Should people be allowed to vote on Brexit type issues?

S

Seahawk

12
Should people be allowed to vote on Brexit type issues?

Let us just say that leaving the EU is a national security risk for the UK. Should the vote still be allowed? What if leaving the EU would mean an epidemic recession or depression for the UK, should the vote be allowed?

What if US voters brought back slavery? Should the vote be allowed to stand?

From my readings most of the people who wanted to Leave, really were concerned about immigration issues. Maybe there is a way to remedy this. Stay in the EU but amend the current immigration policies.

While I think it was silly for liberals to scream about the markets, which I have proven react volatile and are now back up, there is a very real possibility that this could have long lasting negative economic repercussions for the UK and Europe which of course would effect the US. The markets could go back down and when the UK actually leaves, the markets will likely go down again.
 
A slavery vote would be unconstitutional so that's out. But people being allowed to vote on whether they are going to be subjected to another government is another matter.

Revolutions are fought over very similar questions.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
A slavery vote would be unconstitutional so that's out. But people being allowed to vote on whether they are going to be subjected to another government is another matter.

Revolutions are fought over very similar questions.
Click to expand...

That is a fair point. What is you're saying is, the "will" of the people is not unlimited. Stated another way, when people vote on something and the majority vote is for something bad or unconstitutional, then the vote or referendum should be nullified. Is this what you're saying?
 
Seahawk said:
That is a fair point. What is you're saying is, the "will" of the people is not unlimited. Stated another way, when people vote on something and the majority vote is for something bad or unconstitutional, then the vote or referendum should be nullified. Is this what you're saying?
Click to expand...

Well, there's a reason 'the people' express their voice via elected legislators in a republic: pure democracy is rule of mob and all that.

But when it comes to the fundamental right of choosing whether to live under another government...that's a different matter.

The people should have a direct voice in that.
 
Seahawk said:
That is a fair point. What is you're saying is, the "will" of the people is not unlimited. Stated another way, when people vote on something and the majority vote is for something bad or unconstitutional, then the vote or referendum should be nullified. Is this what you're saying?
Click to expand...

I think democracy should be open to anything. If you limit anything, even slavery, then you open the will of the people up for limitation. For example if you have a vocal minority that will protest anytime that a republican gets elected and some of them have backers with cash that can cause a market crash by initiating a sell off then you can determine who is president anytime.

Any step in this direction leads to dictatorship.
 
tsuke said:
I think democracy should be open to anything. If you limit anything, even slavery, then you open the will of the people up for limitation. For example if you have a vocal minority that will protest anytime that a republican gets elected and some of them have backers with cash that can cause a market crash by initiating a sell off then you can determine who is president anytime.

Any step in this direction leads to dictatorship.
Click to expand...

Couldn't this result in mob rule?
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Well, there's a reason 'the people' express their voice via elected legislators in a republic: pure democracy is rule of mob and all that.

But when it comes to the fundamental right of choosing whether to live under another government...that's a different matter.

The people should have a direct voice in that.
Click to expand...

Why can't the people vote for slavery then?
 
"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world": it was George Washington's Farewell Address to us.
The inaugural pledge of Thomas Jefferson was no less clear: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none
++

Brexit was a vote on sovereignty. either you care about that or you don't -but the will of the people must be heard,
as opposed to mundane gov't activities
 
Seahawk said:
Why can't the people vote for slavery then?
Click to expand...

Because people have a fundamental right to not be slaves lol?

There are certain things that are off the table for a direct vote. Whether not to live under another [extra-national?] government isn't one of them.
 
I dare anyone to read USF's posts over the past, well pick any time frame you'd like! and tell me he should have a say on a matter that would change the course of your country, other people's countries, your job, the markets, for decades..forever. Something even that can be viewed as irreversible.

And if you are comfortable with that you may be a Brexiter. You are a dangerous fool.
 
Darla said:
I dare anyone to read USF's posts over the past, well pick any time frame you'd like! and tell me he should have a say on a matter that would change the course of your country, other people's countries, your job, the markets, for decades..forever. Something even that can be viewed as irreversible.

And if you are comfortable with that you may be a Brexiter. You are a dangerous fool.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure there are many who believe you shouldn't have a say. Careful what you wish for stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top