[Closed] Scotch nationalists: what will YOU do to support independent Catalunya?

@benn if everyone had self determination we In the UK would live in 60 million different countries

Apparently not only did most [b]Scots[/b]

Shit! Now it's really going to kick off. 😆

Drac - Moderator
Apparently not only did most Scots
Shit! Now it's really going to kick off.

So how did these ones impact on things north of the border
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_referendum#Past_referendums

[img] [/img]

For the first time ever I saw the Scotch in their natural habitat, and it weren't pretty. I'd seen them huddling in stations before, being loud but… this time I was surrounded. Everywhere I went it felt like they were watching me; fish-white flesh puckered by the Highland breeze; tight eyes peering out for fresh meat; screechy, booze-soaked voices hollering out for a taxi to take 'em halfway up the road to the next all-night watering hole. A shatter of glass; a round of applause; a sixteen-year-old mother of three vomiting in an open sewer, bairns looking on, chewing on potato cakes. I ain’t never going back… not never.

mikewsmith - Member
So how did these ones impact on things north of the border
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_referendum#Past_referendums
br />
POSTED 7 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

Not much - but afaics only one other of them was held in an industrialised democratic EU country (the Veneto one in 2014 - of which I'd never heard).

I don't think Scotland's voters would have much to learn from the referendum result and post-independence lessons of eg South Sudan. I mean, that's an oil-dependent state run by one charismatic leader and his cronies.

Northwind - Member
"seosamh77 - Member
I've never understood the sensitivity to the term scotch."

I'm not sensitive to it, I find it a useful diagnostic

Scotch is actually a description used by Scots themselves in the past. For example, Sir Walter Scott used it frequently.

But these days it is on a par with '****' and as Northwind says, it's a useful diagnostic.

As far as the Catalonian referendum, it doesn't matter if they are rightwing, it's all about the right to self-determination, and if they want to vote for their equivalent of Tories, that's their business.

Answering the OP's question, it's completely irrelevant to the Scottish question.

I'm still perplexed as to why the SNP don't want to recognise that over 50% of the electorate voted against independence and if they did get independence and implemented proportional representation (their apparent majority in Scotland only exists because of the flawed Westminster system - even the Greens got more votes than them nationally) they would hold a very shaky majority government (and possibly not even manage that) which would implode pretty quickly.

This thread raises a number of issues, some quite serious:

Can I still call those eggs covered in meat I was given to eat as a child "Scotch eggs"?

That Konabunny, whom I've always thought of as female, may be a he.

Madrid removed the gold from the Catalan banks. Madrid wins.

Answering the OP's question, it's completely irrelevant to the Scottish question.

Now, we have an example of a relatively similar bunch of people (industrialised, European, democratic, homogenous-ish) voting in favour of being a small independent EU state. The campaign seems to have succeeded. If there is independence, it will show how the EU treats secessionist states from EU members in practice rather than theory.

Aren't those all interesting and relevant issues for pro- and anti-secessionists? Or to put it another way - if Catalonian independence isn't enlightening and relevant for Scottish independence, what is? Surely we are not saying Scotland is completely unique and can't be compared to anywhere.

Scotch...these days it is on a par with '****' and as Northwind says, it's a useful diagnostic.

1a) do you really think that "Scotch" is on a par with "****"?

1b) do you think that Scots experience racial discrimination in the same way that ****stani (descent) people in the UK do?

2) a diagnostic of what? Don't be coy. 😆

Aren't those all interesting and relevant issues for pro- and anti-secessionists? Or to put it another way - if Catalonian independence isn't enlightening and relevant for Scottish independence, what is? Surely we are not saying Scotland is completely unique and can't be compared to anywhere.

The Catalan analysis is that even if a majority voted for the parties wanting a ballot the split is 50/50 for actual independence. Have they managed to agree and sort out currency and the EU?

I never heard anyone be called Scotch in any way, positive or negative, weird.

However, if the weegies could leave and take with them their 3rd world health and sectarian problems, then Scotland could be a nice country 😆

On a par with p***, youse have lost it.

It's just ****s at the wind up ffs.

Now, we have an example of a relatively similar bunch of people (industrialised, European, democratic, homogenous-ish) voting in favour of being a small independent EU state.

Have they?

As far as I can see, a right-wing pro-separatist alliance can join with a far left separatist party to have a majority in the Catalan parliament - this is akin to saying that the popular vote for SNP meant that Scotland had voted in favour of independence - which wasn't the case when the referendum happened. (I have no idea what the parties' other policies are. Clearly in Scottish elections, some pro-union voters must have voted for the SNP.)

From the BBC report:

The pro-independence parties said ahead of the vote that they considered it a de facto referendum on independence from Spain.

I suppose it's easy to say this, but it's only words for now. (As well as the separatists only securing 47.8% of total votes cast...so if that's a de-facto referendum, it's not looking good for them.)

Far from clear cut so far, but it'll be interesting to see how it pans out in the coming months.

Hawl dragon, **** you ya mad chookter! 😆 😉

I do often wonder what cotton wool some Scottish people have been brought up in when the say they are offended by words like jock, scotch, weegie(I know of no person from Glasgow that is offended by that term), tuechter. Particularly when you consider the default culture is ripping the piss out of each other.

I do often wonder what cotton wool some Scottish people have been brought up in when the say they are offended by words like jock, scotch, weegie(I know of no person from Glasgow that is offended by that term), tuechter.

Ps as a non nationalist yes voter, I'd have to say the Catalonia issue means HeeHaw to me. From a distance it does just look like the Catalan separatists are wanting to do it for fairly selfish reasons, but that's Spain's problem.

Aye but mike you're getting a bit serious now. Tread carefully from this point onwards! 😈

@Konabunny

It's irrelevant to Scotland for the reason I put in my post - over 50% voted against independence. Whether another place votes for or against and whether they remain in the EU or not has no bearing whatsoever on Scotland because, you guessed it, they voted against independence. My gripe is that there is a section of Scottish society who wanted the referendum (those who wanted independence) and now can't accept the result of that referendum.

There's a large section, and I'm one of them, that won't accept not having the right to self determination if we choose. Scotland is defined as a nation in many ways, not least by the fact that Westminster keeps letting us have referendums on the basis of being a nation. 😆

I'm not denying you that right, but how often should you be able to hold referenda on the matter? As many times as you need until you get the result that [i]you[/i] want? If the vote had gone for independence would the right to self determination still exist after that? Would you hold regular referenda to check that the people still wanted to be independent?

At some point you have to accept that a collective decision has been made, and I'd suggest that the time for that acceptance would normally be after a referendum has been taken on that question...

In holyrood elections, if a party or a coalition wins a majority government on the basis of a manifesto that contains a commitment to an independence referendum then Westminster should be duty bound, by democratic decency, to allow a legally binding referendum.

Pretty simple stuff, I don't really get why it's difficult to understand.

It's not up to anyone to reject the call for another referendum bar the Scottish people.

The should be no limits on this.

In holyrood elections, if a party or a coalition wins a majority government on the basis of a manifesto that contains a commitment to an independence referendum

Regards the point about still being independent, you do understand democracy, right? Someone puts forward a proposition and the people decide if they will go along with it(or at least trust the people in charge to carry out something as they said).

I heard no mention of an independent Scotland shying away from democracy.

Whether ruk would want to reform the union is another story, but people in an independent Scotland would be free to campaign for reunion and put their proposals to the electorate.

That last part is pretty much the reason. Why if independence was ever going to happen I'd like it, with hindsight, to be an overwhelming result(no not 55%, which is miles away from overwhelming) but somewhere in the 70s or 80% mark. As I could see a 50%+1 type result causing alot of divisions in an IS.

pop back when that happens, problem with elections of a party it's really hard to find one that you agree 100% with. You pick the one you think will do the best.

This. Also, it's a shame the SNP don't currently have a majority.

Another problem comes in that under the AMS voting system a Holyrood majority doesn't necessitate 50% of the popular vote...

You don't need 50% of the vote to form a legitimate government.

This is democracy 101 BTW, do you really not get this or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

Mike I personally don't think there will be another ref till the 2030s.

perhaps the last one should have had a clause that it was an off limits discussion for 5 years

Scotland needs a referendum on how often it wants to have a referendum.

Mike I'm all for a gfa style clause that limits referendums to every 7 years.

seosamh77 - Member
You don't need 50% of the vote to form a legitimate government.

This is democracy 101 BTW, do you really not get this or are you just being deliberately obtuse?

I'm being as obtuse as you are. I don;t think holding a referendum once every 4 years is productive or effective. In fact you then start to devalue the power of a referendum (and therefore the effectiveness of it's outcome). See the film The Rise and Rise of Rise of Michael Rimmer for an example.

Any party which campaigns on the basis of a referendum has to understand that they can hold a majority government without a popular majority. Can they then justify the cost of a referendum (both in terms of the actual economic value, but also in the impact it has on actual governance during that period, the impact on society and the impact on their own mandate to govern) if they know they don't have a clear opportunity to win it?

And who are these "Jocks" that the halfwit on the previous page refers to?

Same as "sweaties", innit?

that's you trying to dictate to the scottish people.

If the scottish people don't want another referedum, they'll tell the SNP to piss off when they put it in their manifesto at the scottish elections.

Complete this phrase in 10 words or less

If the scottish people don't want another referedum,

Its easy to remember!

This is Scotch:
[img] [/img]

This is Scottish:
[img] [/img]

seosamh77 - Member
that's you trying to dictate to the scottish people.

If the scottish people don't want another referedum, they'll tell the SNP to piss off when they put it in their manifesto at the scottish elections.

Or they'll be aware that manifestos contain more than one policy idea and make a decision to vote for a particular party by weighing up their opinion of these different policy ideas and vote for the one which most closely meets their needs? And so they might, shock horror, vote for the SNP but not support independence...

epicyclo - Member
But these days it is on a par with '****' and as Northwind says, it's a useful diagnostic.

[img] [/img]

Scotland needs a referendum on how often it wants to have a referendum.

and a referendum on having a referendum on how often it wants to have a referendum every five years

pjt201 - Member
seosamh77 - Member
that's you trying to dictate to the scottish people.
If the scottish people don't want another referedum, they'll tell the SNP to piss off when they put it in their manifesto at the scottish elections.

Or they'll be aware that manifestos contain more than one policy idea and make a decision to vote for a particular party by weighing up their opinion of these different policy ideas and vote for the one which most closely meets their needs? And so they might, shock horror, vote for the SNP but not support independence...

Like I say, are you just being obtuse?

pjt201 - Member

My gripe is that there is a section of Scottish society who wanted the referendum (those who wanted independence) and now can't accept the result of that referendum.

There's only a [i]very[/i] small group that doesn't accept the result of the referendum, the conspiracy theorists etc. Working meaningfully towards the next referendum pretty much requires that you accept the result of the last after all.

However there seems to be an enormous group that doesn't understand that one referendum doesn't settle the matter for all time, or that it's not up to just a couple of people to decide. And weirdly the people making most noise about the referendum seem to be those against it. Kesia Dugdale's absolutely obsessed with it.

@ b n d

I do understand that people question the urgency to discuss or propose a second IndyRef but if anyone thinks the Political landscape has not been significantly altered in light of the "after effects" of the Ref in '14 then they are a bit of a mug really. It is not about who won but far more about whether the promised assurances for voting No have been upheld.

As to the use of the term "scotch" to refer to people and not a drink it fits with the general attitude prevalent in the UK and predominantly in the English vernacular to coin reductionist nicknames for foreigners - Frogs, Krauts, Yanks etc If you use it at all I put a wee mental note on your card.

And @ninfan - you are wrong on both accounts - Beckhams blue bottled stuff is Donkey piss in a fancy flask and the other picture is of my dad and he's Italian. 😆

and even the blinking tories thought it right that there should be a referendum as the mandate from the scottish people had been given.

And that the outcome of that referendum would settle the matter for a generation, possibly even a lifetime.

"and even the blinking tories thought it right that there should be a referendum as the mandate from the scottish people had been given.
And that the outcome of that referendum would settle the matter for a generation, possibly even a lifetime" They might have thought that but it looks like they might have been wrong.Who knows?