The United Kingdom doesn’t exist.

Britain had a democratic election to either “Remain” in the European Union (EU) or “Leave” the EU, democracy spoke and on 23 June 2016, the country, via democracy said “Leave”.

On 29 March 2017 the Prime Minister formally triggered Article 50 and began the two-year countdown to the UK formally leaving the EU, ‘Brexit’.
From the moment that result happened, everyone against the democratic vote has pulled every trick in the book to try and overrule it.
I want to make this point right here, the vote was leave or remain, it was not, ‘leave with a deal' or stay, it was leave or stay, the vote was leave and therefore, anything else is undemocratic.

Delays
Brexit was due on 29 March 2019, two years after Article 50 was ‘triggered’, however, following a House of Commons vote on 14 March 2019, the Government sought permission from the EU to extend Article 50 and agree a later Brexit date. Why?
Because the leeches in Government decided that the Brexit vote meant Leave with a deal or remain….

cdn.images.express.co.uk...

I didn’t vote for that???

Prorogation
So this weekend, protests have been happening around the dis-“United Kingdom” many of those, “Remainers” claiming it is “un-Democratic”.
Let me ask you this, I voted in a Democratic election to leave the EU on 29 March 2019, what is un-democratic is that my vote, and the majorities vote has not been upheld.
It is not about the amount of losers on the street today protesting, people who cannot afford to travel to Manchester, London or wherever, who are too ill to leave their towns, they traveled en-masse to vote “Leave” in a Democratic referendum and you are trying to ignore them at same time claiming the moral high ground.
I note that the BBC will not call out this hypocrisy and they withhold comments from any ‘story’ that would show them how the Bias Broadcasting Corporation rolls, so much for independent reporting!

Finale
Ladies and Gentlemen (and L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.+) I give you the biggest hypocrisy that a self-proclaimed “perfect vision of democracy” has to offer, something even the Russians would be proud of.
The undemocratic non-united islands near Europe. What a joke you are.

The Globalists don’t like how you voted. The illusion of democracy only works if you pick their answer.

Oh ya, democracy not working. That's sad, but then again, it never worked for the Greeks either, and they invented it.

But anyways, so much drama over nothing. The worst news to come out of that little island across the pond in the past 50 years is the spice girls break up. The world, lived through that much bigger catastrophe, and pretty sure will live through this as well.

a reply to: Metallicus

Oh its much worse then that. Every group who can print out a pink colored group badge at kinkos, dont like what the group with the purple badge printed at kinkos is doing or stands for, and will vote against them every time. And lets not forget that everybody always wants to be right, oh ya, that like 90% of all policy right there.

Heck, you cant even get two people to agree on what is better, pepsi or coke. As for the globalists. Now thats what I would like to call dreamers. But hey, it keeps things entertaining out there.

originally posted by: Forensick
From the moment that result happened, everyone against the democratic vote has pulled every trick in the book to try and overrule it.

Loll!!!! Long live democracy as long as its what they want!

I want to make this point right here, the vote was leave or remain, it was not, ‘leave with a deal' or stay, it was leave or stay, the vote was leave and therefore, anything else is undemocratic.

#Me too .......

But sore looser's only believe in democracy when it goes their way.

I note that the BBC will not call out this hypocrisy and they withhold comments from any ‘story’ that would show them how the Bias Broadcasting Corporation rolls, so much for independent reporting!

Along with the biased John Bercow the speaker in Parliament who is

'supposed' to oversee democracy. Now that has to be an aberration

A few minor corrections but the referendum was on whether the UK triggers article 50 or not, it never offered the public any say in the shape, form, details of the post-Brexit Article 50 talks. MPs overwhelmingly voted to trigger article 50 (I think it was less than 20 voted against the referendum result)

The referendum was displayed as a simplistic Leave or Stay in advertising/PR materials but it was never the actual content of what we were voting for and was never the wording on the official referendum we voted on. The key differences and explanation of Article 50 was sent to every household registered to vote in the referendum materials pamphlet but this information and detail is incredibly dull and boring. No politicians, media or campaigners on either side focused on this at the time as it's so incredibly dull no one would ever read it.

I voted remain at the time but agree with your view on yesterday's protests - they're flogging a long-dead horse and failing to understand the basics of how Parliament functions, the Royal Prerogative or the uncodified Constitution.

I'm certainly no Royalist but the Queen has always taken her duties incredibly seriously - she's the longest reigning Monarch in the world, she's been debriefed by the PM weekly/fortnightly on the inner workings of government and Parliament for 60 years and worked as a non-political negotiator, head of state, envoy visiting most Countries in the World for the same period. She's certainly one of, if not the, most experienced and informed people in the World on such matters and prides herself on remaining apolitical.

I value and trust her judgement and commitment to the country far higher than any of the current politicians - they're more interested in using this for their own careers rather than the public interest as the last few years of bickering have shown.

A few things....

Firstly yes the UK voted to leave the EU but what that actually means is very ambiguous, you can leave the EU and still be part of the ECC for example.

Yes a deal was always part of the plan, you can reading on the VoteLeave owns website who said there would be a UK/EU treaty in place.

The vote was never legally binding.

Its astounding that Leavers say its undemocratic to ask for a second referendum to settle this issue yet have no issue with the proroguing of parliament. You see yes there was going to be a recess but the plan was to vote to cancel this recess to keep the current session running to find a way through this impass but Boris has robbed parliament of this opportunity. When the speaker is calling it a democratic outrage then you know there is a problem.

Both sides have a lot to answer for, I am fed up of one side blaming the other the truth is this is what happens when you use direct democracy to direct a parliamentary democracy it doesn't work. Lets stop pretending its "undemocratic" to block no-deal because no-deal will be economically devastating or this country.

It wasn't a Vote it was a referendum.
It's different...

a reply to: Forensick

You say that but i cant help but wonded what this argument would look like if remain won and the leavers tried to block the result?
And nobody knows for a fact what a no deal would do. My guess would be a short term chaos.followed quickly by the eu doing deals. I mean germany is on the brink of recession already and the UK loves themselves a bmw.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: lakenheath24
You say that but i cant help but wonded what this argument would look like if remain won and the leavers tried to block the result?
And nobody knows for a fact what a no deal would do. My guess would be a short term chaos.followed quickly by the eu doing deals. I mean germany is on the brink of recession already and the UK loves themselves a bmw.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

We don't need to wonder.

Nigel Farage specifically stated, prior to the referendum, that in event of a narrow remain victory that they would continue to campaign to leave.

Apparently remain doing the same is undemocratic...

I live in myworld, on the west of scotland.
I am king here.
a reply to: Forensick

originally posted by: Dannijca
It wasn't a Vote it was a referendum.
It's different...

a reply to: Forensick

You realise how the results of a referendum are obtained right?

Anyway your votes don’t matter policy’s are decided behind closed doors and what the plebs want doesn’t mean snip. You’re opinions won’t change anyone’s mind and half the country will always oppose the other half.

It's a straight question of whether democracy works or not.

If we leave on the 31st it has been seen to work. The outcome of a vote has been implemented. Remainers are free to campaign for Rejoiners Referendum and to try and win it.

If we don't the entire system has been shown a sham. The vote is pointless as if it goes against them those with greatest proximity to the levers of power will do what they want regardless.

That's a different country than millions of people thought they lived in. The most perplexing thing about all this is Remainers thinking "back to the previous normal" is a possible outcome. It isn't whether they win or they lose.

True...but one will never know if that would have happened since Leave won. However, in the same article David Cameron said "we have referendums...not neverendums".




a reply to: ScepticScot

originally posted by: lakenheath24
True...but one will never know if that would have happened since Leave won. However, in the same article David Cameron said "we have referendums...not neverendums".




a reply to: ScepticScot

I think it is a very safe assumption that UKIP and other leave supporters would not just have packed up shop on a remain victory.

The difference is Farage was talking specifically and about something he has control over.

Cameron was sprouting off a meaningless sound bite about something he has no control over.

Farage made it very clear that in the event of a close result they would keep campaigning to leave. It's hypocritical to then say that those campaigning to remain are anti democratic.

Meh..ole dave thought he had it in the bag. Especially with those £9million worth of scary fliers.

Still...its woulda, coulda, mighta now. However i doubt most brexiters would have fussed for too long.





a reply to: ScepticScot

The Brexit debacle has highlighted a key flaw in democracy that no-one seems to be able to agree on what criteria meets the definition. Leading to certain un-elected individuals asserting their own control over its definition with spurious generalisations and often lies.

Is obsessively aiming for the results of an advisory vote in which the voters were lied to on most of the major issues democratic? I would say it's anti-democratic personally, others disagree. I'd also say that in a representative democracy we give parliament and its elective officials the sovereignty to make policy, so a referendum conflicts with that style of democracy and causes chaos.

With it being so unclear over how exactly the UK can leave the EU, you'd think it would be more consistent with our current democratic system to have an election giving people the chance to vote for whatever party they believe best represents their wishes.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Both sides have a lot to answer for, I am fed up of one side blaming the other the truth is this is what happens when you use direct democracy to direct a parliamentary democracy it doesn't work. Lets stop pretending its "undemocratic" to block no-deal because no-deal will be economically devastating or this country.

Two points of rebuttal:
1. It only fails to work when the government does not have a strong, working majority in the House of Commons, as is the case here. We would have long left the EU by now if the Tory Party had had a majority big enough to take care of its own Remoaner MPs.
2. Whether no-deal will damage the country's economy or not is irrelevant to the issue of whether trying to block no-Brexit is undemocratic. The rent-a-mob/Momentum crowds protesting outside 10 Downing St were there because they want to stop Brexit whether it is hard or soft. All their placards said so! These people don't respect democratic decisions - they just want their own way! All these protesting Socialists and Marxists don't care a hoot whether British business is harmed by a no-deal Brexit. That's NOT the reason they protested. The reason was that the government had out-manoeuvered Remoaners such as themselves and they were very upset by it. To raise the question of the economic consequences of a hard brexit in this context is a complete red herring because the protestors were using the issue of whether the government had become undemocratic in not allowing more debate time as a pretext or excuse to demonstrate against what the majority of British people had decided three years ago. It's what the Labour Party has been (and is) doing in its pretence of upholding democracy (what hypocrisy!) whilst delaying Brexit as long as possible. Let us hope that, if they manage to seize control of proceedings in the House of Commons Tuesday, that any bill they create to outlaw a no-deal Brexit in the pretence of upholding democracy will be lost in its first reading in the House of Lords.

originally posted by: twfau


Is obsessively aiming for the results of an advisory vote in which the voters were lied to on most of the major issues democratic? I would say it's anti-democratic personally, others disagree. I'd also say that in a representative democracy we give parliament and its elective officials the sovereignty to make policy, so a referendum conflicts with that style of democracy and causes chaos.

With it being so unclear over how exactly the UK can leave the EU, you'd think it would be more consistent with our current democratic system to have an election giving people the chance to vote for whatever party they believe best represents their wishes.

Firstly, whether the voters were lied to during the referendum is a partisan point of view. It is NOT an objective reason for regarding the referendum as undemocratic.
Secondly, It is NOT parliament but the government who is the executive branch that makes policy. In a representative democracy, a MP represents his own electorate, NOT his party nor the country as a whole and certainly not himself or herself (which is what a lot of Remoaner MPs have been doing). The problem was that most in parliament did not support the decision by a majority of voters to leave the EU. Also, the working majority was small, allowing these unrepresentative MPs to have more power than they would have under normal circumstances. Hopefully, the impasse can be broken by a new election the results of which will accurately reflect what the British people want.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Nigel Farage specifically stated, prior to the referendum, that in event of a narrow remain victory that they would continue to campaign to leave. Apparently remain doing the same is undemocratic...

Campaigning is one thing.

What those who want to remain are doing is trying to sabotage the outcome of the referendum. That is something completely different to campaigning.