Northumbrian

Have you got any evidence to suggest that the EU would object to the dissolution of the United Kingdom?
Lots of Ukippers think that's the plan anyway.

rjt

Thank you for restating your position.

Political partys co-operate all the time Cassie, there is no reason why UKIP and the ED or UKIP and Liberal or Conservative and UUP cannot co-operate desipte diffrences in some areas of policy if they can see a need to do which would benefit a particular casue. An anit EU alliance would be no bad thing which is why there could be a need for co-operation in this case.

__________________
Mr Delors said that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community, The Commission to be The Executive and The Council Of Ministers The Senate. NO! NO! NO!
(Margaret Thatcher 30 Oct 1990)

Ignore List: The Prophets of ST Al the Unelectable.

rjt

Thank you Frith, the day Cassie starts agreeing with me on a regular basis will be the day I know I am not dealing in Realism anymore.

__________________
Mr Delors said that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the community, The Commission to be The Executive and The Council Of Ministers The Senate. NO! NO! NO!
(Margaret Thatcher 30 Oct 1990)

Ignore List: The Prophets of ST Al the Unelectable.

Northumbrian

Mind, I think that Zbrahead guy is of the same mould.

zbrahead

What mould would that be?

KeyStage2

Andrew this is not what Richard Atkins told me when I last spoke with him.

Northumbrian

Someone who wants to argue with everyone?

This is my last response to you. You add nothing of any value to the debate.

Richard the Lionheart

What are you referring to?

__________________
The Free England Party - England's Premier Nationalist Party
www.freeengland.com .....Serious about England

zbrahead

I do not wish to argue with everyone, if you make sense, I will readily agree.

Frith

For something to "make sense" there must be a predefined meaning to this concept, or it just see-saws between subjective opinion. "Sense" in itself, is not the same as "sense" in someone's idea of sense.

The definition is basically: "something sound or reasonable", so someone's opinion here would need to fit this definition in terms of what he or she proposed as a political idea. It would additionally need to make political sense if it were being touted as an argument for devolution or independence, or whatever. It wouldn't depend on tradition, on mindset, on what Karl Marx or Jesus Christ thought, or on what Che the Guava or Tony Blair believed. It would need to conform to the accepted definition of soundness and reason.

So the argument for a Free England (or a Free Scotland or a Free Hawaii or Tibet) , when based on an argument for more control over local matters is sound and especially so in view of the current political debacle. It isn't unsound because it violates some deeply held belief about people or political ideology. It becomes sound or unsound when it violates the rules of logic and reason.

In political terms, it becomes viable when people vote for it democratically, whether some may find it viable or not. Democracy and reason don't always go together. Sometimes what seems logically to be a better idea doesn't translate well from page to world. Hence the gaffs that have placed military juntas in power that have reneged on the original idea of freedom from oppression. By then, it's too late to change back by means of democracy because autocracy enables leaders to defer democratic rights to the dustbin and institute dictatorship.

I think that because quite a lot of people can not only see this happening in other countries (Zimbabwe is a fine example of utterly overturning an original idea) they look closer to home and see the glimmerings and often the rips in the fabric of democracy and want to prevent the Zimbabwe or the Congo effect, or the nazi effect or the Stalinist effect. There are enough signs to prophesy the coming of the global kingdom and so people who want to prevent it often want to do so by means of smaller, tighter, better organised groups like free nation states. They tend to keep wolves from the door and soldiers out of parliament. Look what happened to Pakistan. Look what happened when they wanted to turn things back.

Some people say: "That won't happen here, that can't happen to us because we are protected by democracy." But democracy is a function of one man one vote in our world and a decision based on a majority count in favour. It doesn't take a genius to work out what hope there is for a "democratic" political system in, say, England, if demographic trends continue and the natives are outnumbered in a single generation in enough places to warrant a whole new dispensation under a completely different political system where democracy is replaced by theocracy and the future dies because in systems like this change is outlawed by god and by a clique of wizards who stand behind a naked emperor.

It's happened before, no one should think it can't happen again. History is quite happy to repeat itself and people seem quite gullible enough to allow it to repeat itself because people still cling to ideas that have little to do with reality and much to do with belief, both religious and political. Belief dies hard with a vengeance. Reason often faces insurmountable odds. Reason often is martyred on the thorns of belief. Belief reigns through famine and feast. Belief has a deadly power and when it gets into the minds of individuals it gains its greatest capacity to change what might never alter under normal conditions. With belief all things are possible because, despite the fact that belief reneges on its promises, belief constantly offers the egotistical and the fearful individual alike, the chance to participate in greatness. In eternity. In better-than-thou. It's so wonderful to feel chosen that people can't help believing they have been chosen. They will kill and destroy anyone who argues that this belief is transitory and that the mirror never lies. They will smash the mirror and cling to belief.

But then, you strike me as someone who may understand this danger. If so, good for you. If not, beware the temptation to ignore the mirror's honest reflection.

All children should be given a mirror for their seventh birthday because this is the year when their minds begin to grasp the moral principle and they have glimmerings of a conscience. A mirror gift would go a long way to preventing confusion between what seems to be with what is.