How Easy for GB to Rejoin

[vetran]

I can read the words but the meaning escapes me. So sorry.

Were you involved in that referendum in the 70s? If you were you would know what was being described by Heath's government.

Its a cautionary tale about how you get people to accept something by bringing in changes slowly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

So if you put a frog in boiling water it jumps straight out. If you put it in cold water and slowly heat it the frog stays.

I was a little young but I read some of the papers from the time and it was described as an economic community not the 4th Reich.

This seems to be what was done with the EEC -> EU -> EU superstate.

Before the Brexit vote the EU was still denying there were plans for an EU Army and political wing.

[WTFH]

Its a cautionary tale about how you get people to accept something by bringing in changes slowly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

So if you put a frog in boiling water it jumps straight out. If you put it in cold water and slowly heat it the frog stays.

I was a little young but I read some of the papers from the time and it was described as an economic community not the 4th Reich.

This seems to be what was done with the EEC -> EU -> EU superstate.

Before the Brexit vote the EU was still denying there were plans for an EU Army and political wing.

I'm not going to comment on your earlier post where you try to re-write the second world war, but the far right lost that, you really need to move on.

As for your twist on more recent history, which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Single European Act?
Which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Maastricht Treaty - the foundation treaty of the EU?

[malvolio]

Its a cautionary tale about how you get people to accept something by bringing in changes slowly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

So if you put a frog in boiling water it jumps straight out. If you put it in cold water and slowly heat it the frog stays.

I was a little young but I read some of the papers from the time and it was described as an economic community not the 4th Reich.

This seems to be what was done with the EEC -> EU -> EU superstate.

Before the Brexit vote the EU was still denying there were plans for an EU Army and political wing.

Right. Get it. Although the meaning still escapes me. All I said was I was there, I voted in the referendum (against as it happens) but was relaxed about the outcome since we needed all the economic help we could get.

As WTFH says, there was a step change in the UK's relationship with the EU at Maastricht. Which was done without a referendum, extensive debate (what there was, I seem to remember, was largely against signing) or even much of a mandate. A perfect example of Labour's core philosophy that only the government knows what is best for its electorate.

[hobnob]

Its a cautionary tale about how you get people to accept something by bringing in changes slowly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
So if you put a frog in boiling water it jumps straight out. If you put it in cold water and slowly heat it the frog stays.

Quoting from the second paragraph of that Wikipedia page:
"While some 19th-century experiments suggested that the underlying premise is true if the heating is sufficiently gradual, according to modern biologists the premise is false: a frog that is gradually heated will jump out. Furthermore, a frog placed into already boiling water will die immediately, not jump out."

[d000hg]

No, it wasn't. It was a trading partnership. Nobody said anything about federation or monetary union
.

HTH. BIDI

We joined the EC (and voted in 1975 to stay in it) which subsequently evolved into the EU with memberships legally carried over, which we then voted to leave. The fact the name and scope of the organisation changed over time is not really material.
I'm going to charitably say you're being deliberately obtuse here.

[malvolio]

We joined the EC (and voted in 1975 to stay in it) which subsequently evolved into the EU with memberships legally carried over, which we then voted to leave. The fact the name and scope of the organisation changed over time is not really material.
I'm going to charitably say you're being deliberately obtuse here.

Only if you choose to ignore somewhat uncomfortable fact that it was the unilateral signing of the Maastricht treaty by Blair which gave the EU law primacy over UK law, imposed a superior appeals court above the House of Lords and took us from being a trading partner to being a member of a federal union.

[d000hg]

Good job we could vote to leave then THey should've made the rules that leaving was not allowed.

[WTFH]

As WTFH says, there was a step change in the UK's relationship with the EU at Maastricht. Which was done without a referendum, extensive debate (what there was, I seem to remember, was largely against signing) or even much of a mandate. A perfect example of Labour's core philosophy that only the government knows what is best for its electorate.

The Single European Act was signed in 1986. It was drawn up and signed under Maggie's watch. The UK had a large influence of what went into it. That is what paved the way for the EU.

Only if you choose to ignore somewhat uncomfortable fact that it was the unilateral signing of the Maastricht treaty by Blair

Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. Major's government were the ones who negotiated and signed it. (Francis Maude and Douglas Hurd)

[vetran]

I'm not going to comment on your earlier post where you try to re-write the second world war, but the far right lost that, you really need to move on.

As for your twist on more recent history, which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Single European Act?
Which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Maastricht Treaty - the foundation treaty of the EU?

No, the fact that many countries in Europe participated in a level of racism and participation that marks them for eternity and our Dutch friend wants to call me a Gammon doesn't deserve comment?

https://www.annefrank.org/en/anne-fr...estern-europe/

It was a proven fact in the second world war no rewriting required.

[vetran]

I'm not going to comment on your earlier post where you try to re-write the second world war, but the far right lost that, you really need to move on.

As for your twist on more recent history, which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Single European Act?
Which UK party was in power when it negotiated, agreed and signed the Maastricht Treaty - the foundation treaty of the EU?

My parents voted for a common market and it morphed into a superstate over the next 50 years. I & they never voted for the change.

Governments may have collaborated without asking the people but as can be seen by actions in previous wars that did not have wholehearted support of the people.