Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

This is a challenge to all remain voters (and undecideds). Watch

    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Seems like is ignoring the inconvenient fact that the Treaty of Lisbon and Maastricht were passed through Parliament.
    Really?

    I thought they appeared out of thin air.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    Really?

    I thought they appeared out of thin air.
    #Brexitfact
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    "Democracy. A Brexit would be very bad news for it.

    The science argument and economic argument are both won - they are for Remain. So then why would people willfully damage our economy and innovation? "Democracy!", we are often told. This is heavily ironic, because Brexit would pull our sovereignty out of the democratic mechanisms of the EU and concentrate it in the hands of a government that we are meant to trust to bully for Britain on the international stage. They would do that with corridor lobbyists... and without votes around tables or discussion in a common parliament. If that's your choice - fine, but don't call it a choice for democracy.

    Answering the vacuous charge that the EU is "undemocratic", the Commissioners are not the lawmakers, their hands are tied to writing civil service prescriptions that we have asked them for - and which go nowhere without approval of governments and MEPs. Got a better idea for an international democratic framework?

    A vote to leave brings not a jot of added democracy for us citizens on any level. We already have very little influence on specific national issues. Rather, it means less channels of influence for the people on matters international and more power concentration in the hands of a government that breaks promises, ignores experts and does not have proper accountability mechanisms. Brexit also shoe-horns in a replacement Prime Minister who will not be elected democratically by the people of this country. If you call that a step up in freedom and democracy, that's pretty depressing."

    - Scientists for the EU



    This seemed relevant. Will watch vid tomorrow.
    Science you say, who should I listen to then?

    A - The OP, who this afternoon indirectly accused me of being a Hundred Years War denier because I pointed out that we were ruled by French Kings for part of our history(I meant the Normans, although they were Vikings originally).

    B - Stephen Hawking

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...tephen-hawking
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    Science you say, who should I listen to then?

    A - The OP, who this afternoon indirectly accused me of being a Hundred Years War denier because I pointed out that we were ruled by French Kings for part of our history(The Normans).

    B - Stephen Hawking

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...tephen-hawking
    Well I personally am playing on voting to Remain. So I'll go for Hawking.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's very easy to assert something as fact. This video just cherry picks the facts that back him upIt's pretty impartial and skewed to suit his own agenda. Typical.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    You're also ignoring the other laws that we've agreed with.

    95% Agreed.
    3% Abstention
    2% Opposed.

    https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts...-uk-influence/
    We're not bothered about people letting us pass the laws we want to pass, we're bothered about people forcing upon us laws we do not consent to.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    "Democracy. A Brexit would be very bad news for it.

    The science argument and economic argument are both won - they are for Remain. So then why would people willfully damage our economy and innovation? "Democracy!", we are often told. This is heavily ironic, because Brexit would pull our sovereignty out of the democratic mechanisms of the EU and concentrate it in the hands of a government that we are meant to trust to bully for Britain on the international stage. They would do that with corridor lobbyists... and without votes around tables or discussion in a common parliament. If that's your choice - fine, but don't call it a choice for democracy.

    Answering the vacuous charge that the EU is "undemocratic", the Commissioners are not the lawmakers, their hands are tied to writing civil service prescriptions that we have asked them for - and which go nowhere without approval of governments and MEPs. Got a better idea for an international democratic framework?

    A vote to leave brings not a jot of added democracy for us citizens on any level. We already have very little influence on specific national issues. Rather, it means less channels of influence for the people on matters international and more power concentration in the hands of a government that breaks promises, ignores experts and does not have proper accountability mechanisms. Brexit also shoe-horns in a replacement Prime Minister who will not be elected democratically by the people of this country. If you call that a step up in freedom and democracy, that's pretty depressing."

    - Scientists for the EU



    This seemed relevant. Will watch vid tomorrow.
    Also, I mean, not the thread for it, but EU contributions are only 0.7% of our R&D spending.
    Science is apolitical and would continue just fine outside the EU, as we cooperate with the Americans, the Chinese etc.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drogon)
    It's very easy to assert something as fact. This video just cherry picks the facts that back him upIt's pretty impartial and skewed to suit his own agenda. Typical.
    Are you trying to claim anything in this video is untrue?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by EuanF)
    We're not bothered about people letting us pass the laws we want to pass, we're bothered about people forcing upon us laws we do not consent to.



    Also, I mean, not the thread for it, but EU contributions are only 0.7% of our R&D spending.
    Science is apolitical and would continue just fine outside the EU, as we cooperate with the Americans, the Chinese etc.
    Did you read what I posted? It was about democracy, not science.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Did you read what I posted? It was about democracy, not science.
    I know, just wanted to clear the first bit up (the video will clear up the latter)
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    We're not bothered about people letting us pass the laws we want to pass, we're bothered about people forcing upon us laws we do not consent to.
    You can't win all the time or agree on everything, even Government Ministers on the Council and MEP's from their own party don't always vote the same way. And as I said earlier the British MEP's aren't a united group anyway.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    You can't win all the time or agree on everything, even Government Ministers on the Council and MEP's from their own party don't always vote the same way. And as I said earlier the British MEP's aren't a united group anyway.
    They are when they're voting against something that'd be bad for us.

    What's the point to be in a union that does bad things to us that we can't stop, and gives us no benefits on passing things?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The EU is anti-democratic to the core but it doesn't matter because as long as the trendies are allowed to work any where in Europe they don't care if its ran like a Fascist or Communist dictatorship.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    I've never claimed they were elected, they're technocrats nominated by elected politicians. People bang on about Neil Kinnock being a commissioner but it was the Tory govt's choice to pick him.
    If you watch the QT a bit back with David Davis he explains why Kinnock was chosen, it isn't exactly the choice of the govenrment
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NinjaOtter)
    I kind of like the workers rights we get as part of the EU.
    You know things like maternity leave. Would we get that if we left? No cos the Tories are *****.
    We'd also have to make peace with Northern Ireland again which is fun.
    Plus the Canadian President, Obama, Clinton and Sanders have all said leaving the EU will make trading with America and Canada extremely difficult.
    Oh and who do we export to the most? The EU.
    Sorry that video didn't change my mind at all.
    Are you seriously stupid enough to think the only reason we have maternity leave is because we're in the EU, and that if we left the EU all our rights would disappear and we'd end up like North Korea because 'the tories are ****'? What an absolute joke. Leaving the EU would not make trading with those countries difficult. The US is one of the UK's biggest trade partners and vice versa. The UK currently exports about $50-60bn per year to the US, and imports a similar amount. Neither country would want to give up such a large amount of trade, and *better* deals would be able to be made than what we currently have.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    These 72 issues we were voted down on.

    How important were they to us?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This video, while more subtle about it than others, is heavily biased and CLEARLY uses fear mongering tactics. It pulls a lot of claims out of nowhere and isn't even close to presenting a balanced argument. Whenever it tries to represent the "stay" viewpoint, it is a strawman argument every single time. Here are the notes I made while watching it with counterarguments for various points made. I don't wish to discuss any of what I'm posting, I just thought someone might appreciate it.

    - Video discusses negatives that have happened since joining the EU without considering that worse could have and probably would have happened had we not joined

    - Assumes that EU law overriding local UK law is a bad thing. This is not necessarily true. For instance a few years ago, the British government attempted several times to pass statues allowing them to hold suspected terorrists indefinitely without trial. The Supreme Court ruled that this was a contradiction of EU Human Rights law. EU Law is democratically decided, not dictatorially imposed. It is a good thing, making individual countries accountable. If the UK could veto any EU law then that would defeat the purpose of having those laws.

    - "...each time a treaty is passed, each one bringing us closer to a United States of Europe..." - Ummmm what? No justification is given for this claim at all. More fear mongering buzzwords to appeal to blindly nationalist voters. This video is exactly the same as all the other fear tactics, it just hides under the guise of a middle class man in a suit being more subtle about it

    - "The number of laws deemed important enough for a unanimous vote gets smaller and smaller" - Well obviously, because the most significant laws that require a unanimous vote have already been passed and those issues dealt with.

    - "Finding countries willing to ally with Britain has proved difficult" - Well, that's democracy. The speaker goes on to complain about Britain being outvoted on all 72 issues our government has opposed. That's how democracy works. Why SHOULD Britain have sovereignty over the EU? That's like saying a county council should have sovereignty over parliament.

    - Speaker complains about EU interfering with UK laws. This is no different to the supreme court overruling a crown court decision. The proposed UK law contradicted a treaty we signed. Makes sense that it's not allowed.

    - Speaker gives an example of the UK being overruled and says "this is one of countless examples...". Less than a minute later he directly states how many examples there are, and considering it's over a 40 year period it's REALLY not that much. Again, subtle scare tactics.

    - Speaker points out that the UK has a failure rate of over 77% when appealing against EU rulings. This assumes that the UK was correct and that all these cases where the UK lost are injustices. Over-nationalistic rubbish that just assumes the UK can do no wrong.

    - "The percentage of British laws made in Brussels is 59" - The simple fact is that most laws that are actively applied in the UK are UK made. And also again, it assumes that these EU laws are wrong and unfairly imposed. No, they're democratically decided.

    - "Cronies of Europe's political elite" really? This video isn't using scare tactics, you say?

    - Just a few minutes prior to the part on EU laws being undemocratic, the speaker was discussing instances where EU constituencies rally to veto a law. This is the democratic element. If the majority of countries didn't want the law to be applied, they would veto it.

    - "In the pro-EU leaflet, produced at a cost of £9 million to the tax payer" - A point that is completely irrelevant to the debate at hand, aimed purely to produce an emotional response and create disdain towards the opposite side of the debate. This is a common tactic used in politics that demonises the opposite party to prevent people from switching sides due to emotional response rather than fact-based decision making.

    - Speaker quantifies the UK's sway in the EU purely by the times we have failed to Veto a law. This completely disregards our influence on the discussion that affects the formation of such laws

    - "If we vote to remain in the EU, we will have even less power than we do now" .....based on what?

    - Claims the red card would be useless, without anything to back it up apart from one politician making a joke in the House of Lords

    - Speaker claims that if we vote to stay it signifies our willingness to stay on any terms. Again, this is not substantiated. It could also send the message that if we're this close to leaving already, we won't tolerate much more.

    - "We fought a war to make sure taxes are not raised by non-elected representatives" - Just another attempt to stir up an emotional response. It doesn't actually mean anything. We voted to join the EU and most elected representatives want to remain in the EU, we democratically consent to EU changes.

    - "We have sacrificed that right to tether ourselves to a bureaucratic leviathan" - REALLY? THIS VIDEO ISN'T USING SCARE TACTICS YOU SAY?

    - CONSTANT pushing of "us vs them" narrative with regards to leave voters vs stay voters. This video isn't factual, it is heavily biased and one sided. Heavy misrepresentation of the views of those who vote to stay, again aimed purely to divide people.

    - Describes the UK as "the plaything of unelected officials in Brussels", "The British people were fooled once in 1975" - The video isn't even trying to be subtle about it's fearmongering now!

    Yeah I'm still voting stay.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    72 AFAIK.

    I personally accept the fact that we'll be outvoted on things, I though you Brexiters we're all about democracy or is that only when you get your own way?
    This was something I was thinking constantly while watching the video. Well put.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JoePFR)
    - "...each time a treaty is passed, each one bringing us closer to a United States of Europe..." - Ummmm what? No justification is given for this claim at all.


    Where could the idea the EU wants to form a single state come from, I wonder?

    Hmm....
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheTechN1304)
    . Leaving the EU would not make trading with those countries difficult. The US is one of the UK's biggest trade partners and vice versa. The UK currently exports about $50-60bn per year to the US, and imports a similar amount. Neither country would want to give up such a large amount of trade, and *better* deals would be able to be made than what we currently have.
    Well, we are not going to get a better deal. They have already said that and the US is notoriously protectionist.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, we are not going to get a better deal. They have already said that and the US is notoriously protectionist.
    Over $100bn in trade is not about to go down the drain. The US can say what it likes about wanting the UK to remain in the EU (as it gives the US greater access to the rest of Europe through the UK), but the reality is that if we leave, I can imagine them changing their minds quite quickly.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.