A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Everyday we are reminded of the damage that state-sponsored misinformation can do.
The stupidest part about brexit was that it was a non-binding referendum. They could have just ignored it. But I guess sometimes you need your house to burn down before you realize why we need a publicly funded fire department.
It's was only non-binding if they lost, like they had previously. Asshats like Farrage were just going to keep trying until they got the answer they wanted.
But I guess sometimes you need your house to burn down before you realize why we need a publicly funded fire department.
Question... were you bringing up the house out in Tennessee that burned down because the county didn't have a publicly funded fire department? Because if so, that's a hell of a deep cut.
EU, please let Canada in while you're at it. We share a border with denmark
Also France is just a short ferry ride away if you count St. Pierre and Miquelon .
France is already in the EU though
Shhhh! Some of them don’t know
Brazilian here, from the country that shares the largest of the borders of France...
The free movement of people have been nice, is there any chance the they would pressure Brazil into losing a bit of sovereignty and obey the EU's Constitution?
imagine all country that border EU states start joining in lol
No need to actually join :)
You are technically correct, the best kind of correct.
I'm all for it, but no weird extra right like the UK had. Also, would that perhaps be a problem with your monarchy?
While the governor general (rep of the crown) technically has to sign off on laws passed, they have never in the country's history refused to sign. If they ever did, I think it might be enough for Canada to kick the "monarchy" part of the constitutional monarchy for good.
As long as it's mutual, so 18-30 year old EU citizens can live and work in the UK with little restriction, I'm all for this. I imagine there may be people in the UK who will take issue with that.
A lot of people were given false hope that Brexit would magically solve all their problems. People now regret it.
I'd love if the UK could again be part of the EU. Brexit was the most damaging blow Russia did to Europe in the past 3 decades at least.
There is a reasonable amount of damage being done in Ukraine by Russia just now, but I understand where you are coming from.
british people act like having slightly worse prices is worde than being bombed lol
They won’t be allowed back under the same terms they had before the exit. For example every new member has to become part of the Eurozone and adopt the Euro. I definitely see this becoming a dealbreaker for British conservatives who love to have their ~~master~~ King on their currency
The thing is, that won't work well either. The UK had a very special position previously in the EU, like not adopting the Euro as currency and many other extra "perks" or whatever you want to call it. If they go back in they will likely not get any of those since otherwise it will look really bad for other countries that recently joined. Then people will be unhappy about joining again because it is not what they remembered. So, no, there is no winning with this one, damage is done.
The best was the discounted membership. UK paid less than Italy. Populists have easy way with fools.
100% agree. C'mon back lads. I'll buy the first round.
Surely a vote is warranted at this point. Maybe after the Tories get hoofed out.
To be honest, cleaning Russian influence out of politics would do most of Europe, not just the UK, a favour.
I often wonder how a country with the economy the size of Italy can have so many fingers in so many pies. Those pesky Russians seem to be everywhere.
Because they only have to start the fire, the native population does the rest. All Russia does is exploit historical cultural tensions within a country and fan the flames online. I've always said in the past that some of the research psychologists and sociologists have done over the last century or so was the equivalent of developing WMDs when it comes to psyops. Once a competent psyops department is equipped with how to manipulate people en masse, they can do crazy damage without firing a shot. The US and other countries have done the same thing to great effect.
Edit: I should point out that this form of psyops is most effective in countries with minimal censorship and liberal freedom of speech laws, i.e. most Western countries. That's why it isn't as effective when westerners attempt to do the same to countries like China, Russia, Iran, etc.
It's too raw and toxic for anyone to go near it. Labour will probably tinker around with the deals, maybe pull back on some of the super hard more insane stuff.
Once they've had a go and proved that neither party can make it work the conversation can start properly.
Here's a revolutionary idea: don't set an age limit!
Sunak already killed this, so it doesn't matter really. If it passed, it would have been a step towards re-establishing free movement for everyone.
The UK already has its own Youth Mobility scheme, where it had already struck deals with 13 countries.
If I'm correct, the countries are:
If this is what the UK leadership see as the better choice for British citizens, then it's up to the citizens of Great Britain to do something about it in the next election.
Surely, they are not mutually exclusive and some form of this scheme has been in place for some countries (albeit mainly white commonwealth countries) for many years, even when the UK was in the EU.
Holy shit though, I just looked up the UK's scheme and you have to pay almost a grand in fees (mostly NHS surcharge) and have over £2,500 in savings. I don't want rich a-holes coming over for an extended holiday instead of normal people from more different cultures. Let's vote for better and fairer immigration polices
I feel sorry for those who feel having £3500 makes you rich.
I get the sentiment but you’re glossing over two important things; 48.11% of people voted to remain and there hasn’t been a second referendum.
Half the country wanted to remain, the other half are racists and/or idiots that believed the outright lies peddled by the leave campaign. Latest polls suggest 60% would vote to remain today but we’re not being offered the chance to vote on that. Voting labour in general elections doesn’t mean we get to rejoin the EU.
If I remember correctly, France was one of the first ones to cut them off after they left and they cut them off hard.
I wonder how willing they'll be to let them come crawling back.
And how does EU membership work?
Does it need to be a unanimous decision from the current member states to admit/readmit a country or is it a majority/supermajority decision?
The EU has members elect politicians - MEPs (Members of European Parliament). These politicians vote on issues similar to how most other parliaments would. Many issues are agreed upon this way.
MEPs are grouped by political alignment not nationality.
The EU council is the other legislative body in the EU. The EU parliament can send legislation that it doesn't have the authority to pass itself here for consideration. This type of legislation is still supposed to be developed and debated in parliament. The EU council is a collections of ministers from each member state. These ministers represent their government, not the people (directly at least). This council can approve and amend legislation passed by the parliament. This is where the vetos can happen.
The council is important to maintain the sovereignty of individual nations. Despite what Brexit campaigns say, the EU parliament is and isn't going to be sovereign. The council enables each sovereign state to stop legislation they don't want. This often means the EU passes very boring and very agreeable legislation. But it legislation that makes the rules within multiple nations consistent so commerce is easier and less bureaucratic. Once you comply with the EU rules, you've complied with all the countries within it.
While this is broadly right for legislation, the question above was about admission of new member states.
Admission of new member states requires unanimity among existing member states. That is because EU membership is based on international treaties. For every member state there is a treaty like this one that regulates their entry into the EU; you can see that it's a treaty between literally all (existing and new) member states which had to agree to it.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/520954/brexit-votes-by-age/
We can just ban people over the age of 45 and give the rest some freedom that they wanted back.
Labour said no, Tories said No. So maybe it's time people consider something beyond those 2
I say no to this, they wanted out so they got it. This would be another concession made to the brits and remove an incentive for the younger generation to get involved and get their voice heard. Leave them outside until they learn.