[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 84886)
File  []
>> No. 84886 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 5:22 pm
84886 Right I'm fucked and I've sussed Brexit
Now I'm just a simple lad but it seems to me that the problem really is that some people don't want it and some people do, and those are themselves split into groups about what specifically wanting and not wanting it means; we just can't come to a proper agreement about what Brexit should look like because we all want different things.

So it seems to me that the real issue is that the nation is far too big now to properly represent the wishes of its population. We need more granularity!

I propose that we divide the UK into a number of smaller client kingdoms, all of which are inherited by the current monarch. The boundaries of these client kingdoms would reflect the historical cultures of their inhabitants, for example my idea of a Kingdom of Dál Riata would comprise mainly of those areas of Scotland with high levels of Gaelic speakers, the same for Gwynedd and Kernow (Northern Wales & Cornwall). They have their own languages and peoples, we should let them run their own affairs.

We can then become the United League of Kingdoms of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the ULK. This would take the form of a confederacy in which a Grand Parliament in London would control matters of defence, currency and internal trade.

As a successor state to the UK, we should retain our membership of the EU (with all the concessions and special rights negotiated by the UK) and as a confederacy, it would be down to each individual kingdom to choose whether to (re)invoke article 50 or not, and thus to retain or withdraw membership of the European Union, and could each come to the decision whether to make a Withdrawal Agreement or not. Trade between the kingdoms would be tariff-free except to the EU-remaining ones, where mandatory EU tariffs would apply for imports. This would be okay because these areas will benefit from tariff-free trading with other EU states, whilst non-EU areas would be able to waive tariffs on imports from the EU and would benefit from loosened regulations and increased autonomy which would enable further trade with the rest of the world.

Please let me know your thoughts on this idea otherlad, and don't be insulting now. I've hit a vein of solid fucking gold here and I want to refine it in the smelting pot of britfa.gs /pol/.
Expand all images.
>> No. 84887 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 5:29 pm
84887 spacer
I'm taking away whatever you're playing Crusader Kings II on and you're spending the weekend in a chill-out room.
>> No. 84888 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 5:50 pm
84888 spacer
Why on earth would Lancashire be in Northumbria? (most of) the green bit should be the Kingdom of Lancashire. They'll immediately go to war with Yorkshire of course but that's your problem.

I'd also be happier if Newcastle could be integrated into Scotland. We share more of their culture than we do anyone's in England.
>> No. 84889 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 6:09 pm
84889 spacer


Details, details. What do you think of the idea?
>> No. 84890 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 6:19 pm
84890 spacer

Why are you afraid of dividing Tayside? Just use the bloody Highland Boundary. It's been the historic divide between Scots and Gaels for centuries.
>> No. 84891 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 10:04 pm
84891 spacer


Very good chaps, this is just the kind of diplomatic wrangling one needs to refine their golden idea-ore into golden idea-jewellery.

Anyone else have any opinions on the borders? Or the ULK idea?
>> No. 84892 Anonymous
8th February 2019
Friday 10:47 pm
84892 spacer
>a Grand Parliament in London would control matters of defence, currency and internal trade.

So pretty much what we have now because maintaining an internal market requires common standards. Personally though I'd go further because I just want the government to fuck off for a bit. How about we empower all the county level sub-divisions so nothing ever gets done?

At the very least the Western Isles and Orkney-Shetland should be splintered off. The latter aren't historically Scottish and have long been calling for independence. They even have a catchy jingle which is enough justification for statehood in my book.

>> No. 84893 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 1:07 am
84893 spacer

>maintaining an internal market requires common standards

I don't agree, I had in mind technical solutions to the divergences in standards between ULK kingdoms, which would surely be easier to implement than technical solutions at the Irish border.
>> No. 84894 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 2:16 am
84894 spacer
Are you the 100% inheritance tax bloke, OP? I do enjoy your mad ideas sometimes.
>> No. 84898 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 10:25 am
84898 spacer
I like this map and the names, very much lad. I would probably merge Wessex and Sussex though, and put me in charge. Given the small number of us, we need to carve up the power now before this whole (very prescient) idea becomes real.
>> No. 84899 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 11:09 am
84899 spacer
Doesn't this kind of catastrophic thinking just bring us closer to the kind of traumatic fracturing of society you see in America, with all their "preppers" and militias etc., until eventually the Cornish are murdering anyone popping in for a pasty and an ice lolly and the Hullites have taken to piracy and began harrying North Sea shipping lanes?

I agree the UK needs a larger degree of decentralisation, but I don't think going back to our pre-Christianisation borders is wise.
>> No. 84911 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 3:56 pm
84911 spacer

They're just names inspired by historical kingdoms of Britain before they were merged into Englaland by the grandson of Alfred.

You're right that there does need to be some centralisation of government to prevent societal breakdown but this shouldn't come at the cost of tyranny from Westminster.
>> No. 84919 Anonymous
10th February 2019
Sunday 10:06 pm
84919 spacer

I stole this from another place today. Whoever wrote this contract should actually be in charge of Brexit. This is the kind of attention to detail we need.
>> No. 84920 Anonymous
10th February 2019
Sunday 10:24 pm
84920 spacer

That man deserves a medal.
>> No. 84972 Anonymous
18th February 2019
Monday 11:58 pm
84972 spacer

Totally having a lark, where's the frigging tea clause??
>> No. 84973 Anonymous
19th February 2019
Tuesday 12:04 am
84973 spacer

You don't need one in Britain mate. Might as well put in a requirement for there to be air in the meeting room.
>> No. 84974 Anonymous
19th February 2019
Tuesday 12:34 am
84974 spacer
God bless whoever wrote that in.

Double-edged sword mind, if the Contractor doesn't know what they're doing they'll have put the butter in the fridge and just shredded the bread with lumps of it while preparing the sandwiches. You can't trust anyone.
>> No. 85062 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 7:01 pm
85062 spacer
Bumping because I've had another Brexit solution.

We should start our own EU and invite Ireland, France, Germany and Denmark. We can call it the West European Alliance and make it much better and richer than the EU because we won't have all that dead weight from the other countries.
>> No. 85063 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 7:49 pm
85063 spacer
What if they laugh the UK out of the room?
>> No. 85064 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 7:59 pm
85064 spacer
Germany likes the dead weight; their industries have benefitted massively from taking advantage of a relatively undervalued currency.
>> No. 85065 Anonymous
27th February 2019
Wednesday 5:32 pm
85065 spacer

You want rid of the dead weight but you're inviting Ireland?

Return ]

Delete Post []