Talk:Brexit

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon politics UK.svg

This British politics related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Jellybrain.png
This article requires attention for the following reason(s):

Requires updating. Tagged since 2021-02-02

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)

Question[edit]

Is John Bercow's invocation of the 400 year old precedent an example of 'the revenge of history'? Anna Livia (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

its more the incompetence and grandstanding brinksmanship of all involved has caused them to collectively shit the bed. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:42, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
We actually have a shiteton of law from centuries ago, including legislation that is actually written in Anglo-Saxon yet still in force. It seems novel that it's a 400 year old precedent, but that isn't a big deal really. — Dysk (contribs) 20:48, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
it wouldn't be if 'some' MPs had voted how they really intended instead grandstanding for effect with the intention of voting differently the next time round. perhaps they shouldn't be using brexit for political point scoring when this isn't a by election or even a general election. it really is the issue of a generation that has implications which will fuck us for a generation to come. fucking vermin. AMassiveGay (talk) 20:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
The wrong question was asked in the original referendum, and by now 'no answer is the right one' (and possibly 'no answer' is the right one).
And if you think now is bad, just consider the situation that will arise when 'whatever passes for Brexit' does actually happen and the politicians have to deal with everything they should have been dealing with.
Is it too late to start a popular referendum by setting up parliamentary petitions on various options (including 'None of the Above'(), or do a RON? Anna Livia (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Out of date - revamp after the 31st?[edit]

An ungodly and psychologically horrifying amount of bullshit has happened since Theresa announced her resignation, with Boris Johnson leading a premiership of lies and deceit, so basically business as usual for the Tories. When we (hopefully. hopefully. hopefully) get an extension after the 31st, should we take the breathing time to do some patch notes? Minish (talk) 09:14, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

its virtually a live blog that requires daily updates in its present incarnation. what it needs is significant gutting. most of it is still irrelevant minutiae. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
A complete rewrite, then? Minish (talk) 10:52, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
It doesn't need a rewrite as much as drastic editing, removing things that are unimportant or irrelevant, minor decisions that were rapidly reversed, and things of little consequence. A timeline is ok for some information, but it'll also need proper analysis and an overview.
Also, the 31st isn't going to be the endpoint of the process, whether an extension is granted or not, and may not even mark a significant slowing (the process has always been start-stop). --Annanoon (talk) 11:19, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

"Now", "currently", present tenses[edit]

This article is a prime example of why it's not a good idea to cover ongoing stories. It's really all over the place time-wise. People should have at least put dates in when they added stuff rather than update the article like it's a news story.

But, in fact, it needs to be radically reworked, the blow-by blow details need to be removed, and it needs to focus on the issues and any conspiracy-related debunking in order to make it a RW article.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 11:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the article is poorly constructed and has very little conspiracying. I will try to rework it.Tuxer (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Brexit and Coronavirus[edit]

Scarcely a mention of Brexit since the outbreak began. Anna Livia (talk) 00:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

It also appears that here in the US, no one remembers that Trump was impeached. Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
The Labour Party leadership election also appears to have been forgotten. The new leader takes over next week. Corbyn had his last PMQs as leader on Wednesday and I think Boris was the only person who noticed. The Lib Dems announced over an hour ago that they're postponing their leadership election to May 2021 and I still can't see any mention of it anywhere on BBC. --RWRW (talk) 00:45, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
'Infectious diseases' know no state boundaries, have no passports and are 'illegal immigrants with malicious intent.' Anna Livia (talk) 14:30, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
dunno what you all expect. theres been not much mention of brexit because there isn't anything to mention. negotions where stalled as corona hit before they could get going. what talk there has been is how/when to proceed, and questioning of timeframes and deadlines.
none the other stories havent been forgotten nor gone unreported. its just not front page. theres been nothing 'breaking news' worthy even if it were a slow news week. there has been stuff, but maybe you missed it because its all dross about delays and how coronavirus has effected campaigns. corbyns last pmqs was otherwise unremarkable and its easy to forget someone so imminently forgettable.
aside from anything else, coronavirus is the news at the moment especially since with all kinds of events cancelled and countries on lockdown, not much newsworthy can happen if everyone stuck at home. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Indeed - it's not that there is just no mention of Brexit - there has been virtually nothing else on the news.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Brexit and coronavirus part 2[edit]

How will the 14 day quarantine process affect the Brexit negotiations? Anna Livia (talk) 11:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Probably just give another excuse for another 14 days of sweet f.a. and hoping people forget about so the tories can avoid actually having to accomplish something. BTW has anyone found what happened to russia report? McUrist (talk) 13:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
negotiations will go poorly regardless of pandemics. it just gave us a stay of execution. AMassiveGay (talk) 14:27, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Another boost for videoconferencing - or a good excuse for the negotiators (or others) to go AWOL for a fortnight.
Possibly the Penelope's tapestry manoeuvre - finding new and bizarre forms of delaying tactics until the EU goes into meltdown (for whatever reasons, including the loss of UK funds). Anna Livia (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

AFD[edit]

I am sorely tempted to suggest an AFD on this. It's a chaotic mess and is only tangentially related to the mission.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 12:49, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

its still an ongoing event that we still dont fully know how it is or will impact the uk. especially combined with covid.
i doubt our ability to get even past events down without being distorted by disparate agendas or make every edit a fight to the death. i doubt my own objectivity on the subject nor do i feel like i would be able to graciously consider differences of opinions. i'll not touch it. AMassiveGay (talk) 13:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I agree that we don't know the consequences - but we are not likely to know them for several years as it will really need a fair bit oh hindsight to decide on what was relevant. Maybe we should just shift it to another namespace for the interim.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
I agree it's chaotic, and perhaps a bit bloated in places. But I think Brexit is an important-enough political topic for an article. It's one of the biggest developments in the 2010s surge in right-wing populism across the world. However, I don't have any firm views on how the article should look.
Before voting on whether the article should stay or leave, it may be good to discuss some serious reforms for its structure or emphasis. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Yes it is an important event. What I'm doubting is how much this important event is important to our mission statements. I agree that right wing populism can get close to authoritarianism. But the article does not seem to be talking about that.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thinking further, yes, the article is very thin on what matters more for RW's mission. The space is almost entirely taken up by a blow-by-blow account of the events that can be expected to be done better elsewhere. (Currently the chronology requires updating, too.) I think the topic could be covered in a worthwhile way, if space was given to analysis of ideological and other currents involved, and a little on how Brexit relates to other and later events. If the chronology is not a keeper, maybe it could be edited down to a short-enough summary. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 15:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree. There is conceivably an RW article to be written about logical facilities, bad argumentation, populism, the Good Old Days and the desire for simple solutions to complex problems - but this article really goes nowhere near that.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 16:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
This is very obviously missional, but I would be okay with deleting it so that somebody could start a new draft, keeping the flaws that hold this article back in mind.-Flandres (talk) 00:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
On a quick skim through, there's a load of stuff that can be ripped straight out. See here and here for an example hack n' slash. I'd encourage others to do similar, and then see what's salvageable from the remains. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
pretty sure the 'brexit lexicon' is wank thsat shant be missed. AMassiveGay (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)