The Brexit Arms goes forth! All welcome. Leavers, Remainers, Couldn't give a Tossers, & openly gay athletes.

[surferjet]

Welcome

pbs.twimg.com/media/CwXURSKWQAAq4iN.jpg:large

Poor you. You probably imagine - maybe you really do believe - that you have a cogent argument. Despite all the self contradiction and circularity. Bless.

Hey Autumn
I'm building a fire and it's so cosy and wintry

I agree WW and its glaringly Obv too

Until this week she thought she had legal authority.

^^ and in a few weeks time she may think she has it again. Its debatable.

What part of the argument is circular?

And where do you feel I contradicted myself?

I am a bit confused about why there is such a fuss

This cannot stop Brexit, we are leaving

It means that nobody can pop up after article 50 is triggered and completely bollux it up

It means that everything is done to the letter of the law and means there can be no come backs

No MP is going to vote against their constitutes

It may delay things a little but to be fair i think thats the governments fault, if they had gone to partliment first and covered all the bases this wouldnt have happened

Anyway enough with the boring stuff

Just had my shitheap of a car hand cleaned...very, very impressed

Kaija
Love the letter from PM TM

WW - I think the best course of action would be to put a resolution yes/no before the House next week.

YY - exactly my feeling.

But as we all know, the subtext is about subverting Brexit so that won't be good enough for a vocal section of ardent remainers (in rl I mean, not necessarily in these threads).

If it wasn't about derailing Brexit, then why all the "oh thank goodness, a glimmer of hope!" responses to the result on other threads (interspersed with "well you wanted sovereignty" posts which are extrapolating yet again that all leavers are too stupid to understand nuance & all leavers are against the ruling).

By appealing it, I think TM is being a bit daft really, and wasting time & money.

You say an MP has legitimacy by a majority vote. By what mechanism?

In my opinion (and in the opinion of 100 per cent of people except you) that is because it's considered to be an expression of the will of constituents ie the people. You have said however that a majority vote does not express the will of the people. Therefore you give an MP legitimacy simply by the fact of them being an MP. Not by the fact that a majority vote expresses the will the people - because you don't believe that. So in your world an MP is afforded legitimacy simply by dint of a system built on the legitimacy of laws established by MPs. Who have legitimacy simply by dint of them being MPs and not by the will of the people. There is your circularity.

The self contradiction is based on your saying a majority vote has legitimacy but only in certain conditions - that depend on the human arbiters who are in their positions only because of a system of majority voting.

Yes mango - a swift vote and be done. I think that might be up her sleeve.

"The will of the people" is popular sovereignty, not parliamentary sovereignty. Different things.

Thanks baby I know there are plenty of MPs who support the ruling but in the words of Mandy Rice Davies they would wouldn't they. Why David Davis wants a full act of Parliament is beyond me unless he was a sleeper agent all along.

"Will of the people" is no more a mechanism than "majority vote".

The self contradiction is based on your saying a majority vote has legitimacy but only in certain conditions "

Where did I say a majority vote doesn't have legitimacy?

I agree with mango

Lib dems and labour are in disarray, now would be a clever time to put it to the vote i think

I'm aware of that.

Parliamentary sovereignty is a mechanism of popular sovereignty and clearly understood as such in a modern democracy. There is a spectrum of tendency to exploit popular sovereignty among modern democratic nations - for example with Switzerland further along than us.

Mango...but will she appeal....or lodge time for an appeal with courts, whilst getting on with what has to be got on with? One way of swatting off those dratted irritants.

You said it doesn't express the will of the people. Therefore you think it has legitimacy withou expressing the will of the people. So from where does it derive any legitimacy?

Rorty added your link as a picture.
V true

YY - I distinctly remember the ballot being quite straightforward.

Certain conditions: for example in elections but not referenda.

at rorty and mangos link

stoking a fire WW lovely.

It's the majority. The majority isn't "the people". That doesn't make the process of electing on a majority illegitimate. I'm not sure why this is causing such a problem.

WW I didn't say the referendum result was illegitimate either.