Forum menu
The problem with Scotland / rUK is that the two countries are diverging and the rate of divergence is growing. this can only increase pressures. Scotland is much more social democratic - its a huge victory for tories to have 1/6th of the seats at westmnster from scotland and 30% of the vote. Scotland is also greener in energy policy and more european and outward looking.
diussonance - here is one and IIRC there was one posted earlier
"“The consequence is Ed Miliband cannot become prime minister without the SNP. That has a consequence for Scotland; it has a consequence for the rest of the UK. It is an appalling prospect of having a Labour prime minister propped up by a group of people who a) don’t want to be in that parliament, b) don’t want to be in that country, c) would like to see the whole thing break up. In the meantime [they] are going to push for an economy with a borrowing, taxing and spending agenda.”
Scotland is much more social democratic
Dont suppose you have the studies proving this do you? From memory the difference in atittudes is minimal.
here is one and IIRC there was one posted earlier
That is talking about government not parliament. Given people are getting so het up about his comments it really shouldnt be hard for someone to produce it. Although even then a member of one party saying members of another party shouldnt be elected is really to be expected.
dissonance
Dont suppose you have the studies proving this do you? From memory the difference in atittudes is minimal.
Surely a string of election results trumps "studies". Full marks for another attempt to divert the issue.
Surely a string of election results trumps “studies”.
No it really doesnt. If you want to know what people think you ask them. Why people vote for a particular party is far more complex.
Full marks for another attempt to divert the issue.
Ah so you can make claims but cant be challenged on them? This really is all a bit brexiteer.
Dont suppose you have the studies proving this do you? From memory the difference in atittudes is minimal.
You are correct, no significant difference in attitudes in Social Attitudes Survey.
No it really doesnt. If you want to know what people think you ask them. Why people vote for a particular party is far more complex.
This is correct too.
Bullshine
Lets see. Ukip in Scotland have peaked at under 5% of the vote, In England at 25%. tories in scotloand consider it a huge victory to have 1/4 of the vote adn 1/6 of the seats.
On average over the last 20 years scotland has voted 80+ % for left of centre parties. Until the appaulling labour / tory non agression pact in scotland tories had 1 mp
No new nuclear in Scotland. on course for 100% renewable in under a decade. England no new renewables, huge investment in nuclear
Scotland 62% remain. England 40% remain
Scots taxes are more progressive now we have a tiny amount of taxation power with people under the national average income paying less and people above paying more. Tories tried to play the "highest tax in the uk" line and no one cared
the divergence is obvious if you live up here and are a political geek
For someone who prides themselves on being a political geek you have a very poor understanding of the subject and as always you are completely missing the point.
<p>No new nuclear in Scotland. </p>
<p>Only because one party has taken it off the agenda, to attribute our lack of building to an entire nations educated thoughts on the matter is disingenuous at best. If you think the people and communities around the existing stations wouldn't welcome another you are misinformed.</p>
No new nuclear in Scotland. on course for 100% renewable in under a decade. England no new renewables, huge investment in nuclear
Apart from the world's largest offshore wind farm, opened last month, off the Cumbrian coast.
Still, I wouldn't be dumb enough to claim it's there as a result of English political desires.
Meanwhile, here's some discussion in Germany about this topic
dissonance
No it really doesnt. If you want to know what people think you ask them. Why people vote for a particular party is far more complex.
Aye, it's called putting your vote where your mouth is. Actions trump words.
This thread may be redundant anyway. Looks like the 1922 committee is swinging into action...
Mefty - I clearly understand it far better than you if you think there is not a significant and growing divergence between scotland and england.
You oinly have to look at the voting recoreds to see it. I'll say it again. tories see it has a huge triumph to get 25% of the vote and 18% of the mps and they only got this on the back of a labour / tory anti snp pact
different attitudes to europe are obvious in the brexit vote and the number of votes UKIP get
You really can't treat England as one homogeneous group TJ any more than you can the whole UK. It's quite offensive really.
You really can’t treat England as one homogeneous group TJ any more than you can the whole UK. It’s quite offensive really.
Quiet Gammon..
Dissonance, Mefty,
If you want to know what people think you ask them
Now if that is true, and more important than how they vote (as you suggest), then perhaps on the basis of current opinion polls we should abandon Brexit - after all we’ve asked them and that beats how they voted which was more complex.
But maybe that’s not what you meant.
Just teasing you (but stop being so pious it makes it too easy) 😉
More seriously, I’m a Scot living in Yorkshire.
Pro-Scots, pro-UK, pro-EU and anti-Brexit because those views align.
If I’d had a vote in the Scots independence referendum it would have been for remaining in the U.K.
But much of the case for remaining in the U.K. is diminished by Brexit.
I’m not sure how I would cast my fictitious vote in the forthcoming so far fictitious next Scots independence vote.
Possibly, with heavy heart, to leave the U.K.
Lets see. Ukip in Scotland have peaked at under 5% of the vote
That really doesnt show what you think it does. People will vote for parties for a variety of reasons. One, sadly, frequent reason is to show discontent with the current setup. In Scotland you have the SNP promising the glories of an independent Scotland but for England we have, well, just UKIP promising the glories of an independent UK.
for left of centre parties
I am not really sure I would count the SNP as left of centre. They vary heavily between left of centre and slightly right of centre (even using the adjusted centre in the UK nowadays).
England no new renewables,
Dear god how much badly wrong could you get.
Scotland 62% remain. England 40% remain
Brexit isnt a left or right wing thing (although has mostly been portrayed as right wing). There is as much a left wing case to be made for brexit as a right wing case (plus an unaligned case). Personally I dont agree with any of them but trying to use it as a case of being more socially progressive to vote remain is a tad flawed.
Now if that is true, and more important than how they vote (as you suggest),
In understanding how people think yes it is more important. The problem with voting is you then have personalities and various pieces of bullshit laid on top.
So you can end up with someone agreeing with a parties policies but then not voting for them since the leader ate a bacon sandwich wrong and anyway everyone knows they will destroy the economy.
but stop being so pious it makes it too eas
I would say the pious ones are those with a superiority complex about how Scotland is far better than those nasty English (lets keep ignoring the Welsh).
In understanding how people think yes it is more important.
To amplify this, it isn't the snapshot that provides the power of these surveys, it is long term data that they provide which gives a very good picture of changing attitudes and divergences in opinions on a very wide range of issues. The National Crime Survey is very useful for similar reasons.
dissonance
...I would say the pious ones are those with a superiority complex about how Scotland is far better than those nasty English (lets keep ignoring the Welsh).
Getting desperate for distraction techniques, are we? Ad hominen might work, eh?
It couldn't possibly be because those people want to live in a democracy? Where their political choices are not over ridden by the choices of another country and where there is no unelected upper house.
And I'm sure the Welsh can speak for themselves.
But the whole point of this thread is that it may not be their actions that cause the break up of this Union, but the actions of the Tory party.
What's happening at No 10 today?
To amplify this, it isn’t the snapshot that provides the power of these surveys, it is long term data that they provide which gives a very good picture of changing attitudes and divergences in opinions on a very wide range of issues. The National Crime Survey is very useful for similar reasons.
Very true Mefty.
Of course on that basis, the long term trend is that we used to be anti-EU, but we are ever more pro-EU. June 2016 was in fact the last gasp of the Brexies.
I may of course disagree with you Mefty, I don’t think we’re rid of the Brexies yet, but I see your point.
Or do you only hold such comments about surveys to be true when they support your argument? 😜
Getting desperate for distraction techniques, are we? Ad hominen might work, eh?
If this entire thread wasnt about the Scottish superiority complex you might have a point. As it is effectively a long adhom against the English you dont.
Where their political choices are not over ridden by the choices of another country and where there is no unelected upper house.
The first part is common argument from the brexiteers and the unelected bit also often used by the same. You really are coming across similar to the gammons here.
They are very different sets of data.
The Social Attitudes data is a 40 year study in our attitude to political issues in a non-partisan way, hence its value for discerning changes in attitudes.
That Brexit data is on a much more partisan issue, albeit one which crosses typical party lines, and over a much shorter term so it has a different quality. It is still useful and I don't dismiss it, I just think you read too much in tiny changes. As John Curtice concludes his most recent article on the same site:
But nowhere is this more clearly the case than in respect of the perceived economic consequences of Brexit. Very strong Remainers are almost unanimous in believing that Brexit will make Britain’s economy worse off. In contrast, the vast majority of very strong Leavers believe that the economy will be better off. It is, then, little wonder that after more than two years of debate about what Brexit should and could mean, relatively few voters on either side have changed their minds about the relative merits of Remain or Leave. For even if the head is uncertain, the heart remains sure.
Yes I read that article Mefty.
If im honest I was a little disappointed, I don’t know what you thought, but Curtice is normally a bit more incisive, less fluffy, than that offering.
I don’t disagree with him mind, it was just a statement of the bleedin’ obvious though.
Now a consideration of what will be needed to create one united (ish, don’t expect miracles) country out of this, and what survey data might tell us about that - well that would have been interesting.
At the moment I see little that will do it.
PS - if loosing 25% of the support for Brexit (62>>48) is a tiny change, what’s a big one?
Been “trawling” other blogs and what i have established is
1. Its mainly ideology- the hate for EU Socialism? Unelected EU ministers, Sovereignty, etc.
2. Its not about money or quality of life
3. These people despise the EU
So not matter what the misery they want it.
The bottom line is this country is completely divided there is little or no grey area.
If you sit on the remain side of the fence its going to be a miserable country to live in.
Where their political choices are not over ridden by the choices of another country
What's wrong with people from another country?
Nationalism is bad, isn't it?
PS – if loosing 25% of the support for Brexit (62>>48) is a tiny change, what’s a big one?
When have I ever said it was, I have only ever questioned your suggestions on the Brexit thread that the mood of the country has changed since the Referendum, I don't think the oscillations since then warrant such a conclusion.
Nationalism is bad, isn’t it?
Not really, it has lots of good points.
Well most nationalist countries that went a long way right ended up in the ****
Same with the extreme left.
Okay so whats the benefits of nationalism, i get the snappy uniforms and clean architecture?
Not really, it has lots of good points.
Go on then.
Is it that it allows you to generalise about millions of people based on which side of an invisible like they were born?
The Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic are going pretty well and that was achieved bloodlessly. Many of the former Yugoslav republics are doing alright, although the means to the end was horrible. Nationalism is just a wish for self-determinism.
Go on then.
Free prescription and no tuition fees?
Nationalism is just a wish for self-determinism
But that necessarily means that you are excluding other people from that decision-making process just by virtue of their nationality. We've seen from this & other threads how much some Scottish people are enthralled by fantastic virtuousness of a bunch of people who co-incidentally just happen to be born in the same country as them.
We’ve seen from this & other threads how much some Scottish people are enthralled by fantastic virtuousness of a bunch of people who co-incidentally just happen to be born in the same country as them.
Folk like Mike Russell and Stuart McMillan?
Nationalism is just a wish for self-determinism.
That's tautological. You've used the word 'self' because you are assuming that everyone born within the invisible lines has some sort of common aim or connection. Which is nationalism, and it's bollocks.
They often do have a common aims and connection through language, music, literature, religion etc. This isn't radical stuff, of course some national movements have very nasty elements, but that is not a requirement. What you describe as invisible lines were once natural obstacles, which weren't so easily surmounted as they are now, so it is not bollocks, it is reality - reality that deniers have often found has bit them on the bum.
They often do have a common aims and connection through language, music, literature, religion etc.
Typing this in the Netherlands. Which teaches you a few things about national identity. Also was in Scotland earlier in the year, I noticed quite a lot of shared language and culture. Then there are countries with different languages and cultures inside the invisible lines. And most countries are recent inventions anyway made up of all sorts of groups and regions. Then there are all the people who share the same country, culture and language but have radically different aims.
So yeah nationalism is still bollocks. Learn some history maybe.
I know a reasonable amount about history, I also know a reasonable amount about the Netherlands as I have lived there a couple of times, so I would be most interested to find out what you have learnt from your sojourn there about Dutch Nationalism. I am not sure why you are bringing up Scotland, it clearly has a Nationalist movement which want self-determinism. So I am struggling to see how your argument has progressed from "its bollocks", which I am afraid to say I find remarkably unenlightening, although it does have the merit of succinctness.
nationalist
1. a person who advocates political independence for a country.
"a Scottish nationalist"
a person with strong patriotic feelings, especially one who believes in the superiority of their country over others.
Mefty - dissonance - I take it neither of you live in Scotland?
Quite hostly some of you mutterings on this are pretty offensive and have zero relationship with the truth
Its not about a perceived superiority by accident of birthplace. For starters the people of scotland do not have to be born here.
There are two main threads IMO to the people who want independence. the ideological who simply believe a country like scotland should rule its own affairs and the pragmatists who believe an independent scotland would be abetter country to live in
Its so obvious you have a little Englander cast and simply do not understand the scots civic nationalism
The difference in political and civic outlook is obvious to those of us who have lived in both countries. Yes there is some overlap of course but the central or average position is very different as is obvuious from the voting patterns.
One key thing - in the independence campaign we were told that anindependenct scotland would have no more influence the EU that any other small country. We all shrugged and thought - that sounds about right.
Attitudes in the average are very different. Its a simple fact as demonstrated in many way. You may not want to see it 'cos it hurts your little englander pride. that does not mean it does not exist.
Mefty - I have made no such suggestion, not intentionally anyway, on this thread.
The link I posted went back as far as 2012 and shows a slow but definite collapse in Brexit support.
Now as far as the Brexit thread goes (which is as you will notice another thread) the trend is still valid.
Only 8% of the swing is post June 2016 agreed (though that is not insignificant really, Curtice questions the reasons for the swing more than the swing), however the more interesting point is that June 2016 looks like about the last point the Brexies could have railroaded the country into Brexit.
They’d been losing share for a long time and they haven’t recovered yet - which given they wo we lost and there is a tendency for people to pull together after these things is surprising.
But there it is.
Now stop using short run data when it doesn’t suit your argument. You are better than that done if the time.
There are two main threads IMO to the people who want Brexit. the ideological who simply believe a country like The UK should rule its own affairs and the pragmatists who believe an The UK would be abetter country to live in
Don't agree of course, but what is sauce for the goose...
<p>The difference in political and civic outlook is obvious to those of us who have lived in both countries. Yes there is some overlap of course but the central or average position is very different as is obvuious from the voting patterns.</p>
<p>In your own words - bullshine.</p><p>I don't see any of those differences between my peers on either side of the border, of course the fact I'm (roughly) half your age probably has a lot to do with that.</p>