The real message of Brexit (IMO)

[Richard Hakluyt]

Part of the problems in Britain date back to the poll tax. As you may recall it was rejected by the people (because it was an outstandingly stupid idea) and led to the downfall of Mrs Thatcher. The new government replaced it with the Council Tax, to ensure that the Council tax was accepted it was set at a low level. As a consequence the share of local government expenses borne by central government increased considerably. He who pays the piper calls the tune, the transfer in who was paying also led to great declines in local government power (this had started already due to Mrs Thatcher's controlling nature). The role of local councillor became less desirable and prestigious, the proportion of ordinary folk with good will in councils declined and that of political hacks went up. These councils used to be the recruitment and training ground for future MPs, that role is now much reduced with a greater proportion of MPs coming from distant political elites.

[11B4V]

Ah, this guy is great. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEALC1z3QG8

[Agelastus]

Ah, this guy is great. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEALC1z3QG8

Quite amusing, I must admit, despite a couple of annoying bits.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally was thinking about this again and I think the real message of Brexit is that we're in a moment of an English nationalist moment (and I'm Irish enough not to mean nationalist in a perjorative sense). I think that in some ways it's an incredibly exciting and important fight that we're now facing to define quite what we mean by Englishness because what's clear is that the English now want a voice.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Referenda work *just fine* in Switzerland, where the populace is educated on the issues and has deep experience with handling major political decisions.

How does one judge when a populace is well educated on the issues?

When the majority of people agree with me.

[viper37]

Perhaps they will take back control in a far reaching reform and restructuring of the UK's democratic institutions.

Will they storm Windsor castle? 

[viper37]

the English speaking world is doomed.

[viper37]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/from-brexit-to-texit-renewed-calls-for-texas-secession-after-eu-vote/ar-AAhBJsh?ocid=ansmsnnews11

Thing is, I don't think the country would have a problem with that.

We heeled them once, we'll do it again. The South will not rise again.

Vancouver island also wants to secede now, apparently.  The Front National wants to push a Frexit of their own.  Other movements seemed galvanized at first, until the negative effects hit them.  Sorta like Marty cheering for Trump-likes, until he realized what that would cost him.

[viper37]

Remains campaign was heavy on good arguments and (imo obvs) good arguments, but those were trivial resources compared to the Leave campaigns "Look Immigrants!" and spirited story telling.

did the Remain campaing even tried to counter these arguments?
I understand the government employees could not contribute one way or another for the last 4 weeks, but it should have been pretty easy to counter the facts about immigration and 350 00 000 GBP more per week in NHS.

[viper37]

The simplicity of the question hides the complexity of the issue.

True, but you could use the same argument for any kind of vote.

Look at your Presidential election.  One could argue voting from Trump or voting for Clinton has a lot more consequences than simply voting for more govt spending or less.

There are very complex issues being debatted currently in your country.  Trump has a lot of ideas that appear challenging, even interesting for many of your co-citizens.  They also appear repugnant to many others.
Immigration, religious/racial profiling, discrediting judiciary officials on their origins, paying back the debt in 8 years, etc, etc. 

I don't think you could find 90% of Americans who totally understand the consequences of these questions.  I don't 90% of Canadians truly understand that, even if many here appreciate Trump's policies, while never willing to admit it publicly (they may not be too concerned about Mexicans though...).  Certainly, most of Trudeau's supporters did not understand the consequences of his policies, yet voted for the moron.

US, Canada, and probably European countries too, when you make a vox populi and ask people who are their "Prime Minister", who is Minister of Finance, Economy, etc, they generally can't answer.  Only a minority is able to.
A lot more people know the current contenders of The Voice and other crappy shows.

Also, it is kind of stupid to have a "leave" vote be susceptible to a simple majority anyway. It should take a much greater weight to dissolve a complex union.

Nah.  Unless there are pre-established rules, from a long time, about what kind of majority it takes to make various changes (like repealling a law, changing a Constitution, etc), it should be 50%+1 as it's the basis for our democracy.

I would certainly not agree that a state should be allowed to leave the USA on a simple majority vote, for example. Or that we should modify the Constitution by a simple majority.

Leaving the USA?  I think it's been attempted once.  Don't think most of them are eager to try again.
Btw, what was the required majority of each Colony to leave the British Empire?  And the US Congress did not wait for the Canadian colonies to approve secession before invading and redacting provisions to include us in your country.  If any vote had taken place, it would have been with the British troops expelled from Quebec and under the American army's oversight.

As for the Constitution, I think you have defined pretty clear rules since the beginning, and every founding and later States joining the US agreed to the same rules.  Unlike the current Canadian constitution.

There are reasons we don't all just use simple democracy rather than representative republics.

yes, on that you are right.  On top of the complexity of having so many people vote on every law, there are obvious issues of uneducated people not understanding what they vote on.

[crazy canuck]

Incidentally was thinking about this again and I think the real message of Brexit is that we're in a moment of an English nationalist moment (and I'm Irish enough not to mean nationalist in a perjorative sense). I think that in some ways it's an incredibly exciting and important fight that we're now facing to define quite what we mean by Englishness because what's clear is that the English now want a voice.

I am not sure what you mean.  Last time I checked the British Parliament was still functioning.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Incidentally was thinking about this again and I think the real message of Brexit is that we're in a moment of an English nationalist moment (and I'm Irish enough not to mean nationalist in a perjorative sense). I think that in some ways it's an incredibly exciting and important fight that we're now facing to define quite what we mean by Englishness because what's clear is that the English now want a voice.

I am not sure what you mean.  Last time I checked the British Parliament was still functioning.

I think he means that the English are reaching the point where they realise that Britain != England (even though the English parliament became the British parliament, etc etc). Caused by devolution: the Scots have Holyrood (?), Northern-Ireland has it's thing, even Wales has gotten some sort of regional representative body. England didn't. It's in a bit of odd state as England is the entity that basically conquered and is also so much bigger than all others that the overlap between England and Britain is very high (and in the rest of the world probably close to 1:1).

but sheilbh will need to confirm/refute this as I'm speculating.

[garbon]

Incidentally was thinking about this again and I think the real message of Brexit is that we're in a moment of an English nationalist moment (and I'm Irish enough not to mean nationalist in a perjorative sense). I think that in some ways it's an incredibly exciting and important fight that we're now facing to define quite what we mean by Englishness because what's clear is that the English now want a voice.

I am not sure what you mean.  Last time I checked the British Parliament was still functioning.

I think he means that the English are reaching the point where they realise that Britain != England (even though the English parliament became the British parliament, etc etc). Caused by devolution: the Scots have Holyrood (?), Northern-Ireland has it's thing, even Wales has gotten some sort of regional representative body. England didn't. It's in a bit of odd state as England is the entity that basically conquered and is also so much bigger than all others that the overlap between England and Britain is very high (and in the rest of the world probably close to 1:1).

but sheilbh will need to confirm/refute this as I'm speculating.

Conquered is a bit of strange way of describing what happened to Scotland.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Conquered is a bit of strange way of describing what happened to Scotland.

not all conquests need to happen at bayonet's point. The Scots may have gotten a better deal than most of the conquered but their state was wiped of the map just the same.