'Brexit means Brexit' - a political statement devoid of meaning

[xmasadsboohiss]

I'm not here to rehash the rights and wrongs of the Brexit vote - I was all for remaining but that's by the by. But TM's incessant repetition of 'Brexit means Brexit' is surely an insult to everyone's intelligence. No one knows what Brexit means that's the whole fecking point! I understand that she's trying to say there will be no second referendum (short sighted anyway precisely because no one knows what the negotiations will throw up) but Nigel Farage's idea of Brexit is I'm sure different from say a more moderate Tory's (?). You may as well try nailing jelly to the wall as define what it really means at this stage.

mango or surfer, instead of being outraged about slurs on your intelligence, how about you answer the question about what you think UKIP can deliver in the event this government fails to deliver your Brexit vision.

I wasn't aware that my personal intelligence level was being 'slurred', I'm quite confident & comfortable with my intelligence levels actually.
Regardless, I don't think I've expressed 'outrage' at all, I'm simply bored with the same old lazy, tedious rhetoric from some posters on the MN EU threads is all.

I also have no interest in answering demands from anonymous posters on MN about UKIP - a party I've never given a thought to voting for.

Good on everyone who feels patriotic and proud of your country - there is so much to be proud of - but the days when half the globe was pink and everyone cow towed to the British Empire are over. Even members of the Commonwealth aren't that bothered.

How novel!

Another remainer deciding that it's all about being a nasty ass Empire-loving racist.

Yes, it's funny how all Remainers are the same.

Unlike the diverse tent of Leavers, none of whim have anything in common at all.

Lurking

The only private individual who has my email address is my husband. None of my friends do.

I have signed up to mumsnet using this email address, not anything else. I use the phone for most things, not email. No internet banking etc.

I also change my email address a lot.

The only private individual who has my email address is my husband. None of my friends do.

Er, do you know how email works ? SMTP relays and RFC821/822 (for starters) ?

Your email address has been spaffed (and verified) across the internet. Whether you want to believe it, or not. And you have no idea where those servers reside - nor who they belong to.

(Unless you operate your own SMTP relay and DNS server, in which case it would be easier to leave post-it notes around the place).

27 countries now get to decide between them what Brexit means. The UK is not one of them.

But at least we can have blue passports again eh?

There's no need to be so rude Lurking.

You seem to be blustering now.

I was addressing what you said about if 5 or 10 friends have my email address in their address books that can be cross referenced etc.

I know that hasn't happened. I haven't given my email address to that many people I.e. 5 or 10.

Now you are moving onto something else and implying that it is stupid to think that because I minimise my digital footprint that there is no way to track me.

I don't think that. But I do think that there is a lot less to track me on than people who live and post their entire lives online.

A question of degree that seems to lost on the rude and oafish.

I also have no interest in answering demands from anonymous posters on MN about UKIP - a party I've never given a thought to voting for.

Fair enough mango, I accept you didn't say you wanted UKIP to take over if this government doesn't give you what you want but surfer did.

I'd like to understand her reasoning behind that but I've absolutely no doubt she wont bother replying.

You voted Leave, so did surfer but you clearly have different objectives, but neither can state what they are.

Don't you see the problem here?

We can't blame the EU for facebook's algorithms.

You might say you have only given out your email to a handful of people. It's the same sort of principle which applies with the 'snail mail'.

Think about the time you send off for something by post, forget to untick the marketing box, and suddenly you get inundated with stuff from whoever. To work out who it was, try putting in a deliberate spelling mistake and see how often the junk mail comes along with the same mistake.

*You voted Leave, so did surfer but you clearly have different objectives, but neither can state what they are.

Don't you see the problem here?* 

No, I can't.

I voted on one thing, and one thing only - to leave the EU.
My reasons for doing so were many, but the main reason (for me) was that I didn't like what the EU had become & was becoming.

As with most things in life, I would imagine the wants of voters are on a bell curve.
Few hard Remain, few hard Brexit, majority clustered to either side in the middle.
That's why I think a soft Brexit would be the most likely outcome.

By delaying Article 50, Theresa May has allowed everyone (other EU countries & EU leaders as well as UK) to take a breath and a step back.

I do think we'll come out with a decent deal tbh, especially because many of the other EU countries are looking for similar reforms to the ones we have voted Brexit over.
It would be in the EU Project's best interest to reform the hardline, blanket nature of free movement for eg and allow countries to have some controls and balances - to not do so will stoke far right feeling and popularity further in France, Germany etc.

Brexit is a good excuse to hide behind for much needed reforms.

Just my opinion, obvs - I clearly don't speak for the other 17+ million people.

" I didn't like what the EU was becoming ".

What was that?

Can I ask what is your evidence for this?

"For a start, The fact that if anyone starts a thread on MN in any other area than here it virtually immediately gets reported and moved here is testament to the fact that many people just don't want to think about it anymore."

Those many people could be leave voters, or they could be remain voters or they could have not voted. So this is not evidence that leave voters are not interested in what happens with Brexit.

Wrong the original statement for which you requested evidence was "many of the people who voted in the referendum no longer care what happens with Brexit."

So you can't be complaining that the PP didn't provide "evidence that leave voters are not interested in what happens with Brexit."

Conversely there was evidence that at least one vocal and prolific Leaver is pretty relaxed about what Brexit eventually entails.

So you can't be complaining that the PP didn't provide "evidence that leave voters are not interested in what happens with Brexit."

You are right, I had misread.

No worries Wrong - it's Friday night o'clock for everyone.

Mango I am not for one moment suggesting that Leave voters are Empire loving racists but I will say that, from where I'm standing, thinking the world would be queuing up to strike trade deals with the UK was always a misguided notion - as it is now proving to be. Thinking that restricting free movement of people was likely was similarly wrongheaded. Believing that looking inwards is better than looking outwards is, in my view, never going to be a recipe for success. The EU is by no means perfect, but running a largely service based economy outside it is not going to be a barrel of laughs for anyone.

*" I didn't like what the EU was becoming ".

What was that?*

Too big & diverse for it to still work with a 'one size fits all' ethos.
By diverse I don't mean skin colour or ethnicity etc, I mean economically etc.
As the EU community grew, so should the EU have evolved too (for eg the euro - one currency for such a mismatch of economies is daft).

Too big to reach consensus on things - getting 28 countries to agree is not an easy task - bring in vetoes and exercising real change is virtually impossible.

Too rigid & tunnel visioned in its execution of its tenets. Free movement of people in particular - the individual countries should have the ability for some sort of control in being able to apply brakes as necessary etc.
(I know it was Blair that elected to not use the phased integration with Eastern EU that was available & used by Germany etc, and he should have).

That's just 3, I can't be bothered to go into it all again as it's been rehashed so many times ad nauseum, and I'm sure that my post will be gleefully jumped on and ripped apart with more 'answers' demanded of me etc as is.
I just couldn't be arsed with the inevitable 20 posts demanding to know why I 'hadn't answered questions directed at me!'.

OK, so we try to reform those failings?

Or instead, we just say - lets forget about all that - we haven't got a clue what to do instead but that's the option we will go for. That is where the Leave campaign showed utter dereliction of duty. So we now get stupid remarks by Liam Fox who thinks we can trade with the whole of the planet, and it will be easy to make a deal.

But at least we can have blue passports again eh?

We can have them and not leave the EU at all!

Maroon passports was a choice we made as a sovereign country.

In good "talking Britain down" news - Leader of the Brexiters and Trade Minister Liam Fox has announced that publicly slagging off the country and its industry is totally cool and we should all be doing it.

I love the fact that someone who has been exposed as a liar and to be corrupt has the gall to accuse anyone else of being lazy.

Mango, your "one size fits all" point is utterly incorrect, look at the amount of opt outs and differences in the rules that were made for the UK. Other countries got exceptions too. The EU actually worked with the countires that were its members, and only made rulings on areas that the national governments allowed them to.

We got some control on free movement of people, and of course when you are challenged as to why you don't want freedom of movement you'll spout the same spurious reasons about immigrants.

Also the things that you fail to acknowledge repeatedly is outside the EU there is a strong posibility that freedom of movement will continue in some form and that we'll have to enact EU regulation into law.

Economic diversity? Its not all that, 16 of 27 EU countries are in the richest in the world, btw Ireland isn't included in that. But again that point allows you to imply that there are rich and poor countries, and anyone coming from another country is here to take advanage of our some how superior way of life.

But again that point allows you to imply that there are rich and poor countries, and anyone coming from another country is here to take advanage of our some how superior way of life

Smallfox. Your arguments are getting more & more ridiculous as time goes on.

Of course there are rich & poor countries Romania & Bulgaria being two of the poorest in Europe ( you conveniently forgot to mention that )

& why would anyone come here if not to improve their life & take advantage of what we have to offer? - are people coming here from Romaina to slum it for a few years? - why would they do that?

"are people coming here from Romaina to slum it for a few years?"

No. Luckily for us, they've been working hard, paying taxes and bolstering our economy.

No. Luckily for us, they've been working hard, paying taxes and bolstering our economy

Why aren't they doing that in Romania?

Most of them are