"The Brexit Effect: How leaving the EU hit the UK." Financial Times. [V-28:24]

m3t4tr0n

Member
I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons... I've always been broadly in favour of further integrations with Europe. In principle, the concept of a 'United States of Europe' has never bothered me at all. Bring it on if you ask me. I've never been one for arbitrary lines drawn in the dirt long long ago. Until something major changes we all have to live on this same rock and share the same resources. We're stronger together. ✌️
 

Lefty

Well-known member
Your arrogance is an ongoing feature.
You have no idea what "process" I went through, or what "sources" I used.
You appear to believe that you can assess whether people have the right to hold a different opinion to yours and no doubt then whether they are well informed enough to have a voice/vote.

I have been against "ever closer union" for a long time. I support close economic cooperation, but am sceptical about broader integration and highly cynical about full political integration, especially of a much broader membership.
I understand that the UK had the most opt outs of any member state (Schengen, EMU, Fundamental Rights, FSJ and Social Charter). I understand we had the rebate and why and how it came about. I know we were not in the Banking Union.
I am fully aware that Cameron did obtain more clarity about our right not to support further Political integration and our right to be excluded from further Treaties embracing "ever closer union". He also communicated all this really poorly.
I understand how the Council, Parliament and Commission work. I understand the vetos and how the voting works.
I do understand the budget principles too.
I also fully understand that you can not cherry pick, you can not take yet not give, and that we had a special arrangement.

Yet my concerns were and are about the rapid evolution of the EEC into the behometh EU it became. 28 member countries of massively varying states, challenges, capabilities and needs. Others looking to join what had already creaked under crises of financial collapse and mass migration - and went on to creak on pandemic and Ukraine.
I believe countries will always ultimately cooperate in crisis without having to be bound together on absolutely everything in the way the EU demands and I think will move towards.

I dislike the Commission, the fact it is completely unelected, has 32k extortionately paid civil servants without accountability, but license to shape/do so much.

The opt outs and vetos and rhetoric tells me we can theoretically resist what we fundamentally oppose, and I am aware of the 2011 European Union Act; yet the UK population was frog marched through Maastricht, Lisbon and expansions without so much as a nod to our electorate, let alone the sort of referendum other nations had. In a nutshell that is why I don't trust the relentless progression from 9 nation Common Market through 28 nation EU to the US of E.

I don't feel "European", have greater affinity to other nations and identify strongly as British.
I fully respect that others feel differently and respect their position.
I'm aware that Brexit is part of our current economic difficulties and of course I regret things are (unnecessarily) even tougher.
I didn't vote for this version of Brexit and don't think we will end up with it for very long.

But please don't attempt to put me down as having not thought/read/talked about it, or as how you stereotype other people who were "stupid", "racist", "selfish", "ignorant" etc etc.
I was given the chance to vote and did, just not the same as you.

I don't think you are stupid. By no means. In fact, I'm quite certain you are very, very intelligent. Which might actually be the issue in some ways.

At the same time, I see no reason to think you are an exception to the rest of us. I think you are going to be capable of the same sort of errors the rest of us are, the same stupidity.

I fully understand that we all place different values or emphasis on things and I can see what aspect of Brexit you placed most emphasis on, what you valued most.

This isn't sufficient to demonstrate you employed the right thought process, it just illustrates some knowledge in these areas. You may even be an expert in these aspects, or well versed enough as an interested layman/amateur to have sufficient understanding. Or you may not, I don't know. Are you?

If you aren't an expert in your own right then I'm interested to know where you went to gain the knowledge and understanding you required.

I'm skeptical you followed a sufficiently robust process throughout, since it has been six and a half years and so far not one Leave voter has been able to show this to me and believe me I have tried to find one. So, the odds aren't with you, but I am open to the possibility. I know your referendum answer was (and still is) different to mine, but I'm asking you to 'show me your workings'. Show me you genuinely followed the right thought process and I'll happily accept that it is in your case simply a difference in values. That will slap the arrogance out of me and a good thing too if that's what it is. I don't think it is. The first thing I did after the referendum result came through was to question myself, my process and values, to try to understand what I had missed, what I had got wrong. That is not arrogance. Having gone into, I think, all the aspects of Brexit ever since to quite some degree, it just became more and more clear and continues to get clearer, to my surprise actually, that I didn't get it wrong. The even bigger surprise is that no one who voted leave has been able to show they had good understanding and had followed what they themselves would normally consider best practice when making an important decision, so that the only variable is we have very different values.
 
Last edited:

indeedido

Well-known member
I don't think you are stupid. By no means. In fact, I'm quite certain you are very, very intelligent. Which might actually be the issue in some ways.

At the same time, I see no reason to think you are an exception to the rest of us. I think you are going to be capable of the same sort of errors the rest of us are, the same stupidity.

I fully understand that we all place different values or emphasis on things and I can see what aspect of Brexit you placed most emphasis on, what you valued most.

This isn't sufficient to demonstrate you employed the right thought process, it just illustrates some knowledge in these areas. You may even be an expert in these aspects, or well versed enough as an interested layman/amateur to have sufficient understanding. Or you may not, I don't know. Are you?

If you aren't an expert in your own right then I'm interested to know where you went to gain the knowledge and understanding you required.

I'm skeptical you followed a sufficiently robust process throughout, since it has been six and a half years and so far not one Leave voter has been able to show this to me and believe me I have tried to find one. So, the odds aren't with you, but I am open to the possibility. I know your referendum answer was (and still is) different to mine, but I'm asking you to 'show me your workings'. Show me you genuinely followed the right thought process and I'll happily accept that it is in your case simply a difference in values. That will slap the arrogance out of me and a good thing too if that's what it is. I don't think it is. The first thing I did after the referendum result came through was to question myself, my process and values, to try to understand what I had missed, what I had got wrong. That is not arrogance. Having gone into, I think, all the aspects of Brexit ever since to quite some degree, it just became more and more clear and continues to get clearer, to my surprise actually, that I didn't get it wrong. The even bigger surprise is that no one who voted leave has been able to show they had good understanding and had followed what they themselves would normally consider best practice when making an important decision, so that the only variable is we have very different values.
We've been here before Lefty, as you are all too aware.
You realised then that I don't feel the need to prove anything to you, nor clear bars you set to determine whether my opinion is acceptably arrived at , or not.
My "process" was to (as best I could) assign value to remaining within the EU and what that might look like, versus leaving the EU and my best estimate of what leaving might look like (different to what has happened so far).
Did I understand the objectives and the progression of the EU? Yes and I didn't and don't like it.
Did I understand the UK's position and what our options were whilst within the EU? Yes and I never expected the "establishment" to grant a referendum.
I simply wanted an economic partnership without the political union I felt was growing inevitable if we remained. We've discussed economics and politics being separately considered before.
I don't know what the current purely economic impact of leaving is (nor does anybody), nor what it will be. It hasn't been calculated, there is no value. I am confident that it has been a negative financial impact to date, and may be for some time, but have no idea what the longer term looks like - any more than you do. There is no certainty.
There is no quantifiable metric for value that can be placed on a downside to becoming consumed within a superstate that feels alien to you. There is no more certainty about that either. We haven't been consumed, so I feel better for that, but can't quantify that and compare it to an unquantified economic impact of leaving.
So I knew what to theoretically compare, knew how difficult it was to compare apples with apples, but I couldn't have the best of all worlds. I had to choose based on what I knew and what I felt.
I have always respected the opposite views, but I maintain this is not an exercise in logic. It was always about values and what one most values.

If we get a return to the SM and CU, accepting we can't cherry pick, but remain outside the EU (and any evolution) then I will take that, as its what I wanted to happen following the referendum - and expected would prevail. It could have done but for the deranged ERG.
Yes we will not be formally involved in trade rule making (but will influence) and yes we will take rules on trade (but will have such compromise in entering any other Trading relationships with any other bloc or country).
What would I be losing then through not being a full EU member?
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
We've been here before Lefty, as you are all too aware.
You realised then that I don't feel the need to prove anything to you, nor clear bars you set to determine whether my opinion is acceptably arrived at , or not.
My "process" was to (as best I could) assign value to remaining within the EU and what that might look like, versus leaving the EU and my best estimate of what leaving might look like (different to what has happened so far).
Did I understand the objectives and the progression of the EU? Yes and I didn't and don't like it.
Did I understand the UK's position and what our options were whilst within the EU? Yes and I never expected the "establishment" to grant a referendum.
I simply wanted an economic partnership without the political union I felt was growing inevitable if we remained. We've discussed economics and politics being separately considered before.
I don't know what the current purely economic impact of leaving is (nor does anybody), nor what it will be. It hasn't been calculated, there is no value. I am confident that it has been a negative financial impact to date, and may be for some time, but have no idea what the longer term looks like - any more than you do. There is no certainty.
There is no quantifiable metric for value that can be placed on a downside to becoming consumed within a superstate that feels alien to you. There is no more certainty about that either. We haven't been consumed, so I feel better for that, but can't quantify that and compare it to an unquantified economic impact of leaving.
So I knew what to theoretically compare, knew how difficult it was to compare apples with apples, but I couldn't have the best of all worlds. I had to choose based on what I knew and what I felt.
I have always respected the opposite views, but I maintain this is not an exercise in logic. It was always about values and what one most values.

If we get a return to the SM and CU, accepting we can't cherry pick, but remain outside the EU (and any evolution) then I will take that, as its what I wanted to happen following the referendum - and expected would prevail. It could have done but for the deranged ERG.
Yes we will not be formally involved in trade rule making (but will influence) and yes we will take rules on trade (but will have such compromise in entering any other Trading relationships with any other bloc or country).
What would I be losing then through not being a full EU member?

Having read though 'your workings out' as Lefty said you really did get it wrong. And it probably wasn't your fault totally. It seems that you failed to weigh up what Brexit meant - in reality and politically. Thing is we were warned but people didn't listen.

Stuff like 'Brexit means Brexit' after the referendum was a big red flag showing that the Tories didn't even know what it meant.

I think most leavers were like you. They voted for Brexit without knowing what Brexit was. No one knew what it was apart from Remainers who knew it wasn't staying in the EU.
 

indeedido

Well-known member
Having read though 'your workings out' as Lefty said you really did get it wrong. And it probably wasn't your fault totally. It seems that you failed to weigh up what Brexit meant - in reality and politically. Thing is we were warned but people didn't listen.

Stuff like 'Brexit means Brexit' after the referendum was a big red flag showing that the Tories didn't even know what it meant.

I think most leavers were like you. They voted for Brexit without knowing what Brexit was. No one knew what it was apart from Remainers who knew it wasn't staying in the EU.
You still don’t seem to accept that I considered it all and wanted out.
We have left in a way I didn’t want, but we can and will converge economically. Then I will have what I personally wanted.
I thought Johnson was useless in the campaign, and he was always only ever in it for himself. But ask yourself how well you think the Remain campaign operated. If there were such compelling reasons not to leave, how can do many bright people have been unable to convince a majority of the population to vote Remain.
I find so many Remainers still in denial.
 

Capybara

Well-known member
Yes, the Remain campaign was poor and a large part of that was because it was, essentially, a complacent, Tory-run campaign with other parties pushed to the sidelines and it was run by Cameron and Co largely along the lines of that which 'worked' in Scotland. Hardly surprising that voters dissatisfied with 'the establishment' opted to vote against what they saw as an establishment-run campaign. But I've fallen into the trap I've been trying not to fall into, by going over stuff that happened over six years ago. What matters now is how we get out of the mess we are in.
 

indeedido

Well-known member
Well, my point is we all now know the leave campaign was based on a mountain of lies. Just be interesting to know which ones you believed. Sounds like you went down the EU army/ join the euro lie route
They are not lies, they are risks.
There are no certainties, so you assess risks and assign value.
You always seek to polarise and then assign labels. I won’t be put into one of your boxes.
I’ve been asked why I voted the way I did.
I have explained and my reasons are unchanged.
You so disagree with me ( which is fine) but can’t respect my views, so leap to try and ridicule me.
Some posters like Gunslinger lash out, and leap to caricatures and insults. It’s not helpful.
We are out of the EU and likely will be for some time. Surely the best thing is to try and reconcile and at least accelerate economic cooperation.
By looping back all the time to insist on winning an argument that you never totally acknowledged and still refuse to consider mattered to many people, you simply delay the next phases of life after the decision to leave.
We will converge economically and may one day return to the EU or some derivative, if people really want to and vote so.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
You still don’t seem to accept that I considered it all and wanted out.
We have left in a way I didn’t want, but we can and will converge economically. Then I will have what I personally wanted.
I thought Johnson was useless in the campaign, and he was always only ever in it for himself. But ask yourself how well you think the Remain campaign operated. If there were such compelling reasons not to leave, how can do many bright people have been unable to convince a majority of the population to vote Remain.
I find so many Remainers still in denial.

I agree the remain camp was useless. I do think it's harder to sell the status quo than it is to sell sunlit uplands though, maybe that is why they failed so badly. Or it could have been the borderline illegal methods employed by Vote Leave to influence the outcome? Anyway, it's all in the past and I accept the result and aren't clamouring for a second referendum etc.

I do find the reasons why people voted leave fascinating though and am genuinely interested as to why they did. Thank you for explaining your decision process. What I glean from it is you were aware of all the facts, including Leave damaging the economy, which would result in poorer living conditions for the population, making people (especially the poor) worse off and that it could potentially erode the protections that the EU gave us (well that was always going to happen - the Tories love getting rid of protections and regulations) - Yet despite all of this you voted to leave because you didn't like the political union.

And that is fair enough. Totally your right do do that. But in my opinion one of the most selfish reasons I've heard. Why is it so selfish? Because you researched and knew the risks, and the likely outcomes, but you still did it.

Honestly though - thank you for explaining your reasoning. I understand now and will leave it there (y)
 

indeedido

Well-known member
But in my opinion one of the most selfish reasons I've heard. Why is it so selfish? Because you researched and knew the risks, and the likely outcomes, but you still did it.
Thanks for your response, but I have to say you still don't fully understand if you find my rationale selfish.
At 60, the selfish thing would have been to vote for the most economically advantageous short term thing I could have, which would have been remain.
But I agree let's leave it here, as we do disagree, but have at least reached a position of better understanding and without going round in the ever decreasing circles which gets soul destroying on some threads.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
They are not lies, they are risks.
There are no certainties, so you assess risks and assign value.
You always seek to polarise and then assign labels. I won’t be put into one of your boxes.
I’ve been asked why I voted the way I did.
I have explained and my reasons are unchanged.
You so disagree with me ( which is fine) but can’t respect my views, so leap to try and ridicule me.
Some posters like Gunslinger lash out, and leap to caricatures and insults. It’s not helpful.
We are out of the EU and likely will be for some time. Surely the best thing is to try and reconcile and at least accelerate economic cooperation.
By looping back all the time to insist on winning an argument that you never totally acknowledged and still refuse to consider mattered to many people, you simply delay the next phases of life after the decision to leave.
We will converge economically and may one day return to the EU or some derivative, if people really want to and vote so.
With the risk of repeating myself. The reason I can't respect your views is because of how bad brexit is. And how it was based on lies. You claim to have valid reasons for voting for it but are a bit slower in acknowledging the failures of the process. I'm not insisting in winning an argument. I'm insisting on trying to address the failures.
 
Fair play 👏

Out of interest did any one thing sway you? I've often thought that maybe the remain side talking about the doom and gloom of leaving may have encouraged people, in an anti-establishment kinda way, into voting leave. People want things that make them feel better - change and leaving (the promised sunlit uplands of Brexit) was a powerful driver.

Honestly, looking back I was just really stupid. I remember seeing a video about how they moved the offices every year for some reason and it smacked of pointless bureaucracy I'd experienced in the Army years before. This and as I said I'm a bit anti-establishment and feeling "left behind" being a working-class lad growing up on council estates in Redcar and Grangetown I never felt connected to Europe the way some people I'd worked with in the Army and when I worked in London did. I would probably class myself as politically homeless at the time.

I look at it now and see it for what it was, it was easier to sell the lie than make people see the truth, Cameron and Osborne's desperate speeches when it looked like it could go sideways probably made things worse as well. as I said to someone the next day, Misery loves company.

I know it was a mistake but so many people were marginalised in the run up (and following come to that) that it probably shouldn't have been that much of a shock. Of all the major political leaders I think only Jeremy Corbyn summed it up properly the next day. "A rejection of globalism by people who felt marginalised" and for all the Brexiteers who won't admit they were wrong to vote to leave there's a bigoted "told you so" who doesn't appreciate that there's a whole group of people who are politically homeless and don't have a voice and will continue to shout them down and belittle them. this thread is a good example of the extremes of both sides.
 

ThePrisoner

Well-known member
If we get a return to the SM and CU, accepting we can't cherry pick, but remain outside the EU (and any evolution) then I will take that, as its what I wanted to happen following the referendum - and expected would prevail. It could have done but for the deranged ERG.
Yes we will not be formally involved in trade rule making (but will influence) and yes we will take rules on trade (but will have such compromise in entering any other Trading relationships with any other bloc or country).
You are deluded if you think this will happen.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
Honestly, looking back I was just really stupid. I remember seeing a video about how they moved the offices every year for some reason and it smacked of pointless bureaucracy I'd experienced in the Army years before. This and as I said I'm a bit anti-establishment and feeling "left behind" being a working-class lad growing up on council estates in Redcar and Grangetown I never felt connected to Europe the way some people I'd worked with in the Army and when I worked in London did. I would probably class myself as politically homeless at the time.

I look at it now and see it for what it was, it was easier to sell the lie than make people see the truth, Cameron and Osborne's desperate speeches when it looked like it could go sideways probably made things worse as well. as I said to someone the next day, Misery loves company.

I know it was a mistake but so many people were marginalised in the run up (and following come to that) that it probably shouldn't have been that much of a shock. Of all the major political leaders I think only Jeremy Corbyn summed it up properly the next day. "A rejection of globalism by people who felt marginalised" and for all the Brexiteers who won't admit they were wrong to vote to leave there's a bigoted "told you so" who doesn't appreciate that there's a whole group of people who are politically homeless and don't have a voice and will continue to shout them down and belittle them. this thread is a good example of the extremes of both sides.
I think you're being harsh. The people who are trying to get others to acknowledge the failures of brexit aren't interested in "I told you so". They are interested in how we fix the myriad problems. One of the main issues is the major political parties just won't touch fixing brexit because of a hardcore of brexiteers who just won't acknowledge the problems. So Tories and labour have to "make it work" which, in its current guise, we know it can't. I respect what happened in the past can't be changed and it's brave to admit mistake on such an emotive subject. The issue isn't with people who voted brexit. It's the issue with people who still support it. Look at brexit conversations lately. Even the supporters of brexit can't in any way name benefits or justify themselves. They just insult and deflect or blane something else. That's the sad thing. Everyone on both sides of the discussion can see something is horribly wrong, but a lot of people on the side that were conned can't admit it. Until they can I don't see how we can heal
 

m3t4tr0n

Member
I mean in one way or another we were all played ... the same things that (yes I am again generalising) got leavers all riled got remainers riled too ... divide and conquer played by the establishment ... as us remainers got more concerned and worried about the lies being peddled, our impassioned arguments became more and more fraught, tempers frayed and it didn't help our case ... I think we were caught off guard as much as anyone and by then it was too late. Farage got what he wanted and a lot of rich people got richer.
 

Redwurzel

Well-known member
I agree the meaning of "Leave the EU" was unclear at the time of the Referendum.

It has been shown even in diagramatically forms on here - there are numerous forms of EU Leave involving SEM and EFTA agreements etc.

Within the EU some countries use the Euro as their currency and follow the rules of those that use the currency and some don't. There has also been EU transitional arrangements to control the level of immigration when new member nations have joined. Some nations used these arrangements and some did not (as were their rights). All this is dynamic and has changed over time and is changing.

In the UK the Leave definition ultimately was made by what seemed to me votes in the UK Parliament by around 650 MPs. Personally for me it needed a follow up referendum to either endorse or not endorse what had been agreed by MPs, because it was such a big issue.

For me the 2016 Vote also registered how unhappy many of the UK population is with how they are ruled and they and their coommunities are supported/not supported. People voted who never or rarely vote at General Elections. I was a bit shocked but not as shocked as most of the media and even the pollsters.

The demonisers by some of others too by both sides I find quite shocking - some actually seem to enjoy it, but it is also happening in the USA appears even bigger there and there was no EU referendum vote there.
I don't seem to remember anything like after the 1975 EEC referendum, I was still a child then but watched the news and the sunday politics shows Brian Walden etc.
 
Because it's hard to talk someone out of a wrong belief when you're making them feel stupid. The instinctive reaction is to dig deeper or put barriers up. Not everyone is equipped to admit they are wrong and even fewer are equipped to change someone's mind so easily.

I spend a lot of time listening to James O'Brien and laughable as some of the people who will steadfastly defend a stupid argument on Brexit are he almost never convinces them in the moment because they're making fools of themselves and he keeps asking questions in ways that they keep digging holes rather than let the idea that they're wrong creep in and grow and breathe. it's morbidly entertaining if you can afford to stock your fridge up and keep the lights on but it does nothing to pull the disenfranchised away from the likes of Johnson and Farage who tell them they're not stupid, that they can have Brexit on toast forever and they are the children of the new era of Britain!

I don't actually have an answer to talking people out of this and I've been on the other side. Sadly it's going to be like when you tell your teenage kids they're making a mistake and they never admit they're wrong but end up abandoning it for "other reasons" eventually with all the damage that comes with it.
 

changingman

Well-known member
I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons... I've always been broadly in favour of further integrations with Europe. In principle, the concept of a 'United States of Europe' has never bothered me at all. Bring it on if you ask me. I've never been one for arbitrary lines drawn in the dirt long long ago. Until something major changes we all have to live on this same rock and share the same resources. We're stronger together. ✌️
100% my position too, and has been for some time, hence never fully understanding the "deeper integration = bad" line.

If you look at the EU governmental institutions they are mostly governed by pragmatic, rational and highly educated people. "The Grown Ups" if you will. Compare and contrast that with the plethora of screaming lunatics we have running things here and a stark reality presents itself.

Unfortunately there wasn't an option for even closer ties with Europe on the ballot and our country is arguably much worse off for that fact.
 
Top