Scottish Independence discussion area

Happyman42

Bambi wrote: »

Its a concept that changes to reflect the needs of one particular group though


It may have to change a bit more next week and all

The concept of Britishness is ever changing.

It's another of those nebulous phrases that when you dig into it, means sweet f.a.

karma_

Bambi wrote: »

Its a concept that changes to reflect the needs of one particular group though


It may have to change a bit more next week and all

Ironically enough, it was the policies enacted by those 'supposedly' most in favour of Unionism that has led to this. It's pretty funny that they did it to themselves.

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

Maybe they would be given what happened to Scotland during the 80's and the devastation caused by Thatcher and successive Tory governments.

Yeah, because Scotland was so different to the rest of the UK.

Madam

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Yeah, because Scotland was so different to the rest of the UK.

It is - even if I am a bit biased:)

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

Ironically enough, it was the policies enacted by those 'supposedly' most in favour of Unionism that has led to this. It's pretty funny that they did it to themselves.

Other than your usual pathetic digs, are you going to actually add anything to this thread?

Yamanoto

Happyman42 wrote: »

No, I am, as I have in the past, just trying to show just how unimportant it is as a concept, despite the flowery and airy fairy protestations to the contrary.
Would Britain or Britishness be missed in the greater scheme of things? I very much doubt it.

You're certainly entitled to argue about the concept being of little value.

But you've never felt British in any way, so it's a little less complicated for you. Indeed the only emotion you factor into the equation is more than likely through the prism of Irish Republicanism, which tends to skew things just a tad. I'm not surprised you hold the viewpoint you do, but common sense would dictate we lend considerably more weight to the opinions of Britons themselves on this one.

karma_

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Yeah, because Scotland was so different to the rest of the UK.

Not the rest of the UK Fred, Wales and other parts of Northern England suffered as much as Scotland, but not everywhere. The Tories for all their proud Britishness are the those most responsible for dismantling what once existed that did provide people in the UK with a sense of Britishness, so if you supported them at any time post 1979 then well done, the joke is on you

karma_

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Other than your usual pathetic digs, are you going to actually add anything to this thread?

Appreciating irony is never pathetic, and you know there a massive nugget of truth in what I said.

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

Not the rest of the UK Fred, Wales and other parts of Northern England suffered as much as Scotland, but not everywhere. The Tories for all their proud Britishness are the those most responsible for dismantling what once existed that did provide people in the UK with a sense of Britishness, so if you supported them at any time post 1979 then well done, the joke is on you

I've never voted Tory. Mainly because their policies forced me in to a £27.50 per week yts job when I left school, which I lost a few years later thanks to another of their policies. The company took advantage of the incentives on offer to relocate from south east England to Bathgate.

tigger123

Genuine question: why are some English people so wound up about Scottish independence? It they leave the United Kingdom it will cost them nothing.

It almost seems that they think Scotland should remain as part of the UK so English language feel better about the whole thing?

A Dub in Glasgo

There was a good article in yesterdays Sunday Herald from Tom Devine looking at how Scotland has got to a position of almost voting for independence (although he writes it from the stand point that they did)

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/break-up-of-the-union-how-the-independence-battle-was-won.25298879

Fratton Fred

tigger123 wrote: »

Genuine question: why are some English people so wound up about Scottish independence? It they leave the United Kingdom it will cost them nothing.

It almost seems that they think Scotland should remain as part of the UK so English language feel better about the whole thing?

If the Scots leave, then good luck to them. It's the ignorance of the arguments that I find frustrating.

karma_

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've never voted Tory. Mainly because their policies forced me in to a £27.50 per week yts job when I left school, which I lost a few years later thanks to another of their policies. The company took advantage of the incentives on offer to relocate from south east England to Bathgate.

Well this is exactly what I mean, and I didn't mean you specifically but a lot of those who do constantly vote Tory are those panicking and gnashing teeth the most now, when all along it was their support that has enabled those policies that hurt yourself and others. Modern economic policy is not conducive to any kind of community spirit these days, you can either have one or the other.

tigger123

tigger123 wrote: »

Genuine question: why are some English people so wound up about Scottish independence? It they leave the United Kingdom it will cost them nothing.

It almost seems that they think Scotland should remain as part of the UK so English language feel better about the whole thing?

Are English people that concerned? I don't think so. Politicians in westminster definitely are but their reputations are on the line.

But anyway - the united kingdom has been a country for 300 years. I am sure lots of people who are part of that country don't want it to be divided.

Same way Irish people or at least many irish people are wound up about ireland being divided.

A Dub in Glasgo

tigger123 wrote: »

Genuine question: why are some English people so wound up about Scottish independence?

because the people in Scotland get more spent per head than the rest of the UK and is subidised by England.... oh wait...

That is the misinformation that I see from some people and online comments on the newspaper websites

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

Well this is exactly what I mean, and I didn't mean you specifically but a lot of those who do constantly vote Tory are those panicking and gnashing teeth the most now, when all along it was their support that has enabled those policies that hurt yourself and others. Modern economic policy is not conducive to any kind of community spirit these days, you can either have one or the other.

Personally I believe things should be fixed when broken, not thrown away.

A Dub in Glasgo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Personally I believe things should be fixed when broken, not thrown away.

One man's throwing away is another man's fixing :pac:

Madam

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Personally I believe things should be fixed when broken, not thrown away.

Some things. are beyond repair - besides was it ever perfect to start with?

Fratton Fred

Should people throw away something that doesn't belong to them?

Madam

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Should people throw away something that doesn't belong to them?

Scotland doesn't belong to its people?

Happyman42

Yamanoto wrote: »

You're certainly entitled to argue about the concept being of little value.

But you've never felt British in any way, so it's a little less complicated for you. Indeed the only emotion you factor into the equation is more than likely through the prism of Irish Republicanism, which tends to skew things just a tad. I'm not surprised you hold the viewpoint you do, but common sense would dictate we lend considerably more weight to the opinions of Britons themselves on this one.

I'm listening to two viewpoints from Scotland, those who think Britishness is important and those who don't.
Imo those who 'don't' have the stronger argument so far, it doesn't seem to be anything that cannot be achieved in an independent state. As a previous poster said, it would seem that Britishness like the EU is a construct that favours some and not all.

Happyman42

Happyman42 wrote: »

I'm listening to two viewpoints from Scotland, those who think Britishness is important and those who don't.
Imo those who 'don't' have the stronger argument so far, it doesn't seem to be anything that cannot be achieved in an independent state. As a previous poster said, it would seem that Britishness like the EU is a construct that favours some and not all.

All nationalities are constructs, and they all exist to benefit the ruling class.

Like I said, you seem to be confused. 'Britishness' is a construct whereas 'scottishness' isn't somehow - as if there's a line somewhere around gretna green on each side of which people are incredibly different or care about different things.

Fratton Fred

Madam wrote: »

Scotland doesn't belong to its people?

My comment was tongue in cheek, but how do you feel about Scots not in Scotland not having a vote?

Happyman42

Deleted User wrote: »

All nationalities are constructs, and they all exist to benefit the ruling class.

Like I said, you seem to be confused. 'Britishness' is a construct whereas 'scottishness' isn't somehow - as if there's a line somewhere around gretna green on each side of which people are incredibly different or care about different things.

Why do you keep trying to dumb things down with statements of the obvious.
The debate is about the importance of one over the other, and Britishness as described here is some kind of nebulous 'feeling' that Britain is a beacon of cultural inclusiveness and tolerance. They of course are ignoring the fact that Britain is far from culturally inclusive and tolerant. Yes, it may be ahead of other places in that regard but it still has a way to go. It's only a wet week since they allowed a catholic to marry an heir to throne after all and the Brixton riots which where a result of racial unrest and disenfranchisement.

Fratton Fred

Happyman42 wrote: »

Why do you keep trying to dumb things down with statements of the obvious.
The debate is about the importance of one over the other, and Britishness as described here is some kind of nebulous 'feeling' that Britain is a beacon of cultural inclusiveness and tolerance. They of course are ignoring the fact that Britain is far from culturally inclusive and tolerant. Yes, it may be ahead of other places in that regard but it still has a way to go. It's only a wet week since they allowed a catholic to marry an heir to throne after all and the Brixton riots which where a result of racial unrest and disenfranchisement.

Oh please. Stop talking of things you know nothing about.

Iwasfrozen

Lads this thread has gone to ****.

Happyman42

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Oh please. Stop talking of things you know nothing about.

For a man who answered in cliches and stock tourist brochure speak that is rich!

Happyman42

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Lads this thread has gone to ****.

There seems to be a major problem when you try to look too closely at Britishness.

Iwasfrozen

Happyman42 wrote: »

There seems to be a major problem when you try to look too closely at Britishness.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BetsgAdNpIs/TsxfiZqAXxI/AAAAAAAAAEo/kK5fk-fseJs/s1600/1244649029731.jpg

Madam

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My comment was tongue in cheek, but how do you feel about Scots not in Scotland not having a vote?

I feel if you don't contribute or live in a country you have no right to vote on its future. I have friends and relatives who live all over the place who were born here (unlike myself) and have no interest in voting in the election, why would they if they don't see themselves ever living here again? Scotland is where they were born but it's not home to them anymore.

golfball37

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Well there's a dodge if ever I saw one.

I answered earlier in this thread, but I'll humour you and give you my own feelings on the subject.

Being British is about being part of a collective that reflects the multicultural society the UK is today. It doesn't reflect national or ethnic backgrounds and is, to an extent, a secondary identity.

You can be Scottish and British, English and British etc, or you can be Indian, Somali or Caribbean and British. Being British is what joins is together. You don't look at someone in a burkha and say that they can't be British, or someone who supports the Indian cricket team.

It is a union of people as much as it is a union of politics.

If Scotland votes for Independence then they can still call themselves British if they wish. The land won't detach from the island of Britain. In the same way people from Belfast can call themselves Irish if they wish.

Fratton Fred

golfball37 wrote: »

If Scotland votes for Independence then they can still call themselves British if they wish. The land won't detach from the island of Britain. In the same way people from Belfast can call themselves Irish if they wish.

Their still British, have no control over fiscal policy and will have an uncertain economic future.

My question is, is it worth it?

Madam

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Their still British, have no control over fiscal policy and will have an uncertain economic future.

My question is, is it worth it?

A resounding YES!!!;)

Piliger

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Their still British, have no control over fiscal policy and will have an uncertain economic future.

My question is, is it worth it?

It was well worth it for Ireland. There is absolutely no reason why it is not worth it for Scotland.

A Dub in Glasgo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My question is, is it worth it?

I believe so therefore I will vote Yes on Thursday

Fratton Fred

Madam wrote: »

I feel if you don't contribute or live in a country you have no right to vote on its future. I have friends and relatives who live all over the place who were born here (unlike myself) and have no interest in voting in the election, why would they if they don't see themselves ever living here again? Scotland is where they were born but it's not home to them anymore.

Conversely, I have a couple of friends in Ireland and England who are very annoyed at not being able to vote. The ones in England especially.

As they see it, their lives for one reason or another took them away, but they are and always will be Scottish.

Fair enough in an election, but this is way more than that. Especially when people who have lived there for a few years get to vote, who will most likely clear off if the going gets too tough.

Fratton Fred

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I believe so therefore I will vote Yes on Thursday

I was wondering, what with all the fence sitting and all.

Fratton Fred

Madam wrote: »

A resounding YES!!!;)

I hope you're right.

First Up

Piliger wrote: »

It was well worth it for Ireland. There is absolutely no reason why it is not worth it for Scotland.

It took Ireland the best part of fifty years to recover.

Happyman42

First Up wrote: »

It took Ireland the best part of fifty years to recover.

In fairness there is no comparison to the starting point we had though.

Happyman42

And as if he hadn't messed it all up enough, Cameron now gets the reason why it is called 'Great' wrong too. What a twat!

First Up

Happyman42 wrote: »

In fairness there is no comparison to the starting point we had though.

Depends on what you call the starting point. The 1707 Act of Union was promoted by Scotland because the country needed bailing out and it continued to be bailed out until the discovery of North Sea Oil in the 1970's. That finite resource is still the only economic instrument that keeps Scotland afloat and it is running out. The rest of the Scottish economy is dependent on its links with England far more than Ireland was before or since 1921.

If Scotland leaves the UK, its most urgent priority will be to find a sugar daddy to replace England. Any ideas?

A Dub in Glasgo

The new campaign slogan from Labour to their supporters is 'If you Don't Know, just Vote No' (see letter sent out to Labour supporters)



Note how they portray the vote on Thursday like a General Election vote rather than structural change of how you are Governed

snubbleste

Cameron's speech was a desperate plea. He sounded completely impotent.

A Dub in Glasgo

First Up wrote: »

Depends on what you call the starting point. The 1707 Act of Union was promoted by Scotland because the country needed bailing out and it continued to be bailed out until the discovery of North Sea Oil in the 1970's. That finite resource is still the only economic instrument that keeps Scotland afloat and it is running out. The rest of the Scottish economy is dependent on its links with England far more than Ireland was before or since 1921.

If Scotland leaves the UK, its most urgent priority will be to find a sugar daddy to replace England. Any ideas?

The starting point was the ruling elite of Scotland nearly bankrupting the people of Scotland and the ruling elite went for the union (back then, the views of the people was not considered and did not matter)

Another one who falls into the mindset described here

Madam

First Up wrote: »

Depends on what you call the starting point. The 1707 Act of Union was promoted by Scotland because the country needed bailing out and it continued to be bailed out until the discovery of North Sea Oil in the 1970's. That finite resource is still the only economic instrument that keeps Scotland afloat and it is running out. The rest of the Scottish economy is dependent on its links with England far more than Ireland was before or since 1921.

If Scotland leaves the UK, its most urgent priority will be to find a sugar daddy to replace England. Any ideas?[

Gawd you are one bitter bugger!

Scottie99

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Seriously? You can't see the costs in seperating the NHS, the civil service? Border control, the ministry of defence?

There are civil servants in Scotland, but not necessarily a Scottish civil service. HMRC, for example, collect all the tax for the UK, which is then allocated out. This will need to be split.

The same will apply for all other branches of the civil service.

How will shipbuilding grow in an independent Scotland?

Defence presence in Scotland isn't that low. Some 6000 people owe their jobs to the naval bases on the Clyde. The SNP have committed to removing trident from Scotland, so they aren't going to leave that hanging around for twenty years. That goes, the RN goes. Then there's the RAF.

Scotland will have a depth of 60% of its GDP, but how much interest will they pay on it? Who will be loaning then money? Plus, of course, their new lower tax regime will further reduce their ability to service this debt.

None of this is myth, conjecture or scaremongering, it is simply a much closer view of the facts than the fairy tale happy ending the SNP are talking about.

Of course, we know one person who will be fine and dandy after independence, in fact, there's only one person who future is guaranteed in an independent Scotland.

NHS, education,law is separate in Scotland.
Defence - Scottish government have said there will be saving on defence. The UK charges scotland 4/5Billion a year SG say it can be done for much less.
They're suggesting the start up costs will be 200million

Fuhrer

Whats going to happen to Scottish soldiers in the Army/RAF/Navy etc?

Scottie99

Fuhrer wrote: »

Whats going to happen to Scottish soldiers in the Army/RAF/Navy etc?

I'd say it'll be pretty much like the Irish army. Im hearing they'll be calling the "defence force" As for personnel, they'll be given an option of moving over to Scotland's new military.

Happyman42

First Up wrote: »

Depends on what you call the starting point. The 1707 Act of Union was promoted by Scotland because the country needed bailing out and it continued to be bailed out until the discovery of North Sea Oil in the 1970's. That finite resource is still the only economic instrument that keeps Scotland afloat and it is running out. The rest of the Scottish economy is dependent on its links with England far more than Ireland was before or since 1921.

If Scotland leaves the UK, its most urgent priority will be to find a sugar daddy to replace England. Any ideas?

I suspect that they will do what we did, become a trading partner with England. A partnership that didn't suffer through the conflict because it was in every body's interests.
England won't be huffing and breaking trading links, don't be silly.