I still can't work out whether this obsession with Germany supposedly strangling the EU in its tight little fingers is still resentment from the war or massive amounts of sour grapes. Either way, I'd be happy if people stopping blaming X for every conceivable ill.
EU Referendum: Protecting The Democracy
- Thread starter AlmostCivilized
- Start date
Hm, not sure if you mean the british resentment (which is of different roots), but my own (and local) resentment has a rather evident reason, us being Ruined by the demented austerity. Don't worry, though, as you won't have to live through a similar crisis. There is a local saying, "the person who is already dripping with water is not afraid of the rain".
Wasn't it mentioned earlier that the Germans didn't even want to keep bailing out the Greeks but were persuaded to do so? So much for manipulating the EU as they see fit.
One would hope not, but there's still the ominous cloud of voter resentment lurking for when the Leavers realise en masse that the land of milk and honey will almost certainly not be materialising on cue.
One would hope not, but there's still the ominous cloud of voter resentment lurking for when the Leavers realise en masse that the land of milk and honey will almost certainly not be materialising on cue.
^Must be true. We aren't being bailed out, btw. Just loan-sharked into oblivion. We already have paid back massive amounts, and the debt to gdp keeps getting larger.
Anyway, maybe you should not focus so much on others now that you are an island off the coast of Eu
Play your part, like Macbeth. Teutoburg forest hasn't yet visited your fortress.
Anyway, maybe you should not focus so much on others now that you are an island off the coast of Eu
Play your part, like Macbeth. Teutoburg forest hasn't yet visited your fortress.
Just because 52% of my countrymen seem to insist on introversion does not mean I need to do so. At least it's a good thing that all those pesky immigrants will no longer resort to squeezing themselves into lorries or walking down the Channel Tunnel at night because... reasons.
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
Arakhor said:
For the record, I am not anti-Germany and I am not anti-EU. My only position in this entire debate is that I want to see democratically accountable decision making (the emphasis).
Please calm down and please consider:
In their general election, UK voters elected their Conservative government on the basis that PM Cameron would try to renegotiate specific issues with the EU plus hold a referendum on the changes. That is pure and simple democratic action.
Immediately before those EU renegotiations began, Merkel announced to the press that she would flatly refuse to tamper with the freedom of movement. That is undemocratic simply because no German voter had elected Merkel on the basis that she would block renegotiations at the EU.
Once Merkel made her announcement, all the other EU member states were under undue pressure to take sides before negotiating, and that highlights a structural failure of the EU.
What I would have liked to have seen is Germany (and others) negotiate sincerely and quietly with the UK on the topics that were important to the UK. Then talk to the press, and then let all EU peoples decide if the negotiated changes are acceptable at their national levels. If such a process had been followed, and if the changes had been rejected by other EU voters, I am confident that most British voters would have been satisfied.
Clearly such democratic processes are too democratic for Merkel, and possibly some other EU heads of state.
The EU knew that Cameron (and hence UK voters) did not get what sought from the renegotiation. It doesn't matter if the UK would ultimately succeed or not, what matters is that the UK democratic voice fell on deaf ears at the EU, and other EU peoples were not given a voice. There cannot be unified democratic Europe if its peoples cannot hear one another.
What happened in the referendum that follows is simply the upholding of democratic principles in the UK. The EU didn't just dismiss the UK, it dismissed fundamental democratic principles.
What is your point? It is their democratic right to ask you if they can eat your cake. I'm not saying if they are right or wrong, but if they leave because you said no then everyone should be happy. The UK has voted to leave the EU so what are you complaining about?
For clarity: Other exemptions are irrelevant, and it does not matter if anyone in the EU agrees with what the UK tried to negotiate. The only problem is the process followed by the EU (and specifically Merkel).
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Whether something is 'democratic' or not isn't an argument. A mob of 10 may demand you to jump of a bridge. You choose not to jump and nobody cheers for it. Not jumping is undemocratic, yet it is your right to choose. Mass murderers like Talat Pasha and Adolf Hitler were elected democratically and Oliver Cromwell in fact oversaw the biggest democratisation of Britain at the time, though he certainly loved to kill Irish people. Anyway, who cares about that? "The people" decided!
Lexicus
Deity
Torvegeiter said:
This is actually not true, Hitler was never elected to anything. Even in the completely rigged and terrorized election of March 1933 the Nazis only got 43% of the vote. Hitler only became head of government because Hindenburg gave him the position, undemocratically.
It is a common misconception but Hitler was not 'elected.' The Nazis also did not get such a large share in the Reichstag by 'democratic' means, they got it through organized violence, as in, using their armed gangs to disrupt the activities of their rivals and prevent people from voting.
Aside from that though your point is quite correct.
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
You have confused Ochlocracy and Democracy. Your examples from history did not give an equal voice to their opponents.
Verbose
Deity
Hardly.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Majority-rule gives not an equal consideration to minorities.
Hindenburg gave Hitler the position of Chancellor due to a democratic mandate. as the NSDAP was the biggest party in the Reichstag.
Now, it is true that this election was rigged and intimidation was used. The worst rigging however wasn't applied on ballot-boxes, rather, it was applied on the minds of German citizens. The German media was enthusiastic about Hitler.
The problem isn't even "democracy" (resisting peer-pressure is arguably the first childhood lesson most of us remember), rather, the degree of centralisation of the state. A political entity that can decide over 60 million lives and up is bound to break stuff. Media can then embark on meticulously planned campaigns to bring figures they find sympathetic to power.
And this is a recurring problem when you combine large territorial extent and a population good for millions people with modern communication technologies to mobilise the entire country. In this regard, Hitler was hardly a pioneer or unique, though perhaps a uniquely sick example.
Lexicus
Deity
As I said Hitler's coming to power was not an example of majority rule, as the Nazis had only 33% of the vote (Nov 32, down from 38% in July) when Hindenburg appointed Hitler to be chancellor.
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
I have made my case, and I am asking you to make yours: Why it is undemocratic to ask for something?
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
Ochlocracy is majority rule. Democracy is majority elected governance. Your examples can be categorised as the former but not the latter.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
The term "majority-rule" is admittedly misleading. The majority rarely decides. This might be true for relatively small groups, though once the group is big enough, a minority leads the majority into being a coherent whole.
So there is strong distinction between privileged minorities and suppressed minorities.
Lexicus
Deity
Do you really think 33% is a majority?
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
Point conceded
UK campaigning certainly did over-simplify and distort issues with immeasurable consequence. One peculiarity is that this particular referendum was a manifesto pledge in a general election, thus it needed to go ahead on principle.
AlmostCivilized
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2016
- Messages
- 86
