Scotland Indyref 2

Correct airtragic. Easily achieved by taxing at the average european level instead of the low taxation we have. also huge savings by being non nuclear, not having to pay for foreign wars, crossrail,westminster, hinkley etc and of course being able to grow the economy with suitable economic policies.

Denmark can manage this without Scotlands advantages. Why can’t scotland?

The UN is quite clear on self determination of a people

Could you explain to me on what definition you propose that the residents of Scotland constitute an identifiable ‘people’ distinct from the wider population of the United Kingdom?

The Falklands voted to stay British by something like 99% IIRC. The votes for Argentinean equated to 3 people ISTR! (Jose, Manuel and Pedro)

Denmark has plenty of advantages that Scotland doesn’t, of course, like geography; it’s at the centre of Europe, rather than the periphery. CBA checking, but I bet their tax rates aren’t that different to Germany, because of the other problem Scotland would face with a high tax differential with the UK, capital flight. Nuclear and “foreign wars”: IIRC the white paper identified about £500m savings on defence off your current £3bn share, some way short. You don’t pay for things like Crossrail, covered here.[/url] Grow the economy, laudable goal but if it was that easy, why isn’t it happening already? How is an economically poorer performing Scotland in the UK Govt’s interest? Hinkley, not looking great admittedly, but you’ll be needing some sort of base load in that green mix. You wouldn’t have thought the national grid would split on separation, so maybe you end up paying for it anyway as your existing nukes go offline?
It sounds eerily similar to the Brexit arguments pre-referendum to me, it’ll all be fine because xyz. Xyz often seems doubtful at best!

Airtragic – yes and that is not an independence vote – its a vote to remain a colony which is against UN principles of decolonisation

Ninfan Self recognised. thats all that is needed.

Self recognised. thats all that is needed.

So you’re proposing that any group of people who self identify as a ‘people’ should be able to announce independence?

😆

*klaxon sounds*

TJ – step away from the thread

Denmark can manage this without Scotlands advantages. Why can’t scotland?

History innit.

Didn’t denmark used to be a part of Germany? Schleswig-Holstein?

everyone did but us 😉

I never understood the Schleswig-Holstein question anyway

It’s just our queen who is German

TJ – step away from the thread

And yet….

It’s like catnip, isn’t it? You just can’t resist.

(Step away. Actually, I know what to do….!)

Worse than bloody catnip CFH.

Airtragic – yes and that is not an independence vote – its a vote to remain a colony which is against UN principles of decolonisation

Looking at the list of colonies they mostly seem to be quite happy with their status

http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/nonselfgovterritories.shtml

I is disappointed no one got the Schleswig-Holstein joke. I thought there were experts on here. Obviously not

looks up origin of the word england…oooh really he says in surprise 😉

Who can resist a Scottish Indy thread C’pn – the stuff that gets posted here is truly fantastic

It’s just our queen who is German

makes a change from the usual French post conquest

We’ve had enough of experts

I presume you were pointing out that you’re not dead or mad and your memory is OK?

Angles and saxons – where are they from?

Ta Aracer

Angles and saxons – where are they from?

Using examples of what happens when you invite skilled migrants into your country may not be the best idea

Hang on – aren’t Angles and Saxons peoples? So they could declare independence.

Invite them? Angles and saxons were invaders!

Illegal immigrants then!

Sorry where do you live again and where we you born ?

Invite them? Angles and saxons were invaders!

Historical sources seem to indicate they were initially invited by King Vortigern

Vortigern , was possibly a 5th-century warlord in Britain, known perhaps as a king of the Britons. His existence is contested, and information about him is obscure.

From Wiki

You use wiki, can I cite my sources

The sources

Gildas
We come across Vortigern for the first time in the writings of the British monk Gildas, who wrote his De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae around 540. De Excidio is a moral tract, not a work of history ! We may therefore accept the more outstanding features of the DEB: the reception of the Saxons; the subsequent conflict between them and the Britons; the resistance to the Saxons by a certain Ambrosius Aurelianus; and finally the defeat of the Saxons at the Siege of Badonicus Mons in the day of his birth (or so he seems to say).
In C.23 we hear of a meeting of the Proud Tyrant and all the councillors:

Tum omnes consiliarii una cum superbo tyranno caecantur, adinvenientes tale praesidium, immo excidium patriae ut ferocissimi illi nefandi nominis Saxones deo hominibusque invisi, quasi in caulas lupi, in insulam ad retundendas aquilonales gentes intromitterentur. (DEB XXIII.1)

At this meeting, the council invited the Saxons in three keels from Germany, as a counter to the threat from the Picts in the north. This is followed after some time by a conflict over the annona (payment in kind), after which the Saxon federates devastate the country. Vortigern, who may have been named by Gildas, is not portrayed by Gildas as a sole ruler, or a High King if you will. He rules together with a Council, which Gildas blames equally for the disastrous policy concerning the invitation of the Saxons. Maybe looking at him as a ‘first among equals’ would be more fitting his actual position at that time. In all, Gildas’ view of the Superbus Tyrannus is almost positive; though he is judged careless and lacking foresight, he is called infaustus (unlucky), which is very mild considering Gildas’ views on the Saxons and the hindsight he had on the disaster that resulted from the Tyrannus’ policies.

Bede
Bede, writing in Northumbria at the beginning of the 8th century, hardly gives any information apart from what he has taken from Gildas. He knew Vortigern as the British leader who had authorized the first settlement of the Saxon invaders in eastern Britain, and identified him with the ‘proud usurper’ of Gildas. Bede uses two early versions of Vortigern’s name, the earliest one is Vertigernus, which Bede uses in his De Tempore Ratione. In his Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, which was written rather later than the preceding and is largely paraphrased or summarized from Gildas, the form used is Uurtigerno, which is pre-literary English and must have been copied from a document written early in the 7th century.

Historia Brittonum
The Historia Brittonum gives us far more information on Vortigern; in fact, the chief part is concerned with him. This probably early 9th century work appears to be based on a genuine historical tradition, but the greater part of this portion of his work is folk tale and legend. Much of his material is drawn from an older work, the *Life of Germanus or Garmon, whose cult was centered in Powys. Vortigern is mentioned as a ruler called Guorthigirn, who seems to have the whole of what had been Roman Britain under his authority in some sense. A ruler in Kent is subject to him, as are rulers in other regions. His wife is not disclosed here, but he has sons: Vortimer, Catigern and Pascent, to which is added Faustus as an afterthought. This Faustus is claimed as offspring from an incestous relation between Vortigern and his daughter. During a peace-conference with the Saxons, they treacherously produce hidden Stilicho, fourth centuryweapons and kill most of the British nobles.

More strange is the story about his dealings with St Germanus which interspace the historical material, and which is hardly more than a folk-tale. Also interspaced is the material about Vortimer, who clearly had his own set of legends. Important as well is the bulky Dinas Emrys legend, in which Vortigern also seems out of place (see Saints on the move), but what in the end has made his name famous because of the Merlin-connection…

The Pillar of Elise
This pillar was originally a cross and stands in the abbey of Valle Crucis, not far from Llangollen in northern Powys. The inscription states that the monument was set up by Concenn (or Cyngen), the last native king of Powys, in memory of his great-grandfather Eliseg (or Eliset or Elise). This insription is almost certainly contemporary with the Historia Brittonum.

Much of the inscription seems to have been occupied with genealogical matter. So far as this is preserved, it agrees with the Harleian Genealogies (22, 23, 27), except that, at the beginning Britu and perhaps also Pascent are said to be sons, not of Catigern (son of Catell Dyrnllwc), but of Vortigern. Of Britu it is said that Germanus blessed him, and that his mother was Sevira, daughter of Magnus Fifth-century BritonMaximus! It would seem that the royal family of Powys did not accept the story of their origin as given above in the Historia Brittonum where a slave named Cadell was given the throne of Powys by St Germanus. They evidently claimed to be descended from Vortigern, and declared that he was a son-in-law of Maximus. The Pascent from which most kings claimed descent would then be identified with the Pascent, son of Vortigern, whom the Historia Brittonum itself recognises as ancestor of the kings of Builth.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
This chronicle probably dates from a little later than the last two sources; the oldest text ends in 891. Vortigern is mentioned in two entries: AD 449 and AD 455. Much is taken from Bede, which accounts for the traditional dating. For the year 449 it mentions the Adventus Saxonum, with Vortigern as ‘king of the Britons’ inviting the brothers Hengist and Horsa. Significantly, in the same year there is a second invitation to the Angles. For the year 455 the chronicle mentions a great battle between the Saxons and the Britons under Vortigern, the Saxons are victorious and no more is mentioned of Vortigern or his sons.

Geoffrey of Monmouth
The Historia Regum Britanniae, which was first written down in 1136, is the last source for the stories around Vortigern. Though it clearly borrows from earlier sources, it has been shown that between this material and the doubtless ‘modifications’ by Geoffrey himself, there is enough material from other, unknown, sources to make a detailed study for the origins of this material.

Geoffrey tells us of the archbishop Guithelinus, who takes the responsibility for the defence of Britain by popular demand after the final departure of the Roman armies. Guithelinus or Vitalinus goes to Brittany to get troops and a king to lead Britain: Constantinus, brother of Aldroenus, the king of Brittany. After some time he is killed, and his son Constans is made king by Vortigern, Duke of Gwent, who now enters the scene. I will defend elsewhere in detail why I believe that Vitalinus and Vortigern are one and the same, and that the story of the troops from Brittany is the same as the Adventus Saxonum as described by Gildas and those following him.

Vortigern has Constans killed and ‘reluctantly’ accepts the crown, after which Geoffrey follows much of the earlier story. He gets Hengist from Germany to fight the Picts and marries his daughter Renwein for his own purposes and to reward Hengist. Kent is given to Hengist, thereby angering the Britons and Vortigern’s own sons. Thy revolt and put Vortimer on the throne, who starts fighting the Saxons. Renwein then poisons him, after which Vortigern returns as king. Then followes the Saxon betrayal at Stonehenge, which Geoffrey calls “the Cloister of Ambrius”, clearly after Amesbury. Then Geoffrey Vortigernrelates the Dinas Emrys legend, but calls the boy Merlin. Interspaced are the ‘Prophecies of Merlin’ as a separate chapter. Vortigern flees to Ercing, where he is killed by Ambrosius, who is called ‘Aurelius Ambrosius’ here. Vortigern is burned with his fortress.

So essentially the written history of the period

Forgot you are in Scotland so all the above sources are discredited as the BBC agree with his existence

http://www.historyextra.com/article/alfred-great/10-facts-anglo-saxons-history

So in summary, some King who may or may not have existed invited the German invaders over here, the Falkland Islanders voted to keep them in a referendum, the Schleswigers and Holsteinish weren’t sure what the question is and that’s why Scotland should be independent?

I thought it was just thick racists?

So in summary, some King who may or may not have existed invited the German invaders over here, the Falkland Islanders voted to keep them in a referendum, the Schleswigers and Holsteinish weren’t sure what the question is and that’s why Scotland should be independent?

That’s going to require a big ballot paper

Still probably won’t happen. Nicola hinting at Scotland stays if we get soft Brexit – so underneath all the bluster she really might just know what is in the best interests of the Scottish people after all. Here’s hoping….even if it would less amusing to watch.

nearly there aracer just needed an economic treatise in the middle to explain it properly
#posttruth

EDIT@ THM She may be playing a blinder

What tory PM wants to ignore scottish requests for soft Brexit and do it hard and then risk the break up of the union? so she is forcing the UK to remain in the EU she plays her hand well for she either gets this or once more portrays the english Tories as ignoring the scottish people prior to a referendum. Canny politics IMHO

Big risks for a tory PM horrible Brexit, break up of the union, economic shit storm on two fronts and then an election

High stake game of poker begins, Will May play her hand so well in Europe?

aracer – Member
Hang on – aren’t Angles and Saxons peoples? So they could declare independence.

If they could get enough people together and define their lands then get enough of those people vote for separation, i’m pretty sure they could.

It’s fairly commonly accepted on these islands, the irish have the right to it, the scottish continually get votes as a block allowing then to get further and further towards self determination.

Dunno why you have trouble with the concept. If the welsh wanted it they ccould get it, if the cornish wanted it, they could get it. And if the scots want it they will get it.

Say what you like about the brits, but these days, in relation to self determination, they seem pretty open to following the democratic will of which ever constituent group of people, imo. the 2 scottish devolution refs, the independence ref, the EU ref and the belfast agreement are all pretty hard to argue with as indications of an attitude to allow self determination. Even the falkland islands had a ref.

So yes, gather together your fellow angles, saxons and batter in. Seems to be the in thing.

You keep forgetting that other people have principles other than what is financially best for me, quite possibly because you put money first second and third but not everyone does.
Please just accept it

55 – 45 please just accept it 😀 Having no money is not fun as you well know JY given your day job, the Scots could also ask the Greeks how its working out for them

Will post this in EU thread too, various stories today of Irish proposal for a crises summit to address the impact on Ireland of the fall in £ and how significant the negative impact will be on Irish exports. The Govt has already committed €150m to support farmers. I mention this as an iS will have exactly the same issue. Also something relevant to Scotland is the dire warning issued by the first ECB Chief Economist and “architect” of the euro that the currency cannot survive in its current form.

May can play hardball with both the EU and Scotland. Whilst it will clearly p.ss off a significant minority of Scots (45% 😉 ) she can just ignore their calls for a Referendum, the Scots can pass their own bill the UK is not obliged to pay a blind bit of notice. UK quits EU by 2019, significant politcal change in Austria, France and probably Germany too with flames fanned strongly by financial collapse of Greece and the euro. Immigration issues will flare up materially as a result.

Will this be an environment Scots will want to be part of, will EU members even be willing to focus on new member discussions at a time of crises ?

It’s just our queen who is German

Isn’t she half-Scottish?

More Jambanonsense. If scotland holds a referendum and gets a majority then scotland becomes independent under UN principles. Scotland simply remains in the EU as the successor state. Whats May going to do – invade?

Whats May going to do – invade?

There would probably be plenty people calling for it. By that time though the armed forces will be fully engaged with Russia, so I doubt they’ll have the resources left.