This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?  (Read 7786 times)

Battlemaster
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • I am a Bill Maher Democrat.
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #45 on: July 10, 2022, 09:55:39 PM »
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.



 

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?

Basically the EU didn't come into being fully formed but is an extension of several major economic treaties. The big one being the European Economic Community.

As it expanded its power individual countries wrote EU policy into law. Many of these relate to various economic and commercial regulations. There is a feeling that many of the UKs laws and regulations were not written by Parliament.

In addition the European Convention on Human Rights is a separate treaty but for various not unentirely incorrect reasons is often lumped in with the EU more generally. So there is a feeling there is a higher court that people can appeal to beyond an individual country's own courts.

When the UK joined the EU the membership was quite limited, the entry of the Eastern European countries caused a massive surge of migration that had a profound cultural and economic impact in the UK amongst the working class and the outright poor. Because the EU treaty was embedded there was nothing UK politicans could do about this.

As for the wider economic project and why groups would want to form "non-democratic" systems this is a very complicated question but essential boils down to the EU being a neo-liberal German hegomony. Now there are good economic reasons for this and it would probably increase material prosperity but democratic values are not a particular priority for the drivers of this project.


Mmmmkay, so if britain were not forced to take in more refugees than it wanted, and people could not appeal British law to a court outside England it might have stayed in?
Fuck the fascist right and the fascist left.

Visitor Q

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #46 on: July 11, 2022, 04:51:43 AM »
  I always got the feeling some brits in the UK were a little tired of being told what to do by unelected egg head Germans dictating from offices several nations away.   So yeah, not so sure it was all about economics....being a nation is being a nation, not a free economic zone.



 

OK, knowing less about the EU  than I do Brexit, so please forbear my ignorance, but I'm under the impression that countries in non eastern Europe are generally democracies. Now I'm trying to understand why democracies would form and join a body that is supposedly so non democratic.

I have heard of the 'Brussels bureaucrats' from many right leaning sources. It just seemed odd to me that democratic nations would create a non democratic agency with great power over them.

Can I request some information on this seeming dichotomy?

Basically the EU didn't come into being fully formed but is an extension of several major economic treaties. The big one being the European Economic Community.

As it expanded its power individual countries wrote EU policy into law. Many of these relate to various economic and commercial regulations. There is a feeling that many of the UKs laws and regulations were not written by Parliament.

In addition the European Convention on Human Rights is a separate treaty but for various not unentirely incorrect reasons is often lumped in with the EU more generally. So there is a feeling there is a higher court that people can appeal to beyond an individual country's own courts.

When the UK joined the EU the membership was quite limited, the entry of the Eastern European countries caused a massive surge of migration that had a profound cultural and economic impact in the UK amongst the working class and the outright poor. Because the EU treaty was embedded there was nothing UK politicans could do about this.

As for the wider economic project and why groups would want to form "non-democratic" systems this is a very complicated question but essential boils down to the EU being a neo-liberal German hegomony. Now there are good economic reasons for this and it would probably increase material prosperity but democratic values are not a particular priority for the drivers of this project.


Mmmmkay, so if britain were not forced to take in more refugees than it wanted, and people could not appeal British law to a court outside England it might have stayed in?

The mass migration from Eastern Europe weren't refugees they were economic migrants. One of the key principles of the EU is free movement of labour. Without free movement of labour the EU would be an entirely different entity. So yes UK would probably still be in the EU but it is sort of a superficial answer because everything would be different across all 27 countries.


Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2874
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #47 on: July 11, 2022, 06:55:50 AM »
We never left the EU? Okay.

Still paying them, still following their rules. Fuck off, normie, we haven't left.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

Garry G

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • G
  • Posts: 396
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #48 on: July 11, 2022, 07:56:26 PM »
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?

Garry G

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • G
  • Posts: 396
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #49 on: July 11, 2022, 07:59:26 PM »
We never left the EU? Okay.

Still paying them, still following their rules. Fuck off, normie, we haven't left.

Naw we left just not in whatever glaikit way you preferred you absolute nutjob.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #50 on: July 11, 2022, 08:58:04 PM »
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?

I know sarcasm when I see it.
Who da Drow?  U da drow! - hedgehobbit

There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

Battlemaster
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • I am a Bill Maher Democrat.
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #51 on: July 11, 2022, 11:29:38 PM »
OK now,  just everyone freeze for a second.

First people say Brexit is done.

Now people say that Britain is still paying eu fees and following eu rules.

So which is it?
Fuck the fascist right and the fascist left.

Visitor Q

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #52 on: July 12, 2022, 03:08:10 AM »
OK now,  just everyone freeze for a second.

First people say Brexit is done.

Now people say that Britain is still paying eu fees and following eu rules.

So which is it?

The EU is a very large, very complex economic and political bloc. It put in place hundreds of pieces of regulation. For example minimum standards of cleanliness of water. This means water could be pumped across borders or bottled and sold within the EU without worrying that it was less clean than your domestic supply.

Some countries simply followed these rules directly. Other countries like UK actually voted them into UK law through Parliment.

The consequence of this is that following Brexit the UK still has these standards in place because they are in UK law. Strictly speaking, legally they aren't "their" rules, they are UK rules.

This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.

As for paying the EU essentially there are two areas, cooperative programmes that the UK still engages with and gets the benefit from and a financial settlement based on contributions the UK had agreed to undertake while part of the EU.

Brexit has happened but the reality isn't as straightfoward as just dislocating the economy from EU overnight.

Garry G

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • G
  • Posts: 396
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #53 on: July 12, 2022, 03:28:31 PM »
A Scotsman admitting he was wrong?

It truly is the end of times.

How could you of all people not see I was answering in the sarcasm colour?

Of course you do.

I know sarcasm when I see it.

Pat
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 5252
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #54 on: July 12, 2022, 03:32:05 PM »
This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.
Finance makes sense, because London is so important. But I'm surprised the UK had that much influence over everything else. I thought Germany and France would be more influential.

Visitor Q

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #55 on: July 12, 2022, 04:56:54 PM »
This is added to the fact that in reality the UK either proposed, sponsored or actively supported 95% of the EU regulations that went to a vote anyway so its difficult to separate out what laws and regulations the UK would actually want to get rid of. For example financial regulations within the EU are driven by the Financial Conduct Authority in London.
Finance makes sense, because London is so important. But I'm surprised the UK had that much influence over everything else. I thought Germany and France would be more influential.

It's comparative. Germany, France and UK had the largest economies in the EU  then Italy. Then there's quite a big drop off for the other countries.

Germany definitely has the most influence in EU. Then France and UK were there to balance that influence out or in most cases they worked out what they wanted between the three of them and did that.

But then UK has always been a bit lukewarm about Europe so they probably never quite influenced it to the extent they could have.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2874
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #56 on: July 13, 2022, 10:08:59 AM »
It's comparative. Germany, France and UK had the largest economies in the EU  then Italy. Then there's quite a big drop off for the other countries.

Germany definitely has the most influence in EU. Then France and UK were there to balance that influence out or in most cases they worked out what they wanted between the three of them and did that.

But then UK has always been a bit lukewarm about Europe so they probably never quite influenced it to the extent they could have.

Germany bankrolls the EU, they are the largest net contributor by far (the UK is second).

The UK is "lukewarm" because we were never actually asked to join, most people have always been opposed to our membership, and the EU has taken the piss milking us for as much money as they could get. That's before you get to the fundamental incompatibility of our common law legal system with the civil law systems that prevail on the Continent.
Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

King Tyranno

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #57 on: July 15, 2022, 06:48:31 AM »


Always nice to see Commander Riker helping UKIP out.

Kiero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 2874
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #58 on: July 19, 2022, 10:33:07 AM »
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:

Currently running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia in 300BC.

Our podcast site, In Sanity We Trust Productions.

Garry G

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • G
  • Posts: 396
Re: Bojo no mo'. Can you explain this to murkans?
« Reply #59 on: July 19, 2022, 12:00:42 PM »
Just in case you're wondering who owns all three candidates still in the running to be PM:



They're coming to get you Kiero! It's okay you can defend yourself through the ECHR, oh.

I despise all of them but I'm loath to think an organised conspiracy would be this fucking inept. If it is then your safe. The whole idea of presenting the Tory internal civil war over the last decade as some over-arching conspiracy is unbelievablly idiotic.