You might think. The UK would be the most prominent example and in fact has been a much more predictable and consistent trading and negotiating partner than the USA

▲

philipallstar an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The UK hasn't really changed, regardless of who's in charge, in 20 years. Because it's mostly run by the state and not by the politicians.

▲

Symbiote an hour ago | parent | next [-]

In case you hadn't noticed, within the last 20 years the UK made an enormous constitutional change by leaving the EU.

▲

classified 33 minutes ago | parent [-]

But no government has reversed that step.

	▲	vrganj a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah but that step itself was a dramatic change within said 20 year timeframe

▲

tyrabound 33 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

You didn’t say it and it may not occur to you, but you are correct, the UK is among the many sham democracies, which is arguably the primary objective of “democracies”; an illusion supported by a concept called choice supportive bias, i.e., if you believe the outcome of something was due to your own action, choice, or agency you’re prone to accept it, defend it, not question it, and ignore its detrimental effects.

It’s a rather diabolical form of control, democracy. “You have fake choices and you like … nay, you love what you choose”, quite literally. You have to love it, because you have to believe it’s true. And that’s where they latched onto your mind.

It’s quite ingeniou.

▲

mschuster91 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> The UK would be the most prominent example and in fact has been a much more predictable and consistent trading and negotiating partner than the USA

European here: Oh hell no. The Brexit breakup drama was years of chaos with each of the braindead Prime Ministers somehow managing to make things worse.

▲

Normal_gaussian an hour ago | parent | next [-]

That's quite a take.

The EU-UK negotiations were mired in issues of EU maximalism; attempting to force each PM to agree a worse deal knowing not agreeing to it would cause short term pain for that PMs political situation. Its quite the thing that the UK managed to hold on as much as it did.

The UK was on the back foot in all negotiations having been forced into the Brexit outcome.

For all the nonsense printed in the UK and Continental presses, the UK had a surprisingly consistent position through the entire thing with clear threads of staff and policies still running to today.

	▲	benj111 24 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		What? "Forced into the Brexit outcome" Cameron stepped down after he shat the bed, every PM was a Tory. And yeah, the position was consistent. Before it was 'we could have all the benefits of being in the EU, with none of the down sides'. We could have soft Brexit, or the less popular hard Brexit. Teresa Mays position was "Brexit means Brexit" and non of the others had a clue either. Because they promised everything to everyone. In the event we got a harder Brexit than the hardest Brexit discussed before the vote. So if you want to say the UK was consistent, I say fuck you to the civil servants that consistently ignored the conversation prior to the vote.

▲

benj111 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It still is.

We still aren't doing border checks on EU imports.

Still, Boris Johnson wasn't as bad as Trump.