英国脱欧后，英国选民希望与欧盟建立更紧密的关系
正文翻译
(Protesters gather in front of the Foreign Office and Downing Street, demanding a new election and the UK's rejoining of the EU.)
（抗议者聚集在外交部和唐宁街前，要求举行新的选举，并要求英国重新加入欧盟。）
新闻：
UK voters want closer relationship with EU in ‘significant’ shift since Brexit
-Major study finds public see ties with Europe as more important than lixs with US and many ‘exhausted’ by ‘toxic’ debate
英国脱欧后，英国选民希望与欧盟建立更紧密的关系
——一项重大研究发现，公众认为与欧洲的关系比与美国的关系更重要，许多人被“有毒”的辩论“耗尽精力”
-Major study finds public see ties with Europe as more important than lixs with US and many ‘exhausted’ by ‘toxic’ debate
英国脱欧后，英国选民希望与欧盟建立更紧密的关系
——一项重大研究发现，公众认为与欧洲的关系比与美国的关系更重要，许多人被“有毒”的辩论“耗尽精力”
(Protesters gather in front of the Foreign Office and Downing Street, demanding a new election and the UK's rejoining of the EU.)
（抗议者聚集在外交部和唐宁街前，要求举行新的选举，并要求英国重新加入欧盟。）
新闻：
Almost twice as many UK voters now believe a close relationship with the EU is more important for peace, prosperity and security than ties with the US, according to a major new study of post-Brexit attitudes.
一项针对英国脱欧后态度的重要新研究显示，如今认为与欧盟保持密切关系比与美国保持密切关系对和平、繁荣和安全更重要的英国选民数量几乎是持相反观点的英国选民的两倍。
一项针对英国脱欧后态度的重要新研究显示，如今认为与欧盟保持密切关系比与美国保持密切关系对和平、繁荣和安全更重要的英国选民数量几乎是持相反观点的英国选民的两倍。
The report, based on extensive polling and discussion groups with people of all Brexit persuasions, finds that attitudes towards the EU are becoming more favourable across a range of policy areas, and that the entire Brexit debate is now far less toxic and more pragmatic.
基于广泛的民意调查和与所有脱欧派人士的讨论群体的该报告，发现在一系列政策领域，人们对欧盟的态度正变得更加支持，并且整个脱欧辩论现在远没有那么有害，而是更加务实了。
基于广泛的民意调查和与所有脱欧派人士的讨论群体的该报告，发现在一系列政策领域，人们对欧盟的态度正变得更加支持，并且整个脱欧辩论现在远没有那么有害，而是更加务实了。
This, its authors say, will give a potential Labour government “space and permission” to work towards closer lixs, particularly on issues of trade, security and defence, where a clear majority of the public is now in favour. The report by the independent thinktank British Future found that 52% of the public would now like the UK to have a closer relationship with the EU, with only 12% saying it should have a more distant one, and 27% in favour of maintaining the status quo.
报告的作者说，这将给潜在的工党政府提供“空间和许可”，使其致力于建立更紧密的联系，特别是在贸易、安全和国防问题上，这是大多数公众现在支持的。独立智库“英国未来”的这份报告发现，52%的公众现在希望英国与欧盟保持更密切的关系，只有12%的人认为应该疏远欧盟，27%的人赞成维持现状。
报告的作者说，这将给潜在的工党政府提供“空间和许可”，使其致力于建立更紧密的联系，特别是在贸易、安全和国防问题上，这是大多数公众现在支持的。独立智库“英国未来”的这份报告发现，52%的公众现在希望英国与欧盟保持更密切的关系，只有12%的人认为应该疏远欧盟，27%的人赞成维持现状。
Asked which relationship they regarded as most important for peace, prosperity and stability, almost half of respondents (48%) ranked the EU first, above the US (27%) and the Commonwealth (25%).
当被问及他们认为哪种关系对和平、繁荣和稳定最重要时，近一半的受访者（48%）将欧盟排在第一位，高于美国（27%）和英联邦（25%）。
当被问及他们认为哪种关系对和平、繁荣和稳定最重要时，近一半的受访者（48%）将欧盟排在第一位，高于美国（27%）和英联邦（25%）。
As evidence grows of the economic damage done to the UK by Brexit, the poll found 61% of people now favour closer cooperation over both trade and science and research with the EU. Some 68% back closer cooperation over crime and terrorism, 57% on customs arrangements and 57% on international health.
随着越来越多的证据表明英国脱欧对经济造成了损害，民意调查发现，61%的人现在支持与欧盟在贸易和科学研究方面加强合作。68%的人支持在打击犯罪和恐怖主义方面加强合作，57%的人支持海关安排，57%的人支持国际卫生。
随着越来越多的证据表明英国脱欧对经济造成了损害，民意调查发现，61%的人现在支持与欧盟在贸易和科学研究方面加强合作。68%的人支持在打击犯罪和恐怖主义方面加强合作，57%的人支持海关安排，57%的人支持国际卫生。
The report notes that UK attitudes have “shifted significantly against” leaving. From discussion groups it identified “a sense of public exhaustion with the issue of Brexit” with most people “keen to put the divisions of previous years behind them”.
报告指出，英国人对脱欧的态度已经“明显转变”。从讨论群体中，它发现了“公众对英国脱欧问题的疲惫感”，大多数人“渴望把前几年的分歧抛诸脑后”。
报告指出，英国人对脱欧的态度已经“明显转变”。从讨论群体中，它发现了“公众对英国脱欧问题的疲惫感”，大多数人“渴望把前几年的分歧抛诸脑后”。
While there was little evidence to suggest that people in this country felt European, or regarded themselves as sharing European values, they were nonetheless open to working more with the EU out of pragmatic interest.
虽然几乎没有证据表明这个国家的人觉得自己是欧洲（大陆）人，或者认为自己分享欧洲的价值观，但出于务实的利益，他们仍然愿意与欧盟进行更多的合作。
虽然几乎没有证据表明这个国家的人觉得自己是欧洲（大陆）人，或者认为自己分享欧洲的价值观，但出于务实的利益，他们仍然愿意与欧盟进行更多的合作。
The report said: “There is majority support for a less heated debate on the UK-EU relationship across both 2016 Leave voters (56%) and Remain voters (73%), as well as from both Conservative supporters (61%) and Labour supporters (68%) alike. Importantly, support for a less heated debate was consistent: around six in ten, across all age groups that were eligible to vote at the time of the referendum.
该报告称：“2016年脱欧选民（56%）和留欧选民（73%）以及保守党支持者（61%）和工党支持者（68%）中，大多数人都支持对英欧关系进行不那么激烈的辩论。重要的是，支持不那么激烈的辩论的人是一致的：在全民公决时所有有资格投票的年龄组中的大约六成的人。
该报告称：“2016年脱欧选民（56%）和留欧选民（73%）以及保守党支持者（61%）和工党支持者（68%）中，大多数人都支持对英欧关系进行不那么激烈的辩论。重要的是，支持不那么激烈的辩论的人是一致的：在全民公决时所有有资格投票的年龄组中的大约六成的人。
“This suggests the potential for an upxed and less divisive ‘future relationship’ than previously. Meanwhile younger people aged 18-24, who largely would have been too young to participate in the referendum, showed plurality agreement (45% agree, while 12% disagreed).”
“这表明，与以往相比，双方有可能建立一种更新的、分歧更少的‘未来关系’。与此同时，年龄在18岁至24岁之间的年轻人（他们大多还太小，无法参加公投）表示了多数同意（45%同意，12%反对）。”
“这表明，与以往相比，双方有可能建立一种更新的、分歧更少的‘未来关系’。与此同时，年龄在18岁至24岁之间的年轻人（他们大多还太小，无法参加公投）表示了多数同意（45%同意，12%反对）。”
Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, said there had already been signs of a willingness among the public to see the UK government working more closely with the EU, with the positively received introduction of the Windsor frxwork on arrangements for post-Brexit trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland earlier this year, and the more recent agreement on the UK rejoining the EU science programme Horizon as an associate member from 1 January next year.
“英国未来”的主管森德·卡特瓦拉称，已经有迹象表明，公众愿意看到英国政府与欧盟更密切地合作，今年早些时候，英国和北爱尔兰之间关于脱欧后贸易安排的温莎框架得到了积极的欢迎，最近，英国同意从明年1月1日起重新加入欧盟科学计划“地平线”，成为协理成员。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“英国未来”的主管森德·卡特瓦拉称，已经有迹象表明，公众愿意看到英国政府与欧盟更密切地合作，今年早些时候，英国和北爱尔兰之间关于脱欧后贸易安排的温莎框架得到了积极的欢迎，最近，英国同意从明年1月1日起重新加入欧盟科学计划“地平线”，成为协理成员。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
But Katwala said such was the shifting mood that a new government “could try to go further”.
但卡特瓦拉表示，这种情绪正在转变，新政府“可以尝试走得更远”。
但卡特瓦拉表示，这种情绪正在转变，新政府“可以尝试走得更远”。
“Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have talked about resetting the relationship with the EU. The public will give them space and permission for increasing pragmatic cooperation – though it remains unclear how much appetite there is for this in Brussels,” he said.
他说：“凯尔·斯塔默和雷切尔·里夫斯谈到了重新设定与欧盟的关系。公众将给予他们空间和许可，以加强务实合作——尽管目前尚不清楚布鲁塞尔对此有多大兴趣。”
他说：“凯尔·斯塔默和雷切尔·里夫斯谈到了重新设定与欧盟的关系。公众将给予他们空间和许可，以加强务实合作——尽管目前尚不清楚布鲁塞尔对此有多大兴趣。”
“The challenge for those who want a future government to be bolder still – and reconsider more totemic issues like the single market, free movement or a project to rejoin the EU itself – is that this would mean opening up more contested political arguments and reopening the Brexit debate.”
“对于那些希望未来政府更加大胆、重新考虑单一市场、自由流动或重新加入欧盟等更具象征意义的问题的人来说，挑战在于，这将意味着开启更有争议的政治争论，重新开启英国脱欧辩论。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“对于那些希望未来政府更加大胆、重新考虑单一市场、自由流动或重新加入欧盟等更具象征意义的问题的人来说，挑战在于，这将意味着开启更有争议的政治争论，重新开启英国脱欧辩论。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
To date, Starmer has been reluctant to talk about closer lixs with the EU, for fear of losing support in red wall seats in the north and Midlands and being accused by the Tories of having a secret plan to rejoin. He has, however, spoken about the need to make Brexit work better for the UK, particularly economically.
到目前为止，斯塔默一直不愿意谈论与欧盟建立更紧密的联系，因为他担心失去北部和中部地区的红墙席位的支持，并被保守党指责有一个重新加入欧盟的秘密计划。然而，他谈到了让脱欧更好地为英国服务的必要性，尤其是在经济上。
到目前为止，斯塔默一直不愿意谈论与欧盟建立更紧密的联系，因为他担心失去北部和中部地区的红墙席位的支持，并被保守党指责有一个重新加入欧盟的秘密计划。然而，他谈到了让脱欧更好地为英国服务的必要性，尤其是在经济上。
The survey also asked people for their opinion about the decision to leave the European unx: 49% of respondents said it was wrong to leave, against 36% who said it had been right to leave. 15% did not know.
该调查还询问了人们对脱欧决定的看法：49%的受访者表示脱欧是错误的，36%的受访者表示脱欧是正确的。15%的人不知道。
该调查还询问了人们对脱欧决定的看法：49%的受访者表示脱欧是错误的，36%的受访者表示脱欧是正确的。15%的人不知道。
The research included a representative survey of more than 2,000 people by Foculdata as well as a series of discussion groups with people in London, Peterborough and Stockport.
这项研究包括对2000多人进行的有代表性的调查，以及与伦敦、彼得伯勒和斯托克波特的人们进行的一系列讨论。
这项研究包括对2000多人进行的有代表性的调查，以及与伦敦、彼得伯勒和斯托克波特的人们进行的一系列讨论。
评论翻译
lordnacho666
What we never got after the vote was a proper discussion about what Brexit should mean. I bet a lot of leave voters thought it would be mostly on paper, with business as usual in many areas. Instead we got the most extreme Brexit imaginable.
在公投之后，我们从未对英国脱欧意味着什么进行过适当的讨论。我敢打赌，很多支持脱欧的选民当时认为，脱欧主要就是纸上谈资，许多领域一切照旧。结果相反，我们得到了可以想象到的最极端的脱欧。
What we never got after the vote was a proper discussion about what Brexit should mean. I bet a lot of leave voters thought it would be mostly on paper, with business as usual in many areas. Instead we got the most extreme Brexit imaginable.
在公投之后，我们从未对英国脱欧意味着什么进行过适当的讨论。我敢打赌，很多支持脱欧的选民当时认为，脱欧主要就是纸上谈资，许多领域一切照旧。结果相反，我们得到了可以想象到的最极端的脱欧。
3pok
This should have been discussed and defined way before the vote....
这应该在公投之前讨论和确定好……
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
This should have been discussed and defined way before the vote....
这应该在公投之前讨论和确定好……
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
VidiVentura
Indeed, it was an abuse of the official referendum guidelines - referrendums are not supposed to be held unless the options are clearly defined and there is a reasonable expectation that the average voter know what's what about the options.
事实上，这是对官方公投指导方针的滥用——除非选项有明确的定义，并且有合理的预期，普通选民知道这些选项是什么，否则就不应该举行公投。
Indeed, it was an abuse of the official referendum guidelines - referrendums are not supposed to be held unless the options are clearly defined and there is a reasonable expectation that the average voter know what's what about the options.
事实上，这是对官方公投指导方针的滥用——除非选项有明确的定义，并且有合理的预期，普通选民知道这些选项是什么，否则就不应该举行公投。
Battle_Biscuits
It's reasons like this why I was arguing at the time that the referendum in itself was democratically invalid- and I stand by that.
Brexit did however become valid once the Tories won an election promising to deliver Brexit. Doesn't change the fact though that it's a shitty idea.
正是出于这样的原因，我当时认为公投本身在民主上是无效的——我依然坚持这一点。
然而，一旦保守党通过承诺脱欧赢得了选举，那么脱欧就变得有效了。但这改变不了这是个烂主意的事实。
It's reasons like this why I was arguing at the time that the referendum in itself was democratically invalid- and I stand by that.
Brexit did however become valid once the Tories won an election promising to deliver Brexit. Doesn't change the fact though that it's a shitty idea.
正是出于这样的原因，我当时认为公投本身在民主上是无效的——我依然坚持这一点。
然而，一旦保守党通过承诺脱欧赢得了选举，那么脱欧就变得有效了。但这改变不了这是个烂主意的事实。
VidiVentura
Brexit did however become valid once the Tories won an election promising to deliver Brexit.
I get where you are coming from, but I can't consider it valid when the party was intentionally lying and misinforming the voters.
Democracy is only democracy if it's informed, as I see it.
It's like if I sold you a house, but then it turned out I didn't own it. It wasn't a valid sale just because you entered into it of your own volition.
“然而，一旦保守党通过承诺脱欧赢得了选举，那么脱欧就变得有效了”
我明白你的意思，但我不认为政党故意撒谎和误导选民是有效的。
在我看来，民主只有在了解情况的情况下才是民主。
这就像我卖给你一套房子，但后来发现它不是我的。只因为你是自愿购买的并不能使它成为一笔有效的买卖。
Brexit did however become valid once the Tories won an election promising to deliver Brexit.
I get where you are coming from, but I can't consider it valid when the party was intentionally lying and misinforming the voters.
Democracy is only democracy if it's informed, as I see it.
It's like if I sold you a house, but then it turned out I didn't own it. It wasn't a valid sale just because you entered into it of your own volition.
“然而，一旦保守党通过承诺脱欧赢得了选举，那么脱欧就变得有效了”
我明白你的意思，但我不认为政党故意撒谎和误导选民是有效的。
在我看来，民主只有在了解情况的情况下才是民主。
这就像我卖给你一套房子，但后来发现它不是我的。只因为你是自愿购买的并不能使它成为一笔有效的买卖。
Tannerleaf
Did the average voter know anything about how the EU Parliament works at all?
I left Great Britain well before Brexit, but even then, I know myself that I didn’t know much about who my MEP was, what their responsibilities were, who their EU party was, what their policies were, or even who the three presidents were. Even less about what all of that actually meant for regular jackoffs, such as myself.
Even going to Europe was basically the same as any other foreign country, because I still needed my passport.
In hindsight, there needed to be a lot more done to inform people as to the inner workings of what went on the the EU houses of commons and lords (without looking it up, I’m not actually sure how the EU parliament is structured).
Maybe a reality tv programme following one of the relatively anonymous MEPs for a year or two, as they do EU stuff each day might have helped.
To be fair though, when we went to school in the 70s and 80s, there wasn’t a single thing taught about how democracy and the government works in the UK. And even less taught about the new EU. So it’s not really surprising that people have no idea about how foreign governments work.
普通选民知道欧盟议会是如何运作的吗？
我早在英国脱欧之前就离开了英国，但即使在那时，我自己也清楚，我不太了解我的欧洲议会议员是谁，他们的职责是什么，他们的欧盟党派，他们的政策是什么，甚至不知道三位主席是谁。更不用说这对我这样的普通人来说意味着什么了。
即使去欧洲，基本上也和去其他国家一样，因为我仍然需要护照。
事后看来，需要做更多的工作来告知人们欧盟下议院和上议院的内部运作情况（如果没有搜索查阅，我实际上不知道欧盟议会是如何构建的）。
也许一个对这些不为人知的欧洲议会议员进行一两年的跟踪报道的电视真人秀节目会有所帮助，因为这些人每天都在做欧盟的事情。
平心而论，当我们在70年代和80年代上学时，没有学过任何关于英国民主和政府如何运作的内容。对后来的欧盟的了解就更少了。所以人们不知道外国政府是如何运作的也就不足为奇了。
Did the average voter know anything about how the EU Parliament works at all?
I left Great Britain well before Brexit, but even then, I know myself that I didn’t know much about who my MEP was, what their responsibilities were, who their EU party was, what their policies were, or even who the three presidents were. Even less about what all of that actually meant for regular jackoffs, such as myself.
Even going to Europe was basically the same as any other foreign country, because I still needed my passport.
In hindsight, there needed to be a lot more done to inform people as to the inner workings of what went on the the EU houses of commons and lords (without looking it up, I’m not actually sure how the EU parliament is structured).
Maybe a reality tv programme following one of the relatively anonymous MEPs for a year or two, as they do EU stuff each day might have helped.
To be fair though, when we went to school in the 70s and 80s, there wasn’t a single thing taught about how democracy and the government works in the UK. And even less taught about the new EU. So it’s not really surprising that people have no idea about how foreign governments work.
普通选民知道欧盟议会是如何运作的吗？
我早在英国脱欧之前就离开了英国，但即使在那时，我自己也清楚，我不太了解我的欧洲议会议员是谁，他们的职责是什么，他们的欧盟党派，他们的政策是什么，甚至不知道三位主席是谁。更不用说这对我这样的普通人来说意味着什么了。
即使去欧洲，基本上也和去其他国家一样，因为我仍然需要护照。
事后看来，需要做更多的工作来告知人们欧盟下议院和上议院的内部运作情况（如果没有搜索查阅，我实际上不知道欧盟议会是如何构建的）。
也许一个对这些不为人知的欧洲议会议员进行一两年的跟踪报道的电视真人秀节目会有所帮助，因为这些人每天都在做欧盟的事情。
平心而论，当我们在70年代和80年代上学时，没有学过任何关于英国民主和政府如何运作的内容。对后来的欧盟的了解就更少了。所以人们不知道外国政府是如何运作的也就不足为奇了。
SoftwareWoods
The problem was the politicians showed their true colours by jumping ship rather than dealing with it, then we got a buffoon to deal with it who botched the entire thing, all while the EU was playing hard to work with because despite the article being there, they were trying to make us an example.
We should have really just tried to get trade deals elsewhere rather than spend all our time trying to get a brexit in name, it was like trying to get mercy from the enemy who now wants you dead.
At the very least we should have got other trade deals then come back to Europe
问题是政客们通过跳船而不是处理问题来显示他们的真面目，然后我们得到了一个小丑来处理这件事，他把整个事情搞砸了，而欧盟一直在努力与之合作，因为尽管有这篇报道，他们还是想让我们成为一个榜样。
我们真的应该试着在其他地方达成贸易协议，而不是把我们所有的时间都花在名义上的脱欧上，这就像试图得到敌人的宽恕，而这个敌人却想现在就置你于死地。
至少我们应该达成其他贸易协议，然后再回到欧洲
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The problem was the politicians showed their true colours by jumping ship rather than dealing with it, then we got a buffoon to deal with it who botched the entire thing, all while the EU was playing hard to work with because despite the article being there, they were trying to make us an example.
We should have really just tried to get trade deals elsewhere rather than spend all our time trying to get a brexit in name, it was like trying to get mercy from the enemy who now wants you dead.
At the very least we should have got other trade deals then come back to Europe
问题是政客们通过跳船而不是处理问题来显示他们的真面目，然后我们得到了一个小丑来处理这件事，他把整个事情搞砸了，而欧盟一直在努力与之合作，因为尽管有这篇报道，他们还是想让我们成为一个榜样。
我们真的应该试着在其他地方达成贸易协议，而不是把我们所有的时间都花在名义上的脱欧上，这就像试图得到敌人的宽恕，而这个敌人却想现在就置你于死地。
至少我们应该达成其他贸易协议，然后再回到欧洲
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
barryvmEuropean unx
IMHO, this is basically meaningless without actual policies proposed by a political party with a chance to form a government.
Wanting a better trade deal or closer cooperation on science is different from being in favour of the trade off in benefits and obligations that an actual agreement would entail. The actual deal could be a lot less popular than the idea of a deal.
Being in favour of specific agreements that can be more or less described (e.g. single market membership) means nothing if no political party is willing to consider or negotiate it. If both major parties ignore the issue, then that blocks any progress on that front.
The reality is that no changes to the current agreement, if the EU is actually willing to negotiate that, will fundamentally mitigate the damage done by Brexit. Without fundamental changes to the UK's position as expressed by its politicians, the scope for improvements and changes will be very limited. Note that there is no guaranteed solution to any problem, let alone a tangled one such as this. The fact that the UK in general doesn't like its current position regarding the EU means very little. It is perfectly possible that no possible post-Brexit position (a trade deal, single market membership, even EU membership) will be politically stable. It's also possible that the UK's political system simply does not have the capacity or legitimacy to negotiate and uphold far reaching international treaties such as these any more.
Personally, I would be very much surprised if the UK rejoins either the single market or the EU proper without first going through political and electoral reform. First-past-the-post, the resultant political duopoly and the electoral calculus it creates are the major things blocking it from meaningfully engaging with the EU (and many internal issues besides). Of course, political and electoral reform is also not on the table at the present time, so this is probably also not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The UK's political system is, to put it mildly, resistant to reform.
The most probable outcome is IMHO that UK's political parties will refuse to engage on this. It's just so much easier to not try to untangle this particular knot and hope it all goes away. If nothing changes regarding the major parties' position (and there seems little scope for that), then no one will try any substantial changes or fixes for the next one or two parliamentary terms.
恕我直言，如果没有一个有机会组建政府的政党提出实际的政策，这基本上就是没有意义的。
想要一个更好的贸易协议或更紧密的科学合作，与赞成在利益和义务上进行权衡（这是一个实际的协议所需要的）是不同的。落在纸上的实际协议可能远不如想法中的协议那么受欢迎。
如果没有政党愿意考虑或谈判，支持或多或少可以描述的具体协议（比如单一市场成员资格）就没有任何意义。如果两大党都忽视这个问题，那么就会阻碍这方面的任何进展。
现实情况是，如果欧盟真的愿意就此进行谈判，对现有协议的任何修改都不会从根本上减轻英国脱欧造成的损害。如果不像英国政界人士所表达的那样，从根本上改变英国的立场，那么改善和改变的空间将非常有限。请注意，任何问题都没有保证的解决方案，更不用说像这样纠缠不清的问题了。英国总体上不喜欢其目前对欧盟的立场，这一事实意义不大。完全有可能的是，英国脱欧后，任何可能的立场（贸易协议、单一市场成员国，甚至欧盟成员国）都不会在政治上保持稳定。还有一种可能是，英国的政治体系根本不具备谈判和维护此类影响深远的国际条约的能力或合法性。
在我个人看来，如果英国在不首先进行政治和选举改革的情况下重新加入单一市场或欧盟，我会感到非常惊讶。简单多数制，由此产生的政治双寡头垄断和由此产生的选举计算是阻碍它与欧盟进行有意义接触的主要因素（此外还有许多内部问题）。当然，政治和选举改革目前也不在讨论之列，因此在可预见的未来，这可能也不会发生。委婉地说，英国的政治体制抵制改革。
在我看来，最有可能的结果是，英国各政党将拒绝参与此事。不去试图解开这个特殊的死结，祈祷它会自行消解要容易得多。如果主要政党的立场没有改变（似乎没有什么余地），那么在接下来的一两个议会任期内，没有人会尝试任何实质性的改变或修正的。
IMHO, this is basically meaningless without actual policies proposed by a political party with a chance to form a government.
Wanting a better trade deal or closer cooperation on science is different from being in favour of the trade off in benefits and obligations that an actual agreement would entail. The actual deal could be a lot less popular than the idea of a deal.
Being in favour of specific agreements that can be more or less described (e.g. single market membership) means nothing if no political party is willing to consider or negotiate it. If both major parties ignore the issue, then that blocks any progress on that front.
The reality is that no changes to the current agreement, if the EU is actually willing to negotiate that, will fundamentally mitigate the damage done by Brexit. Without fundamental changes to the UK's position as expressed by its politicians, the scope for improvements and changes will be very limited. Note that there is no guaranteed solution to any problem, let alone a tangled one such as this. The fact that the UK in general doesn't like its current position regarding the EU means very little. It is perfectly possible that no possible post-Brexit position (a trade deal, single market membership, even EU membership) will be politically stable. It's also possible that the UK's political system simply does not have the capacity or legitimacy to negotiate and uphold far reaching international treaties such as these any more.
Personally, I would be very much surprised if the UK rejoins either the single market or the EU proper without first going through political and electoral reform. First-past-the-post, the resultant political duopoly and the electoral calculus it creates are the major things blocking it from meaningfully engaging with the EU (and many internal issues besides). Of course, political and electoral reform is also not on the table at the present time, so this is probably also not going to happen in the foreseeable future. The UK's political system is, to put it mildly, resistant to reform.
The most probable outcome is IMHO that UK's political parties will refuse to engage on this. It's just so much easier to not try to untangle this particular knot and hope it all goes away. If nothing changes regarding the major parties' position (and there seems little scope for that), then no one will try any substantial changes or fixes for the next one or two parliamentary terms.
恕我直言，如果没有一个有机会组建政府的政党提出实际的政策，这基本上就是没有意义的。
想要一个更好的贸易协议或更紧密的科学合作，与赞成在利益和义务上进行权衡（这是一个实际的协议所需要的）是不同的。落在纸上的实际协议可能远不如想法中的协议那么受欢迎。
如果没有政党愿意考虑或谈判，支持或多或少可以描述的具体协议（比如单一市场成员资格）就没有任何意义。如果两大党都忽视这个问题，那么就会阻碍这方面的任何进展。
现实情况是，如果欧盟真的愿意就此进行谈判，对现有协议的任何修改都不会从根本上减轻英国脱欧造成的损害。如果不像英国政界人士所表达的那样，从根本上改变英国的立场，那么改善和改变的空间将非常有限。请注意，任何问题都没有保证的解决方案，更不用说像这样纠缠不清的问题了。英国总体上不喜欢其目前对欧盟的立场，这一事实意义不大。完全有可能的是，英国脱欧后，任何可能的立场（贸易协议、单一市场成员国，甚至欧盟成员国）都不会在政治上保持稳定。还有一种可能是，英国的政治体系根本不具备谈判和维护此类影响深远的国际条约的能力或合法性。
在我个人看来，如果英国在不首先进行政治和选举改革的情况下重新加入单一市场或欧盟，我会感到非常惊讶。简单多数制，由此产生的政治双寡头垄断和由此产生的选举计算是阻碍它与欧盟进行有意义接触的主要因素（此外还有许多内部问题）。当然，政治和选举改革目前也不在讨论之列，因此在可预见的未来，这可能也不会发生。委婉地说，英国的政治体制抵制改革。
在我看来，最有可能的结果是，英国各政党将拒绝参与此事。不去试图解开这个特殊的死结，祈祷它会自行消解要容易得多。如果主要政党的立场没有改变（似乎没有什么余地），那么在接下来的一两个议会任期内，没有人会尝试任何实质性的改变或修正的。
shatty_pants
There is zero chance of the UK rejoining the EU unless a rejoin party is created, wins a landslide, then negotiates us back in, or the Liberals go for gold on it. Labour/conservatives will not get us back in.
英国重新加入欧盟的可能性为零，除非成立一个“重新加入党”，赢得压倒性胜利，然后通过谈判让我们重新加入欧盟，或者自由党在这方面全力以赴。工党/保守党不会让我们回归的。
There is zero chance of the UK rejoining the EU unless a rejoin party is created, wins a landslide, then negotiates us back in, or the Liberals go for gold on it. Labour/conservatives will not get us back in.
英国重新加入欧盟的可能性为零，除非成立一个“重新加入党”，赢得压倒性胜利，然后通过谈判让我们重新加入欧盟，或者自由党在这方面全力以赴。工党/保守党不会让我们回归的。
barryvmEuropean unx
I more or less agree.
There could have been a window when the consequences of Brexit became apparent, but it seems closed now. The opposition will try to play it safe in an effort to attract as many of the erstwhile Brexit voters as they can and no substantial change in the UK's policy regarding the EU is the price of that.
The alternative route would be ending the political duopoly through election reform, but that doesn't seem likely to happen either. The UK's political system seems very resistant to reform (which is ironic given the absence of any safeguards) and Brexit has probably destroyed any opportunity for another constitutional change for the foreseeable future.
A third party victory still seems unlikely though. By far the most likely outcome is that the UK gets stuck in its current position for a few decades, unable to muster the political will to rejoin the single market, but also unable to leave the EU's economic and regulatory orbit.
我或多或少赞同。
当英国脱欧的后果变得明显时，可能会有一个窗口，但现在似乎关闭了。反对派将尽可能谨慎行事，以吸引尽可能多的以往支持英国脱欧的选民，而英国对欧盟的政策不会发生实质性变化就是代价。
另一种途径是通过选举改革来结束政治上的双头垄断，但这似乎也不太可能发生。英国的政治体制似乎非常抗拒改革（鉴于缺乏任何保障措施，这是具有讽刺意味的），在可预见的未来，英国脱欧可能已经摧毁了再次进行宪法改革的任何机会。
然而，第三政党似乎仍不太可能获胜。到目前为止，最可能的结果是，英国在未来几十年里滞于目前的境地，既无法凝聚重新加入单一市场的政治意愿，也无法脱离欧盟的经济和监管轨道。
I more or less agree.
There could have been a window when the consequences of Brexit became apparent, but it seems closed now. The opposition will try to play it safe in an effort to attract as many of the erstwhile Brexit voters as they can and no substantial change in the UK's policy regarding the EU is the price of that.
The alternative route would be ending the political duopoly through election reform, but that doesn't seem likely to happen either. The UK's political system seems very resistant to reform (which is ironic given the absence of any safeguards) and Brexit has probably destroyed any opportunity for another constitutional change for the foreseeable future.
A third party victory still seems unlikely though. By far the most likely outcome is that the UK gets stuck in its current position for a few decades, unable to muster the political will to rejoin the single market, but also unable to leave the EU's economic and regulatory orbit.
我或多或少赞同。
当英国脱欧的后果变得明显时，可能会有一个窗口，但现在似乎关闭了。反对派将尽可能谨慎行事，以吸引尽可能多的以往支持英国脱欧的选民，而英国对欧盟的政策不会发生实质性变化就是代价。
另一种途径是通过选举改革来结束政治上的双头垄断，但这似乎也不太可能发生。英国的政治体制似乎非常抗拒改革（鉴于缺乏任何保障措施，这是具有讽刺意味的），在可预见的未来，英国脱欧可能已经摧毁了再次进行宪法改革的任何机会。
然而，第三政党似乎仍不太可能获胜。到目前为止，最可能的结果是，英国在未来几十年里滞于目前的境地，既无法凝聚重新加入单一市场的政治意愿，也无法脱离欧盟的经济和监管轨道。
purpleduckduckgoose
Kind of obvious really? Having trade deals with the rest of the world is important obviously but the EU market is just across the Channel and when it comes to things like policing, defence agreements and cooperation etc Europe is undeniably an important partner.
真的很明显吧？与世界其他地区达成贸易协议显然很重要，但欧盟市场就在海峡对岸，当涉及到警务、防务协议和合作等问题时，欧洲无疑是一个重要的合作伙伴。
Kind of obvious really? Having trade deals with the rest of the world is important obviously but the EU market is just across the Channel and when it comes to things like policing, defence agreements and cooperation etc Europe is undeniably an important partner.
真的很明显吧？与世界其他地区达成贸易协议显然很重要，但欧盟市场就在海峡对岸，当涉及到警务、防务协议和合作等问题时，欧洲无疑是一个重要的合作伙伴。
JayR_97Greater Manchester
The problem is a lot of people basically used Brexit as a protest vote. I dont think they ever expected to actually win.
问题是很多人基本上把脱欧作为一种“抗议投票”。我不认为他们真的指望会赢（结果玩脱了）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The problem is a lot of people basically used Brexit as a protest vote. I dont think they ever expected to actually win.
问题是很多人基本上把脱欧作为一种“抗议投票”。我不认为他们真的指望会赢（结果玩脱了）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
thetenofswords
My dad voted for Brexit as a protest vote and didn't expect it to win, he just wanted to spook "the elites". On the day of the vote he blustered for a bit about how the EU was shite anyway and he was glad the establishment had been given a bloody nose. Now he completely accepts that leaving has been catastrophic.
我爸爸投票支持英国脱欧就是当成一种“抗议投票”，他没想到英国脱欧真会赢，他只是想吓吓“精英们”。在投票当天，他咆哮了几句，说欧盟不管怎样都是垃圾，他很高兴建制派受到了打击。现在他完全承认离开欧盟是灾难性的。
My dad voted for Brexit as a protest vote and didn't expect it to win, he just wanted to spook "the elites". On the day of the vote he blustered for a bit about how the EU was shite anyway and he was glad the establishment had been given a bloody nose. Now he completely accepts that leaving has been catastrophic.
我爸爸投票支持英国脱欧就是当成一种“抗议投票”，他没想到英国脱欧真会赢，他只是想吓吓“精英们”。在投票当天，他咆哮了几句，说欧盟不管怎样都是垃圾，他很高兴建制派受到了打击。现在他完全承认离开欧盟是灾难性的。
Initial-Laugh1442
Democratic choice it was. Choices have consequences ... few more years outside the EU will inform people about said consequences better than any leaflet.
这就是民主的选择。选择是有后果的……离开欧盟后再过几年，将比任何传单都能更好地告知人们上述后果。
Democratic choice it was. Choices have consequences ... few more years outside the EU will inform people about said consequences better than any leaflet.
这就是民主的选择。选择是有后果的……离开欧盟后再过几年，将比任何传单都能更好地告知人们上述后果。
Red-White-Green
Was it really a democratic choice?
Cambridge Analytica was investigated for interference in the vote. They collected the publics data points from their Facebook profiles and bombarded them with tailored political ads and memes.
Even if the investigation against them was dropped, I'm certain that their tactics tipped the vote towards Leave.
这真的是一个民主的选择吗？
剑桥分析公司因干预投票而受到调查。他们从他们的Facebook个人资料中收集公众数据点，并用量身定制的政治广告和表情包轰炸他们。
即使对他们的调查被撤销，我敢肯定，他们当时的策略使得投票倾向于脱欧。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Was it really a democratic choice?
Cambridge Analytica was investigated for interference in the vote. They collected the publics data points from their Facebook profiles and bombarded them with tailored political ads and memes.
Even if the investigation against them was dropped, I'm certain that their tactics tipped the vote towards Leave.
这真的是一个民主的选择吗？
剑桥分析公司因干预投票而受到调查。他们从他们的Facebook个人资料中收集公众数据点，并用量身定制的政治广告和表情包轰炸他们。
即使对他们的调查被撤销，我敢肯定，他们当时的策略使得投票倾向于脱欧。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Unlikely_Alps7091
Anyone else sick of media lying about what we all think?
还有谁厌倦了媒体对我们的想法撒谎吗？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Anyone else sick of media lying about what we all think?
还有谁厌倦了媒体对我们的想法撒谎吗？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
VidiVentura
I mean, there are several thousand surveys that all come up with the same answer.
It was always going to swing because of demographics, old people were the highest voting population and you can't vote when you're dead. Because of covid we lost a shittonne more of these voters than we usually would of.
Combine that with all the people who suffered because of the exit, and I gotta ask - TF could you expect otherwise?
我想说，有几千个调查都得出了同样的答案。
由于人口统计数据的原因，它总是会摇摆不定，老年人是投票率最高的人群，当你死了你就不能投票了。因为新冠疫情，我们失去了比平时更多的选民。
再加上所有因为脱欧而受苦的人，我不得不问——你还能指望什么？
I mean, there are several thousand surveys that all come up with the same answer.
It was always going to swing because of demographics, old people were the highest voting population and you can't vote when you're dead. Because of covid we lost a shittonne more of these voters than we usually would of.
Combine that with all the people who suffered because of the exit, and I gotta ask - TF could you expect otherwise?
我想说，有几千个调查都得出了同样的答案。
由于人口统计数据的原因，它总是会摇摆不定，老年人是投票率最高的人群，当你死了你就不能投票了。因为新冠疫情，我们失去了比平时更多的选民。
再加上所有因为脱欧而受苦的人，我不得不问——你还能指望什么？
SoftwareWoods
Oh boy, a totally non-bias article from the guardian.
I’m sure if you got a general census, most people probably dislike the EU. Like while government botched it, the EU was trying very hard to make it worse for the UK on leaving, to avoid more people doing so. Effectively showing their true colours.
哦，这是一篇来自《卫报》的完全没有偏见的文章（反讽）。
我敢肯定，如果你做一个全面的人口普查，大多数人可能不喜欢欧盟。就像政府搞砸了这件事一样，欧盟也在努力让英国在脱欧时处境更糟，以避免更多国家脱欧。有效地展示了他们的真面目。
Oh boy, a totally non-bias article from the guardian.
I’m sure if you got a general census, most people probably dislike the EU. Like while government botched it, the EU was trying very hard to make it worse for the UK on leaving, to avoid more people doing so. Effectively showing their true colours.
哦，这是一篇来自《卫报》的完全没有偏见的文章（反讽）。
我敢肯定，如果你做一个全面的人口普查，大多数人可能不喜欢欧盟。就像政府搞砸了这件事一样，欧盟也在努力让英国在脱欧时处境更糟，以避免更多国家脱欧。有效地展示了他们的真面目。
Unlucky-Jello-5660
How has the EU made it harder than needed ?
欧盟是怎么个让它变得比应得的更困难的？
How has the EU made it harder than needed ?
欧盟是怎么个让它变得比应得的更困难的？
SoftwareWoods
There's normally a case of negotiating between both parties, this was meant to still establish trading and such between both despite not being in the same unx anymore.
That was the plan, however the EU was making itself incredibly hard to work with despite no actual hurdles being there (since we just came out of it, not like there's difference in laws, etc), essentially as an attempt of screwing us over, and to make an example of us against other countries so they don't get any ideas about leaving (Poland, Netherlands, Greece, etc).
I probably should have explained it better but by harder I meant more difficult/more hostile than it needed to be.
通常情况下，双方之间会进行谈判，这意味着尽管双方不再属于同一个联盟，但仍然可以建立贸易等等。
这就是计划，然而欧盟让自己难以置信地难以合作，尽管没有实际的障碍（因为我们刚刚脱离欧盟，法律上似乎并没有什么不同，等等），本质上这就是为了玩我们，把我们在其他国家（波兰、荷兰、希腊等）面前树个典型，这样他们就不会有任何离开的想法了。
我可能应该更好地解释它，但我所说的“更难”是指比实际情况更困难/更具敌意。
There's normally a case of negotiating between both parties, this was meant to still establish trading and such between both despite not being in the same unx anymore.
That was the plan, however the EU was making itself incredibly hard to work with despite no actual hurdles being there (since we just came out of it, not like there's difference in laws, etc), essentially as an attempt of screwing us over, and to make an example of us against other countries so they don't get any ideas about leaving (Poland, Netherlands, Greece, etc).
I probably should have explained it better but by harder I meant more difficult/more hostile than it needed to be.
通常情况下，双方之间会进行谈判，这意味着尽管双方不再属于同一个联盟，但仍然可以建立贸易等等。
这就是计划，然而欧盟让自己难以置信地难以合作，尽管没有实际的障碍（因为我们刚刚脱离欧盟，法律上似乎并没有什么不同，等等），本质上这就是为了玩我们，把我们在其他国家（波兰、荷兰、希腊等）面前树个典型，这样他们就不会有任何离开的想法了。
我可能应该更好地解释它，但我所说的“更难”是指比实际情况更困难/更具敌意。
ScreamOfVengeanceScotland
It is not a huge shift. The swivel eyed loons in the Tory party voted in their representatives as leaders so we got the worst possible deal.
这不是一个巨大的转变。保守党的SB们把他们的代表选为领导人，所以我们得到了最糟糕的脱欧协议。
It is not a huge shift. The swivel eyed loons in the Tory party voted in their representatives as leaders so we got the worst possible deal.
这不是一个巨大的转变。保守党的SB们把他们的代表选为领导人，所以我们得到了最糟糕的脱欧协议。
Red-White-Green
I'd love for the UK to rejoin the EU but the reality is, we'd never get the same cushy deal we had before.
我希望英国重新加入欧盟，但现实是，我们永远不会像以前那样轻松地达成协议。
I'd love for the UK to rejoin the EU but the reality is, we'd never get the same cushy deal we had before.
我希望英国重新加入欧盟，但现实是，我们永远不会像以前那样轻松地达成协议。
grrrranm
No they don't, they really don't! Just saying it over and over again is rejoin desperately trying to stay relevant!
不，他们没有，他们真的没有！只是在一遍又一遍地拼命说要重新加入，为了保持自己的重要性！
No they don't, they really don't! Just saying it over and over again is rejoin desperately trying to stay relevant!
不，他们没有，他们真的没有！只是在一遍又一遍地拼命说要重新加入，为了保持自己的重要性！
castorkrieg
EU be like: No thanks, we had enough of your bitching about everything.
欧盟会说：不了，谢谢，我们已经受够了你们对一切的抱怨。
EU be like: No thanks, we had enough of your bitching about everything.
欧盟会说：不了，谢谢，我们已经受够了你们对一切的抱怨。
notoriousnationality
Brexit was an IQ test.
脱欧就是一场智商测试。
Brexit was an IQ test.
脱欧就是一场智商测试。
很赞 1
收藏