Forum menu
Can you really not see a difference between simple straightforward nationalism and 'petty' nationalism ?
It is fair to call the SNP and their supporters nationalists. And they can make the nationalist case without engaging in petty nationalism.
Likewise there is absolutely nothing wrong with being patriotic, but patriotism takes a very different character when it expresses itself as jingoism.
The nationalist argument is a perfectly valid argument imo even if I don't necessarily agree with it. Pointless petty and meaningless nationalism isn't imo valid.
Thanks for the clarification
Withdraws objection.
No it doesn't. That is precisely why reform of the House of Lords is an ongoing issue which has never been resolved.
The issue seems to be phrased far more around the process/membership of the HoL rather than how well it does/doesn't do its job. For all the obvious faults in the design, I doubt that a democratic process would deliver the level and breadth of expertise that currently sits within the HoL especially in relation to the levels and breadth that sits in the HoC
For all it's quirks, my experience from listening/ reading what is said overseas it that our systems is one that is eyed with respect rather than derision.
ernie_lynch - Member
Those who argue in favour of Scotland breaking way from the rest of the UK easily fall within the accepted definition of the term separatist...
The unionists are simply trying to use any term that has negative connotations.
Meanwhile today the USA celebrates Independence, not Separation Day.
Meanwhile today the USA celebrates Independence, not Separation Day.
....... and we call it thanksgiving 😉
my experience from listening/ reading what is said overseas it that our systems is one that is eyed with respect rather than derision.
Yes we are still a shinning beacon of democracy that the entire world looks up to. We are awesome , we know and they know it and the whole world wish they entrenched birthright based on land ownership going back centuries.
Any chance you could explain why none of them emulated this set up [ except when we imposed it] and so many left the empire?
there are other ways to get the expertise other than political patronage and birthright. all of them more democratic as it is hard to think of anything less democratic.
Ps Gove will be on the phone for you to [s]write[/s] right the politics syllabus 😉
They like the castles. People overseas like the castles and the Queen and the golden carriage and the pomp and circumstance. They like the plucky Brit with the stiff upper lip (though not so much when they're bayoneting the natives). They like the story about how it's still legal to shoot a Welshman in Bristol or whatever.
The history is what they like. As a democratic system, it leaves a lot to be desired, which is why not many other countries use it.
However you interpret it the [b]unelected[/b] house of lords still added an amendment to a bill, the amendment was not debated in the commons .This amendment resulted in a loss of powers for the[b] elected [/b]Scottish parliament
@gordimhor they were no loss of powers, there were a loss of proposed powers. If they were so important then why were they not discussed in the HoC after the revisions by the Lords. The Commons can overrule any revisions. The HoL has breadth of knowledge compared to the Scottish Assembly or the HoC.
We seem to be criticising the house of Lords but not addressing the problem of no second chamber for an iScotland. Yes the house of Lords can be improved on but no second chamber for iScotland can also. I personally do not think iScotland would be too wee to have a proper two chamber system and this should be something voters in Scotland should be interested in. I often hear separatists using the phrase "a fairer more democractic society", IMHO no second chamber means a less democratic society.
[list]@sadmadalan Fergus Ewing Scottish Energy Minister,(edit) said the issue concerned the Scottish govt existing powers. This is from a press release on 2/11/13
Mr Ewing has also challenged Mr Davey to explain a last minute amendment to the UK Energy Bill that will remove the Scottish Government’s existing powers and discretion over support for renewable technologies across Scotland. The UK Government’s amendment is to be debated by the House of Lords on Monday November 4, 2013.
Rumble, rumble, rumble.....,,,
Edit: echo not required
The unionists are simply trying to use any term that has negative connotations.Meanwhile today the USA celebrates Independence, not Separation Day.
Why do you think that the term "separatist" has negative connotations ? I don't think it has. Is the term "Basque separatist" negative while "Basque independentist" acceptable ?
I personally don't like using the term 'pro-independence' because I disagree with the nats that separating Scotland from the rest of the union will make Scotland significantly more independent.
I believe that a separate Scotland will be more dependent on institutions such as the EU and have less input than it has now. Similarly a separate Scotland will still be heavily reliant on UK institutions such as the City of London but have no input over control and regulation as it does now. In another example the taxation policy of a separate Scotland will be heavily influenced by the taxation policy of the UK despite the fact that unlike now they will have no input.
Putting yourself more at the mercy of things which you have less control over does not represent a greater level of independence imo. Even if they do give you your own seat at the UN.
So call it "independence" if you wish but I would rather not subscribe to what I consider to be a misleading term.
The way forward for greater autonomy and control of the conditions which affect the lives of ordinary Scots is not by breaking away from the rest of the UK. imo.
ernie_lynch - Member
...The way forward for greater autonomy and control of the conditions which affect the lives of ordinary Scots is not by breaking away from the rest of the UK. imo.
Well we'll soon find out. 75 days.
I suspect that in 75 days time my opinion which you've just quoted will be exactly the same.
I can't be certain of course, but it's unlikely to change.
However you interpret it the unelected house of lords still added an amendment to a bill, the amendment was not debated in the commons .This amendment resulted in a loss of powers for the elected Scottish parliament
That will be why it is the envy of the world. This also, somewhat, counters the view it has no power.
IMHO no second chamber means a less democratic society.
I agree and I am sure power crazy wee eck is drawing up a list of people that will serve and pass it on to their children for ever more. THM is ready to praise it as being wise 😛 Its not trolling to repeat your views or question them. We all know you have no reply
Rumble, rumble, rumble
Thoughts bouncing around inside your hollow head?
Hiding behind a troll claim wont make your position anymore credible but at least you have the sense to not defend the indefensible
The world does not envy our system it is why they do other things.
Thoughts bouncing around inside your hollow head?
😀 😀
Dodgy yS practices on C4 at 8 (phew still on the train for that) then Peston ("Welllllll Huw....) on the biased (!!) Beeb at 9
Even less to learn that "more Lance" at 9 on C4. Appropriate level of telling the truth perhaps? From a viewing perspective I reckon lance gets it just
What amazes me is what delicate flowers these big businessmen are.*
What's also amazing is that the boss of Braehead Travel sent a message to all his employees telling them to vote No, and somehow he's the victim.
* Actually it's only a couple, and it's all very vague what they think might have been intimated to them by persons unknown.
Rather ironic what the dispatches website says
Antony Barnett goes on the campaign trail with [b]both sides[/b] of the Scottish independence debate to investigate[b] claims of dubious tactics and misinformation.[/b]
My emphasis obviously.
So both sides not just one...I think I know which you think comes out best without either of us bothering to watch it
EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28197298
EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor:
Sounds a lot like what several of us have been saying, along with some of official legal advice. Don't worry though, THM will be along shortly to tell the Prof that she's wrong.
In other news, C4's Dispatches are giving both sides a bit of a beating for some of the pressure and underhand tactics that are going on.
She is obviously impartial coming from Scotland herself. Being as the white paper is based on a series of assumptions another assumption about automatic EU membership is just what the nats ordered.
She is obviously impartial coming from Scotland herself. Being as the white paper is based on a series of assumptions another assumption about automatic EU membership is just what the nats ordered.
Right, so a Professor at one of the top universities in the world and en expert on EU law and you're dismissing her as unreliable because she's Scottish?
Don't worry though, THM will be along shortly to tell the Prof that she's wrong.
Nah, missed it. Got in and the programme on Uni Challenge (lots of very bright people from elite institutions) seemed far more interesting and factual. Starter for ten, is a currency an asset, a liability or neither......
Still Peston (errr, we don't know the answer) or lance at 9?!?...yS or LA for the great dishonesties of our time......
Did you expect some deep and well reasoned argument from Faster then
Even when wrong on simple facts of trams and the SNP the response was to just rant about nats.
From the article - the key points
Prof Douglas-Scott acknowledged that there was no precedent within EU law for a territory of an existing member state becoming independent and wishing to retain EU membership, and the treaties do not provide for such an event.But she said EU law characteristically takes a "pragmatic and purposive approach" to pressing issues that are not dealt with by specific treaty provisions.
She added: "There was no explicit provision in the treaties capable of dealing with the situation of German unification in the 1990s.
"But the (then) EEC Institutions responded to this event in a pragmatic and expedient manner, enabling a united Germany to become a member of the EU without long drawn out negotiations, accession proceedings or legal wranglings."
'Values and norms'
Prof Douglas-Scott said she took issue with Mr Barroso's assessment that it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the EU for four main reasons.She explained: "First, it is inconsistent with previous Commission pronouncements on the issue of Scottish independence. Second, it threatens to cast out Scotland from the EU, thus fracturing the Single Market, ignoring acquired rights and obligations of good faith.
"Third, it ignores the existence and growth of EU citizenship as elucidated in case law of the European Court. Lastly, it is difficult to reconcile with the EU's values and norms as enshrined in the general principles and spirit of the Treaties."
She added: "Rebuffing or alienating a country such as Scotland, that wants to maintain EU membership, and is keen to stress its European credentials, will hardly do much for the EU's image.
"The EU ought to be showing what it can do for its citizens, not rebuffing them."
Responding to Prof Douglas-Scott's paper, a spokesman for the UK government said: "There is no doubt the route into Europe for a separate Scotland would be uncertain and the weight of expert evidence is against the unprecedented use of Article 48.
SO THM did you watch Dispatches - would you like a link?
Both sides guilty and not just YS - surprising eh.
Would you like to call me a troll or do you prefer to ignore my posts as it highlights your glaring, and inaccurate, one sided view? I very much doubt you will choose to retract, in the face of facts that counter your view, even though the programme is freely available for all to see.
Can I call you the DO for that comment then as it is economical with the actualité 😉
EDIT : Crossed posts innit
THM watching tv earlier tonight
[img] 
[/img]
Right, so a Professor at one of the top universities in the world and en expert on EU law and you're dismissing her as unreliable because she's Scottish?
I said impartial not unreliable old chum.
It disturbs me to find myself most commonly in agreement with Junkyard.
JY I suggest you calm down, especially taking into consideration that you practically had a mental breakdown online a few pages back. You are an intellectual heavyweight, but only in your own opinion unfortunately.
More rumbling..... 😀 (extreme hunger messes with the mind!)
I said impartial not unreliable old chum.
Fair play, but do they not amount to the same thing in this context?
I definitely meant impartial. She undoubtedly knows her stuff about the EU I just doubt that she is impartial on the subject. After all there is more support among Scot expats than there is in Scots actually living in Scotland for independence according to some polls I have seen.
[img] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Edinburgh_tram_02.jp g" target="_blank">
Watch out FnF these trams are very quiet
Prof Sionaidh Douglas-Scott
Nice impartial name 😀
JY I suggest you calm down, especially taking into consideration that you practically had a mental breakdown online a few pages back. You are an intellectual heavyweight, but only in your own opinion unfortunately.
I am nothing but calm but a broad ranging assault wont cover up that when you are clearly wrong you respond by simplying carrying on ranting at nats *. Personally I would consider this to be yet another example of ranting
* lolz at the irony you think I am the one becoming angry here and a bit mental and you post that.
[quote=bencooper ]EU entry would be simple, according to an Oxford professor
Oh good. Would be handy to be able to send my kids to uni for free.
Good to see you have calmed down old bean. Think calm thoughts, control your breathing, unclench your fists etc. All I did was say nats...
of the SNP were responsible for the trams and then got "tired and emmotional" when a number of posters pointed out the FACT that the SNP actually opposed the legislation, but were outvoted, and not responsible.
FTFY
With some more ad homs from you I might just reach the tranquillity and zen like calm enlightenment that blind ignorance and denial seems to have brought to you 😉
You wont admit you were wrong even though we all know you were
Shall we move on or do you want to insult me a bit more first?
Maybe it's time this thread is closed. It seems to have degenerated into petty name calling, trolling and no analysis or debate.
It seems to have degenerated into petty name calling, trolling and no analysis or debate.
Spot the common denominator? Remove that and the thread is pretty civil and interesting.
I knew some clever person would spot that that oxford professor was Scottish 😉
Okay, so Scottish people are unreliable when they're talking about independence? Does that apply to No-voting Scots like Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown? Or does it only apply to Scots who say things that might be construed as helping the Yes side?
That circular argument has been tried on this thread before - an expert was accused of being a Yes supporter, the evidence was that they said something that agreed with the Yes position.
If by civilised you mean making claims you cannot back up then crying troll then yes it is very civilised.
Nothing i said in my previous post did anything other than point out your somethingion of the dispatches programme was at odds with the facts, was biased and was one sided. Playing the man wont alter the fact you were incorrect in your analysis.
You know you cannot defend what you said as accurate hence you play me and not the point I made as you know you have no defence.
Okay, so Scottish people are unreliable when they're talking about independence? Does that apply to No-voting Scots like Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown?
It's reasonable to assume that most Scots have a biased opinion concerning whether Scotland should separate from the rest of the UK. Any opinions expressed with regards to that issue by Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown can only seen in the context of their bias. It would be ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
So in answer to your question of course the opinions of Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown should not be considered neutral and impartial.
What about people from elsewhere in the UK? Can they be impartial? Can anyone?
Some interesting points raised in Pestons program . In my opinion the most surprising one was that at the end he concluded economics is only one important factor to be considered among many including identity.
People are unreliable when they (1) are ignorant of the facts, (2) know the facts but forget them, (3) know that facts but prefer to lie, (4) know the facts but prefer to deceive the voters.
So start with a trained economist (MA no less) from Scotland's finest University who regularly states in public that a currency is an asset. 1,2,3 or 4 or a combination?
It's impossible to be neutral or unbiased but is is possible to stick to factual evidence. Funny how a whole range of people manage to do that even though they are on very different sides of the political and economic debate! Takes a magician to unite so many against himself.
qSome interesting points raised in Pestons program . In my opinion the most surprising one was that at the end he concluded economics is only one important factor to be considered among many including identity.
True and yet odd that the early poll indicated that £500 and the vote is yours pall!
People are unreliable when they (1) are ignorant of the facts, (2) know the facts but forget them, (3) know that facts but prefer to lie, (4) know the facts but prefer to deceive the voters
So pretty much every politician, then?
Unlike, say, academics at prestigious universities who have to produce peer-reviewed papers to get funding.
Every played poker with a prof Ben?
Anyway what's the issue with Europe? Smooth negotiations immediately and all done and dusted in 18 months. Yer man works miracles, he says so with a "straight" face (1,2,3 or 4?)
Aw shucks Thm you say the sweetest things but....no not for 500quid not even for 500 unicorns 😆
Every played poker with a prof Ben?
My dad only knows Gin Rummy.
Europe will be fudged, of course it will, because the alternative to not letting Scotland join will be a lot messier, and we meet the criteria anyway. Only an officious moron would make Scotland leave and then rejoin agin in a year or two.
And you only need to get 28 other countries to agree with that point of view to make it come true... 😉
Unlike, say, academics at prestigious universities who have to produce peer-reviewed papers to get funding.
Like Professor Adam Tomkins at the School of Law of the University of Glasgow ?
According to Professor Adam Tomkins :
[i] "It is clear that if we leave the UK then we would need to reapply to join the EU. To imagine that an independent Scotland could negotiate and ratify the terms of membership which the Scottish Government are proposing within an 18 month time-frame is hopelessly unrealistic"[/i]
http://news.stv.tv/politics/281876-law-professor-says-independent-scotlands-eu-membership-assured/
Fascinating ernie but what nationality is he ? 😉 [ not a real question to be clear]
It's impossible to be neutral or unbiased but is is possible to stick to factual evidence. Funny how a whole range of people manage to do that even though they are on very different sides of the political and economic debate!
Funny how folk only say this about the ones who agree with them and then ignore it when say their side use the figures of someone who then criticises their sides analysis [ cost setups for example]
You should have watched dispatches programme as it mentioned how the UK "neutrality" was not true [ in diplomatic communications] and they [ UK] put pressure on international figures and leaders to support the Union...see if you can name some it worked on.
Clearly Ys do exactly the same and put pressure on folk so that some wont speak out and feel silenced.Neither side, nor their supporters , are anywhere near impartial but some are way more biased than others
To try and claim your side is and the other is not is daft [ I am not sure if you are claiming this tbh.
Gordi, take it up with scotcen social research
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25846914
Their idea not mine. I would rather spend the money at the Peat Inn, Inverlochy or Altniharre than buying a yes vote!
Professor Adam Tomkins? This Professor Adam Tomkins?
[img] 
[/img]
https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfTomkins
Yeah, he's totally impartial 😀
Ah, but he's working at a Scottish Uni so is therefor not impartial and can't be trusted. See how that work? Silly, isn't it.
The argument from the Prof in Oxford and the legal advice given to the Government is that although that option is the most obvious in law, the situation isn't likely to occur to a whole host of things mentioned in both papers and reports. u But I feel we've been over this before.
[quote=bencooper ]Only an officious moron would make Scotland leave and then rejoin agin in a year or two.
You do remember we're talking about the EU? Do you not see the problem?
No one can predict what the EU will do and , given they fudged the Euro, stopped having referendum when they were not going their way and then claimed it was not a constitution then I am sure we can all agree they can do pretty much anything they please
Personally, given they are expansionist and the precedent[ish] of germany I think they will find a way to allow them to "remain" in the EU.
Most EU leaders think Cameron is an idiot - several have already said so - so I wouldn't put it past various EU leaders to wave Scotland in just to wind him up.
Yeah, he's totally impartial 😀
Erm, that was the point 🙄
It was in response to your apparent suggestion that politicians are biased but not academics, remember?
bencooper - MemberPeople are unreliable when they (1) are ignorant of the facts, (2) know the facts but forget them, (3) know that facts but prefer to lie, (4) know the facts but prefer to deceive the voters
So pretty much every politician, then?
Unlike, say, academics at prestigious universities who have to produce peer-reviewed papers to get funding.
Hence my comment : "Like Professor Adam Tomkins at the School of Law of the University of Glasgow?"
😀
No, I agree that academics can be biased - however they've got no intrinsic reason to be, unlike politicians, and without evidence you can't say an academic is biased just because they're Scottish.
So dispatches have you watched it yet 🙄
😆
which is it 1, 2 ,3 or 4 ?
8)
Where do you think they get their funding from Ben? You have watched the climate debate?
Why would Paul Krugman ever defend austerity?
Dodgy yS practices on C4 at 8 (phew still on the train for that) then Peston ("Welllllll Huw....) on the biased (!!) Beeb at 9
Even less to learn that "more Lance" at 9 on C4. Appropriate level of telling the truth perhaps? From a viewing perspective I reckon lance gets it just
You're so deep into your own comedy posting style that this post is barely comprehensible.
😆 😆
I appreciate that KB as does the DO - he knows how to keep things simply untrue much better than most.
Have you never heard Peston's reports on the news? Don't bet a beer on any report starting without Wellllllllllll Huw......
Better than most but not better than you?
Your assessment of the dispatches programme is at odds with what it actually did so heal thyself rather than keep moaning about his deceit /misrepresentation.
Calling me some more names wont make your account anymore accurate.
Crikey, hunger really plays with the mind doesn't it......it even starts to get embarrassing. Perhaps a little morsel might help avoid any more outings from under the bridge.....
Nah, missed it. Got in and the programme on Uni Challenge (lots of very bright people from elite institutions) seemed far more interesting and factual.
Salmond-esque degrees of misrepresentation to say otherwise Someone would be very proud!!!!
Meanwhile, in related news, more unsuccessfully trolling reported elsewhere according to the Torygraph
Alex Salmond has been accused of personally pressurising the body that represents Scotland's financial services to drop a report on independence, The Telegraph can disclose.The First Minister telephoned the chairman of the Scottish Financial Enterprise (SFE) last November and is said to have discouraged him from publishing a briefing paper on the referendum.
Both Mr Salmond and John Swinney, the finance minister, are also alleged to have rung senior executives of leading SFE member companies expressing their concerns about the paper.
A source at the trade body characterised the ministers' conversations as "forceful" and said the SNP Government had been "trying to discourage us from saying anything" on the referendum
The SFE defied Scottish Government pressure and published a report that contradicted some of Mr Salmond's most central claims on the country's finances after independence.
AS must be getting hungry too?
Is that better or worse than the PM using the Foreign office to try to get leaders of other countries to support the No side?
One is trying to get people to say what they think, the other is trying to stop people saying what they think.
Is that better or worse than .......
What if it was the same, would that make it ok ?
I'm sure it would. What do you think ?
Is that better or worse than the PM using the Foreign office to try to get leaders of other countries to support the No side?
Whatever happens in the division of oilfields after independence, Scots should rest assured that they will be one of the world'a leading producers and exporters of whataboutery.
Interesting thread here and IMO a preview of future attractions from an independent Scotland, racing to cut taxes to attract/retain businesses. The fact is someone else is going to have to make up the difference or public expenditure is going to fall.
[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/have-we-done-the-oil-industry-call-for-less-tax ]Oil Industry Tax Cuts Proposed[/url]
Whatever happens in the division of oilfields after independence, Scots should rest assured that they will be one of the world'a leading producers and exporters of whataboutery.
Seems like a pretty fair comment given that nearly half this thread is THM et al attacking Salmond for doing what every other politician under the sun is doing.
Crikey, hunger really plays with the mind doesn't it......it even starts to get embarrassing
To repeat calling me some more names wont make your account of the dispatches programme anymore accurate. You were incorrect and you have no defence so you are left with name calling only. Your were wrong everyone knows it even you. the fact you do this rather than retract is pathetic [ literally].
Yes the SNP have pressurised numerous bodies into taking up supportive positions or not publishing/ highlighting overly negative ones on independence
I know this will come as shock seeing as you[s]"chose"[/s] were too busy to watch the programme you mentioned but so has the UK government
So which are you here 1, 2, 3, or 4?
All politicians/both sides are a little bit duplicitous and pressure folk to say things that support their position. Obviously when china and Obama do this you highlight it as genuine support and just criticise the other side when they do it.
Some balance is required here THM and you are some way from it.
Claiming I troll and name call when you get facts wrong is an interesting tactic and one so tragic no t even the DO has done it yet.
[b]bencooper[/b]
Only an officious moron would make Scotland leave and then rejoin agin in a year or two.
The delay before re-joining would more reasonably be 3-5 years, it's highly unlikely it could be as short as 1 or 2, so such a longer delay doesn't look to be the work of a moron. It could be that Scotland could agree an immediate transition or fast track but that IMO means adopting the euro, the full EU book of legislation and an appropriately large budget contribution. Given the relatively small resources available to Scotland in terms of manpower that's a big ask given all the concurrent negotiations with the UK about separation.
@whatnobeer - AS is very much in the premier league of misrepresentation.