View Topic

You're displaying a level of naivety I haven't come to expect from you, Seroim.

Countries where ethnic cleansing is taking place don't have "rich" people fleeing to suck up to easier times for financial gain in other countries. They flee because they're going to get killed if they stay.

Even when nothing that extreme is happening, take a look at South Africa's current politics. White people are becoming an actual target for race violence, and the government is slowly but surely covering up the news, de-weaponising the citizens and adding to the racist sentiment to gain more votes. Why should we not flee? Democracy isn't going to save us. Our skills and knowledge are not going to help us negotiate our safety in any way. Look at what happened to Zimbabwe. This is what's coming for white South Africans (especially Afrikaners), by all indications. And it's not just us. Many black people are suffering too, and are even getting killed in the riots breaking out all over South Africa.

From a very cold rational perspective, you could claim that the levels of immigration (regardless of who are immigrating) is just not something your country is currently equipped to deal with, but you've shown a remarkable misunderstanding for why immigrants are flocking to your countries, just now.

...and then cute little bunny Barnes bravely coming in and giving it his all trying to break it up.

When you want to be Nick Wilde but realize you're actually Judy Hopps

Meanwhile, my thoughts on the matter.

I felt that a Brexit was inevitable, even though I would've voted Remain. As much as I am excited for "change" in politics (which is why I agree with claims that "democracy won" last night), my Remain vote comes out of pragmatism, because I know the British economy will suffer because of the EU exit. I also quite like the EU freedom of movement/habitation between countries, and thought it was pointless to leave the EU when the UK already has an exemption from the Schengen Area.

If anything, it seems like the Leave vote was based on emotion and populism rather than on sound economic poiicy/fact, and thus the vote created (albeit somewhat-exciting) uncertainty for Great Britain. I was talking to one of my friends, and he said the Leave vote was good from a socialist perspective because of being anti-free-trade.

I also agree with him in that I feel that Scotland and Northern Ireland will make calls for independence because they, unlike England and Wales, voted to Remain in the EU. If another referendum is promoted, and a vote comes to fruition in Ireland, soon all that will be left of the UK will be England and Wales. I say this because Gibraltar will be dependent on the EU for all of its activity, and may have to join Spain if the border cannot be opened for the area. An independent Scotland would also need some work to potentially rejoin the EU.

You're displaying a level of naivety I haven't come to expect from you, Seroim.

Countries where ethnic cleansing is taking place don't have "rich" people fleeing to suck up to easier times for financial gain in other countries. They flee because they're going to get killed if they stay.

Even when nothing that extreme is happening, take a look at South Africa's current politics. White people are becoming an actual target for race violence, and the government is slowly but surely covering up the news, de-weaponising the citizens and adding to the racist sentiment to gain more votes. Why should we not flee? Democracy isn't going to save us. Our skills and knowledge are not going to help us negotiate our safety in any way. Look at what happened to Zimbabwe. This is what's coming for white South Africans (especially Afrikaners), by all indications. And it's not just us. Many black people are suffering too, and are even getting killed in the riots breaking out all over South Africa.

From a very cold rational perspective, you could claim that the levels of immigration (regardless of who are immigrating) is just not something your country is currently equipped to deal with, but you've shown a remarkable misunderstanding for why immigrants are flocking to your countries, just now.

I'm talking about immigrants, not refugees. There's a difference between one who immigrates to "have a better life" and another who flees because he won't have a life if he stays where he is. By their very natures, they require different treatment.

The treatment of people fleeing strife and ethnic hatred is a matter of international law and not up for debate. National immigration policies are something else entirely.

So I typed up a response to this last week when Barnes tagged me, but I was still quite emotional and hadn't had time to think about everything and probably would have gotten angry and stuff... and I don't like getting upset . But last night Gov asked me about why I voted the way I did and I explained my position, and that reminded me of this thread.

The EU has been a mess for some time, but during the whole run up to the referendum and even now I don't believe the UK leaving will solve any of those issues with the EU and I don't think it will necessarily be much better for the UK... The majority of the issues are actually due to the lack of power the EU holds, it grants vetos and opt-outs to it's member states, and all the looping of votes, with things getting shot down and rewritten and then vetoed means that it actually barely gets anything it plans to do done in a reasonable time-frame... It's not actually physically that "Bureaucratic" as it's mainly elected officials (trying) to make decisions and they aren't fighting legislation so much as they are fighting each other and their own (often petty) politics.

Anyway, I still like the EU, I believe these kinks can be worked out and they aren't that different from any other government and especially extra-government bodies (looking at you UN and NATO) but the EU has very successful in it's initial goals, and they were to try to bring a divided and broken Europe together after 2 world wars and countless civil wars and acts civic strife, and it has definitely done that, it's clear that Europe has been more united than it ever has been in history... how the fallout of this referendum will affect all that I don't know, but I'm optimistic for the future in this regard.

What's clear after the election is that the UK public have been massively mislead... mislead by the media (especially the tabloid media, but other news sources as well), by politicians, by their community leaders but basically all in all it was twisted and incorrect information; I believe everyone has a right to their opinion but when that person is unintentionally misinformed then they have no solid foundation for that opinion... This came from both sides, and a lot of people did notice it, but just because they noticed it doesn't mean that they found the correct information.

I'll quickly try to go through some of this, note that many politicians have actually apologized for what they said, I don't really think it's enough in this instance and it's only served to make the British public more displeased at the current state of affairs.

If you want you can skip these three big points, but they are my attempt to explain some of the goings on in the EU and maybe reveal why some people are confused.
Immigration:
A big push from the leave campaign was Immigration, capitalizing on strong anti-Muslim and bordering on "nativistic" notions of many Brits especially the working and lower middle classes, I don't entirely disagree with these notions, cheaper foreign labour and new arrivals who don't just refuse to integrate but are often hostile towards British culture as well as people and break the UK's laws, are real concerns... but how will leaving the EU necessarily solve these issues... only around 25% of all immigration comes from the EU members, and a significant portion of that is actually skilled labour, people with degrees and qualifications which we would still want to attract... many of the refugees actually arrive in the UK not under EU law but under UN regulations, specifically the UNHCR 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol, that means that a country must accept refugees that arrive at it's border... this is why the camp at Calais exists, because if those refugees leave France and step foot on British soil the government will be compelled to look after them.
Democracy: 
There have been many allegations as to the "undemocratic" nature of the EU, these are not entirely without grounds. The main executive body is the European Commission, this is a cabinet of 28 "commissioners" each member is proposed by one of the elected governments of each of the member states. The commission is headed up by a president (elected by the Parliament), this president changes every 5 years as well as all the commissioners, they must vote on each piece of legislation they wish to propose and it must pass with a majority each commissioner gets 1 vote, it's power isn't all encompassing as foreign policy and many internal decisions are left up the the European council.
The Council is made up of each of the heads of state of the member states, any member of the council can veto any legislation proposed by the Commission as well as veto any selection of a commissioner and they can remove any commissioner from office at any time for any reason.
The European Parliament is made up of directly elected Members of European Parliament (MEPs) the parliament can also veto any selection of a commissioner or have any commissioner removed at any time. They must also vote on any legislation proposed by the commission, and the parliament also controls the budget.

So you can see... it isn't so much undemocratic as it is... eh... well, a mess. It reminds me a lot of the US's electoral college... where people vote for delegates who then select the president (but don't actually have to do what the people tell them under certain circumstances). Also you can see why it struggles to get anything done... everyone holds all the cards, and anyone can veto anything this makes everything very slow.

Regulations:
The EU does impose many laws and regulations on it's member states... however in the UK's case it has opted out of many of these... The main purpose of the EU's laws are standardization, because this makes trade, industry, governance and other things more efficient and cheaper. It ensures that products made in France can be sold in Germany without the need for a separate production line, that workers trained in Sweden can work in Italy without extra courses. As such many of the laws focus on: machine tolerances, workplace health and safety, notation, units and other boring mundane things.
I spent 4 months this year writing a report on the EU's energy efficiency initiatives which literally has 50 pages devoted to the appropriate way to note down an power meters values...
Even so, in the case of the UK it's opted out of most of this, for example plugs HV transmission voltages, colour coding guides, ect, ect... in recent years the EU managed to get some things adopted but it hasn't made much progress.

The EU provides many grants and subsidies to areas in the UK and in many other states, its policies have effected positive change in many countries, especially in regards to climate, energy and standard of living... the UK has always distanced itself from the EU.

Now my opinion with this information is that I'd like to keep the EU, and I still wish to be in a country in the EU; It's my personal belief that countries should have external non-affiliated non-party-political bodies that they have to adhere to, and those bodies should have governments that they have to adhere to, creating a feedback loop of rights and security. I think the EU does an OK job at this... I can see what it was going for, though it doesn't quite work perfectly... but much like democracy itself it's the best of the worst solutions we've found.

In the end if you still disagree, you don't like extra-governmental bodies or don't want more election, if you prefer national identity over standardization and international community; then that's fine, that's your opinion and you are free to have it, I just hope I've helped clear up a lot of the misconceptions and given every opinion a more secure foundation.

In short, oh dear lord help us. At least the remote chance of Scotland (where I grew up) staying in is something to take heart in