The key word are ‘have to be’.
What did we vote for in June? We voted ‘to leave the European Union’.
There was much agonising in the lead up to the referendum as to how the question should be phrased. The ‘Commission’ decided that the question asked should be simple and clear – no buggering about with leading questions. ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’ was decided to be the clearest wording. But little consideration seems to have been given to the meaning of the words ‘the European Union’. In fact, I do not recall anyone in either campaign group stating, with any precision what the words the European Union’ meant.
Before casting my vote (Exit), I gave some thought to what I was voting for. I must admit to being a bit depressed by the fact that neither side elaborated with any precision.
“The economy will tank”, said the Remainers.
“The economy will thrive”, said the Leavers.
And so on. But no one talked about precisely what the words ‘Leave/remain in the European Union‘ meant.
So you have to ask what is the physical thing called ‘The European Union’? It is strange to call a disembodied construction a physical thing, and yet the EU acts like a massive chemical reaction. It acts like a catalyst in chemical reactions. It makes verbal and theoretical regulations which cause massive physical changes.
The crux of the Brexit negotiations is what we voted for, and it was very clear. We voted ‘to leave the European Union’. All that is necessary is to define ‘The European Union’. There is no negotiation involved in that decision. It is ‘absolute’.
I personally see the ‘European Union’ as an attempt to ‘standardise’ The People. You can be nationalistic as regards football and other sports, and are encouraged to be so, so as to distract attention from the denationalisation of almost everything else.
What I detest is the ‘hidden agenda’ – the rendering of whole populations, with their different attitudes to religion, family, culture, etc, into a lump of sloppy clay, to be manipulated into a beautiful object. It will not happen – not least because the object is very unlikely to be beautiful.
So what did we vote to leave? I wish that I could define it, but I cannot. The only idea that comes into my mind is to abrogate the Lisbon Treaty. But I must admit that I have no idea what that means and what the effects are.
In effect, what I am saying is that we remove ourselves from the propaganda non-entity and stop paying for propaganda. Stop paying is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
Finally, would it not be wonderful if the USA, UK, and possibly Russia, reformed the UN and got rid of its massively wasteful blatherings? To say nothing of its magnificent physical edifices which we all pay for.
So I see our vote to mean that we absent ourselves from the massively expensive politics and associated institutions, and that we do not pay a penny towards their continuity.
But I would like to see easy movement of Europeans. Note that I do not say ‘free’ movement. The word ‘free’ no longer has any real meaning. ‘Easy’ movement means having a passport which is not ‘freely’ gained. You have to earn the passport. ‘Easy’ movement applies to tourists and settlers, but absolutely not to health tourists and spongers. The problem is distinguishing between the two groups.
But those later considerations are paltry. The main thing is to exit the quagmire and to reverse anything that was horse-traded. The ban on snus is an obvious example, but there are many others.