That seems to be a very accurate description. If only enough people will be only passive, then human stupidity in Einstein's sense will have it's way soon again.

It's going to happen over and over again. All that considerateness can do is help delaying the next iteration of the bad branch.

The UK leaving the EU is nothing to do with tribalism apart, perhaps, from the odd idiot racist. This is a reflection of the fact that there is no one rule book that will "make every country work".
Whether or not this was a good decision is yet to be seen but wanting devolution of government, be it in the USA, the EU or within the UK itself is not a sign of not getting on with fellow humans it's a sign that local issues are not the same as global ones and, perhaps, more local decision making may help everyone.

If, for example, we had an Afro-centric world the law may mandate that everyone use solar panels in every build because, in a lot of Africa, they have the sunlight for it. Meanwhile, in more cloud-bound countries the energy needed to produce the panels may not be paid off for a lot longer than envisaged, if at all. OK, a very childish example but local rule doesn't mean isolationism or
tribalism.

I know, economically, they're not a good model (to skip the pre-separation debate) but take a look at Eurosceptic Norway for an example of a Schengen country willing to give charity and homes to many in the name of humanity.

The problem with referendums and popular votes in general, as opposed to representative assemblies in a republic, is that the people voting for things usually have no clue about what they are voting for or against specifically (or they don't care). Over here in the US, we have seen two candidates with opposite viewpoints (Trump and Sanders) have appeal to some of the same voters. Clearly the desire to make a rude gesture at the government is more popular than the actual issues at hand.

I found this https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...g-to-leave-it/ relatively typical, and have heard other commentary along the same lines.

Best of luck humans, I'm still rooting for you anyway.

I think that the US (and, to a lesser extent, the UK) having no actual choice over who to vote for may have some bearing on things.
Quite how a choice of two or three parties to vote for constitutes a choice at all I fail to understand.
The Simpsons had it right when they had the aliens telling people it doesn't matter which party you vote for the people ruling you are the same.

There's a lot of talk of voter ignorance yet no mention of the fact that the US and UK are not actually democracies nor are they actually designed that way.

So, yes, be superior in calling out Trump voters as ignorant, racist or belligerent as I am sure many are. But, perhaps, take a second to think about waht a vote for any other candidate really means.

Personally, I am not excited about brexit as I am an EU national living in the UK. I think it was a mistake although I admit there are valid arguments on both sides. The reason I am disappointed with the results is that it marks another win for right wing nationalism in Europe. Although most of Brits who voted Leave are not right-wing xenophobes, there were those who voted Leave for IMHO wrong reasons. EU is far from perfect bit the rise of nationalism in Europe is a worrying thing. It gives cover for the likes of Farage. It never ends well. Hopefully the negotiations wont take long. There is nothing worse than uncertainty (eg. Shall I spend £1200 on a British passport?) As someone mentioned, this is democracy in action. British people have spoken whether I like it or not. Having said that, I remember one stand up comedian taking the piss out of the idea of a referendum (especially in such a complex matter): yes, let us vote on the issue we have no idea about!

This was before the vote today, so now I really cannot wait to see his reaction on Sunday

I think this pretty much illustrates what you say: https://www.instagram.com/p/BG_n6oAioFO/

Well, honestly, "what a vote for any candidate really means," in the current standing of things in the USA. Since more-or-less the turn of the last century, political control has been effectively ceded to a corporation that I'll refer to as "The Two-Party System, Inc." Since then, it has fielded two popular brands: one red, and one blue.

After there was "a bit of confusion about this gentleman, Al Gore," the issue of "hanging chads" was dealt with by making all votes be counted by computers ... with no receipts. No paper trail of any kind. (Can you say, "electronic ballot-box stuffing?" Of course. Why else would we design a voting system in a manner that is expressly prohibited for financial systems?)

Mr. Trump is no savior, and I actually don't think that he would be a good President, but I am pragmatic enough to realize (as he does ...) that he is very likely to win, because he has tapped into public frustration. His tag-line is simple: "You're fired!"

In England the UK, you can throw out your entire Parliament and bring in a new one in a month. Americans today are ruled by a political apparatchik that has far less turnover within its ranks, than the Soviet Politburo had in its glory-days. Our Supreme Court can -- and did -- merely declare that "bribery is a Constitutionally-protected corporate right," even though the word "corporation" does not appear in the document, and although, in the actual text, "bribery" is explicitly spelled-out as a high-crime equal to "treason."

When you're in power, and entirely confident that you cannot be displaced out of power, you simply stop worrying about such things. (And, as for the people: "let them eat cake.")

(Trump, if he makes it, will very quickly discover that the design of the Office that he holds is basically flawed. The President has absolute military authority, but no civil authority to speak of. Our very first President observed this ...)

But, still, I think I see an expression of the same basic force. People have had enough of socio-political stratagems that have been forced upon them and which obviously are not working.

Sorry, I just can't help myself

Hmmm... sounds a bit like my favourite political quote:

"It doesn't matter which party you vote for, the Government always gets in."

Play Bonny!

... and, I guess, "(a very-tiny majority of ...) The People" decided that they would rather be "bat-shit crazy!"

Enjoy!

My gut reaction is that separatism in a globalized world is not an answer; the historical record of nationalism is not a pretty one.

Nevertheless, I haven't studied the Brexit issue well enough to have an educated opinion, and I know that the UK has a long history of ambivalence about its relationship to mainland Europe.

There's been a lot activity about Brexit today on the sites that I tend to read regularly, as I'm a news junky, but I'm waiting for the dust to die down before I try to figure this one out.

I will commend one blog post to your attention, as it draws a moral that crosses borders: https://southernbeale.wordpress.com/...-protest-vote/

Maybe the people in Briton/England are just tired of being screwed by the lopsided favoritism the EU is forcing?
Maybe they feel they aren't being rewarded for their efforts?
Maybe they figure they can get a better deal without the EU?
Maybe they were duped into voting for the wrong choice?
I have no idea just starting trouble.

One thing for sure is that the people did vote.

As to what effect it will have on the world. Not one thing. It is less than an issue. I haven't bought one thing from England in years.

They will just have to re-negotiate deals in new currency values.

Throughout the campaign one of the leading lights in the leave camp - the "colourful" Boris Johnson - travelled the country in a battle bus covered in a slogan "we send the EU 350GP a week - let's fund our NHS instead" (and there should be a pic attached). The morning after the vote Farage (leader of the UK Independence Party but not an elected UK politician) appeared on breakfast TV and announced something like "we never said the money would go to the NHS". As mentioned by someone else though, Farage is in the Trump class when it comes to speaking without engaging the brain.

Although I live in Aus I was born in England and I am very depressed about this vote. I think a lot of people voted "leave" for the wrong reasons and already some English regions are expecting the same money now they were getting in grants from the EU.

While I am unhappy about the vote I am no big fan of the EU. Something had to give and this is the consequence. It is now up to Boris Johnson and Michael Gove to lead (what's left of) Britain to the promised land. I am not holding my breath.

Attached Thumbnails

 

For most though this isn't about nationalism it's about a business relationship entered into over 40 years ago that's kind of taken on a life of its own and people have started to question whether the UK should have been so passive in it.This, to me, is the reason the vote was to leave.

Sadly there is an element who are nationalist and have caused and will cause problems to the UK as it tries to negotiate a new relationship with the EU and in many ways I hope that the people who end up doing that are form the "stay" camp.