Why are Europhobics such lying fuckwits?

Europhobic blogger Prodicus has a heartfelt rant on the EU treaty. He thinks we need a referendum on it, even though we don’t normally have referenda in our political system.

The reason why he claims to think this is dressed up in paragraphs of elegant and enraged piffle – but in short, he says that the current treaty represents Parliament permanently and irrevocably giving up our sovereignty to the EU.

Only one problem: this is complete and utter bollocks. Any British parliament convened at any future event can vote – on a simple majority – to revoke the treaty and withdraw from the EU. If UKIP were elected next Tuesday, they could have us out of the EU by Wednesday (obviously the administrative tasks of deporting the foreigners, dealing with retirees evicted from Spain, abolishing human rights, losing our entire financial services industry to Frankfurt and so on would take longer, but the admin’s always a killer…). The same will be true once the new treaty is in force: we do not have to follow the treaty for one second longer than Parliament deems it appropriate for us to do so.

Why the fuck do the likes of Prodicus perpetually spread the lie that the EU, and not Parliament, has the ultimate power? Is it, err, because they don’t actually have any sane grounds to oppose the EU so need to make shit up…?

11 thoughts on “Why are Europhobics such lying fuckwits?

  1. Falco says:

    The lying shits (TM), promised a referendum on the constitution in their manifesto. This treaty is the same damn thing and so they should be held to their promise or held face down in boiling oil.

    As for “losing our entire financial services industry to Frankfurt”, why do you believe this. The only thing that could kill off the financial services sector in London is yet more regulation from the many arme’d beastie in the former country of Belgium.

  2. EvilEuropean says:

    Falco….I do belive PDF was being sarcastic, but then libertarians (yes, I looked at your website) are none to be humourless….well, actually, they exhibt no emotions beyond smugnes, condesention and anger (cant get a girl friend?).

    Anyway, the fact is that if UKIP did somehow get in, the impact that thier actions would have on the UK economy would be worse than all the ‘regulation coming from the many arme’d beastie in the former country of Belgium”. The bulk of regulation that does come out is to create and maintain a single market for goods, serivces and capital. I thought you free-market blowhards would be all for that….there is a different arguament between regulation per sa and the libertarian wet dream of no regulation.

    Anyway, as we live in the REAL world, if the UK did pull out of the EU, we would still have to implement EU regulations….the EU is our single biggest market…..its just that we would be in a situation like Norway and Iceland…which defacto implement EU regulation to ensure market compatibilty but have no actual say on how that regulation is developed.

    Just ignore these ramberlings of a Nazi-Commie like me and go back to reading Ayn Ran and not have a girl friend.

  3. Nosemonkey says:

    There’s a distinct correlation between opponents of the EU and people who talk about “1000 years of history” and think that Magna Carta a) meant something, and b) is binding for all time on all governments ever. They also seem to think that the people, rather than parliament, are sovereign, deny the whole “no parliament can bind another” thing, and refuse to accept that statutory instruments and the civil service are just as (if not more) undemocratic than EU directives and the European Commission.

    In other words, there’s a distinct correlation between opponents of the EU and people who know fuck all about the British constitution.

  4. Prodicus says:

    Never mind 1000 years. Just look at the last ten. Twenty seven (I think it is) referenda have been called by the Labour Party in office, on, e.g., electing town mayors and a (sort of) separate government for Wales. Critical issues of democracy, I’m sure you’ll agree. Clearly more appropriate for plebiscite than the EU constitution – *without* that name but absolutely the same in legal effect as the previous document *with* that name, according to *all* Europe’s heads of govt. except ours… and who’s lying?

    And yes, I do know about one government not binding another, thanks. The point is, I don’t want to wait around for some notional future government to deploy the nuclear option in order to restore my nation’s right to self-determination. I want *this* bloody government to do its duty to those who elected it and to whom it promised the referendum.

    Brown has no democratic mandate and no moral right whatever (and his hypocritical ‘son of the manse’ crap nauseates me) to do what he now proposes to do. He hedges it around as he does with the most transparent lies. He can’t expect the electorate to let him away with it in supine silence.

    If you don’t like people like me complaining about Brown’s abuse of his (very temporary) power, that merely tells me something quite unsurprising about you.

  5. Falco says:

    EvilEuropean, you’re right, I don’t have a girlfriend. I do however have a wife.

    Please learn how to spell condescension, smugness and Ayn Rand.

    As for EU market share and regulation:

    Our largest market is the UK, at about 80% of total trade. If you meant external market please do say so.

    We have so little say on current regulation that it’s not all that valuable. In trading with any nation you must of course apply their, (or higher), standards of production, labelling etc for the goods you wish to trade with them. That is simply capitalism, you have to produce what people want to get them to buy it. There is no need however to be shackled to the EU for this and “enjoy” the many extra regulations that come along with that. Currently we lack even the ability to negotiate our own trade agreements outside the EU when we could be opening up our markets to our and others great advantage.

    More spelling tips; believe, exhibit, their, services, argument, de facto, compatibility, ramblings.

  6. Falco says:

    I do apologise, I missed “can’t”. Either learn to spell and/or get a fucking spellchecker.

  7. Falco says:

    and “known”…dear hypothetical being, am I being had by a troll here?

  8. PDF says:

    Difficult to say. I’d stick with NM’s points rather than my or EE’s personal abuse, if I were you…

  9. Falco says:

    Bollocks to that. If a chap can’t get a bit of fun ripping twats who launch unprovoked personal attacks to shreds then what’s the point?

    As for NM I can’t say that I’m impressed. His argument boils down to; “If you oppose the EU it is merely because you are too stupid to understand the wonderful joy this organisation brings by saving us from making our own far less democratic decisions.”

    Bullshit. There are two reasons many anti EU types get het up about handing more power over to the beastie(TM). Firstly they see no good reason that it should have that power in the first place, since power is being reassigned it is for those who wish this to happen to make the argument. As we know far too well this argument is not made honestly, if you believe that the EU is a project of deep and genuine benefit to the UK then make the sodding argument. Just attempting to belittle those who think otherwise is not good enough.

    Secondly there is the problem of salami tactics and inertia. Each time just a little power is handed over it does not seem, (to most people at any rate), that it is worth arguing too much over and little by little everything becomes an EU “competence”. There is no effective process to take back these powers without withdrawing from the EU altogether. This is possible but far more difficult. One Parliament cannot bind another but it can leave the next with fewer options, in this case to submit like an old, worn down, near prolapse prossie or leave. The sad thing is that the former is far more likely than the latter.

  10. whats wrong with having our own parliament elected by we the people, for the people and of the people?

    oh right. pigdogfucker subscribes to a socialist vision of utopia, and we should all shut the fuck up while we submit ourselves to unelected bureaucrats. who pays you pigdogfucker? the EU?

  11. “even though we don’t normally have referenda in our political system.”

    Yes well we don’t usually sign up to a construction that transforms so much of a long standing history of legislature, currency, constitutional monarchy and native judiciary. Apparently some people do care about changes that big.

    “Why the fuck do the likes of Prodicus perpetually spread the lie that the EU, and not Parliament, has the ultimate power?”

    Or maybe it’s because the idea of an EU appointed constitutional court gives a strong implication that the EU has the ultimate power since that’s what we are signing on for, regardless of whether or not parliament can revoke our membership.

    Why the fuck do you have to resort to abusing everyone to get attention?

    Still, it’s nice to see another loud mouth, polemic, angry left winger on the net. Not nearly enough of them about.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>