How can remainers get behind Brexit and pull together ?

[frumpety]

What does this mean in practical terms ? What do I need to actually do to achieve pulling together and getting behind Brexit ? Why does it matter if I and the rest of the 48 million don't ?

So divorce is still a failure in the majority of people's eyes.

Still you won, so get over it.

So divorce is still a failure in the majority of people's eyes

In the eyes of those who don't divorce maybe. For those that have divorced it was very likely the greatest relief ever felt once it was over.

Some might be worse off, but happiness is not always measured with money.

🍆💦🍆💦🍆💦 The seats in this thread feel a bit sticky... 🤢

But to approximately get back on topic, things Remainers should do: watch, be quiet, ..., ..., ... 🤔

Have you read that article I linked to Mystery?

Nah... thought not.
TBH I'm not listening to someone who hasn't lived in the UK for decades

Literally the only answer to the OP we have been given is "wait". No leavers are able to identify any ACTUAL tangible benefits whatsoever. They will only dispute the negatives. And comparing this self-inflicted act of self-amputation to the war is beyond a joke.

Also, isn't it incredible how all the leavers -who were so convinced Brexit would be the best thing ever and give us "sovrinty" and "our country back"- are now saying "none of us have ever had the answers/ we don't have a crystal ball/ don't blame me guvnor".

Would any of them kindly deign to tell us at what point Brexit can be judged a failure? Or will that be conveniently after they're all dead?

No leavers are able to identify any ACTUAL tangible benefits whatsoever

Maybe leave was not based on tangibles? Lots of possible in tangibles;

National pride
Immigration
EU commissioners not elected

Would any of them kindly deign to tell us at what point Brexit can be judged a failure

Needs time to take effect. How that can be agreed now is unknown. Look at how the date at which UK was supposed to leave the EU was extended. Argument always the same;

Let's give it a bit longer if we can close a deal.

Peregrina I have yet to hear them tell me how exactly NATO kept the peace between France and Germany/German speaking states in the past, when they have been fighting each other for centuries.

NATO was founded in 1949, before the ECSC in 1951. NATO keeps the peace in Europe by NATO nations signing up to Article 5 , so an attack on one is an attack on all. This dealt with the issue of Germany from 49-55 as West Germany didn't join til 55, and East Germany was behind the Iron Curtain under the Warsaw Pact. Had E Germany attacked France, W Germany etc, then the Allies would have ridden to the rescue, and would the Warsaw Pact/the USSR states have really wanted to take on the US? NATO and the Warsaw Pact co-existed as we had the idea of MAD, so the Cold War never really heated up to full boiling point, just got to a rising simmer at times.

When the reunification of Germany happened, the whole of Germany became a NATO nation.

France chose to remove itself from some of the NATO structures in 1966, and fully rejoined in 2009. As it still participated in some NATO structures, in which it was allied with Germany, from 1955 onwards, there was no option but to cooperate, unless you wanted to be outside the idea of collective defence and the nuclear umbrella of the US, which was the best defence against the USSR.

If you care to do some digging around the RUSI website; the NATO website etc, you will see quite clearly how it has worked.

EU Commissioners not elected
Who voted for Dominic Cummings?
Zac Goldsmith was voted OUT and is still in Government.
Nicki Morgan did not stand for election and is in Government

people in glass houses and all that

Yup, still nothing concrete whatsoever.

Those so called benefits are not benefits though are they Mystery. They are just benefits if you're a bigot.

E.g. "National Pride". So you're proud of being an inward looking small minded nation. But this is clearly not a benefit for at least half the country.

when could Brexit be judged a failure in an interesting one? OxfordCat since we were in the EU and its forbears for 47 years, the obvious answer is 47 years hence.

However, IMO that rather underplays that the Eurosceptic cause really got a rocket under it after1992, i.e. after Maastricht when the EC became the EU, so just over 20 years after entry. I suggest a similar time frame, Maastricht "effective" to 2016 referendum is 23 years, and to actual "Leave" day is 26 years. so in that ballpark would be my suggestion.

Depends on the economy doesn't it? If that goes into a massive downturn then it will be quicker.

Exactly. Waiting 47 years ffs. By which time the leave voters will all be long gone. Once again the leavers light the touch paper and then run away.

LouiseCollins
You really want to put my kids through 47 years of shit just in case
I won't live that long
Really ?

It won't be up to Louise Collins or us for that matter.

Thankfully it will be up to those kids and people now in their teens, twenties and thirties. They won't be waiting for 47 years.

So, concrete things that Remainers must do: to elaborate on “wait” we have “wait for 47 years”?

Did the latest respondents read my post?

I pretty much said that I thought a timeframe of 23-26 years was more reasonable given that the changes post 1993 really caused people to question the EU, as it became since then.

I pretty much said that I thought a timeframe of 23-26 years was more reasonable
oh that makes it all right then

What a nonsense argument! Inflicting this upon ourselves without any rationale or evidence of benefits then expecting the country to suffer for "23-26 years" before we can decide if it was worth it.

FFS. We DIDN'T NEED TO DO THIS!

Try to think of how to make positives out of the consequences. For example: FoM, whatever its benefits, did disincentivise employers from investing in training, especially young people. So supporting and lobbying for better training might not fall on such deaf ears in these post-Brexit days. See:

www.bbc.com/news/education-51094279

There must be many other similar things to turn attention to.

For example: FoM, whatever its benefits, did disincentivise employers from investing in training, especially young people

Ah but countries like India are already saying they would like movement of people in return for trade deals.

So in summary, we wait for a period of somewhere between 10 and 26 years (depending on who you speak to). If everything has turned to shit by then we start campaigning for a rejoin and elect a party that promises to attempt a rejoin. We then continue to wait whilst the terms of a rejoin are negotiated and agreed (if the EU are willing to have us back).

So if this doesn't work out we're looking at somewhere between 15 and 35 years from now (with 4 years already under our belt) to get ourselves back to the place we were at in 2015? Can't see any problems there!

@Sunshinegirl82

EU will more likely have broken up by then. US, China, Russia all want EU broken.

Every time a Tory minister speaks this cluster fuck gets bigger and bigger

@MysteryTripAgain

Think you’ll find Brexit has made the EU stronger and more likely to stick together rather than the opposite.