Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Jul 03 20:17:48 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / RIP UK 2 Boris's revenege
Im better then you
2012 UP Football Champ
Tue Sep 24 15:44:17
First three votes were epic fail.
Parliament being purged for disloyalty.
Hard Brexit is coming
People starting to wish the constitution was written down somewhere.

This Shit show is providing a tremendous amount of shit.
Tue Sep 24 15:55:59
"People starting to wish the constitution was written down somewhere."

Nah, better to have feefees and vague judge rulings
Tue Sep 24 16:22:13
It is written down. Just not in one place. And the ruling was far from vague.
Tue Sep 24 16:48:07
^ lol
Tue Sep 24 17:49:08
"52% of voters can go fuck themselves. Parliament exists only to grant sovereignty over Britain to Brussels."

Tue Sep 24 18:10:06
A ruling based on unwritten, vague premises is a vague ruling, even if the conclusion is concise and clear.
Tue Sep 24 18:27:33

If 52% of the voters in 2016 wanted to leave. The leave campaign was conducted promising a deal with Europe, but in any case the vote was to leave. No dirigieron of how. If the electorate wanted hard brexit, they'd have given the conservatives a majority in 2017 when Theresa May stood on a hard brexit platform and lost her majority.

The current cabinet all voted at least once against brexit.
They might not like the brexit that has been offered, but there is no claim to be made at all that 52% want a hard brexit.

So if they want a hard brexit, they need to either win a majority in Parliament (which represents the will of the people) or another referendum.

They reject another referendum because they know Brexit is no longer the will of the people. It was the will of the people when they believed all the bollocks Boris promised. Now they know it means getting poorer, losing freedoms, losing rights, and a govt that wants to rule without any checks and balances.

In short, you are talking bollocks.


The premises aren't unwritten you tit. There are loads of written constitutional documents and rulings that specify the various principles.

Tue Sep 24 18:31:11
Rugian is such a little fascist.

"We should abolish parliamentary sovereignty and give all power to an unelected minority Govt because leave won, and I don't like the deal to leave that's been negotiated"
Tue Sep 24 18:31:45
Let's take back control, and give it to an unelected govt that doesn't even have a majority.
Tue Sep 24 18:32:35
Fuck it Rugian, why not just crown Boris god emperor for life and forget this whole democracy thing. We had a vote in 2016, that's all we need!
Tue Sep 24 18:39:58
Just remember you suggested it
Tue Sep 24 18:50:52
Seb is such a sniveling little shit. You absolutely contemptible homo.

Parliament spent the last three years sabotaging Brexit at every turn, and when pro-Remainer May finally did unveil "Brexit," in turned out to be "Brexit in name only." That's not at all what the people voted for.

You accuse me of supporting fascism by being opposed to Parliament in its current form, which has objectively proved that it is unable to deal with Brexit. Yet you're the one who opposes the customary answer to resolving the deadlock - elections - precisely because you're worried that you'd lose, and badly. It is the duty of the opposition to give the PM an election, and they won't do it. Sounds like you're the one in favor of overturning your system of government.

And speaking of which, we're nowhere near getting past the blatantly unconstitutional ruling by your pro-Remain high court, which had to completely make up powers for itself in order to rule the way they did. Apparently, every action and statement made by the government is now subject to second-guessing by a bunch of unelected toffs in robes. Fucking amazing.

You literally resorted to government by the judiciary in order to clip Johnson's wings. Congratulations, you've destroyed any illusion that democracy means anything in your shitty, irrelevant, Third World-tier country.

You cunt.
Tue Sep 24 22:04:50
"The premises aren't unwritten you tit. There are loads of written constitutional documents and rulings that specify the various principles."

Lulz. And you call others tits.

A mishmash of legislation and precedent do not a Constitution make.

"B-b-but the Federalist Papers are the Constitution, you tit"
"B-b-but the New Deal is the Constitution, you tit"
"B-b-but the the Roberts USSC is the Constitution, you twit"
Wed Sep 25 01:51:19

"A constitution is an aggregate of fundamental principles or established precedents that constitute the legal basis of a polity, organisation or other type of entity, and commonly determine how that entity is to be governed.

We grew ours. You designed yours. Ours functions better.

Revisionist claptrap.

Both leave campaigns stood on a platform of negotiating a deal, and that there would be no costs to leaving. To claim people didn't vote for the TMs deal in 2016 is absurd. They assuredly didn't vote for no-deal either. As for "name only", that's bullshit. You can sign TMs withdrawal agreement and that leaves any final status up in the air. It doesn't cover the future status: it could be canada, WTO, or EEA. There's no constraint other than the status of NI.

May had a completely free hand to negotiate whatever she wanted that she could get the EU to agree to. There was no parliamentary input or constraint up until she put her deal to parliament. Indeed the govt repeatedly avoided even informing parliament of the content of the deal - it didn't even provide any of the sectoral analysis that supposedly informed it.

And when her deal was put forward, the people that voted against it in parliament were the current PM and cabinet, something he only did to ensure she was forced to resign so he could become leader. A deal he himself endorsed when in n cabinet only to resign some time afterwards when he saw it b was unpopular and his rival for the leadership resigned.

It is the duty of the opposition to oppose, there is no duty to give the PM an election whenever he feels like it, particularly if his chief of staff has repeatedly said that he'd use the election period to try and engineer a no deal brexit that parliament has opposed and which is the notional reason he wants to secure a mandate for in an election.

If Boris wants an election to secure a mandate for no deal, all he needs to do is stop trying to perform unconstitutional, unlawful shenanigans and instead secure the sodding extension to on the A50 process. Once that's done, the opposition will get likely hold an election.

Damn right when you start to loudly proclaiming you are going to break the law and abuse public office; the courts can and should step in and clip your wings.

As for the court, it's not at all unconstitutional. We literally cut the head off the last executive to attempt to rule without Parliament and the resulting documentation of the limits of the executive forms the inspiration for the declaration of independence and your own Constitution.

None of the powers were "made up", that's just insane bullshit.

You want a govt that can rule by fiat like a fucking 15th century monarch, with no legislature based on a single vote which cannot be repeated because it would be lost.

Yes Rugian, that's fascism.

Jesus, where do you get your ideas on government? Leviathan?
Wed Sep 25 01:54:22
Boris can still get Brexit.

He just has to do so by constitutional and legal means, not dissolving Parliament for an election on the issue only to break the law and force a crash out while the election campaign is happening and nobody able to stop him.

Any difficulties he has in finding a deal that meets his absurd promises to the people - literally to have our cake and eat it - is a cautionary tale in populist politics.

Average Ameriacn
Wed Sep 25 02:01:41
Read this and dare to tell me again that she is no activist judge!!!!!!

Wed Sep 25 02:03:28
"We grew ours."

An act of Parliament is not a Constitution.

"Ours functions better."

Wed Sep 25 03:25:14
Average American:

What? She is a woman with a collection of broaches! Why wasn't I told!!

Reality check: this was the a unanimous decision by the full panel, with a number of those having a very conservative take on powers of the executive.

Judges are independently appointed in the UK, not through a partisan review process, and the majority of the panel come from demographics that tend to vote overwhelmingly Tory.

Arguing that they are somehow secret hyper partisan remainers is not only completely without evidence, it's also highly unlikely to be true on what little circumstantial evidence is available.

Wed Sep 25 05:21:34

Yup. Actually holding the govt to account with an independent judiciary.

Unlike your system.
Wed Sep 25 06:28:49
Quick reminder:
Parliament is elected.
The govt is not.
The govt rules by consent of parliament.
Elections are fixed every five years, unless either no govt can be formed that has consent of parliament, or two thirds majority decides otherwise.

Those are the rules of the game.
Wed Sep 25 11:42:32
"Yup. Actually holding the govt to account with an independent judiciary.

Unlike your system."

Fucking lol, you say that with a straight face in an era of unprecendented judicial activism roadblocking perfectly legal executive actions.

Wed Sep 25 13:15:37

A unanimous decision including three justices who found for the govt in the article 50 case disagree, citing plenty of previous constitutional documents.

It is not perfectly legal for the crown to dispense with parliament. This was settled 400 years ago with a sword blow to the neck of Charles I.

Wed Sep 25 13:16:48
Your own Revolution was justified in part by the govt of George III blocking the colonial assemblies meeting.
Wed Sep 25 13:17:12
So a non-partisan judiciary that makes sure the government behaves lawful is... anti-democratic, in your minds?


This forum and the world in general has become so annoyingly partisan. It probably always was... my tribe yay, your tribe boo!

Still... maybe it was just youthful idealism, but I felt like people were less partisan in the 90's and 00's.

Seriously, your opinion on Brexit should have no bearing on what you think of this ruling.

Also lol @ Forwyn insisting it was perfectly legal, despite not knowing the first thing about British law and being diametrically opposed to a unanimous decision by the British high court. Ok, yeah... you know your place.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share