@Maureen
THEY JOINED FOR THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS, that's why.
Your position ignores that 50 years ago the British begged to be allowed into the Common Market and remained in during the evolution to the EU. They managed to have their cake and eat it too, being allowed to remain while keeping their own currency. Now they want to bail out. The general populace was sold a bill of goods by BoJo, Farage et al. They claimed they could exit while still keeping all the benefits of free trade and none of the costs. The referendum passed by the narrowest of margins on ginned up jingoistic outrage, xenophobia, and the raw bigotry of a minority, with the help of phony numbers supplied by BoJo, a proven liar who was fired from his first job as journalist at The Times for making up "facts".
11
@Mattfr
The British people lost friends and family fighting two world wars because they refused to be dominated by Germany or their proxy, France. They are the people who voted to leave. You believe they were deceived. I do not. The Brits are not Europeans - they never were and they never will be.
2
Boris's suspension of Parliament may be seen as an incremental negotiating tactic or something that upsets the checks and balances of the British system. Yet it was Parliament's failure to act on PM May's 3 negotiated Brexit deals that brought them to this point.
I see parallels in Trump's attempts to sidestep Congress on many topics. Each instance may look small, but in the larger scheme, it's eroding trust in the Federal government. We're lucky that our system does not allow a president to suspend Congress.
2
>>> "We're lucky that our system does not allow a president to suspend Congress."
We are unlucky, however, that our system allows presidents to effectively ignore Congress, and that our Congress seldom objects very strenuously.
5
Brexit is an emotive subject and you have to be British to fully understand it. There are three strands of opinion, strong Brexiteers. strong remainers and those who couldn't care less and are just fed up with the whole process. The main reason as to why we are where we are now are British politicians who have spent the last three years pontificating but not actually doing anything, and an EU that refuses to even compromise a bit in order to find a deal that the British find acceptable. I hope that Boris's actions give a collective kick up the backside to both UK and EU politicians so a deal can be found that both sides can live with.
2
Right. The EU negotiated and renegotiated and reached agreements for three years, only to have right-wingers back in England trash everything and demand more.
Obviously the EU’s fault. Those tyrants. After all, all right-wing Britian was asking is to punch them in the snoot, lie like crazy, and then get all the bennies of EU membership while accepting none of the responsibilities.
13
@Trevor Downing There has been EU-dictated terms on the table since last November. If the British government wants to come to terms with the EU on their resignation, then the empty dotted line is waiting. I mean it is still waiting. It is true that little has been done in Britain in order to adjust the country and the people to live outside the European Union. Thousands of EU-bound agreements will be liquidated on 31st October 2019 at 2300. Needless to say, Britain will largely become defunct then. The David Cameron scheme to milk more concessions and privileges for the EU-Britain backfired beautifully.
4
The story stubbornly remains the same though the players have exchanged roles - Germany and her democratic allies must now prepare to do battle with the (if untreated deadly) virus of racist nativism and nascent fascism just across the English Channel.
3
I can't wait to finally visit the UK in the ensuing years after the Dollar overtakes the Pound post no-deal Brexit.
2
An unelected PM suspends Parliament's ability to consider Brexit any further. Johnson allies state he is trying to shock the country to make final arrangements to leave the EU. The problem is that Johnson has no mandate. His party is in a minority gov't. So the outrage level rises.
1
@c harris
Most large European governments (France, Germany, Netherlands, Italy, Belgium etc) are coalitions--I guess they don't have mandates either. Macron puts thugs on the streets and water cannons protestors regularly,
UK Parliament has shown to be disfunctional on the Brexit issue. Strong action was necessary.
BTW. The Queen is the one who made the decision after receiving advice from Privy Counsellors.
@Michael The Queens role is completely for show; she does not determine anything. You do know that, right? The only strong action that’s needed is to steer the UK away from this mess. Johnson just did the opposite.
A good analogy for UKs actions with the EU is a spouse filing for divorce and then throwing a last minute fit in court when they can’t get everything they want, despite terms being readily available throughout the process, and despite being strongly advised to pursue a different strategy. Dumber than a box of rocks.
2
The E.U. was established and is run by and for the elites. It is inherently anti-democratic. If each member country was asked to vote, and if they had the guts to allow those votes to be clean, nearly every country would seek to leave.
And, the elites are very, very afraid of this. They, especially the Germans, have gotten richer than ever under the E.U.
The “little guys” hate it, and have voted against the E.U. whenever possible.
4
Thanks. I hadn’t known that “little guys,” was a synonym for raving loonies, bigots, and ignorants.
2
@Lily Nobody could force those 28 countries to join the European Union. Each one of them applied for a membership. Political apparatus in the USA is not driven by the "Elite" of the country? Come on! The Clintons, the Bushes, the Kennedys, the the Adamses, the Roosevelts and so on. I have often wondered, what is the underlying political apparatus about in the USA when it so heavily supports births of dynasties. Personally, I don't find it as an image of a solid state administration. Not at all.
1
@Markku I mean, we vote for are presidents. So if the people wish to keep a "dynasty" in power, so be it.
Like it or not, the Brits voted to leave the EU. Since then, there have been constant attempts to sabotage the wish of the majority of the people. Curious to know exactly where 'undemocratic' comes in.
There is nothing unusual about suspending parliament. It's a tactic used on occasion, most often in autumn, and especially before the Queen's Speech, so how exactly is that undemocratic also?
It would seem that to be democratic in NYT terms means overturning the Brexit vote by politicians alone, most especially European - and not British - ones.
Would that suffice for you? If so, isn't that kinda Trumpian?
So how'bout we allow the British government to govern themselves and find a way to finalize the wish of its vote without further attempts at sabotage from anyone? Including so called journalists with agendas or those just trying to make money on this very difficult process, and whether it's something you agree with or not, because that argument is over. And it was a British one.
Everyone knew the process would not be easy, and it would seem that many outside forces are trying to make it even harder. Is it really democratic to try and wreck the process from outside, or make the inevitable transition harder than it need be? Shouldn't we be supporting the effort to ease the misery that everyone talks about so gleefully. Or are you trying to make that misery worse in order to justify your own argument? Just to say: "See, I told you so!" At the expense of all Britain.
3
The only one's here that are Antidemocratic are the EU themselves.
2
@scarlett...and those that want a second referendum on Brexit.
Lets play the Super Bowl again 'cos' we didn't like the result the first time around.
3
I feel badly for the people that did not vote for Brexit, as they will have to go down the tubes with their countrymen, who will be shouting "Isn't Boris brilliant for pulling this fast one?" Then the real consequences will start. And for anyone thinking that Trump will bail you out, think again. He's already circling your country like a shark.
1
@Kristine Why feel badly for them? If you don't vote you get no say. That's how it works.
What rubbish! The simple facts are that the people of Britian voted to exit Brexit and that is just what they are doing. If you didn't vote in the poll to either exit or stay in Brexit then don't moan because the majority of people voted to leave. It is no different to voting in the elections for a new leader; don't moan about the leader if you didn't bother to make an effort to go and vote.
The uncertainty created by Parliament dithering around and just continuously yakking about it is costing the British economy money. Politicians pay isn't minimum wage stuff.
Just get on with it and exit. The world won't end.
4
An interesting opinion piece on there still being two Germany's and how the eastern part is swinging right. It might be that way throughout the West. There is an educated and wealthy elite doing very well and perhaps a numerical minority who isn't. They see themselves being forgotten to make matter worse illegal immigration pushes them aside.
Columbia has taken in a million refugees from Venezuela. The Vice President was saying how great his country was to do so. However they are working for half the wages Which was little concern to the VP. It's also cultural. You have to wonder who decided to train female fighter pilots in Afghanistan or try to bring gay marriage in Tunisia. I won't get into energy policy that robs the.
What will bring the governments of the world back in touch with it people. They might be right but not when they're light years ahead of their people a divide is created that can only get worse.
2
'Guntram B. Wolff, the director of Bruegel, a Brussels research institution, wrote on Twitter. “How can a PM of a democratic country, elected neither by parliament nor by citizens, suspend the parliament that should hold him accountable?”'
Wolff doesn't know what he is talking about. The PM, as a member of Parliament, is elected by his constituents, as are all members of Parliament, including those members who form the government.
If Wolff has a problem with parliamentary government, he should explain how the British system could be improved.
Here is a good place to start:
"British Politics For Dummies" by Julian Knight & Michael Pattison (2nd ed., Wiley, 2015).
3
@VTK, you are right, Wolff doesn't understand. Johnson has been elected PM by 0.13% of the voting population, which is not uncommon in Fake Democracies like Britain, a country with a winner-takes-it-all election system, an unelected House of Lords and a lack of a stable constitutional system.
"If Wolff has a problem with parliamentary government, he should explain how the British system could be improved."
True. He could for example point to Germany, a country vastly more democratic than Britain, which proportional representation and a solid constitutional system. Or to most other EU countries, in fact, which are also way more democratic than Britain.
7
That is not what was said. Johnson did not become a PM as the leader of the party that won the elections. Johnson was chosen by a bit more than 100k members of the Conservative Party to replace Theresa May. So, neither citizens nor the Parliament choose Johnson to become PM. That’s why the statement is correct.
4
The very structure and origins of the E.U. are anti-democratic. It was foisted upon the people by the elites. If the people were allowed to vote up or down, in each country, there would be no more E.U.
The E.U. only benefits the elites: shareholders in certain companies and the actual E.U. permanent bureaucracy in Brussels. (Hey, NYT, do a story on the immense self-dealing of E.U. bureaucrats, ask them about their unbelievably generous retirement plan and all the other perks).
The E.U. brought about the demise of the economies of Greece, Spain, Italy, etc., all for the benefit of Germany.
And, who runs Germany: Angela Merkel, a former East Berlin Communist apparatchik who must have been then overseen by Vladimir Putin, the then head of the KGB, who is native fluent in German.
Please, NYT, do some more of your excellent reporting and analyze Merkel’s bosses before the fall of the Berlin Wall. And, you know what they say, once a Russian agent, always a Russian agent, unless they smear poison on your door knob.
6
@Lily
Agree entirely but the NYT will do no such investigative reporting since it is a tool of the global elites and wealthy class.
1
This account is wildly distorted, and not based on facts. Why is it published?
2
@Manuel Robles
Do your research and then you are free to say it is “wildly distorted”.
Research requires talking to people high in the Russian and Cuban governments BEFORE the Berlin Wall fell. They’re still alive, you just need to find people to introduce you to them in their country. So, be ready for travel and working connections, sometimes for years.
I'm sure Trump is jealous of Boris Johnson. He would love to suspend Congress and rule by decree. Oh wait, that's pretty much what's happening.
2
Boris Johnson saw how his predecessor struggled to convince Parliament. Thrice rejected. Perhaps, the move to suspend Parliament, is smart and strategic on the part of Johnson.
The days ahead - pre and post October 31 will not be easy. Will be more complicated.
The overall objective for Brexit is for Britain to go it alone. Will Brexit be the beginning for everything the country wants to do by themselves? Leaving the EU, makes England look a different country. Is it England, Great Britain or United Kingdom? Besides the EU, there are other Associations in Europe, Britain is part of. Will there be a day, when the country will decide to leave those other Associations as well. Will it not lead to isolation?
Policies are sometimes short sighted, and ill planned. The people may soon realize, the Brexit was not what they wished for.
1
This is hypocritical nonsense by the EU. In the UK we had the largest democratic vote ever and it was to leave the EU. To have MPs now trying to thwart the will of the people is most certainly undemocratic and borders on the treasonous.
4
@Jason, you said
"In the UK we had the largest democratic vote ever and it was to leave the EU"
Seriously? An *advisory* referendum where less than 52% voted to leave? I can see that for a Fake Democracy like Britain this might look like democracy in action, but in reality it was nothing of the sort, what it was however is a great national embarrassment on the world stage.
4
@Wurzelsepp -- For legal technicality having to do with British law on referendum, it could only be "advisory."
However, before the vote, all parties promised the voting public that they would abide by the outcome.
It appears that in Britain, such a promise is a promise.
The heart of world fiscal fraud will leave the EU on october 31th, GREAT !!
3
This is a silly game. You can either have European "democracy" or member state sovereignty. Not both. The more power EU voters have over EU affairs, the less say member states have.
5
The Brits voted for Brexit, but the entrenched pols tried to stymie the will of the people.
BoJo has used an established procedure to thwart the entrenched pols and give the people what they voted for; what a clever fellow.
4
Can a PM if a democratic country..?
Just look at the deliberate voting suppression efforts by the far far radical right wing in the US...
2
@Adam S Urban Warrior. Or the ballot farming (CA) from the moderate, liberal left. Democrats firmly believe in democracy, as long as they get their way.
Hilarious. "Who will save us from unaccountable government? Let's ask the Tories!"
3
The EU is not anti-democratic. Some choices had to be done during its construction for practical reasons but one of the objectives is to keep reforming it when it will be possible with a more democratic and direct system. Destroying the EU won’t help to get one.
Some high level positions are not filled following a direct election but eventually by people and political bodies who have been elected.
A same kind a system can be seen in the USA where the president is chosen by the electoral college. Fundamentally, the USA is a democracy even if it currently has some serious hiccups.
5
@Gvaltat, actually the EU is a lot more democratic than the U.S. as proportional representation is widely common amongst EU countries and because every member country has the same voice (and every EU citizen has the same voice when it comes to EU elections).
The U.S. system is only marginally better than the Fake Democracy of Britain. Unlike the latter the U.S. has a solid constitutional system but it shares the winner-takes-it-all FPTP system which automatically disfranchises large parts of the population, and to make matters worse, the weight of a vote is dependent on where the voter lives.
Calling this "democracy" is really a stretch.
4
What Boris Johnson still apparently fails to realize is that the EU views being soft on the UK as an existential threat. It will not permit members to exit gracefully and risk falling apart, even if it's clear that they are "serious" about a no-deal exit. The consequences will be much worse for the UK than the EU, and for them that is a win.
The other thing he has failed to realize is that he is turning his own people against him. UK citizens will not stand behind this maneuvering. He is isolating himself.
He's about as good of a strategist as our own embarrassing mistake of a leader.
8
Well said! The EU team are accomplished and seasoned negotiators. Moreover, they will have a real trade deal to negotiate with the UK in the future, not just a withdrawal one. Why would they give in to the UK?
Theresa May negotiated this deal, it was fashioned in accordance with her “red lines.” The British themselves came up with the Backstop.
Peace in Ireland is not an aspiration of vanity, no one on this Island wants to go back to the violence and savagery of the past. There are deep wounds here from the past. We have become accustomed to peace and sharing without conflict.
5
Regardless of how the Brexit mess is resolved, the greater challenge for the EU is the disconnect between the EU's control of monetary policy and member countries' control of their fiscal policies. This fundamental flaw will ultimately doom the EU to disintegration. The only question is when.
Meanwhile, the EU's fondness for expanding the scope of regulatory power will simply speed its disintegration.
Case in point. Is there a burning need to regulate the color of hens' eggs? In the early 90's some committee within the bowels of Brussels thought so, until outraged consumers and farmers forced that initiative to be cancelled and the parliamentarians who supported the regulation became laughingstocks.
Whether Britain has good reasons for Brexit remains to be seen. But the EU should be worried that other member countries may also find membership too costly to support.
4
@pinewood I fear without the counter-balance of Britain, France will go full Napoleonic and want to micro-regulate everything. That will hasten the end of the EU.
@pinewood
Hi! Actually, its quite the opposite what is happening here. Since this all Brexit mess started, all the disrupting voices shouting Frexit!, Nederlexit!, Italix!, Polix! etc etc have gone silent. Now they have another plan. To change the EU system from the inside (mwahah!). Even Le Pen stopped with the Frexit rethoric!
On the committees...legislating at EU level is a complex democratic (yes, Democratic.) process. We are 28 (yet!) with different agendas. 28! So...not easy and there is a lot of noise (and rubbish on occasion) going around but this really is the best system we have come up with so far. Even with all its flaws. And there are many. I mean look at our history. We have always been at each other throats. This alliance was the one thing that kept peace for this long.
13
@pinewood
The EU doesn't control monetary policy. It has 27 members excluding the UK while the Eurozone which you're clearly confusing it with has 19 members.
You could perhaps usefully acquaint yourself with the facts before giving us the benefit of your wisdom. Btw your anecdote about the color of eggs belongs with all the other nonsensical myths about the EU like the suggestion they were going to legislate for straight bananas.
8
Didn't the voters in the UK vote to leave the European Union?
Why is making that happen undemocratic? It seems to me that trying to stop it from happening is what is undemocratic. Closing Parliament a little early prior to its re-opening for a new season is a pretty smart move to finally get the job done. Britain needs to move on and put Brexit behind it.
3
@Asher
Well, UK voters weren't given any description of the ACTUAL consequences of leaving the EU, just assurances from Johnson and Farage that it would be a cakewalk (to us Cheney's term about Iraq). If there are real economic and life quality downsides, that isn't what they thought they would get.
7
@Asher, actually less than 52% of people who voted wanted to leave (predominantly the English), so almost half of the country wanted to stay.
Disfranchising almost half of your population doesn't strike me as very democratic.
2
@Cfiverson I think people are smarter than you give them credit for.
Proroguing Parliament is a traditional right of the monarch; but under constitutional monarchy the monarch must do whatever foolish thing his/her PM wants. The last monarch to exert monarchical power was Queen Victoria early in her reign. While I am not recommending absolute monarchy I would like the monarchs in monarchies to have some independent ability to make decisions -- like whom to appoint as PM. Did Queen Elizabeth really want Boris Johnson; could she have chosen someone else? I think she could have; I cannot believe she wanted this childish version of a chief minister.
2
Rich, rich, rich. The EU was conceived by aristocratic elites to preserve and enshrine rule by modern day mandarins who would be insulated from and unaccountable to the masses. A modern day feudal system. This is because the elites believed themselves inherently better at governance and the masses as uneducated and subject to be ruled by their passions. After years of bullying the British government, they've come up against someone better at maneuver than they and are shocked out of complacency.
2
@MHVC
"This is because the elites believed themselves inherently better at governance and the masses as uneducated and subject to be ruled by their passions."
This perfectly describes Johnson's Conservative Party. Johnson himself is an Eton and Oxford educated elite. You couldn't get much more elite than Johnson.
8
@nickdastardly Indeed. I was aware of Mr Johnson's background. However, my point wasn't which of these systems or people is more or less elite. I was merely pointing out that EU complaints of processes as undemocratic are somewhat hypocritical.
@MHVC I’m sorry, do you have any data to back up your argument (I use the word loosely) or are we reduced to unsubstantiated nationalist talking points? Some examples of “bullying” of the U.K., please? (as a reminder, the U.K. was able to opt out of Schengen and of the euro: no E.U. autocrats stormed London to impose their will). And really, elites vs masses is still a viable argument?
9
It’s alarming how, with russian interference, we’ve acquired a putin supporting “president “, beholden as a debtor to a dictator, and now a United Kingdom that may become disunited in short order by another wanna dictator, again through the internet and russian influence.
I know we’ve let the genie out of the bottle, but internet technology will be the death of us yet.
2
@Wayne
No need to blame Russia for Brexit.
They may have tipped the balance, but the main problem is the 40% + base load on people who believed in decades of Euromyths and the easy scapegoat EU.
The European Commission has prepared a tiny overview
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/
Not a best off:
>Double-decker buses to be banned, Apr 1998<
>Brussels to ban British emblems on licence plates, Aug 1999<
>Mountains must display height warning signs for climbers, Mar 2004<
>EU to ban our beaches, April 2014<
>EU responsible for your hay fever, May 2015<
>EU to blame for floods, Jan 2016<
Hundreds of those stories went through the UKs MSM without any challenging.
2
Parliamentary maneuvers do not change the facts on the ground.
This is what happens, when you have a legislative body that is under the control of the executive. I think most of us know of someone else that would like to be able to suspend the sessions of the legislative body.
5
@John Vesper
No hints be direct
Vote and democratic suppression by those who have NO ideas new or otherwise is the new norm
GOP
trump
McCONnell
Graham
.....
@Adam S Urban Warrior
So very right you are!!!
I tend to think of the EU is pretty undemocratic, because their policies always end up favoring the richer Northern European countries.
The example that I always think of is Greece. If the Greeks had been able to inflate their currency, they could have increased exports and crisis would have been far less severe. On top of that, Brussels demanded harsh austerity measures that the crisis much worse.
The odd thing about he referendum in Britain is that these complaints don’t really apply. Britain got to keep the pound. Britain’s one of the largest economies in the world and had a great deal of leverage in the EU. I guest that’s why wealthy London and its suburbs voted remain...
...but even within rich countries, the negative affects of globalization are felt most strongly by poor provincial folks.
4
@-brian That narrative is outdated.
Southern E.U. countries lagged the Northern ones in updating labor laws and regulations, for example to accommodate Internet sales which requires flexible working hours but also to stay competitive in the free trade the E.U. continues to pursue and by and large is successful at.
Spain, after reforms and digesting its housing bubble, has been in great shape for years and much more compatible with the North. You won’t read about it in Krugman’s op-Ed’s. France is starting to see the results of Macron’s changes, as unemployment now drops.
Greece will get there, but indeed it should have not joined the eurozone when it did.
7
@Anne,
Spain is in great shape? I suppose, if you accept 14% unemployment as 'great'. What is so wonderful about being "compatible with the North"? Would you say that Mexico should become "more compatible with the North"? I truly have no idea what drives your analysis.
2
@-brian Grrece was not allowed to join de euro. But after fixing their books, with definite opposition of Germany and Netherlands they were allowed in. Greece saw it as a change to use germans creditcard. After they met an unsustainable debt (250% of their GDP) they were just about declaring bankrupcy. They the were bougt out bij the eu witch costed Netherlands 50 billion and Germany 500 billion.
After that the were forced to balance their budget. That means mainly getting people to pay taxes. Varoufakis threaded to blow up the euro by printing lots of euro banknotes. That was diverted by ousting him out, because never for a second even would Greece think about leaving the euro.
2
Americans do not seem to understand the UK parliamentary system.
When a new government has a new legislative programme it is normal to prorogue parliament in preparation for the Queen's speech where she outlines what that programme will be.
Johnson has a good case that the raft of legislation that will be needed to be enacted when the UK leaves the EU at the end of October is such a new legislative programme.
The other point is that all parliaments have a time span, and this one has been in continuous session longer than any parliament since the 17th century.
So to talk of constitutional crisis is just simply hyperbole. People who still cannot accept the democratic will of the people of the UK are just trying to continue stalling for another 3 years.
11
Suspending the representative body in order to enact “the will of the people” is the oldest play in the autocrat playbook, and is based on the premise that only the autocrats and not the elected representatives know “the people” and can discern “their will”, and the representative body is corrupt or slow or yada yada.
It’s a play that’s not run better when the man who supposedly knows the will of the people best is an unelected and privileged insider best known for being a liar and a cut rate Mr Bean.
15
@Soracte Don't try to normalize the exceptional: this is the longest prorogation since 1945. Johnson's aid Dominic Cummings had spelled out clearly weeks ago their plan to prevent parliament to stop a no-deal brexit, including prorogation. So don't insult people's intelligence by saying that "Americans don't understand" in order to pretend that this is business as usual. It's not.
13
@Soracte
A number of Conservative MPs, such as Dominic Grieve, are also outraged. Possibly, they do not understand the UK parliamentary system as well as you do.
6
The E.U. has its problems. That said, those problems are fixable. And should be fixed.
The Brits have their own problem -- Brexit. The people of the U.K. voted on a fuzzy-worded ballot proposition that the many ugly and damaging impacts were never mentioned.
If the Brits voted on a Brexit ballot proposition that asked if they would approve an exit from the E.U. regardless of the painful consequences the British voters would have said "NO"!
There should be a new vote of the people.
27
@Richard don´t forget the role played by Cambridge Analytica in tracking down the indecisive and influencing its position based on a lot of "alternative facts". And in this case i believe it made a difference. The ref results were 4% apart, i think...its not much... :-(
1
@Richard Not Correct. The Government at the time sent out a substantial advisory note and David Cameron (Prime Minister) was crystal clear as to the consequences and what a leave vote meant. Project Fear abounded. The people said "Leave"
Parliament voted with an overwhelming major to leave WITHOUT ANY CONDITIONS (Article 50 vote 498 v 114). It is those in Parliament stifling the will of the people and their own vote that are acting undemocratically. Boris is getting the job done to fulfil the promise that David Cameron made.
By and large, the E.U. sides more with people than corporations. It takes care of anything ranging from sustainable fish populations, food and product safety to a guaranteed 20 paid holidays in the whole union. The E.U. is the best place to live for ordinary folks for a reason.
To me, that’s what matters more than the mechanics of forming an E.U. commission.
Who would trust a British government desperate to resuscitate its economy to shift the cursor to people instead of lower corporate taxes and deregulation?
That is, aside from Jeremy Corbyn, through his warped E.U. hatred glasses.
35
@Anne
" the E.U. sides more with people than corporations."
Tell that to the 6000 workers of Fiat whose jobs were moved to Poland.
Or tell it to the Greeks.
The EU is a neo-liberal construct whose primary interest is the protection of corporations.
I think you will find vacation entitlements in the UK very generous, certainly a lot better than in the US.
1
@Soracte Poland is in the E.U. and it will be lifted up just like Spain and Portugal, not only by trade but also by infrastructure investments.
I do agree that Greece did not benefit from the Eastward expansion of the EU, due to dilution of investments from rich countries. BTW Britain was the biggest supporter of E.U. enlargement... then they didn’t like Eastern EU workers in their country.
18
@Soracte
'Tell that to the 6000 workers of Fiat whose jobs were moved to Poland.'
The jobs were moved within the EU. That is like complaining about jobs moving from CA to TX. It happens.
As for vacation, the US has zero laws on the required length of vacations so practically every country on the planet is better in this regard.
10
"Mr. Wolff suggested that something like a 10-year limit on the backstop could be an acceptable compromise, since it would give both sides plenty of time to negotiate a comprehensive trade deal that would make the backstop unnecessary."
That's just stalling. There has been plenty of time to negotiate. Unless conditions in Northern Ireland change*, there is going to have to be a hard border again.
* For example, Northern Ireland could choose to leave the UK.
13
I can’t say I’m a fan of Boris Johnson, but I am appreciative of his tactic here. We’re 3 YEARS into this waffling project that is Brexit. Something needs to get done.
12
If 2/3 of the country had voted Brexit, it would have long been taken care of.
Instead, Britain is deeply divided about Brexit itself and which version to pursue.
Most countries require a 2/3 majority to change their constitution, Brexit should have never been started based on a tiny majority of a non-binding referendum, which was even manipulated by outside influence (Murdoch empire, Russia, Cambridge Analytica, ...).
10
@Brian S Actually, his plan is to do nothing...
At what point, will UK citizen's be able to apply for refugee status in the EU due to it's political uncertainty? As it's looking more and more like a tempting option for many people (you just have to see the huge jump of people trying to get an Irish passport to see the trend).
5
The EU is anti-democratic. That is its underlying ethos - it is far removed from public scrutiny or accountability. It’s legislative body is clothed in the veneer of being elected in their home countries but because the MEP’s came from different nations and cultures they have absolutely no cohesion. The two top jobs in the EU were recently actually chosen by Germany and France - Ursula von der Leyen and Christine Lagarde. One is a corporate lawyer and the other believed to be a close friend of Angela Merkel. They were literally appointed by Germany and by France - they were elected by no one. They are accountable to no one.
17
@Maureen I struggle to understand these sorts of observations, they are held accountable within the parliamentary system under which most European countries operate. There are committees, checks and balances made up of directly elected representatives. There is a balance between the executive branch, legislature and courts. The US is the same. Member states also have considerable veto powers. What do right wingers want to achieve when they say they want sovereignty back? Is shutting up the voices of directly elected officials taking sovereignty back?
46
@jonnymo_
When you have an election at the European parliament for a president of the European Commission - arguably the most powerful position in the EU - and France and Germany decide there will be only one candidate, then you know you are dealing with an undemocratic system.
And she only scraped in anyway!
7
@Maureen You have to understand that a lot of countries rely on the European Commission to impose unpopular policies or laws.
The relative distance and autonomy the E.U. commission needs to do this is the price of holding 28 (27) countries together in a union.
Britain’s politicians are particularly infamous for blaming “Brussels” for just about anything that goes wrong in their country. Yet Britain had the best deal of all countries: the membership rebate, opt-outs (e.g. Schengen), the financial center of the eurozone without being in it, etc.
They’re about to throw it all away.
34
"... Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s gambit of suspending Parliament, which was widely perceived as an antidemocratic maneuver, ..."
Under the US Constitution, the President has a similar power:
"... [the President] may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper ..." (Art. II, Sec. 4)
Obviously, the Houses could avoid a presidential adjournment by agreeing, but the point is that the British PM's power is not wholly unique in democracies.
3
This isn’t a disagreement about the time of adjournment.
1
I hope they finally go through with the so-called "Brexit" and are joined by some of their fellow European nations. If I were a European citizen, I wouldn't want to take orders from Brussels any more than I'd want the U.S. to take orders from some Canadian or Mexican city. Heck, it's hard enough to write federal laws that logically apply to the cultural differences of our 50 states, much less trying to write such a thing for differing countries.
5
@Independent Observer
They don't take orders. They vote for representatives in a democratic process and sometime you win your favored policy and sometimes you lose. This is the way it works in America. What's the alternative? People in Russia and China really do take orders!
For UK to lose access to the world's largest free market will hurt them irreparably, esp considering they had the sweetest deal in the whole world, keeping their own currency.
28
@Independent Observer You speak of Brussels as if the European Parliament was elected by some mysterious cabal instead of the citizens of Europe. And of course now the alternative to the E.U. is that great trade agreement that Trump and Trumper (or BoJo, take your pick) have been crowing about, because, guess what, these days a relatively small country like the U.K. can’t go at it alone and the days of Empire live only in some deluded Tory minds. So, taking your orders from Washington and having no say whatsoever will be a great trade-off for U.K. citizens. I hope they’re not too attached to their National Healthcare System, I hear that will be first on the chopping block.
2
@Independent Observer
Speak for yourself.
I for one don't mind taking orders from my _directly_ elected Members of European Parliament.
Moreover, I would like for the Parliament to be even more powerful. Veto rights of member states should be abolished.
1
And so the implosion of the developed world continues.
The European "leaders" shown in the photo are simply not up to the monumental challenges before them, of which Brexit is merely the most urgent.
None of all this turmoil would be happening if globalization hadn't been so poorly implemented and managed over the past quarter of a century.
And it's becoming increasingly likely that addressing the "negative externalities" caused by the colossal failure of globalization for the developed world may actually lead to widespread social upheaval across the West, with the outlook for decade of the 2020s looking very ominous, indeed.
30
All this talk of globalization being poorly implemented, what does that really mean? Despite it's problem the world is still a vastly better place than it was in the 1980s when the world consisted of a couple of big handfuls of welfare democracies, and we regularly saw famines, not to mention the constant threat of nuclear war. Since then billions of people have been lifted out of poverty and most countries are developing positively (although everything is far from perfect). Most of the EU's problems today can hardly be blamed on globalization, amd not even on the ill-conceived implementation of the euro, but rather on three decades of US-led wars in the Middle East (including the one in Afghanistan, sort of taken over from the Soviet Union), and a Russia rising again, exerting its influence once more. The result? Huge refugee streams, of which the EU and other Western countries see only a trickle (but the numbers are big enough to cause problems, just as they do throughout the Americas), and the biggest tensions are seen in the immediate neighbours of the countries affected. Brexit, to come back to that, is unlikely to cause the EU much damage, but highly likely to destroy the UK (especially in case of No Deal), to the point of breaking up the union with Scotland seekin indepedence and Ireland and Northern Ireland uniting.
14
@LRS
Agree with everything you say about the Republicans.
But you could not be more wrong about the Democrats. Destruction of the American middle class was truly a bipartisan effort.
You should go back and read the speeches Bill Clinton made about the benefits that NAFTA would bring and then look at how things actually turned out, and his statements about how globalization was like the weather; unstoppable, which is patently absurd.
And a review of his statement about China's role in the global economy back in 2000 illustrates in rather stark terms just how breathtakingly wrong he was about China's entry into the WTO, which may be one of the most disastrous decisions affecting the American middle class in the entire 21st century.
https://1997-2001.state.gov/regions/eap/000110_clinton_china.html
And the acceleration of the globalization of finance and capital during his term, including the effects of the repeal of Glass-Steagal, has had devastating consequences.
And that is why Trump is President.
And Tony Blair tried to be a clone of Clinton and adopted his pro-corporate Democratic "Third Way" policies.
And that is why Boris Johnson is Prime Minister.
And it didn't have to be this way, at all. There is no reason, other than unbridled greed, that globalization could not have "raised all boats", as the economists promised, repeatedly.
It did not. It failed, and it failed miserably.
And we have only just begun to reckon with the consequences.
1
@TB, you said
"And it didn't have to be this way, at all. There is no reason, other than unbridled greed, that globalization could not have "raised all boats", as the economists promised, repeatedly.
It did not. It failed, and it failed miserably."
Actually, it didn't. Globalization did really "raise boats". If that hasn't arrived for you and others then look no further to your own politicians.
Basically, the idea of globalization is to shift simpler work like production to less developed countries which makes it cheaper but also raised their standard of living (and while to us Westerners many work conditions in countries like China look horrible, for the people there it's actually a huge improvement from their former living standards). In the Western country, the idea was that the work force that is now out of jobs is trained up so it can do more complex, higher value work that also pays better. This is how "raising all boats" does work.
Now, the thing is that the money for training up the old work force should have come from the cost savings from shifting the simpler work to other countries. What happened in the US and many other places however was that the money from the cost savings was simply pocketed by the employer, with approval from especially conservative "pro business" politicians.
So no, it's not globalization which failed, it's how it was abused by employers and politicians.