do you think britain should leave the ecohr
European courts of human rights? is that it's title? because ukip party is building the argument that we in britain should leave it.
what are your thoughts?
what are your thoughts?
46-50, M
I always question when someone advocates rejecting the authority of a body of law overseeing their behavior. Why do they want to be able to do what they want to do? What do they want to do?
I know this is wildly unpopular in some circles, but the world isn't the same world it was only a hundred or so years ago.
I think we are in a crucial position now. We can find a way to live in a fluid world-culture that offers peace and cooperation or we can return to the Medieval times when we huddled separately in our dark caves.
Every separating action bears potentially massive losses.
I don't know enough about this to speak knowledgeably - but it feels scary.
I know this is wildly unpopular in some circles, but the world isn't the same world it was only a hundred or so years ago.
I think we are in a crucial position now. We can find a way to live in a fluid world-culture that offers peace and cooperation or we can return to the Medieval times when we huddled separately in our dark caves.
Every separating action bears potentially massive losses.
I don't know enough about this to speak knowledgeably - but it feels scary.
durinsBane1983 · 46-50, M
@Mamapolo2016 thanks for your thoughts on it.
Mamapolo2016 · F
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Mamapolo2016 Even in the Mediaeval era, a mainly-European context, no-one lived in that level of isolated anarchy; and many parts of the world were under the authority of religious ideologies as well as individual state-level governance and legislatures.
Most countries were not isolated either. Apart from occasional territorial or ideological (usually religious or simple power-hunger) wars they traded with each other to a considerable degree, and with that cam many cultural exchanges.
Yes we can all hope for a peaceful, co-operative world - and surprisingly the world as a whole has for a long time now been a lot more free of wars than it was in the past - but human nature being what it is, peaceful and cop-operative on what terms, given or imposed by whom?
Most countries were not isolated either. Apart from occasional territorial or ideological (usually religious or simple power-hunger) wars they traded with each other to a considerable degree, and with that cam many cultural exchanges.
Yes we can all hope for a peaceful, co-operative world - and surprisingly the world as a whole has for a long time now been a lot more free of wars than it was in the past - but human nature being what it is, peaceful and cop-operative on what terms, given or imposed by whom?
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
If UKIP is promoting it, that's a good reason to reject leaving.
The Conservative government's ludicrous plan to process migrants in Rwanda is probably illegal under the European Convention on Human Rights. Instead of moderating their policy and trying to live within internationally accepted laws and rules, some politicians are proposing withdrawal. It is unlikely to happen as we are still struggling to adapt to life outside the European Union.
The Conservative government's ludicrous plan to process migrants in Rwanda is probably illegal under the European Convention on Human Rights. Instead of moderating their policy and trying to live within internationally accepted laws and rules, some politicians are proposing withdrawal. It is unlikely to happen as we are still struggling to adapt to life outside the European Union.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@MartinII We have always tried to portray the county as upholding basic human rights and dignity, and acting as best we can (not always easy or well, perhaps) on it.
The UK was one of the founders of the ECHR, which now numbers 46 European countries - the exceptions being Russia and Belorus (no surprise there) and the Vatican City.
I don't know why the last. It might be trying to look politically and judicially neutral. Whether it is, I would not care to say, but I think its detractors might call its membership deeply hypocritical.
.
If we were to leave, it indicate to all the other members, and to rest of the world generally, that we no longer regard such rights as very important. That would hugely encourage not only the creeping expansion of tyrannies like China, Russia and the Middle Eastern theocracies, but also growing authoritarian ideologies among some European nations and possibly, growing isolationism in the USA to whom a "special relationship" with any other country is always USA-first.
Although the EU and its ECJ have nothing to do with the ECHR, the USA did want the UK to join the EU originally, to reduce the UK's influence in the world. I do not know how it now views our leaving the EU or what it thinks at Government level of the EU and the ECHR - but I do worry that any nation leaving either body might play into some US political hands to US advantage.
'
However, it is important to keep in mind that this is an idea put up by a few MPs. It is not Government policy, and it would almost certainly need Parliamentary approval it would almost certainly not obtain.
Given that one trait of parliamentary democracies is a tendency to look only to the next General Election, it may even be Electoral suicide for any Governmental party that brought about such leaving. Yes, that electoral defeat would make the Opposition parties and supporters happy, but for the wrong reasons and not guaranteeing rejoining the Court.
The UK was one of the founders of the ECHR, which now numbers 46 European countries - the exceptions being Russia and Belorus (no surprise there) and the Vatican City.
I don't know why the last. It might be trying to look politically and judicially neutral. Whether it is, I would not care to say, but I think its detractors might call its membership deeply hypocritical.
.
If we were to leave, it indicate to all the other members, and to rest of the world generally, that we no longer regard such rights as very important. That would hugely encourage not only the creeping expansion of tyrannies like China, Russia and the Middle Eastern theocracies, but also growing authoritarian ideologies among some European nations and possibly, growing isolationism in the USA to whom a "special relationship" with any other country is always USA-first.
Although the EU and its ECJ have nothing to do with the ECHR, the USA did want the UK to join the EU originally, to reduce the UK's influence in the world. I do not know how it now views our leaving the EU or what it thinks at Government level of the EU and the ECHR - but I do worry that any nation leaving either body might play into some US political hands to US advantage.
'
However, it is important to keep in mind that this is an idea put up by a few MPs. It is not Government policy, and it would almost certainly need Parliamentary approval it would almost certainly not obtain.
Given that one trait of parliamentary democracies is a tendency to look only to the next General Election, it may even be Electoral suicide for any Governmental party that brought about such leaving. Yes, that electoral defeat would make the Opposition parties and supporters happy, but for the wrong reasons and not guaranteeing rejoining the Court.
bijouxbroussard · F
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@bijouxbroussard It's just a bogie man to scare people with and distract voters from the things that really matter.
bijouxbroussard · F
@ninalanyon Ah, yes. Such tactics are often used here. 😅
MartinII · 70-79, M
Many people, including for example numerous members of the Cabinet, think we should. So do I. Apart from immediate pragmatic considerations, I think the modern concept of “human rights” is fatally flawed.
Roundandroundwego · 61-69
For a while it looked like it would be easy to use human rights as our guide to a more moral world. I think we're in a reactionary phase right now, where you might even think we can survive just fine with more brutal society.
ElwoodBlues · M
View 2 more replies »
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues That bus was a straight out lie and exposed as such. Lets be absolutely clear what the plan was. A whole heap of agreements and plans at the commercial level were formulated on both sides of the channel where "the right people" made money out this with the support o0f government trade and tourism agencies. Those agreements were locked in safes to be pulled out on the seperation and everything would be "tickety boo". Boris was to handle the british side. But money was to be made on both sides.. Then Boris woulr esign after a short interval and take up board seats at various banks and financial institutions and ride off gracefully into the sunset..
Sadly, along came Covid, and shut down movement, trade, tourism and killed off a few million Europeans, which was also bad for business.. And the resumption of business with opening up was not the rosy picture they had been hoping for. Putin and the Ukraine also dragged the recovery off the path it was supposed to take. So a lot of people who were supposed to make money, didnt.. With no real upside and paper currencies being overused to support economies all over, the inflation we got was the obvious result. How governments deal with it will tell the tale.😷
Sadly, along came Covid, and shut down movement, trade, tourism and killed off a few million Europeans, which was also bad for business.. And the resumption of business with opening up was not the rosy picture they had been hoping for. Putin and the Ukraine also dragged the recovery off the path it was supposed to take. So a lot of people who were supposed to make money, didnt.. With no real upside and paper currencies being overused to support economies all over, the inflation we got was the obvious result. How governments deal with it will tell the tale.😷
MartinII · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues No-one claimed that Brexit would lead to an economic boom. You are the liar on that one.
Longpatrol · 31-35, M