Comments by "Iazzaboyce" (@Iazzaboyce) on "Sangita Myska: Everyone that was a racist probably voted Brexit" video.

@lloydbelle3406 I didn't 'redefine' the ballot. The British people never wanted to be part of the 'federal Europe project' - it was an imposition by politicians and those politicians understand the British people will never vote to re-join.
5
Because Remain was seen as the safe option and Leave the high-risk option - of those in 'two-minds' the greater majority would have voted remain. This means many more 2016 Remain voters would now vote for Brexit than vice versa... Sorry, but you changing your mind is nonconsequential.
4
@gordonstrong5232 Brexit delivering something was not what people voted for. Brexit was the delivery of what people voted for. The ballot paper simply asked the voter did they want Brexit... Most voters did and Brexit has happened. Some people are able to argue Brexit should have been more absolute because the word "leave" was there. But you cannot chunter on about fish and fruit and airports, because those things were not on the ballot paper.
4
@gordonstrong5232 Because before the vote there was a huge fear factor and people feel it did not materialise. You need to wake up to the fact the UK/EU political vision has been destroyed.
3
@bryangeake5826 And if the vote had gone to Remain - which version of Remain was that going to be? I'm sure Remain voters had different ideas on the UK adopting the euro...
3
@bryangeake5826 I don't think some of you are getting the enormity of the 2016 vote. I blame the EU propaganda campaign to get a second referendum, but you have to see that for what it is and accept reality. The easy way to look at this is if they couldn't persuade the UK people to stay in the EU - they're never going to persuade the UK people to re-join the EU.
3
@cedriclempereur1892 Was there one version of "stay" in the UK 1975 referendum on the EEC? The version of Brexit we have is not being a member of the EU and making the best of it. I see Brexit as a simple instruction by the British people to British politicians to forget about ideas of a federal Europe and work for the people and country that actually pays your wages.
2
@cedriclempereur1892 I think you are making absurd arguments. You seem to accept UK government decisions made when the UK was a member of the EU, but not the UK government decision to leave the EU. Brexiteers did accept the 1975 referendum, but they argued a lot had changed since that vote (like 'The European Union'). Enoch Powell did say on BBC as the votes were being counted that, he accepted the vote, but added the British people had not understood what they had voted for and in time would not agree to being part of a federal Europe. They mocked him, but was right, four decades later less than 20% of UK citizens were positively participating in the federal Europe project that was being imposed on them. They voted to regain independence at the first opportunity.
2
@cedriclempereur1892 My maths is accurate and I stand by it. Your statement "majority of people voting for the UK/EU election were voting UKIP" is inaccurate as in the 2014 UK/EU election, UKIP gained 26.6% of the vote. When you have a sample of 33.5 million votes and this represents 72.% of the electorate, this tells you the residual 28% would have voted the same way. You could factor in that these non-voting people, if forced would be more likely to choose the anti-establishment option (Leave). It was a fair vote - both sides were allowed to make a case - the votes were counted correctly.
2
@bryangeake5826 In a democracy the advice of the electorate is important. The government sent a leaflet to every home in the UK which stated: "This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide"
2
@bryangeake5826 Well, the referendum obviously did not in itself end the UK's membership of the EU. We really ended up with a parliament of elected and unelected politicians at odds with the people on a constitutional matter. That parliament did its utmost not to follow the advice of the people. In the end the people voted a party into power that, promised to do what the people had advised the government to do. Now UK politicians shouldn't be having ideas about the UK being in a federal Europe.
2
@bryangeake5826 Well, 'them's the rules' - you must understand that a PR voting system in the UK would have likely brought about Brexit much earlier. UK's FPTP system was the friend of the pro-EU machine. I have been trying to explain that, this whole thing was an imposition on the people by a few in power. The 'movers & shakers' responsible were the equivalent of a small English village (though you would never find a small English village with a majority in favour of the UK's EU membership). This was the big obstacle - they thought they could 'pull it off' but have instead ended up looking very silly. Poor old Shirley - she must have smirked a little when Tony Benn was on his death bed. 'It's a funny old world'...
2
@gerardjlaw Yes, well, frankly, all of your analogy is irrelevant to Brexit. The problem, as I have said before was political parties had been hijacked by EU supporters and there was never going to be a discussion or plan on whether leaving the EU would be better for the UK. The UK voters were given the choice of half a dozen parties all of which had a UK/EU vision. The vast majority of MPs and other politicians were plotting and scheming to fool the UK people into handing the UK over to the EU. As I have explained - the people didn't want this - so the people put a stop to it.
2
@bryangeake5826 Not sure what it is you're getting at.
1
@gerardjlaw Interesting analogy - in my experience people that sell a house and buy a new one are glad they did. You are referencing pro-EU propaganda used at the time of the referendum: 'buying a house without seeing it first' 'getting divorced' 'crashing a car' 'being pushed off a cliff' - it's no coincidence these things are known to be the most feared life events. Nice EU trying to frighten us...
1
@gerardjlaw 'How To Get A Second Referendum' 'Chapter One: Make the people think others (clever people) have changed their minds and the old result would be overturned'. If the 2016-2019 UK parliament believed it could reverse the Brexit vote - it would have voted for a second referendum on the basis, 'the reliable evidence shows the electorate has changed its mind'. I would define 'positive participation' in a democratic system of governance as, 'voting in that democratic system of governance and wanting to be governed by that system of governance'. In the 2014 UK/EU elections less than 36% of UK citizens voted - 2 years later (using a sample vote of 33.5 million and loosely allowing for variables) at least half of those 2014 voters voted to leave the EU. Thus, at best 20% (more like 18%) of the UK electorate had been 'positively participating' in the EU.
1
@cedriclempereur1892 My maths are accurate - perhaps you just cannot understand.
1
@gerardjlaw You could get a bus with Let's send £25 billion each year to the EU and another bus with Let's give up our sovereignty to Brussels' and another bus with _Let's ditch the Pound and join the Euro and anther bus with Let's have freedom of movement I'm starting to get worried now...
1
@gerardjlaw I think you are mistaken about the level of support for the EU as most people are not interested in the EU and are fed up with hearing about it. After the referendum there were some protests - these consisted of around 20 retired men in beards, socks and sandals. It was only when the pro-EU propaganda machine made out that Brexit was all a cunning plan by Jacob Rees Mogg that the demented 'Momentum' movement became involved (oddly Jeremy Corbyn had always opposed the EEC/EU and voted with JRM). The marches were greatly exaggerated by the Pro-EU news/media and prominent left-wing Brexit supporters were cancelled. Go out and talk to people - most couldn't care less about the EU.
1
@JohnSmith-ji6lu You mean 'Brexiteers and Brexit' - that's 'game on'...
1
@gerardjlaw Have you factored into you maths theory the fact that, old people (like you) also voted Remain and also die?
1
@gerardjlaw And 8 out of 10 old people vote and 3 out of 10 young people vote. Also young people are impressionable and inexperienced - less likely to understand the issues as well as most older people do. I think you are putting way too much store in this notion 'the 2016 majority' will soon be 'brown bread'. And it's completely unrealistic to assume 48% would vote to re-join on the basis at least 7 years ago 48% voted to stay in. Any re-join vote would be an entirely different kettle of fish - for a multitude of reasons - all of which would benefit the 'No' side. I have demonstrated with indisputable fact how less than 20% of voters are truly committed to the 'UK/EU vision'. I would guesstimate more voters are committed to the 'independent UK vision' -perhaps 30%. This would mean a re-join campaign needing to convince the greater majority of the remaining 50% of undecided/uninterested voters to vote 'Yes' with the 20% just to level. These people would be asked to vote for: 1, Sending £20billion to brussels each year. 2, Surrendering UK Parliament autonomy. 3, Reintroducing EU freedom of movement. 4, Agreeing to potentially adopting the euro. 5, Joining the EU armed forces. 6, Having to pay and put up with UK MEPs. These thing are too easy to argue against and exactly who do you have in mind to champion this 'let's go-backwards' crusade? All of your leaders have either accepted defeat, run away or clearly need putting in an institution.
1
@gerardjlaw I think it's generally accepted among non-partisan experts that the UK would not vote to join the EU. Re-joining would be too hard to sell and too easy to oppose. A massive factor would be the national humiliation associated with crawling back to ask for our tummy to be tickled. Labour will change its policy on the EU - just as it did in the 1980s. So, like I said who's going to do this referendum - Richturd Branson?
1
@slaterslater5944 So, everyone knew what Remain would be and the people chose the alternative - thanks for making this clear.
1
@slaterslater5944 As I remember it leaving the EU was the alternative option to remaining in the EU and most voters chose to leave. There was plenty of information given by both sides. I don't understand your question.
1
@gerardjlaw The EU would be very keen not to appear desperate in case the vote was for not joining. It would have to come out with something like: "The UK would be treated in exactly the same way as any other country wishing to join the EU'. This would be very useful to the 'no' side, as it would give carte blanche to claim the EU would make new demands as a condition for entry. The 'yes' side would not be able to presume what the EU might or might not do.
1
@gerardjlaw The reality is the EU would do almost anything to get the UK back, but it's complicated. The UK is easily the most influential country on the planet. The UK's international role during the last few centuries has in many ways shaped the modern world. So plainly, the EU was damaged by Brexit - it was a blatant rejection and it severed the EU from UK's wealth, international connections and standing. If there was a referendum, the EU would be forced to stay out, it would not offer the UK special terms, as this would be seen as interference. As I say, the 'no' side would be free to claim the EU would be in the driving seat in any negotiations creating uncertainty, whereas, the 'yes' side would be unable to speak for the EU, unable to allay concerns. This would be just one of many advantages the 'no' side would hold.
1
@cedriclempereur1892 You are arguing with yourself Cedric. I have not said the British Empire has not long gone - I haven't said the UK economy is out performing any other economy. You cannot win an argument by inventing your opponent's position. I said, the UK has had great influence on the modern world. Why have you learned the English language Cedric? Probably, because there's no way you can use the airports of the world without learning every other language. I said the UK was a wealthy country - It's rated to be fifth richest country on the planet. The UK pound is rated to be the fifth strongest currency in the world (above the euro) and is the oldest 'in use' currency in the world.
1
@gerardjlaw The British Empire followed a natural and inevitable course, yes, there was some exploitation (What's old about that?) but, overall it was a story of development and collaboration, a 'family of nations' - still existing and loving cricket today. I'm not longing for empire, power or even influence. I was simply pointing out that, because of the UK's past influence in shaping the modern world and its wealth, Brexit was a humiliation and detriment for the EU. Like most people, I voted for Brexit because, I believe politicians voted into power by the UK people, should stick to making the UK the best it can be.
1
@gerardjlaw I might buy into that, if it wasn't for my lived experience. I remember life in the UK before EEC/EU. A single unskilled wage could keep a family and buy a home. After a few decades of 'Europe' both parents are forced to work, claim 'in work' benefits from the state to feed and clothe their children and cannot buy a home.
1
@gerardjlaw You appear to be assuming that, had we not joined the EEC/EU our standard of living would have declined even further - we cannot know this. If UK working class people were more content with their lot then Remain might have won. Politics is always about contrasting ideology and vision of the minority, there were those that really wanted in, and those that really wanted out, but most were/are not very interested. In the end the EU was expecting UK people to handover money, handover control, handover jobs, handover houses, handover medical care, handover education, handover fish and they could see no benefit.
1
@gerardjlaw Well, I have to disagree because, I had an unskilled job and I supported a family and bought a home and that was 10 years after we joined the EEC. Also, there was no 'working tax credits'. I think you have hit the nail on the head when you point out UK working class are worse off than EU27 working class. This is why I think they are entirely justified not wanting to fund those counties. Countries like Southern Ireland that has taken £50 billion more than it contributed for just 5 million people that can't stop hating the British. There were 10 million EU27 in the UK - I'm pretty sure they were using hospitals and schools.
1
What's 'Bregsit' - is it a made up silly sounding word intended to mock Brexit?
1