Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Please help me understand - what exactly WILL happen if we leave the EU?

134 replies

DorynownotFloundering · 07/06/2016 09:02

Because quite frankly I can't see how all these wonderful ideas Brexit have could be implemented if the govt are not in agreement & no one from the Leave side is in any position of power?

Genuine question.

OP posts:
Chalalala · 08/06/2016 10:38

Bolograph, about your thought experiment - well of course it wouldn't be justifiable. But we're in a greyer area here, where some argue that curbing immigration is both morally ok, and economically beneficial. It's a lot easier to argue the economic side, because it's patently false, while arguing the broader moral and political aspect requires making a wide-ranging case about the EU as a political project. Which people in this country are highly skeptical about.

About America, you are right, of course. But the strategy you suggest hasn't been really working there either. Promoting alternative values of tolerance and solidarity doesn't appeal to the poor white republicans, because they feel it only benefits others, not them. And it the same problem with the Brexit vote, to some extent - they (wrongly) feel that European solidarity would only benefit others, not them.

MrsBlackthorn · 08/06/2016 10:41

Chalala: I wish there were a like button on here.

The EU is an amazing institution - supporting trade at the same time as human rights. Working together to engage with the wider world.

I genuinely can't believe this country is about to commit this act of economic, cultural and social suicide. It's madness.

Chalalala · 08/06/2016 10:42

(that being said Bolograph I think your point about technocratic arguments is proving to be entirely correct)

Bolograph · 08/06/2016 10:49

About America, you are right, of course. But the strategy you suggest hasn't been really working there either.

From outside, it doesn't work, because we think the important US politics are national/federal.

From inside it's devastatingly effective: in the flyover states, the vast majority of governors, legislatures and judges are republican, and for the typical American about town, the actions of their state legislature are of far more direct impact than the actions of the federal government. All your Roe v Wade rights are worthless if the state is driving abortion providers out.

Chalalala · 08/06/2016 10:59

Sorry, I meant, your suggested strategy of arguing for positive values and beliefs, instead of narrow economic interest. This is not working with the poor white republicans at the local level, exactly as you're saying. It's not working because they don't see how the "liberal" values of the American left benefit them at all. Everything for the blacks and the gays, nothing for them - that's what they see. Sort of like all the positive social arguments that can be made for the EU are seen by Brexit voters to only benefit poorer Eastern European countries and immigrants. Which is not true, of course.

DorynownotFloundering · 08/06/2016 11:40

I posted to gain some insight which I have thanks all, and it does seem to be a minefield on both sides and the thought of 2 years of wrangling while we negotiate a leaving deal is mind blowing. Sorry if I sound like a stuck record as someone said, but that worries me hugely.

OP posts:
Winterbiscuit · 08/06/2016 11:50

Except this argument falls apart because the Treasury have done - and published - detailed reviews of the potential options if we Brexit.

I don't trust Treasury assessments after Osborne's misleading £4000+ figure. Also to give the worst case scenarios hardly gives you confidence in their ability to manage the economy effectively in challenging times!

Bobby2013 · 08/06/2016 11:55

The fact is there is not a clear answer to your question. All one can do is look at the potential consequences. The Leave campaign swell up the importance of the UK to Europe - sorry but that's a load of gingoistic BS.

The reason there's a referendum at all is that Cameron is too weak a PM to stop the power-hungry elite from pushing for it. This is a power grab by hard line right wingers, and those involved don't give two monkeys for the fallout because they have the wealth to see them through. Immigration is being used, as it was in 1930s Germany, as a smokescreen for what is really going on.

So to understand what could happen, you need to understand the geopolitics involved. The EU is fragile, and Russia in particular wants it to topple in order for Putin to occupy large parts of Eastern Europe once more.

Therefore, if there's a Brexit there's a potential crack in the system - how will the EU respond? By hammering the UK as an example and warning to other countries of the consequences of leaving. Yes 46 per cent of our trade is with the EU, but the majority of that is in services and the reason is that English is a common language. However, services can easily be moved (look at the flight of the call centres) especially to cities such as Amsterdam, and Berlin where highly educated, fluent English speaking workers abound.

If there's a Brexit, it's in the interests of the EU for the UK to fall, and for the EU to flourish as a way of warding off conflict with Russia. The upshot is, the folk on the street - the likes of you or me - are hung out to dry all so that some posh, Eton educated Tory can live out his/her dictatorial fantasy. People like Gove believe in conflict, they believe in shrinking the state to the bare minimum - so the NHS will go, worker protection will go, police force will be slashed even further - look at America and you'll see a post-Brexit UK. WE will suffer - not those in power.

Don't believe the hype that Europe needs the UK - it really is the other way round, whether racists like it or not. The EU is not perfect, in fact it's a mafia, but the only way to influence that organisation is from the inside. And if you think I'm being alarmist - then read the following post.

blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/.../dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum

Bolograph · 08/06/2016 11:56

Sort of like all the positive social arguments that can be made for the EU are seen by Brexit voters to only benefit poorer Eastern European countries and immigrants. Which is not true, of course.

If you can't get a place for your child in school and it's three weeks of a GP's appointment, it probably feels very true. Vague talk about economic benefit doesn't help that. If we in Labour in 2005-ish had distributed the economic goods of immigration throughout the country, it would be better; instead we allowed Polly Toynbee being able to get a good plumber and Baroness Scotland to employ an illegal immigrant ("unknowingly", of course: it is obviously unreasonable to expect the Attorney General to either understand the law or make efforts to comply with it) to substitute for good social policy.

You're on a housing estate. There's an influx of low-paid, low-skill immigrants, willing to work for lower wages, and disproportionately likely to have young children. How do you benefit? I've done doorstep campaigning in communities like that: they tell you to fuck off because they're voting UKIP. Why wouldn't they? What benefit do they get from immigration other than lower wages, more pressure on services and less social cohesion?

Chalalala · 08/06/2016 12:51

I think the answer is in your question - immigration benefits the country as a whole, but the economic benefits have not been distributed fairly. So yes, they do have a right to be angry. It's been a very successful trick by successive governments to direct this legitimate anger at immigration and the EU, instead of at their own policies.

Winterbiscuit · 08/06/2016 13:44

the only way to influence that organisation is from the inside

If it hasn't happened by now, is the "reformed EU" really going to happen? Or will it carry on with its plans from last century regardless?

We can certainly influence the UK from inside though, and refuse to be bullied by the EU. Interestingly it's the poshest Tories who seem to back Remain, and the slightly less so on the Brexit side.

OTheHugeManatee · 08/06/2016 13:54

The only truthful answer to the OP's question is that no-one really knows what will happen if there is a vote to leave.

  1. The referendum is still advisory and a Bill would still need to be passed resolving to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. So Europhile MPs could ignore the referendum and still opt to stay in.

  2. Even if we leave, the most likely transitional arrangement would be that we remain in the EEA (the European trade group, which includes other non-EU countries such as Norway) while leaving the EU political union. This would mean retaining some of the EU's regulations, accepting free movement and paying towards the EU but would exempt us from some other significant aspects of the EU's incursions into our sovereignty.

  3. The third big unknown is what would happen to the EU if we left. Voting publics across the continent are turning against it and it might trigger referenda in other countries. Or it might trigger a far greater consolidation among the eurozone states, as without the UK carping on the sidelines they can get on with the banking, fiscal and security unions they need.

But the reality is that no-one really knows. Remain predicts WWIII and rains of poisonous toads if we leave; Leave says it'll all be sunshine and free kittens for everyone. Me, I don't think either outcome will really be that dramatic either way, but I'm voting Leave because I am unhappy with the EU democratic settlement and unconvinced that it can be reformed, while we stand a good chance of reforming the UK's democracy problem (eg with a properly elected second chamber) in the constitutional reboot that will be necessary if we leave.

Bolograph · 08/06/2016 14:04

So Europhile MPs could ignore the referendum and still opt to stay in.

I think it's fair to say that the outcome from that would be the end of British democracy and a massive constitutional crisis. I'd hope that the Queen would use her power to dissolve parliament (as they would be acting against the clearly and lawfully expressed settled will of the people) and I'd hope that the ensuing general election would see the MPs in question paraded through the streets on tumbrils. It would be the ultimate in technocratic "we know best" politics, displaying utter contempt for the electorate which would be right up Seamus Milne's alley, the disgusting Stalinist.

Joysmum · 08/06/2016 14:04

For me the biggest issue is that I have a problem with how the EU had become so much more than a trade agreement and moved towards a political superstate.

This move towards a political suspect state will only continue to increase.

By voting to stay in, we're not just accepting of how the land lies politically now, it's also acceptance of this continuing process.

We can't even keep the UK together without devolution, yet the EU is doing the opposite in tightening its grip on member states at the opportunity cost of dynamic trade agreements with the developing world.

The Remain campaign often accuse those who want to leave as nationalistic and pears looking, in reality many are outward looking beyond the increasing suffocating confines of the EU.

I so wish the that the Leave campaigners weren't mostly arseholes though. Highly embarrassing for me to have to keep distancing myself from them Blush

Bolograph · 08/06/2016 14:07

I so wish the that the Leave campaigners weren't mostly arseholes though. Highly embarrassing for me to have to keep distancing myself from them

It's a difficult question: which is the more incompetent, dishonest, dissembling, fear-mongering, contemptuous, elite-driven campaign, leave or remain? If it weren't so important I would want both of them to lose.

ThroughThickAndThin01 · 08/06/2016 14:10

I totally agree with your post Joysmum echoes my thoughts. (Except I don't think I look like a pear Grin)

mollie123 · 08/06/2016 14:18

If there's a Brexit, it's in the interests of the EU for the UK to fall, and for the EU to flourish as a way of warding off conflict with Russia. The upshot is, the folk on the street - the likes of you or me - are hung out to dry all so that some posh, Eton educated Tory can live out his/her dictatorial fantasy. People like Gove believe in conflict, they believe in shrinking the state to the bare minimum - so the NHS will go, worker protection will go, police force will be slashed even
bobby - and you know all this for certain?
suggest you think about what would really happen if all the above did come to pass.
Yes that is right - a change of government at the next GE Shock
Can you not see how nonsensical this overblown scenario is.
I think In supporters are mostly ignorant and misguided but I feel sorry for them as they are probably young and naive. Hmm

Joysmum · 08/06/2016 14:36

Doh. I'll get me coat! BlushGrin

I am concerned at the UK being made an example of though in Brexit.

There's so many fors and against for each side. It's not a simple issue.

Winterbiscuit · 08/06/2016 14:46

It's a difficult question: which is the more incompetent, dishonest, dissembling, fear-mongering, contemptuous, elite-driven campaign, leave or remain?

The EU embodies those characteristics more than the Leave and Remain campains put together.

Joysmum · 08/06/2016 15:18

I think those with the most are going to gravitate towards Remain to protect their short/medium term self interest. Think sunk costs.

For the biggest and most successful companies trading in Europe, they have the most to lose and the most costs to incur.

For those starting up or wanting to trade outside the EU in the faster growing world economies, they are going tone evict more from leaving.

I think the potential gains of trading more with faster growing developing nations is greater than protecting the stagnant trade with have with already developed markets.

No doubt about it, there will be short/medium term hits to the economy...but then I think it's only a matter of time before the increased stranglehold the EU is taking on nations means it'll implode anyway.

I think distancing ourselves from this and pursuing a free trade agreement instead will be best for our economy longer term, even if it's not in the short term.

OTheHugeManatee · 08/06/2016 15:33

I so wish the that the Leave campaigners weren't mostly arseholes though. Highly embarrassing for me to have to keep distancing myself from them.

As a Leaver, I agree that there are some arseholes on the Leave side. I think the context for this perception needs a bit of study though.

The EU is the political manifestation of a consensus among the elites of a number of countries about what politics should look like. An ever increasing number of questions are, quite intentionally, removed from democratic scrutiny and managed technocratically via treaties and laws instead of via negotiation, engagement with the public, or any kind of open debate. Big questions handled in this way include, for example, the consensus view that the right mode of government must be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

To put it another way, the EU is a technocratic (ie non-democratic) means of narrowing the range of acceptable political options within member states to minor variants on the same centrist consensus. You only have to look at the oft-repeated fear of 'populism' within the European Parliament to see that. There is a profound fear of electorates, of giving electorates too much power and of them doing rash or 'extreme' things.

Now, perhaps you agree with that and perhaps you don't. Personally the centrist take is pretty well-aligned with my interests and personal views. But the problem I have with using technocratic means of narrowing the Overton window is that removing from public the scope to debate or indeed democratically alter fundamental aspects of the type of government wanted or needed turns what should be a benign, self-sustaining consensus on what constitutes 'moderate' government into something altogether more suffocating and authoritarian. (I also think it's a major contributor to the modern perception that 'they're all the same' and it doesn't matter who you vote for. Because, increasingly, it doesn't, as all politicians are constrained within the same narrow band of what the EU consensus considers acceptable political policy. But that's possibly another thread.)

That quiet, smiling and superficially democratic suppression of any political view deemed to deviate too far from the consensus - either leftwards or rightwards - is reflected in a similarly stifling social pressure that declares that All Serious And Nice People hold views within a narrow range that corresponds to the centrist political consensus. People whose political views fall within that range tend to be supportive of the EU, because they see it as a safeguard of their moral outlook against the vaguely dangerous forces of 'populism', ie those riotous, under-educated plebs who persist in holding political views that don't quite fit. Why would we want to give any encouragement to fascists or communists? Surely we've worked out the right way to do politics in the centre and that's that? Similarly, at the level of culture and beliefs, surely the social consensus condemning racists, anarchists and other outlier views is a good thing?

So in a very real way the European centrist consensus has created the EU as a mechanism for keeping unruly electorates on the political straight and narrow. And the same mindset has set busily about painting anyone whose views fall outside its acceptable range as mad, dangerous, evil, racist, destructive and otherwise generally Not Our Type. In a word, arseholes.

On the whole my own views are pretty centrist. But I don't think it's healthy to shut discussion down like this. We shouldn't stifle political diversity, even when it's unpalatable: it pushes more extreme views underground and gives them a sense of grievance. You only have to look at the steady rise of right- and left-wing protest movements across Europe to see this in action. And by the same token we shouldn't silence arseholes: we should debate them, and let their unpleasant views bury them. But fundamentally I welcome viewpoint diversity, because I think it's a sign of a healthy civic society. And that means allowing scope for there to be a few arseholes - gasp - sometimes even politically aligned with me in some respects.

I think this is probably a bit off-topic but I think it's really important to recognise that the eurosceptic movement - and it is a movement, that goes way beyond left and right, as well as way beyond the UK - is as much about fighting for political and viewpoint diversity in general as it is about the specific grievances that more right- or left-leaning eurosceptic groups have with the EU.

Joysmum · 08/06/2016 15:45

Yes, but it's wearing to be lumped in with the faces of the Leave campaigners as having the same reasoning as they do.

I've trodden my own path on this. Explained my reasoning and disassociated myself from the rest as much as I can. There's nobody from Leave that I can relate to Sad

OTheHugeManatee · 08/06/2016 16:02

I'm very much with you Joysmum.

My particular frustration has been with the absence of left-wing voices making a case for leaving, despite the (to me) obvious fact that the EU is a set of institutions with a bit of workers-rights window-dressing but fundamentally hostile to meaningful movement leftwards. Varoufakis' idea that it can be transformed into a socialist utopia if only we all hold hands and sing kum ba ya just baffles me, especially as he of all people has seen up close what the EU's institutions are capable of.

This makes it look like disentangling ourselves from this would-be corporatist superstate is a sort of right-wing vanity project, when the reality is that anyone who believes in democratic self-determination, political debate and viewpoint diversity should be in favour of leaving its stifling consensus.

Chalalala · 08/06/2016 16:11

Manatee I think I agree with a lot of this, even though I'm Remain.

Of course as you point out the narrow consensus thing is not an exclusively EU thing. The US has the same problem, voters get the same economic policy no matter what they vote - hence the popular success of the genuinely different (for better or worse) programmes of Trump and Sanders. Same thing is France, in spite of our very diverse political culture and currents.

ThroughThickAndThin01 · 08/06/2016 16:24

if it helps joysmum There are quite a few 'shy' leavers, I reckon i.e. one Mr J Corbyn. He's just towing the party line. Although I wouldn't risk putting my x on the leave box if I were him - it might flutter onto the floor Grin