersonage

Original post by gladders

newpersonage is scaremongering. Let's end the discussion here.

I've noticed that you seldom ever argue from the heart, telling anyone what you really want to happen in the EU.

Reply 64

inhuman

Original post by newpersonage

Ah, but what do you believe? You are clearly a Remain supporter. What sort of union do you want? You have already done the "it will never happen" bit, now tell us what you are campaigning for.

I am not eligible to vote.

Reply 65

inhuman

Original post by newpersonage

I've noticed that you seldom ever argue from the heart, telling anyone what you really want to happen in the EU.

And that is all you, pretending your emotional opinions are fact.

Reply 66

newpersonage

Original post by inhuman

I am not eligible to vote.

But you are campaigning. I can vote but I soon wont be eligible to be a student when I get my thesis finished (Hooray!), only a couple of months to go.

Reply 67

newpersonage

Original post by inhuman

And that is all you, pretending your emotional opinions are fact.

We just want to know what you really believe. No-one likes being told "it will never happen" when it clearly has happened, its patronising to people who know what is going on and downright subversive when used on people who don't know what is happening.

Aren't you proud of your intentions? Or are you so ashamed of them that you have to hide them?

Reply 68

inhuman

Original post by newpersonage

Do I want a Europe where there are no country governments but a single EU one?

Not any time soon. But I think this should be the end goal.

Do I think the EU should change?

Of course. It must change in fact.

Is that enough for you?

And mate, patronizing? That is essence putting off people pretending you know more than them. That is exactly what you are doing.

Reply 69

newpersonage

Original post by inhuman

And if merger of states and central government for Europe is a "good idea" then what about also merging with N. America? (TTIP is first step, being an EEC for the N.Atlantic).

(On the patronising issue I was not referring to you but to the OP)

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 70

Davij038

@gladders
@Lib
@typonaut
@Maker

Just thought I'd let you guys know that as well as the top scientists, academics, politicians, economists, businesses (big and small ) , trade unions and allies we also have the best film stars:

Including Brian Blessed! :wink:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/05/19/letters-actors-artists-and-writers-look-in-the-mirror-and-see-a/

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 71

typonaut

Original post by ThatDoesntTickle

…countries such as Norway and Iceland are part of the EEA but not the EU; this, in theory could be suitable for us too?

Please consider the position of these countries properly. People keep making the "Norway" argument, but the facts are that Norway has to pay into the EU, is a member of the Schengen area, is a member of the single market, has free movement of people, is subject to EU law via the EFTA court, has to share its fisheries with the EU…

These are all things that the LEAVE camp want to eliminate in our relationship with the EU - but they are all things that Norway is obliged to take part in. So the Norway model does not align with LEAVE aspirations.

Reply 72

newpersonage

Original post by Davij038

I've made the point a few times- essentially they think that the nation state is the end point of civilisation and anything outside that is heresy. Globalisation and environmental pressures are making this idea more and more absurd.
States should serve the interests of the people and not vice versa

I think you will find that "globalisation" - the IMF, WTO, GATT, EU, OECD, UN - is the machinery that the relatively enlightened allies put in place to rule the world that they conquered in 1945. It is not a God given inevitability and was never intended to lead to the destruction of the diversity of nation states.

The EEC was an example of how states can cooperate as independent entities rather than governed centrally as in the EU. We can cooperate to solve the world's problems, and will have to cooperate because India, China and Russia are never going to join your fantasy World Government.

Reply 73

newpersonage

Original post by typonaut

Brexit is not a problem, total WTO tariffs payable to EU would be <£5bn per annum. UK's EEA payment would be 40% of Norway's per capita until we get as rich as other Non-EU N.European nations.

Reply 74

Davij038

Original post by newpersonage

I think you will find that "globalisation" - the IMF, WTO, GATT, EU, OECD, UN - is the machinery that the relatively enlightened allies put in place to rule the world that they conquered in 1945.

I know what's your point?

It is not a God given inevitability and was never intended to lead to the destruction of the diversity of nation states.

All things must end in time. We've had kingdoms and empires. Now it's the nation state turn. I'm thinking of something akin to Huntingtons Covilisations thesis.

The EEC was an example of how states can cooperate as independent entities rather than governed centrally as in the EU. We can cooperate to solve the world's problems, and will have to cooperate

Unfortunately, economic forces do not co operate and the actions of some impact hugely on the lives of others- no where more so than in Europe where there there is a rough multipolarity. I urge you to read And the weak suffer what they must (don't worry, the author gets very critical of the EU!) who illustrates this superbly.

India, China and Russia are never going to join your fantasy World Government.

Russia is a failed basket case that will taken in by the EU in my lifetime.

India has a long history of cosmopolitanism and if there is a world government down the line it will be certain to be a part of that.

China will certainly be amongst the last to join a world state in (to guess six hundred years time) but it's time will come.

[i should add I'm not predicting the future, the only thing we can be certain about is that things will be very different. Seven hundred years ago you would have been arguing that the status quo of feudal kingdoms is the end point of human. Civilisation!]

Reply 75

newpersonage

Original post by Davij038

All things must end in time. We've had kingdoms and empires. Now it's the nation state turn. I'm thinking of something akin to Huntingtons Civilisations thesis

.....

We get recurrent Empires and the EU is just another one. Its a corporate megastate, a bit like the East India Company but with many Multinationals rather than one.

Did you know that Josef Retinger, the Secretary General of the European Movement (the most successful pro-EU pressure group) set up a nasty nest of corporates to finance the movement. Here is a list of those who attended the June 15th meeting that set up Britain Stronger In Europe:

Notice that the BBC, FT and Economist were there to take part in events rather than report on them.

Reply 76

KimKallstrom

Original post by inhuman

Particularly the Leave campaign has been vicious, and personally attacking the Remain campaign.

To be fair, the Remainers have been painting everyone who even dares to question them as small-minded, bigoted, racist, uneducated, far-right mongs. It's like a typical Labour Party election campaign. I'm inclined to vote Remain at this stage and I'm almost certainly going to do so come referendum day. But the Remain campaigners haven't covered themselves in glory at all to be frank.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 77

chemistrybro

we should stay in the eu because the ttip is the best trade deal and it will allow the nhs to be privatised

Reply 78

Davij038

Original post by newpersonage

We get recurrent Empires and the EU is just another one. Its a corporate megastate, a bit like the East India Company but with many Multinationals rather than one.

Did you know that Josef Retinger, the Secretary General of the European Movement (the most successful pro-EU pressure group) set up a nasty nest of corporates to finance the movement.

Here is a list of those who attended the June 15th meeting that set up Britain Stronger In Europe:

Notice that the BBC, FT and Economist were there to take part in events rather than report on them.

Because Big corporates don't operate in 'sovereign' states like China, U.S. Etc...

The only way these corporates can be mitigated is in pure isolation (like North Korea) or as part of a large collective- otherwise your Starbucks say will go to the UK 'oh you want is to do such and such (eg pay more tax) ? We'll just go to Ireland then, and we'll take our ten thousand jobs, investment and revenue with us. Good luck at the next general election where we'll finance the opposition into making the economy more competitive'. My point is it will be far far more costly for a global business to abandon the entirety of Europe than just the UK so it gives states s far greater Deal of leverage.

On your point about the pro EU pressure group- sure! most states come about through violence I see this as a welcome improvement! If the EU democratises fully (which I believe it will) it will be able to better protect its citizens far more effectively than one nation state acting unilaterally .

Reply 79

Davij038

Original post by chemistrybro

we should stay in the eu because the ttip is the best trade deal and it will allow the nhs to be privatised

Boris , Farage et Al have advocated the NHS be privatised- in addition we need not be in the EU to get t t I p- which is facing a huge degree of opposition in the EU.