[Closed] Scottish independence- where do you stand?

Do you really think that after independence you're going to get the party you vote for at every single election,

Again you can debate what it means but it is factually true that the country sometimes gets an English voted govt and it wont after independence it will get a scottish one

Why is this even being debated?

The government of the union is not in itself a reason for independence.

That government of the union not representing the needs/wants of the Scottish electorate is.

Electoral and constitutional reform would be far better than this.

Remind me, what happened the last time electoral reform was on the cards in the UK.

winston_dog - Member

Scotland is part of the United Kingdom and is not a Nation State.

If it is not a nation state, why is it one of the kingdoms in the United Kingdom?

The referendum is to undo the ties to the UK and revert back to local control.

And the great thing is it really doesn't matter what frothing at the mouth naysayers in other countries do, this is up to us in Scotland. We will decide.

I'd like a government that seems to act in the interests of our society as a whole,not just specific groups or parts of it

Me too.

Is it the "being a different country" thing?

What does that mean then? Define country for me.

Remind me, what happened the last time electoral reform was on the cards in the UK.

When was that? I remember the last time constitutional reform was on the cards, that was voted in and was quite successful iirc.

And the great thing is it really doesn't matter what frothing at the mouth naysayers in other countries do, this is up to us in Scotland. We will decide.

It does affect us. You're taking away a large part of my country.

Truth is, we have a 2 party system and they're mostly interested in scrapping over which of the 2 gets to be in charge, and thus mostly not too interested in disturbing things. Completely understandable tbh but it's an impressive barrier to change.

Exactly as will happen between SNP and Scottish Labour if Scotland go independent. Same sh*t, different country, but with the added problem of bitter in-fighting over the scraps of new found political power, and trying at the same time to sort out the complex issues of setting up a whole new country. Heaven help you!

And whilst all this unstable turmoil and uncertainty is going on can you really see companies investing their money in Scotland, providing the growth that is needed to fund's Salmond's vision?

Like I said independence could be a good thing in the long term, but short to medium tern there will be a whole load of hideously expensive and deeply unsettling problems to be dealt with.

When was that? I remember the last time constitutional reform was on the cards, that was voted in and was quite successful iirc.

I was thinking of AV. Which even the AV yes camp didn't want. But the conservatives refused to allow PR to even be on the table.

Catalans looking to Scotland as a blueprint.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2adb8102-56bd-11e3-ab12-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2m1u29PZX

English voters aren't daft enough to take us out of europe but hey, precedents aren't great.

Most people in England are Pro europe, your chip on your shoulder about who an English person is (e.g. Daily Mail reader), is making you believe a small vocal minority, and I can assure you they are speaking for everyone.

And I'd be daft to do so, so I didn't.

Hmmmm...

Remind me, what happened the last time electoral reform was on the cards in the UK.

We were offered a shabby compromise that no-one really wanted?

Are we really arguing that Scotland's status as a country is some how in doubt?

Westminster is broken. Blair's stroke of "genius" was to realise that Labour no longer had to be a genuine party of the left. It just had to be one step to the left of the Tories in order to capture the votes from the left and the steal the Tories votes from the centre ground.

We are now witness to the spectacle of both the Tories and Labour trying to demonstrate who is tougher on welfare reform and immigration. Meanwhile the Tories are also in a crisis over whether they should adopt the policies of a racist lunatic in a shiny suit and seriously consider leaving the EU. All the time you have a bunch of mendacious shits hovering in the background desperate to do a deal with anyone to try and remain in power.

Scotland has a chance to genuinely escape this cycle and try a new approach.

Define country for me.

Why do you do this? Its somewhere between desperation and rhetorical so please dont reply it just seems utterly pointless to "ask" stuff like that

Most people in England are Pro europe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Opinion_polling

one had them pro 3 had them tied circa 40 had them against

Still enough dont knows to swing it either way

[quote=dragon ]Most people in England are Pro europe, your chip on your shoulder about who an English person is (e.g. Daily Mail reader), is making you believe a small vocal minority, and I can assure you they are speaking for everyone.
No truth in any of these polls then?

The Future of England survey 2012 showed English voters saying they would vote to leave the EU by 50% to 33% in a referendum on the UK's membership. By contrast, a February 2013 poll showed Scots would vote to stay in the EU by 53% to 34% in a referendum on UK membership, while EU membership in the event of an independent Scotland was supported by 61% to 33%.

Can we please stop making generalisations about 'England is this' or 'England does this'? It's not a homogenous entity where everyone thinks the same.

Just an aside about the treaty of union, it was ratified by an unelected parliament many of whom were bribed. It was so unpopular that rioting broke out and they needed military protection to get the documents out of Edinburgh.

rebel12 - Member

Do you really think that after independence you're going to get the party you vote for at every single election

Well, yes, Scotland will get the government they vote for in every election. Durr.

rebel12 - Member

Exactly as will happen between SNP and Scottish Labour if Scotland go independent. Same sh*t, different country, but with the added problem of bitter in-fighting over the scraps of new found political power

You would benefit from paying a bit of attention to scottish politics tbh. Where was the bitter in-fighting you imagine when the Parliament was created? We don't have first past the post to deal with, avoiding the false power blocks that creates, and out of 4 governments we've had only one majority so there's far more give and take- there's always had to be.

TBF one of the things that's polarised westminster politics so badly is FPTP. But you say we'll end up with a 2-party system... You realise that the SNP was basically nowhere within my lifetime and is now the majority party? That's how closed to political change we are.

We were offered a shabby compromise that no-one really wanted?

Which led to a No campaign filled with misinformation and scaremongering? Yup, sounds about right.

Exactly as will happen between SNP and Scottish Labour

I don't know. Assuming we keep the style of voting we have at the moment, there's a lot of scope for the smaller parties to do well and keep the larger ones in check.

Are we really meant to think you dont actually understand what this word means? That you have no access to the internet to get clarity if you are genuinely "confused"

Don't be thick.

The reason I asked is because the word's not clearly defined. It's one of those words that gets used a lot but has different meanings and implications depending on who's talking.

What do YOU think it means?

Can we please stop making generalisations about 'England is this' or 'England does this'? It's not a homogenous entity where everyone thinks the same.

Same applies to Scotland.

We were offered a shabby compromise that no-one really wanted?

It brought you here didn't it?

Adding insult to your troll to get a reaction...how tragic.

You realise that the SNP was basically nowhere within my lifetime and is now the majority party?

That's debatable, since voting patterns change from regional/council elections to general elections. Labour were the strongest by a mile then it's level pegging for Libs Dems and SNP, with the Tories a close 4th. However, interestingly looking at voting patterns where the SNP won seats, if their vote collapsed post independence then the net gainers would likely be the Tories. So I'd guess you'd end up with a parliament not looking too dissimilar to Westminster circa 1997.

You would benefit from paying a bit of attention to scottish politics tbh. Where was the bitter in-fighting you imagine when the Parliament was created?

[img] [/img]

Infighting, hmmmmmmm, Salmond can't even agree with himself it seems?

In the second quote he is saying their is an argument and it is being made strongly - he is not saying he is arguing it is he ? Is that really the best they can do to tarnish him ?
Somewhat weak though I would be surprised, like all politicians and most of us on here, if he had not contradicted himself at some point.

Adding insult to your troll to get a reaction...how tragic.

FFS I was raising a legitimate and pertinent question. You just didn't get it, and opted to chastise me for trolling or being thick myself.

AFAIK it has always been SNP policy to use sterling post-independence and then to adopt the Euro at some point in the future (in fact it could never be otherwise - see the rules for joining the Euro). I'm guessing that "some point" will be when it is sensible to do so and that the decisions on that will change according to circumstances prevailing at the time.

Who was it that said "[i]when the facts change I change my mind - what do you do[/i]"?

Oh the goad and the false claim i called you thick - Well played but its al fairly standard trolling 101.
If the question was so pertinent why was the only response to it mine?
Perhaps you might like to reflect on that and consider how pertinent it was.

I shall learn to ignore your future pertinent questions just as everyone else has learnt to ignore them

Well played but its al fairly standard trolling 101

It most definitely is not. It's a serious question and has been my point for ages.

What is the value of historical national boundaries?

What is the value of historical national boundaries?

They are very subjective. If the Romans had maintained the Antonine Wall was the border, the Central Belt would of been part of England.

IMO, culturally and socially the Southern Uplands feel very similar to Northumberland and Cumbria. If you were ignorant of the area, without a map it would be hard to tell when you had crossed the border.

What is the value of historical national boundaries?

Exactly, and when you read the definition of the Scottish people then you have to wonder if this all just isn't a little bit hypocritical and pointless:

The Scottish people (Scottish Gaelic: Albannaich), or Scots, are a nation and ethnic group native to Scotland. Historically they emerged from an amalgamation of the Picts and Gaels, incorporating neighbouring Britons to the south as well as Germanic peoples such as the Anglo-Saxons and the Norse. Later the Normans also had some influence.

Exactly.

dragon - Member

That's debatable, since voting patterns change from regional/council elections to general elections.

OK, fair point, I was referring to the Scottish Parliament where the SNP do hold an overall majority, wasn't clear enough there.

Junkyard- I love ya but every time you call troll a kitten dies.

molgrips - Member
...It does affect us. You're taking away a large part of my country.

No, not your country.

We are taking our country out of a union with another country. Scotland is a separate country divorcing its partner.

winston_dog - Member
...If the Romans had maintained the Antonine Wall was the border, the Central Belt would of been part of England.

They were incapable of maintaining it and had to withdraw south, so it is not a valid border.

The Romans were not very successful in Scotland.

If we are going to use Roman wall as boundaries, then Hadrian's as the longest lasting would be the border, but I doubt the residents in that area would be happy at suddenly being classed as Scots.

Scotland is a separate country divorcing its partner.

Where's that ****ing Pre-Nup? 😀

rebel12 - Member 

The Scottish people (Scottish Gaelic: Albannaich), or Scots, are a nation.
There you are you said it yourself.
I still see independence as a step towards a fairer distribution of power. Less centralised government would be good and some sort of effort to mitigate the power of multinationals

Junkyard- I love ya but every time you call troll a kitten dies.

What word should I use then to describe his behaviour? I only used it once he got insulting to provoke a reaction. If its not a good description what do you prefer?

That loioks like a troll but it a serious point.

They were incapable of maintaining it and had to withdraw south, so it is not a valid border.

The Romans were not very successful in Scotland.

That's a bit of a myth. It was more a cost/benefit thing. There was little natural resource that was of interest to them to expend the military resources that would of been required to occupy Scotland.

One wonders why they kept invading [ over a circa 350 year period] and getting beat if it was just a cost benefit thing and they wer enot interested.

Your either poor on history or trying to get a reaction

Neither of these make me think highly of you.

No, not your country.

Yes it is, my country is the UK.

Scotland is a separate country

How're you defining that?

What word should I use then to describe his behaviour?

I'm not trolling!

Trolling is posting something calculated to start an argument just for the hell of it. This debate is quite reasoned, calm and interesting. But you're shouting troll all over it, I don't understand why.

For the record, I NEVER deliberately wind people up (not without a wink and a smile at least) and I never have done it. I post alternative viewpoints where they are missing, and I try and make posts to make people think. That's not trolling.

One wonders why they kept invading [ over a circa 350 year period] and getting beat if it was just a cost benefit thing and they wer enot interested.

The Romans wanted to conquer places to expand their empire, but given the lack of resources in Scotland it wasn't worth throwing that many resources at it. So they tried, but ultimately gave up.

So all of the No camp are stupid people with shit jobs? I don't buy that for a second. Indeed, we have had some very articulate contributors on here who disprove that theory.

Well I'm very intelligent and have a good job in the very sectors that will supposedly be the lifeblood of the independent Scotlan... which is why I'm in the 'No' camp at the moment...

Articulate I'm not I wouldn't say I am though very.

The United Kingdom consists of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

What do you mean when you say its your country?

Oh this should be fun

But you're shouting troll all over it, I don't understand why.

I post alternative viewpoints where they are missing, and I try and make posts to make people think.

No offence I dont dislike you but I do dislike you doing that on the religious threads as I dont think you believe much of what you type on those threads

The UK is a fully independent sovereign state. Most people would agree it's a country.

Neither of these make me think highly of you.

Why would I want a stranger on the interweb to think highly of me?
Why would I care if he didn't?
Why would you think less of someone with a poor knowledge of history?
What a strange thing to type!

The Romans were as far North as Inverness and built a fort there I believe. They didn't stay for very long. I would imagine it would be a bit like Afghanistan at the moment, lot's of hard fighting brave local tribes. Yes you can use massive military force to knock them down but they keep coming back and in the end it just isn't worth it so you pull out.

I post alternative viewpoints where they are missing, and I try and make posts to make people think. That's not trolling.

you post stuff you dont believe then argue it to death which i consider to be trolling, pointless ,poorly executed and utterly pointless

I'd call it 'taking the concept of playing devil's advocate and stretching it way, way past any kind of usefulness', rather than trolling.