Mellsblue wrote:Digby wrote:Mellsblue wrote:
If you need me to spell out the flaws in the EU (diggers gave a few of his own) then it probably is best to leave it.
Without doubt there are flaws, but one doesn't just look at reasons to stay or leave but rather both and then take a view of what to do on balance.
I've stated that myself. My issue was with there being no intelligent arguments as to why you'd vote leave. Whether that argument out weighs arguments to leave will be down to your views and requirements. What I don't agree with is stating the other side is thick and/or ignorant as they disagree with you. There will be thick and ignorant people of both sides - more on leave I'd say - but to paint all with the same brush is plain wrong.
I think its quite reasonable to look at the flaws the EU has and consider that its an organisation which desperately needs reform and has members whose long term interests on its future don't coincide with the majority of people in this country. However, if that is an incentive to leave the organisation, which I can understand, it needs to be counter balanced with the potential risks of departure, which are basically economic in nature. I don't like the EU and I cant see it reforming any time soon, but I did consider the economic risks to be too great to consider leaving, hence why I voted to remain.
That said, if some people have very little financially, I can see why they thought 'fuck it, lets stick the establishment and vote out'. In their perception, they had little to lose. Sadly, the remain campaign seemed to focus too much on the risks (which is always dangerous as predictions don't always come true) and not enough on the positives that the EU provides, i.e. free trade.
I do get the feeling that if the political elite had taken the rumblings against immigration more seriously a decade ago, and actually done something to improve integration in the area affected rather than label all complainers racist, this would never have happened.