|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 25, 2024 12:08:25 GMT
You really are on dodgy ground complaining about the EU being undemocratic given we are the least democratic country in pretty much the whole of Europe: We have an unelected head of state We have an unelected second chamber We have a voting system that effectively disenfranchises two thirds of the population that consistently returns a Parliament that in no way reflects the will of the people We have the most centralised state in Europe with very little regional power We don't have a written constitution or a Bill of rights The EU certainly needs democratic reform but in comparison as a democracy we are a joke. The UK is one of the most democratic countries in the world. www.statista.com/statistics/679796/democracy-index-most-democratic-countries/The UK is more democratic than most European countries. The people elect the HoC where sovereignty lies. The head of state is appointed and succession rules have been changed by parliament in the past. The HoL has no real power, its members are appointed, and its decisions can be overruled by the HoC. We have a well established judicial system. We are far from a joke and the envy of most of the world. The EU is far from a democracy. All legislation is drafted by the unelected Commission along the treaty lines of ever closer union. The EU parliament is a talking shop and its only power is to stop legislation and can only approve what the Commission draft. The Commission runs rings round individual national commissioners and dances to the tune of big business and commercial interests. Tell which country has a government that reflects the will of the people. Maybe Romania? I'll try not to repeat much of CBUFAWKIPWH's post which you have completely ignored by not addressing any of his excellent points How can you with any integrity say that a Government with an overwhelming majority elected by 1 in 3 people that voted or 20% of the adult population is Democratic Besides Iran UK is the only other Country in the World that reserves automatic places in its Legislature for Clerics and we have seen recent evidence of their turpitude. The "people" don't elect the Government, Billionaire Non Dom Press Barons tell people how to vote and Hedge Fund Managers and such like Donors dictate the policy. And who elected the "Special Advisors" like Cummings, Coulson, Campbell etc wielding more power than any Minister It's an antiquated system that relies on the good faith that "good chaps" will do the right thing. Johnson was certainly not a "good chap" when he attempted to overturn the system by proroguing Parliament, yes he was stopped but it demonstrates how fragile the system is. And UK is not only subject to influence from Press Barons and Donors but by malign Countries with the collusion of PMs/MPs Using the Russia Report as an example. Its 42 Page Summary proved interference but everyone looked away, noone wanted to look further, in fact the Security Services were prevented from doing so. And why do particular Countries need special lobby groups of MPs to champion them. Why are there Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel. Surely we should be friends with everyone that is an ally, although Truss couldn't make up her mind if France was one, in purely the interests of UK Citizens And the biggest Elephant in the room the USA, we operate like one of poorer States taking instructions on the 2 most important things a Government is supposed to do to protect its people, Defense and the Economy |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Nov 25, 2024 12:30:03 GMT
Big Nige still settled into the minds of lefties I see. Rent free of course😏 He is their kryptonite. |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 25, 2024 15:39:00 GMT
The UK is one of the most democratic countries in the world. www.statista.com/statistics/679796/democracy-index-most-democratic-countries/The UK is more democratic than most European countries. The people elect the HoC where sovereignty lies. The head of state is appointed and succession rules have been changed by parliament in the past. The HoL has no real power, its members are appointed, and its decisions can be overruled by the HoC. We have a well established judicial system. We are far from a joke and the envy of most of the world. The EU is far from a democracy. All legislation is drafted by the unelected Commission along the treaty lines of ever closer union. The EU parliament is a talking shop and its only power is to stop legislation and can only approve what the Commission draft. The Commission runs rings round individual national commissioners and dances to the tune of big business and commercial interests. Tell which country has a government that reflects the will of the people. Maybe Romania? I'll try not to repeat much of CBUFAWKIPWH's post which you have completely ignored by not addressing any of his excellent points How can you with any integrity say that a Government with an overwhelming majority elected by 1 in 3 people that voted or 20% of the adult population is Democratic Besides Iran UK is the only other Country in the World that reserves automatic places in its Legislature for Clerics and we have seen recent evidence of their turpitude. The "people" don't elect the Government, Billionaire Non Dom Press Barons tell people how to vote and Hedge Fund Managers and such like Donors dictate the policy. And who elected the "Special Advisors" like Cummings, Coulson, Campbell etc wielding more power than any Minister It's an antiquated system that relies on the good faith that "good chaps" will do the right thing. Johnson was certainly not a "good chap" when he attempted to overturn the system by proroguing Parliament, yes he was stopped but it demonstrates how fragile the system is. And UK is not only subject to influence from Press Barons and Donors but by malign Countries with the collusion of PMs/MPs Using the Russia Report as an example. Its 42 Page Summary proved interference but everyone looked away, noone wanted to look further, in fact the Security Services were prevented from doing so. And why do particular Countries need special lobby groups of MPs to champion them. Why are there Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel. Surely we should be friends with everyone that is an ally, although Truss couldn't make up her mind if France was one, in purely the interests of UK Citizens And the biggest Elephant in the room the USA, we operate like one of poorer States taking instructions on the 2 most important things a Government is supposed to do to protect its people, Defense and the Economy I'll also try not to repeat myself. 1. Here is another reference stating the UK is a "full democracy ": en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_IndexI accept it can always be improved. 2. The UK system results normally in the party winning the most seats forming the government, sometimes with a coalition. PR results in a government that nobody voted for with policies and ministerial jobs filled by politicians wheeling and dealing behind closed doors. Italy has had more governments than you can guess at since the war, and even Germany is unstable government today. PR gives a voice and platform for extremists and undue influence in coalitions. www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9n79w8p7po3. You have a poor opinion of how much influence the press and the rich have on the British public, I have a much higher opinion. One person's view is equal to another's in a democracy. Long may it be that way rather than be governed by experts and those who think they know best. 4. The removal of Johnson and his replacements shows the strength of the UK constitution. Once a president is appointed countries are effectively stuck with them and it takes a huge effort like Nixon in the 70s to remove a bad one. Who elected anyone in the EU Commission and they just draft all the rules! I see no problem with appointing people to use their talent , power rests in the HoC. I doubt a few clerics sat in the powerless HoL are a threat to the UK's democracy. But if an elected government chooses to remove them, I have no problem. 5. Your view that the UK dances to the US tune is laughable. They supported us in WW1 and WW2 against European tyranny. Maybe that is your problem. Trump will be around for another 4 years, but as I posted last time he was president, he will not be around for very long, unlike European politicians who enjoy long runs in power despite their unpopularity with their citizens, because their systems favour keeping the same people in power. Except for Italy of course! |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 25, 2024 16:52:44 GMT
I'll try not to repeat much of CBUFAWKIPWH's post which you have completely ignored by not addressing any of his excellent points How can you with any integrity say that a Government with an overwhelming majority elected by 1 in 3 people that voted or 20% of the adult population is Democratic Besides Iran UK is the only other Country in the World that reserves automatic places in its Legislature for Clerics and we have seen recent evidence of their turpitude. The "people" don't elect the Government, Billionaire Non Dom Press Barons tell people how to vote and Hedge Fund Managers and such like Donors dictate the policy. And who elected the "Special Advisors" like Cummings, Coulson, Campbell etc wielding more power than any Minister It's an antiquated system that relies on the good faith that "good chaps" will do the right thing. Johnson was certainly not a "good chap" when he attempted to overturn the system by proroguing Parliament, yes he was stopped but it demonstrates how fragile the system is. And UK is not only subject to influence from Press Barons and Donors but by malign Countries with the collusion of PMs/MPs Using the Russia Report as an example. Its 42 Page Summary proved interference but everyone looked away, noone wanted to look further, in fact the Security Services were prevented from doing so. And why do particular Countries need special lobby groups of MPs to champion them. Why are there Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel. Surely we should be friends with everyone that is an ally, although Truss couldn't make up her mind if France was one, in purely the interests of UK Citizens And the biggest Elephant in the room the USA, we operate like one of poorer States taking instructions on the 2 most important things a Government is supposed to do to protect its people, Defense and the Economy I'll also try not to repeat myself. 1. Here is another reference stating the UK is a "full democracy ": en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_IndexI accept it can always be improved. 2. The UK system results normally in the party winning the most seats forming the government, sometimes with a coalition. PR results in a government that nobody voted for with policies and ministerial jobs filled by politicians wheeling and dealing behind closed doors. Italy has had more governments than you can guess at since the war, and even Germany is unstable government today. PR gives a voice and platform for extremists and undue influence in coalitions. www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9n79w8p7po3. You have a poor opinion of how much influence the press and the rich have on the British public, I have a much higher opinion. One person's view is equal to another's in a democracy. Long may it be that way rather than be governed by experts and those who think they know best. 4. The removal of Johnson and his replacements shows the strength of the UK constitution. Once a president is appointed countries are effectively stuck with them and it takes a huge effort like Nixon in the 70s to remove a bad one. Who elected anyone in the EU Commission and they just draft all the rules! I see no problem with appointing people to use their talent , power rests in the HoC. I doubt a few clerics sat in the powerless HoL are a threat to the UK's democracy. But if an elected government chooses to remove them, I have no problem. 5. Your view that the UK dances to the US tune is laughable. They supported us in WW1 and WW2 against European tyranny. Maybe that is your problem. Trump will be around for another 4 years, but as I posted last time he was president, he will not be around for very long, unlike European politicians who enjoy long runs in power despite their unpopularity with their citizens, because their systems favour keeping the same people in power. Except for Italy of course! You haven't refuted any of the reasons CB or I proffered as evidence of lack of Democracy You just offer some survey by the Economist collectively owned by the Agnelli, Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder Families "well they would wouldn't they" Your link that Schult's Coalition is in difficulty is actually a measure of Democracy that an unpopular Government can be ousted before full term, the last UK Administration hung on like grim death WW1 was a result of a Family Squabble WW11 due to Appeasement and not just by UK Government What a ridiculous comment that European Politicians enjoy a long run in power despite being unpopular I get it that you don't like change but at least acknowledge that the system is undemocratic or at the very least engage why the 10/12 reasons CB and I have given are Democratic. |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 25, 2024 23:37:24 GMT
I'll also try not to repeat myself. 1. Here is another reference stating the UK is a "full democracy ": en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_IndexI accept it can always be improved. 2. The UK system results normally in the party winning the most seats forming the government, sometimes with a coalition. PR results in a government that nobody voted for with policies and ministerial jobs filled by politicians wheeling and dealing behind closed doors. Italy has had more governments than you can guess at since the war, and even Germany is unstable government today. PR gives a voice and platform for extremists and undue influence in coalitions. www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9n79w8p7po3. You have a poor opinion of how much influence the press and the rich have on the British public, I have a much higher opinion. One person's view is equal to another's in a democracy. Long may it be that way rather than be governed by experts and those who think they know best. 4. The removal of Johnson and his replacements shows the strength of the UK constitution. Once a president is appointed countries are effectively stuck with them and it takes a huge effort like Nixon in the 70s to remove a bad one. Who elected anyone in the EU Commission and they just draft all the rules! I see no problem with appointing people to use their talent , power rests in the HoC. I doubt a few clerics sat in the powerless HoL are a threat to the UK's democracy. But if an elected government chooses to remove them, I have no problem. 5. Your view that the UK dances to the US tune is laughable. They supported us in WW1 and WW2 against European tyranny. Maybe that is your problem. Trump will be around for another 4 years, but as I posted last time he was president, he will not be around for very long, unlike European politicians who enjoy long runs in power despite their unpopularity with their citizens, because their systems favour keeping the same people in power. Except for Italy of course! You haven't refuted any of the reasons CB or I proffered as evidence of lack of Democracy You just offer some survey by the Economist collectively owned by the Agnelli, Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder Families "well they would wouldn't they" Your link that Schult's Coalition is in difficulty is actually a measure of Democracy that an unpopular Government can be ousted before full term, the last UK Administration hung on like grim death WW1 was a result of a Family Squabble WW11 due to Appeasement and not just by UK Government What a ridiculous comment that European Politicians enjoy a long run in power despite being unpopular I get it that you don't like change but at least acknowledge that the system is undemocratic or at the very least engage why the 10/12 reasons CB and I have given are Democratic. My first link this morning clearly places the UK around the middle of the top 30 world's most democratic countries, above France and Spain, with Italy not even on the list. My second link this afternoon to the The Economist Democracy Index based on 60 indicators grouped into five categories describes the UK as a " full democracy" and ranks it the 18th most democratic country out of 167 countries. You don't like the message, so you "shoot the messenger", the Economist. Maybe you will give credence to Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg www.democracymatrix.com/rankingThis ranking of countries by Quality of Democracy describes the UK as a " Working Democracy" and places it 19th out of 176 and second highest of the G7 countries after Germany. Here is another link which is less flattering for the UK but still places it in the top quartile for each aspect of democracy examined and no worse than many peer European countries: www.idea.int/gsod/2023/countries/Is there a credible reference that demonstrates the UK is undemocratic? I did address the issues of an unelected head of state and an unelected second chamber, by pointing out that sovereignty lies solely with the HoC. The monarch and the HoL have effectively no powers and therefore do no impact on democracy. They have a ceremonial and advisory role. I also gave my view on PR and am happy to see the UK voting system improved, but not to PR. The suggestion that having a monarch/unelected person as head of state as a reason for the country not being democratic is silly. If you look at the lists of the world's most democratic countries Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Belgium, Spain and Australia all dominate the top 15 or so of the lists as the most democratic countries in the world and they all have monarchs as head of state. In fact it might lead one to believe that not having a monarch makes a country less democratic! The last thing I want is a politician as head of state. We can all unite behind a monarch, I doubt there is a UK PM in history we can regard as representing all the people. France and the US have elected heads of state most of their peoples disfavour. I can personally vouch that King Charles is an excellent person to be doing the role. Turning to Germany and the collapse of the "traffic light alliance" following a lengthy dispute over how to stop a multibillion-euro hole in next year’s budget. If you consider that is " actually a measure of Democracy that an unpopular Government can be ousted before full term" then presumable you think Italy is the most democratic country in the world having had 69 governments, at an average of one every 1.11 years since the end of WW2 in 1945. |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Nov 27, 2024 23:24:42 GMT
I'll try not to repeat much of CBUFAWKIPWH's post which you have completely ignored by not addressing any of his excellent points How can you with any integrity say that a Government with an overwhelming majority elected by 1 in 3 people that voted or 20% of the adult population is Democratic Besides Iran UK is the only other Country in the World that reserves automatic places in its Legislature for Clerics and we have seen recent evidence of their turpitude. The "people" don't elect the Government, Billionaire Non Dom Press Barons tell people how to vote and Hedge Fund Managers and such like Donors dictate the policy. And who elected the "Special Advisors" like Cummings, Coulson, Campbell etc wielding more power than any Minister It's an antiquated system that relies on the good faith that "good chaps" will do the right thing. Johnson was certainly not a "good chap" when he attempted to overturn the system by proroguing Parliament, yes he was stopped but it demonstrates how fragile the system is. And UK is not only subject to influence from Press Barons and Donors but by malign Countries with the collusion of PMs/MPs Using the Russia Report as an example. Its 42 Page Summary proved interference but everyone looked away, noone wanted to look further, in fact the Security Services were prevented from doing so. And why do particular Countries need special lobby groups of MPs to champion them. Why are there Conservative and Labour Friends of Israel. Surely we should be friends with everyone that is an ally, although Truss couldn't make up her mind if France was one, in purely the interests of UK Citizens And the biggest Elephant in the room the USA, we operate like one of poorer States taking instructions on the 2 most important things a Government is supposed to do to protect its people, Defense and the Economy 5. Your view that the UK dances to the US tune is laughable. They supported us in WW1 and WW2 against European tyranny. Maybe that is your problem. Trump will be around for another 4 years, but as I posted last time he was president, he will not be around for very long, unlike European politicians who enjoy long runs in power despite their unpopularity with their citizens, because their systems favour keeping the same people in power. Except for Italy of course! There couldn't be a more vivid example that UK doesn't retain Sovereignty over its foreign policy than the Chagos Islands Agreement Labour's position is that it's following International Law and following through on negotiations commenced by the previous Conservative Administration Appropriately on this thread Farage a Member of the British Parliament is behaving like a Fifth Columnist and veritibly wollowing in the discomfort by disengenuously saying he can intercede on behalf of the UK Government with his mate Trump and try and get UK exempted from Tarrifs that Trump is proposing if UK will walk away from the International Agreement with Mauritius. There are literally dozens of examples I could site but this is both obvious and topical By the way I'm not saying having the US as a protectorate is necessarily a bad thing for UKs Defence and Economy but please don't pretend that UK is anything more than a vessal to US. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chagos-islands-powell-donald-trump-starmer-b2654747.html |
|
|
|
Post by 4372 on Nov 27, 2024 23:34:06 GMT
No, fundamentally you are against the EU. You have described it as corrupt and anti-democratic. Nearly four years ago now you repeated a slur against one of the Founding Fathers of the EU, without even bothering to check the legitimacy of the source. That's where the prejudice showed itself, and you have struggled to acknowledge that fact. The trouble is that you were wrong about Jean Monnet, and thought you could mislead people. If you were wrong about that, what else were you wrong about? You are also wrong to characterise the events of the May years as being down to Remainer Resistance. That May could make no progress was due in part to tensions between various factions in Parliament. But that Parliament was elected by the people, and reflected the divisions in the country at that time. And of course, Parliament was and is sovereign. You seem to have a thing about the Jean Monnet quote that proved to be unsupported by factual evidence and which I recognised as such. Nevertheless, That does not change the fact that Monnet clearly set out a plan for the gradual "abnegation of sovereignty" to use his own words. This plan started with economic union on the grounds of creating greater prosperity and avoiding future conflict between states. But then followed by a gradual evolution in small steps to the formation of a super state. www.thefederalist.eu/site/index.php/en/notes/2495-9th-may-1950-jean-monnet-the-revolution-of-european-sovereigntyI don't want the UK merged into a European super state and law making made outside of the UK. Regarding your second paragraph, Johnson gave the people another chance to change their mind in the 2019 GE and the people chose to get Brexit done and restore parliamentary sovereignty. It is vital to retain control of politicians or they will control you. Farage is a loose cannon and God forbid he actually gets any power but I'm sure the people of Clacton will remove him when it suits them, till then he is their elected representative. Actually, I have a thing about researching and recording accurate information to develop and present an argument. It's worth writing out in full what you wrote about Jean Monnet in the Brexit thread, if only to refresh memories. "Europe's nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each described as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation". This was challenged almost immediately by another poster, with a link that took us to a site which had analysed and finally ridiculed the idea that this was written by Jean Monnet. It's not that the quote was "unsupported by factual evidence" as you say above, it's that it was quite clearly fake news, propaganda posing as persuasive prose. So, the question is, why were you so easily taken in by it? I think you wanted to believe it was accurate, because it suited your anti-EU prejudice. Jean Monnet is recognised throughout Europe as one of the great architects of the EU project, and yet you seek to belittle his work in the cause of your anti-EU crusade. And in the process you demonstrated the absolute power of propaganda. |
|
