BREXIT LOSES POPULARITY IN GREAT BRITAINMore than six years have passed since Great Britain voted to leave the European Union, and two since its departure was officially ratified, but the political, economic and social consequences of Brexit are still present. And it seems that, now, the majority of citizens disagree.

In the midst of an economic downturn, political crisis, rising cost of living and labor shortages in different industries, citizens are questioning whether leaving the EU was, in fact, the best decision. Likewise, the government of Rishi Sunak tries to find solutions that, ironically, bring them closer to 27.

At Christmas 2020, the UK and the EU signed a free trade agreement that sealed what relations between them would be like. However, with last week’s Autumn Declaration, which announced higher taxes as well as cuts in public spending, the government is considering a new way of doing business with the EU.



There have been reports that important government figures wanted to establish a relationship similar to that of Switzerland, that is, closer, with the European Union. Which would be a different path for the Conservative leadership, especially Boris Johnson’s line.

However, Sunat put an end to the rumors during his appearance at the Confederation of British Industry. The prime minister assured that during his term the United Kingdom will not have a relationship with the EU in a way that it has to align with the laws of the Union. He also highlighted that one of the important opportunities that arose with Brexit was regulatory freedom.


Although journalistic reports have put conservatives on alert, the truth is that the majority in parliament still supports the United Kingdom’s exit from the EU. Likewise, from the European Union they have denied that there is any type of negotiation to reach other agreements than those that were already established in 2022.


Although the government is not really considering a change in policy towards the EU, the truth is that the majority of citizens in the United Kingdom are against Brexit. That, at least according to a survey by YouGov Plc.
This study showed that 57% of the British reject Brexit, while 43% are in favor. Of those who disagree, 19% of those who voted in favor of the UK leaving the EU now regret their choice sexe porno.

On the other hand, this change of opinion may also come hand in hand with the wear and tear that exists with the Conservative government, which has been in power for more than a decade. This is also related to the renewal of the electorate and how the new generations are more likely to be pro-European Union, as explained by professor of politics John Curtice, from the University of Strathclyde.

Another factor that dampened the popularity of Brexit is the fact that, following changes in migration policies, the UK has lost labor in different industries, while the government spends millions of pounds to prevent migrants from entering through the English Channel.

Because the free passage of people from the EU was one of the keys to promoting the hiring of personnel, sectors such as hotels, agriculture and services suffer from a lack of mobility. To solve, the prime minister suggests that he will create an effective and highly competitive migration system. Meanwhile, the economy has to find a way to grow.


Related Posts:





The war between Russia and Ukraine, since its inception, has shaken the European world in many aspects: social, economic and, above all, political. One of the most obvious consequences for the rest of the continent is the increase in prices as a direct consequence of the conflict.

Already from the first weeks it became evident with products such as bread, Ukraine being one of the largest exporters of the wheat that supplied Europe. However, this is not the only product or service with a considerable increase.

Because of these increases in the cost of living, many specialists in social policy do not hesitate to point out that a possible recession and deepening of socioeconomic inequalities could strengthen the far-right political arm for the future of the continent.

The recent resignation of Luigi Di Maio as leader of the 5 Star Movement is believed to be the first of many political consequences. Although he will remain as chancellor until the end of his term, there is no doubt that his decision marks a turning point in the political map of the boot-shaped country. After all



As the war in Ukraine continues, the political and economic instability of its participants continues to affect the whole of Europe. A 35% increase in electricity prices, 20% in diesel and a growing increase in various foods in the Italian basic basket only make the crisis that is coming more evident, especially for the population.

Faced with this situation, it is inevitable to rescue the ideas of Iacopo Scaramuzzi, author of the famous book “God? The bottom right“. According to Scaramuzzi, since the economic crisis xxx is a motor for the political movement, it tends to favor nationalist and xenophobic movements.




However, what is this due to? When it comes to inequality, the vast majority tend to point to technocratic elites. An argument that continues to be present in the political discourse of those who militate towards the right and the populist left.

In this sense, Scaramuzzi affirms that this is not necessarily a negative thing. After all, a strong conviction or need to change paradigms works as the shake that is needed for politics to break away from what he calls “the story of like and ephemeral leadership.”

We would then speak of a policy whose actions were not entirely guided by a political ideology, but rather based on the search for solutions to real needs and problems.

The truth is that the elections of March 2023 are approaching, and with them, the moment for the left to take its opportunity to accumulate votes by criticizing NATO and assuming a pacifist discourse. Likewise, it creates the conditions for those who call themselves “Europeanists” to finally assume that only if the continent unites as one, will it be able to build a future for its people.

However, this is a task that must be executed against the clock. Only forceful and swiftly executed actions can prevent what is expected to become a global food crisis.



Related Posts:




Ukraine Conflict: What We Know About the Invasion

Ukraine Conflict: What We Know About the Invasion

Russia has recently launched a war in Ukraine that’s been described as “The worst military invasion in Europe.” Thanks to President Putin’s order, Russia spent several weeks creating a sizeable military force along Ukraine’s border. Eventually, the invasion is now on full-scale, marking the beginning of a significant expansion in the nation’s east that has already led to the loss of thousands of lives. 

The Genesis

Ukraine Conflict: What We Know About the Invasion

The invasion stems from a treaty made decades ago between the two countries. In the late 1700s, Ukraine fought for independence but lost and was forced to join the Soviet Union. However, it was always a separate entity from the beginning, and its people even spoke their language. During the 1930s, Ukrainian farmland was seized, leading to a famine that killed about four million people xnxx

When the Soviet Union crashed in 1991, Ukraine declared its independence. By this time, a large portion of the Soviet nuclear power was within Ukraine’s borders, and it agreed to give up its weapons to Russia. Ukraine’s democratically elected government has formed ties with Western Europe recently. This angered Putin and threatened his desire to reinstate the Russian empire. 


This Is Not the First Time

In 2014, Russia invaded Eastern Ukraine, which Putin described as an assault spiked by ethnic Russians residing in Ukraine’s eastern region. However, Putin used this invasion to claim part of Ukraine for Russia. He annexed the Crimean Peninsula, a decision not supported by the international community. 


What’s Putin’s End Goal?

The strongman leader believes that the ethnic ties between Ukraine and Russia would be weakened by Ukraine joining NATO. He was unhappy with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and is determined to restore the nation’s greatness. Since Putin took over the country in 2000, his sole mission was to make Russia great and restore its influence. He believes that no other leader will be willing to take such a risk, so the clock is ticking. 

Is Ukraine Part of NATO?

Man in Blue and Yellow Costume Standing on Street

Ukraine is not a NATO member. Although it has stated its quest to join the alliance, there haven’t been any discussions about its admission. Many Ukrainians, especially those in the country’s east, are pro-Russian, but they ousted their final pro-Russian president in 2014. After that, they have continued to lean towards the leadership of pro-Western politicians. 

Ukrainians seem to desire to join NATO, according to UN Ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya. The number of Ukrainians who are pro-NATO has increased steadily since 2014, and today, over 50 percent are for the idea. They have realized that trying to protect their nation on their own is questionable from a military perspective but is also an expensive affair. 

Is the War a Problem for America?

Since Ukraine is not a NATO member, the US and many European countries are against the idea of sending troops into Ukraine to help protect its territory. Instead, they have offered diplomatic support, cash and military hardware. The US doesn’t benefit much from Ukraine as a trading partner, nor does its instability pose a direct threat to the US. 

Some of the world’s robust democracies have struggled for decades to keep Putin’s actions in check. As Putin hopes to strengthen ties with China, the US needs to return the apparent effort to bring a rife between NATO members. 

What will happen to Central Europe when Brexit happens?

Who would have thought, such thing like Brexit was going to happen?

Not me, not you. I don’t think anyone could have prevent it.

I don’t even want to think about what Churchill would have said.

I mean, way before Brexit, at Winston Churchill era, the United Kingdom was stronger than Queen Elizabeth. Back then, when her father King George VI was about to face World War II, the speech that announced the war to his nation (1939) and inspire an Oscar winning movie, did nothing else but to encourage the union of the people living on the United Kingdom and the Dominions of the British Commonwealth – which by itself means the cooperation of diverse countries порно with different economical and political structures, joined together for historical, political and economical comms.

Nowadays, is a fact that nationalism has been growing for a while in Europe, even though, no other elusive demonstration happened before.

It was a matter of time, until something like a radical application of article 50 occurred to the European Union timeline.

It’s done. 51.9% of the voting population on the UK shouted a yes, against a not so far away 48.1%, who said no.

For now, what’s done cannot be change. So, let’s not focus on the UK.

What about the other countries? Are they going to face hard times?

What about Central Europe?

How did we got here?

There is not an specifical reason or moment that led the UK to Brexit. The explanation about why it happened is a combination of political, social and economical comms that have slowly been growing on the population. Let’s quickly explain the main ones before talking about consequences and facts.

First we have the economical side. Before the referendum, Britain was having a hard time on the economical matter, and the European Union (EU) rules and policies were not in the side of improved due to their restrictions. For example, the Central Agricultural Policy (CAP), which was a high percentage outcome to the UK, that a worthless problem to Brexit stands.

On the other hand, without the EU, Britain would have the opportunity to pursue bigger international trade deals with countries like China, India and the United States, that may improve their performance. 

Then we have the political side, which is obviously connected to the economical facts. UK was not the leader for its economy. EU bureaucracy, was not something people could stand anymore. By leaving, they think, they would get the power to structure and perform their own region economical and political strategies according to their needs.

Finally, on the social matter – slightly political -, of course, immigration.  Britain has one of the biggest populations of the countries that conform the EU. Adding a growing immigrant population, that they couldn’t control because of the immigration policies of the EU, it was just a matter of time until british people got bothersome, not because of economics or culture, but because city housing a public services consequences; besides from their vulnerability to terrorist attacks. 

What is Brexit?

Now that we got a little deeper about the main topic for today. Let’s go, like we said before, to the core of the subject.

What we call “Brexit”, is a shorthand to refer to the British exit from the European Union. Easy, just a combination between Britain and exit, similar to Greexit – which was the word people used to refer to the Greek get out from the European Union (EU).

On june 23th of 2.016, the United Kingdom (UK) took the decision of leaving the UE in a referendum celebrated to decide whether to stay or leave the EU.

The results were not truly apart. According to a BBC report, leave (yes) won by 51.9% to 48.1% against the no; over 30 million people participated the votation.

Once the nation took a decision, Britain’s government Prime Minister Theresa May triggered article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, starting the process of leaving the EU on March 29 of 2.017. 

After that, negotiation took part 1 week per month until the UK and the EU, agreed an arrangement.

The deal was reached on December 8th of 2.017 but negotiation about transition policies are still on the board.

The “real Brexit” will finally happen on the schedule day March 29th of 2.018, after the two years deadline for negotiation and transitioning, wrote on the Article 50 from the Lisbon Treaty.

What will happen to Central Europe?

We’re about to enter the countdown to the Brexit day and we would like to focus on the Central Europe countries and the consequences UK exit from the UE will prosecute.

Instead of thinking about the inevitable fall of the UK economy because of divorce with EU, is time to talk about other countries economic problems. 

Central Europe, is not actually a real region. The phrase is use to refer to Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and usually also Austria and Germany, position at Europe’s map.

Once the UK gets out of the European Union, not only it’s economy will suffer (at least for a while), other countries will face their own issues too.

It is said that, the economy will contract 1% by the time the UK is gone, affecting countries with imports related to Britain’s, by reducing their execution to 4% on export growth in Central Europe.

Of course, for countries with lower import percentage, economical damage will be slightly smaller (Germany, for example).

For Central Europe, the main economic impact is likely to come through the dampening effect on an already weak EU recover. Expecting, to shave around 0.2% annually from EU nowadays growth forecasts.

Smaller countries may be having the necessity of expanding their trade routes away from Germany to China; the unwanted desire of European economists. Perhaps, that’s most likely to stay as a myth.

Germany, however, will have the economical and political spotlight in the region, by being the thoughtgest country of Europe and not only of Central Region. Depending on their execution and growth, may lead to political and economical independence for Central Europe, Eurozone.

For now, let’s not exaggerate. This are just presumptions and predictions. I mean, UK is not actually doing that bad since december. 

We will see while it happens.

Looking forward to reach a worldwide participatory democracy

World seeks a worldwide participatory democracy. A worldwide political union would have the mandate to deal with environmental issues and economic migration. Existing military technology should be redirected into defence of our world from external attack (e.g. meteors) and military research should need consume no further resources. Worldwide web-based governance presents great economy of scale. Be a world citizen.

“Fair, free and equal”

fair : one’s actions determine one’s rewards
free : one can choose one’s own lifestyle
equal : everyone has opportunity & resources

A worldwide electronic currency, the “Geo”, should be created and backed up by a worldwide portfolio of resources, e.g. a basket of other currencies. It should be defined to be perpetually inflation-free and tradable with resources, currencies and worldwide. It should provide a low-volatility haven for wealth, though the nominal interest rate on balances held in Geo’s should be low to reflect the absence of inflation. A worldwide tax system should be set up to provide a citizen’s income uniformly to everyone, paid for by taking from everyone a fixed percentage of his/her other income plus a different fixed percentage per year of the value of assets (s)he owns. The citizen’s income would replace bureaucratic unemployment benefits payments and the asset tax would replace inheritance tax. It would be a matter for public opinion and the world parliament to determine the worldwide levels of citizen’s income, income tax & annual asset tax. The correct balance would efficiently ensure a minimum standard of living, reward hard work, and reduce the inequalities in the global wealth distribution. When sourcing goods and services people should be able to choose as suppliers either the world public sector or private companies. People coordinating their efforts and individuals being creative are both important.

A cleaner method of Proportional Representation avoids the problems of cronyism found with AV+, where the party presents a list of its choice of MPs in a chosen order. All ballot papers in a constituency are placed in identical plastic balls and mixed up thoroughly in a spinning drum before one is selected at random. The vote on this ballot paper elects the selected candidate as the Member of World Parliament for that constituency. This returns close to the number of seats for each party justified by its national or worldwide vote. The method has here been applied to the UK General Election on 7th June, 2001. A similar random process can be used to select people to publicly air their views on issues under debate, which avoids undue tyranny of the majority or the powerful. As a decision making mechanism it avoids the artificiality of coalitions for 51% of the vote.

If m parties receive at least one vote and each party gets its own uniform fraction p of the vote across all constituencies, where n(total) is the number of constituencies, then the probability P of party 1 gaining n(1) seats and party 2 gaining n(2) seats etc.

Decisions can be made in parliament and indeed world parliament by considering small sub-issues for which every member of parliament or world citizen places an opinion in an identical plastic ball. These balls are then mixed up thoroughly in a spinning drum before one is selected at random. The opinion selected then forms a parliamentary decision from which point debate advances. Clearly there are open-source Java programs which could be written to make random selections using computers on the Internet that are open to public scrutiny. Since there is no arbitrary number like 51% of the vote which guarantees winning a debate, proponents of a given position simply have to win over as many people as they can. This rationalises coalition bargaining. A unanimous 100% vote will definitely lead to a matching decision, regardless of whose opinion is randomly selected.

Selecting people at random to find out their views enables the political process to be representative of people in proportion to their numbers, thus providing balanced input into debates. People can decline to comment on issues in which they have no interest. One may ask whether an electoral register provides the fairest way of selecting people at random. To avoid the intrusion into people’s privacy associated with such a register, a system which randomly selects a geographical location and a time, weighted according to population density and relevance of the issue at this location, can select the nearest person. One may further ask how relevant locations for an issue are determined. For a proposed hydroelectric dam, these are downstream, or upstream in a town that would be flooded, or where people would benefit from the generated this way.