Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Soul Reaver

What We Need Are Worldcentric People In Power

Recommended Posts

Fred Sums it up nicely as usual. Linky

In all the newspaper articles, in all the radio programmes and TV shows now exposing our MP’s expenses, and previously, our failed bankers’ bonuses, two core issues have been strikingly missed. One is to question the suitability of the type of people currently in both those roles to be there at all. The other is to question the wisdom of desperately propping up a failing, obsolete and unsustainable world economic system.

Let us start with the first issue. Individuals, tribes, cultures, nations and humanity all mature or evolve psychologically, psychosocially and psychospiritually over time in a broadly similar predictable sequence. Some individuals may mature rapidly triggered by a crisis, and others may choose to embark on a journey of conscious self-development by a variety of means including the use of psychological or spiritual practices. Thereby these individuals climb the evolutionary ladder through sequential stages in a decade or three, whereas collectives such as a culture may take several centuries to attain the same heights.

By understanding the pattern that individuals follow, the progress of a culture or a nation becomes predictable, and the stage that they have reached is identifiable by certain known characteristics. Those who study the evolutionary consciousness of humanity all over the world, have developed countless maps and models of the evolutionary journey, from simple easy to understand three stage models to complex ones of 15 or more stages. When they are superimposed over one another, they show a consistent sequential pattern.

One of these models, a four stage one devised by Kohlberg and Gilligan, labels Egocentric as the lowest level, followed by Ethnocentric, then Worldcentric and finally Kosmocentric. The other more complex models provide more detail, but I am intentionally keeping it simple here. This model can be described as showing the size of the person’s consciousness or what the person includes in his or her field of care. A recent study suggested that some 77% of the world population is currently Ethnocentric or below.

This Ethnocentric stage is characterised by tribal orientation, nationalism, rivalries, adolescent behaviours, and the like. Let us consider now the responses made by the bankers and the politicians to media and public criticism. They were very similar.

* The claim that “Everything I did was within the rules.â€

* An inability to recognise that what they did was ethically or morally wrong.

* The excuse that “I made a mistakeâ€, but the mistakes were all to their own benefit.

* An almost pathological inability to take responsibility, and to say “I am sorryâ€.

Anyone who has a teenage son will recognize these adolescent traits; however, when one is under 25 such behaviour is to be expected as an acceptable phase in growing up. Above 30 or so, and especially if one is a banker or a politician with power over many, such behaviours are not only unattractive, unacceptable, and inexcusable, they are positively dangerous. Why have the media not picked this up and pointed it out?

Introducing tighter regulations for bankers or politicians does not raise their level of maturity, morality or their ethics, it just limits what they can get away with. No, it is the type of people, the Ethnocentrics themselves, that have to go. Worldcentric people by definition and by their nature would not have abused the old regulations, let alone need new ones. Anyone below Worldcentric on the “chart†should not be selected or elected into positions of leadership in politics or big corporations, not just banks. Fewer people would fit the bill and that would limit our choice, and so it should.

The second of the two issues was the failure of commentators to seriously question the capitalist economic system that has proved to be so fragile and unjust. It has brought wealth to half the world while the rest starve; it thrives on excess consumption and the inevitable emissions, and it seriously retards the evolutionary development of individuals and cultures. Bankers and politicians alike strive to prop up the old failing system which they abused, because they know no better.

It did not occur to them that this was a golden opportunity to start to create a viable, sustainable economic system in line with the requirements of emerging Worldcentric human consciousness stage. Putting off the inevitable only makes the next economic crisis bigger and sooner. Worldcentric observers are amazed, distraught by the primitive ethnocentric thinking of our politicians and bankers, but they are up against the power that they still exercise.

However there is also a groundswell of more conscious or ‘worldcentric’ people who will no longer tolerate the old order and they will become ever more vociferous until the ethnocentric majority of politicians are discredited, ousted and replaced. Some commentators will reread if not resurrect Karl Marx, but the way is forward not backwards. A new economic order is essential, one that puts people and planet before profit.

So why have these two core issues been bypassed? Because few can contemplate the demise of capitalism and so they retreat into a state of denial, and few so called leaders can face the fact that despite their profile and in some cases their cleverness, their behaviour is adolescent. They have no knowledge of the evolutionary imperative that determines our future and ultimately our survival, let alone any understanding of it, or are guided by it. Why not? Because our schooling has tragically failed many generations now by ducking evolution, in simple terms, it omits the development of emotional intelligence followed by wisdom. Instead schools have been obliged to promote quantitative technowledge to meet commercial goals. The result is a gross excess of designed obsolescent material gadgets, goods, guns and emissions, and an absence of the wisdom to use our innovative ability responsibly for the collective benefit of mankind.

Are Worldcentric politicians and bankers too much to ask for? Many conscious people are waiting in the wings for this adolescent lot to get out or grow up. Worldcentric people are described as having “a greater expansion of self to embrace all people regardless of race, gender, class, or creed; social activism, moral relativism, rationality that questions rigid belief systems and transcends traditional rules and rolesâ€, and so on. Kosmocentric ones would be better still. They “identify with all life and consciousness, human or otherwise, have a deeply felt responsibility for the evolutionary process as a whole, and have an innate universal moralityâ€, amongst other things. This is, after all, what we need if we are to overcome further economic crises and the even greater environmental and social justice crises that are on the way.

Edited by Soul Reaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
Fred Sum it up nicely as usual. Linky

All of this is psycho-babbling bullsh*t

The reason is very simple. Nowhere in all of the above boll*cks was there any mention of power

Edit...

Ok there is some talk of power but it's limited

My main objection is the notion that there is some kind of linear trajectory to consciousness.

There are just environments, their demands and they way in which we respond. That's it.

Edited by Steve Cook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All of this is psycho-babbling bullsh*t

The reason is very simple. Nowhere in all of the above boll*cks was there any mention of power

Edit...

Ok there is some talk of power but it's limited

My main objection is the notion that there is some kind of linear trajectory to consciousness.

There are just environments, their demands and they way in which we respond. That's it.

It's not clear that you read the article; it is clear that you didn't understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the article is 100% wrong. What distinguishes our political class is their prioritisation of the global economy and globalised corporations over the interests of the British electorate.

I mean how many times does Brown use the word "global"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited for it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." -- Douglas Adams

sums up the dilemma nicely IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
It's not clear that you read the article; it is clear that you didn't understand it.

The specific part that immediately raises my bullsh*t radar is:

Let us start with the first issue. Individuals, tribes, cultures, nations and humanity all mature or evolve psychologically, psychosocially and psychospiritually over time in a broadly similar predictable sequence. Some individuals may mature rapidly triggered by a crisis, and others may choose to embark on a journey of conscious self-development by a variety of means including the use of psychological or spiritual practices. Thereby these individuals climb the evolutionary ladder through sequential stages in a decade or three, whereas collectives such as a culture may take several centuries to attain the same heights.

By understanding the pattern that individuals follow, the progress of a culture or a nation becomes predictable, and the stage that they have reached is identifiable by certain known characteristics. Those who study the evolutionary consciousness of humanity all over the world, have developed countless maps and models of the evolutionary journey, from simple easy to understand three stage models to complex ones of 15 or more stages. When they are superimposed over one another, they show a consistent sequential pattern.

One of these models, a four stage one devised by Kohlberg and Gilligan, labels Egocentric as the lowest level, followed by Ethnocentric, then Worldcentric and finally Kosmocentric. The other more complex models provide more detail, but I am intentionally keeping it simple here. This model can be described as showing the size of the person�€™s consciousness or what the person includes in his or her field of care. A recent study suggested that some 77% of the world population is currently Ethnocentric or below.

This Ethnocentric stage is characterised by tribal orientation, nationalism, rivalries, adolescent behaviours, and the like. Let us consider now the responses made by the bankers and the politicians to media and public criticism. They were very similar.

We are all egocentric and/or ethnocentric. It's the nature of being human. Sure, it's possible to "rise" above this. But this is, arguably, down to the inherent intelligence of the individual concerned rather than reference to any kind of psychosocial/psycho-spiritual bullsh*t. Thus, it is perfectly possible for an individual from any given culture to achieve such a psychological state irrespective of the culture they live in.

The only thing that may mitigate such a psychological state is hard material knowledge. It is certainly the case that someone from a more technically advanced society may well be able to make decisions that appear to be higher up this manufactured hierarchy of "awareness". However, any behaviour that appears to take the broader needs of the wider environment into consideration is only a side effect of making ego-centric and/or ethnocentric decisions that are more far-reaching in their self interest. But, to reiterate, this is simply a function of increase in material knowledge. Not some kind of ephemeral cultural maturity.

To be honest, it sounds like it has come straight out of California. The kind of bullsh*t cod philosophy/psychology that assumes there is an inexorable linear trajectory to personal development and where this has been superimposed onto a cultural level.

It's basic premise appears to be that some people just need to become psychologically "mature" and then the world would be a nicer place. This is just laughable.

So, in answer to your assertion, I can assure you I have read the post and fully understand it.

It's still bullsh*t

Edited by Steve Cook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there's two Sir John Whitmore's I've met the author. He's an ex racing driver, and I've barreled round country lanes , driving his Honda Vtec with him in the passenger seat coaching me. Very nice chap, I found, and trusting too. :)

I get his point, but I agree with the above poster that it seems to naively skirt around the issues of power and democracy. nations and tribalism aren't flaws, they are human attributes which have evolved for a purpose, just like our arms, legs, emotions and intelligence.

Our tribal nature ensures variety and diversity of societies, and prevents any one "species" of societal model becoming too dominant.

We should be protecting the nation state, not trying to destroy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God it takes so long to get between threads these days and I only have limited PC time so not sure who the poster was that said :

We are all egocentric and/or ethnocentric. It's the nature of being human. Sure, it's possible to "rise" above this. But this is, arguably, down to the inherent intelligence of the individual concerned rather than reference to any kind of psychosocial/psycho-spiritual bullsh*t. Thus, it is perfectly possible for an individual from any given culture to achieve such a psychological state irrespective of the culture they live in.

In a way I can hear where they are coming from, finding ways to present these ideas that appeals to the majority is difficult. The posters rejection of the article wholesale seems to come from it not fitting their world view and of course the way the article is presented invites that kind of wholesale rejection becaue it too proposes that ITS world view is the one we should all be moving towards. People do not like to be told how they should be especially if it requires change .

To be honest, it sounds like it has come straight out of California. The kind of bullsh*t cod philosophy/psychology that assumes there is an inexorable linear trajectory to personal development and where this has been superimposed onto a cultural level.

It's basic premise appears to be that some people just need to become psychologically "mature" and then the world would be a nicer place. This is just laughable.

So, in answer to your assertion, I can assure you I have read the post and fully understand it.

It's still bullsh*t

The article puts forward two Q's for our consideration:

1. the suitability of the type of people currently in both those roles to be there at all.

2. the wisdom of desperately propping up a failing, obsolete and unsustainable world economic system.

In relation to Q1 I am not keen on the idea of ladders and reaching "heights" it implies that there is somewhere to go and that we can achieve by climbing ever higher which is just a perpetuation of old thinking that first makes something wrong and then sets out to make it better usually making it more and more wrong and on and on.......

This kind of terminology makes something better than something else where in truth it is all part of the same whole. So we have to be careful when using things like Kohlberg's model, but surely there cannot be any disagreement that how aware a person is depends on "what that person includes " in their world view and how balanced that view is not from a purely egoic self gratification perspective.

One only has to watch the way that most threads on HPC go to see how important our personal world views are and how difficult it is to enter into true communication .

As for "only worldcentric people " should be voted into govern the country, well who would vote for them when they would be perceived as such a threat to our egocentric world view?

So we are in a Catch 22 when only by expanding our own world vision /views can we get the stage where we could actually allow change , instead we are caught between right / wrong - left / right politics - thinking .....and an overwhelming feeling carried with us from childhood that if we don't protect what we have and fight for every penny someone might take it from us. Unfortunately "energy follows thought" ............and we do , whether we believe it or , create our reality .

As for Q2 I would seriously Q that the current system has "brought wealth to half the world" , it is in actual fact a very small % of the world isn't it that "benefits" from the capitalist economis system isn't it? I remember being shocked when I read the figures.

However I can't argue with the fact that :

the capitalist economic system ........thrives on excess consumption and the inevitable emissions, and it seriously retards the evolutionary development of individuals and cultures. Bankers and politicians alike strive to prop up the old failing system which they abused, because they know no better.

This is the tragedy that we are all so busy trying to prop up something that doesn't work frigthened that we might become losers that we have no energy left to do something that might bring benefit to us all. I seriously q every day the time I spend on HPC , especially when I get caught in the middle of a bear / bull thread where never the twain....

Worldcentric observers are amazed, distraught by the primitive ethnocentric thinking of our politicians and bankers, but they are up against the power that they still exercise

I must confess the whole tone of this article is so off putting, the very word "worldcentric" mixed with words like "primitive" has such a judgemental attitude attached, when I sense that when our awareness grows beyond our own self limiting beliefs we are more tolerant of where we find ourselves playing our part in the world's unfolding.

With regards the issue of power I was reading this the other day:

While it’s not surprising that Labour, as the party in power, is in the firing line, the Tories, and others, all have their skeletons in the cupboard too. But for Labour loyalists, it is not enough to say that others are equally culpable; we feel that we have the right to expect better from Labour.

It is probably not too harsh to say that we don’t necessarily expect too much by way of principle from the Tories. They have always been a party of the self-interested. That self-interest is sometimes – in their better moments – tempered by a touch of noblesse oblige; but, in these days of the “self-made manâ€, there hasn’t been too much noblesse in evidence.....

....So, how did we come to this? How did Labour embrace a culture of self-aggrandisement, pursued even against the interests of the disadvantaged in that society that we like to insist, pace Margaret Thatcher, does exist?

It might be argued that we can’t indict the whole Labour Party because of the defalcations of a few. Well, that is indeed the question. Has New Labour’s “intense relaxation†about the “filthy rich†now been extended to ourselves? And does that indulgence cover the “filth†as well as the riches? Is this what New Labour now stands for in British politics?

.................. there, in other words, a recognisable connection between the politics of New Labour and the fall from grace of individual Labour standard-bearers? The first evidence of this was the emphasis placed by the New Labour project on doing whatever was necessary in order to win power, even if that meant the abandonment of principle. Opinions may differ on whether the junking of much that had been considered to be core Labour values was really required for electoral victory - and no one can doubt that the way in which those values should be applied to the issues of the twenty-first century was overdue for re-appraisal.

But what was surprising about New Labour was the enthusiasm shown, not just for change and renewal, but for the positive adoption of a quite different agenda – one that had hitherto been seen, with its acceptance that the market should not be challenged and that growing inequality was the necessary condition for economic development, as the property of the right. ...............

....As it floated free from its traditional moorings, little wonder that a new generation of Labour leaders became confused about what they were in politics for. If policy dictated that unashamed greed was indeed the irreplaceable mainspring of economic advance, how could it be wrong to act on those same precepts in one’s own life?

.........The Labour Party was assured that it did not need political analysis or a programme for real reform.

But without that analysis and programme, what was power for? The question matters little to the right; power for them is the means by which the pace and direction of change can be controlled and, at times, completely frustrated. But for the left, power is surely a means to an end, to a different and better society – one which shares its benefits with everyone.

But that, too, was denied by New Labour. For them, the purpose of power was not to use it but to enjoy it and extend it. Power was a state of being, not a path to change. The over-riding priority of New Labour was always, from the first day of taking power, to retain it by winning the next election.

So how can anyone with a less limited more embracing world (and that can be local as well as global) vision ever be voted into a country that fails to see beyond the limited egocentric world view that is presented to us daily in our new papers , by the people around us and the governments that WE vote in because we are fed up with the government we have got over and over and over and over again...............?

If the only way is to wait for the adolescents to grow up I think we could be waiting for a long long time..........

Many were hopeful that this economic crisis will help us learn what works, what doesn't and what has real value , I see no evidence of that in the world around me .........I am not sure what shape our emergence out of egocentricity will take but I sense it will have so many ups and downs it will not be a W shape but more like wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Edited by Sybil13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

peopel have searched for the philosopher king since plato first suggested the idea and never found him.

The problems are structural and institutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vicmac64

I'll give you it in a more simple format - anything that is used to weaken or destroy the peoples parliamentary democracy and their inalienable right to their British citizenship is treason.

There you go - there you have it - our country is not for sale - our democracy is our democracy not the rest of the worlds - and we the people of the United Kigdom will make changes to ensure this will be the case. Politicians beware - there is a political rebellion going on with savvy voters - they know your game, British and our parliament we will remain. As the the old American slogan goes - DONT TREAD ON US.

All of this is psycho-babbling bullsh*t

The reason is very simple. Nowhere in all of the above boll*cks was there any mention of power

Edit...

Ok there is some talk of power but it's limited

My main objection is the notion that there is some kind of linear trajectory to consciousness.

There are just environments, their demands and they way in which we respond. That's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vicmac64

That is right injin - there is no perfect system of Government - there never will be because we are not perfect and never will be in this life.

So we have to make the best of what we have got and not give it away for some fascist one world system that will not tolerate dissent. That is where we are going and that is why we must take on these globalists politically in our country - and hope that the light of freedom will be lit in the UK and will shine bright across the world - an example of how good government can be. Government of the People (all the people, all races, religions etc BUT NOT the secret societies), By the People (not the Bankers) and For the People (Not the Elites)

Let the UK shine the light of LIBERTY - there is a job to be done, and a political revolution to be won, hearts and minds to touch with the message of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Educate everyone you know - they already suspect something is wrong with our rotten system - they will not be hard to talk to...... Just talk to everyone about what is going on and we will have our country back in no time.

peopel have searched for the philosopher king since plato first suggested the idea and never found him.

The problems are structural and institutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are all egocentric and/or ethnocentric. It's the nature of being human. Sure, it's possible to "rise" above this. But this is, arguably, down to the inherent intelligence of the individual concerned rather than reference to any kind of psychosocial/psycho-spiritual bullsh*t. Thus, it is perfectly possible for an individual from any given culture to achieve such a psychological state irrespective of the culture they live in.

The only thing that may mitigate such a psychological state is hard material knowledge. It is certainly the case that someone from a more technically advanced society may well be able to make decisions that appear to be higher up this manufactured hierarchy of "awareness". However, any behaviour that appears to take the broader needs of the wider environment into consideration is only a side effect of making ego-centric and/or ethnocentric decisions that are more far-reaching in their self interest. But, to reiterate, this is simply a function of increase in material knowledge. Not some kind of ephemeral cultural maturity.

You seem to be saying that it's a matter of giving the human machine the right fuel. But some (many?) machines are broken and incapable of making the jump above (bolded). Not because they're ignorant or stupid, but because they are suffering from some disorder. I read the article as saying that people with these disorders have been getting into power, and they shouldn't.

Diagnosis of "disorder" is subjective of course ... I'm sure that Gordon Brown thinks he's mentally just fine, it's the rest of us who don't get it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from any other wooliness, it seems to me that the article fails on its assumption of the rise and rise of individuals, cultures and nations without making any reference to recidivism and the decline and fall of civilisations, nations and empires.

The path from primitivism to civilisation is not quite such a predictable trajectory as the author claims, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should also be pointed out that those countries that have kept their industry and attempted to properly earn their place in the world are also the most ethnocentric (Japan, Korea etc.)

So that's another reason why the article doesn't stand up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More on this theme from another renowned "woolly" thinker:

Clinton: 'How generation' needed to solve world's ills

Bill Clinton at N.C. State

Posted: Jan. 26, 2009

Updated: Mar. 9, 2009

RALEIGH, N.C. — People worldwide need to take action to help solve the global problems of political and economic instability, inequality and environmental unsustainability, former President Bill Clinton said Monday.

"I don't think it's good enough anymore to define your citizenship by being a good, honest worker and a taxpayer and someone who votes," Clinton said in a speech at North Carolina State University's Reynolds Coliseum.

Unlike his upbeat appearances in North Carolina last year for his wife's presidential campaign, Clinton was serious and matter-of-fact during his 40-minute speech about the difficulties facing the state, the nation and the world.

He related a series of current problems:

* The global recession has destroyed wealth equal to half of the world's gross production.

* Terrorists continue to strike at targets but are difficult to retaliate against.

* Most of the world's wealth and access to education and health care is concentrated among a minority of its people.

* The benefits of development have to be balanced against the cost of global warming.

Because the world has become so interdependent in recent decades, small problems in one part of the globe often affect the U.S. and other countries, Clinton said. Such interdependence means that people's fortunes rise or fall together and that "divorce is not an option" because we all continue to share the globe, he said.

"We should be trying to create a world where we share the future," he said. "We share the benefits and the opportunities; we share the burdens and the responsibilities."

One of those responsibilities is to work to solve the world's problems, Clinton said, calling on people to become part of "the how generation."

"How do you go about taking the best of intentions and turning them into positive changes in people's lives?" he asked. "You've got to say, 'I want to be a person involved in the how.'"

Some people have started the process, he said, noting about 500,000 non-governmental organizations were started in the last decade to take on specific issues. But much more needs to be done, he said.

"We have a 'crisis of doing' in the world," he said. "We have all of these problems out there that people know are problems, that they can talk about till the cows come home, but nobody knows the how – how do you turn good intentions into real changes?"

I must say I am surprised at the vitriol the original article by Sir John generated here. The analogy he hints at in his videos of mankind, post industrial revolution, as an adolescent with raging hormones - all strength and little wisdom - seems very apposite to me. The graphs since industrialisation began are off the scale as he points out yet we carry on as if this is all perfectly sustainable. That is immature!

I don't understand the objections to his broad thesis and sentiment: a call for the adults to take the car keys back from the teenagers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More on this theme from another renowned "woolly" thinker:

I must say I am surprised at the vitriol the original article by Sir John generated here. The analogy he hints at in his videos of mankind, post industrial revolution, as an adolescent with raging hormones - all strength and little wisdom - seems very apposite to me. The graphs since industrialisation began are off the scale as he points out yet we carry on as if this is all perfectly sustainable. That is immature!

I don't understand the objections to his broad thesis and sentiment: a call for the adults to take the car keys back from the teenagers.

Because it assume two species of humans?

All we need to do is find the right person to tell us all what to do and everything will work out ok.

Doesn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because it assume two species of humans?

All we need to do is find the right person to tell us all what to do and everything will work out ok.

Doesn't work.

The leaders are already there in waiting, according to Sir John. I don't think they are a different species though.

How can you say "Doesn't work"? Are you omniscient Injin? Do you have a control planet where you've tested this all out?

Admittedly how we get from here to there is the issue, as Bill Clinton says.

The point is people are starting to wake up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The leaders are already there in waiting, according to Sir John. I don't think they are a different species though.

That's why nothing will change.

How can you say "Doesn't work"? Are you omniscient Injin? Do you have a control planet where you've tested this all out?

yes, it's called earth.

Admittedly how we get from here to there is the issue, as Bill Clinton says.

The point is people are starting to wake up.

Bill Clinton is a lying, thieving mass murdering *******.

Why don't you wake up yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's why nothing will change.

yes, it's called earth.

Bill Clinton is a lying, thieving mass murdering *******.

Why don't you wake up yourself?

eh? :huh:

Oh, I quoted a thinker you don't approve of. Sorry about that. Can you isolate the thoughts and sentiments from the person, or in Clinton's case do you revert to ad hom?

What do you hope for, Injin? You don't seem to like the status quo much but you are determined to be pessimistic about mankind's future. What on earth is your motivation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   288 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.