Scottish independence

Tuesday, the 16th, is set to be the Tory hustings in Scotland. Perth appears to be where it will be held but it seems they are keeping the venue a closely guarded secret to avoid any bad reception. It will be interesting if pro-independence supporters are able to get wind of it. There's bound to be more questions on independence.

Frost has turned his attention on Scotland in his latest article.

Striking bit is this sentence: 'we need to act. The devolution settlement is not written in stone. It has evolved – all in one direction – since 1999. It can evolve back, too.'

He goes on to suggest another referendum should only happen if '75 per cent of seats in the Scottish Parliament in favour of independence, over a 10-year period, legally binding.'

This paragraph is also ominous considering he is someone being talked up as possibly having a key role under Truss:

'‘Westminister politicians invariably say they want a “constructive relationship” with the Scottish government. The new UK government must realise the relationship is only constructive when it is doing what the SNP wants. In the current institutional set-up, a constructive relationship is a sign of failure. Instead, we need disagreement, vigorous argument, and consistent political challenge to the SNP world-view. That’s what we need to see – because that’s what’s needed to save the country.’

So Frost is advocating undermining devolution, 'disagreement', and an adversarial relationship with the Scottish government. I don't see how that is going to win over the middle ground who will be necessary to keep Scotland in the Union. If the UK government adopt this approach, it looks like a massive own goal in the making. Sturgeon responded to his piece:

If a Truss government seeks to 'evolve back' devolution as Frost is pushing for, might that be the moment that tips the balance firmly in favour of independence?

Pure spite. They have nothing to debate with against the points being made by the Scottish population. Their own government is in a state and they decide to attack another within the union, one that is doing quite well and moving further away in both a social and political sense.

This is total shocked Pikachu meme territory. Celebrating the potential of anrat infestation in Scotland then wondering why they want to leave the union.

I find the economic argument against independence (Table 3) a really strange one. Virtually no country that became independent in Europe in the last 30 years (and there have been a lot of them) paid any attention to the economic situation when deciding to go for independence.

Which was probably even understood by many at the time. I find it quite baffling that a country going for independence would base their decision on whether it was economically viable or not. It would be like a man pondering whether to divorce his wife or stay with her for the rest of his life going through his bank account to check on how it would impact on his finances and solely basing his decision on that.

So the question I have is how applicable to modern day Scotland is the above?

Because they need it to be applicable to get a majority to vote for independence

The 'Scottish unionist' crowd are a really strange bunch. I've seen numerous ones on social media arguing vehemently that Scotland is not a real country and is merely a British region. They almost sound more hardcore and ideological than the DUP in Northern Ireland.

Not withstanding Frost and his rabmlings in a Tory newspaper none of what you describe above as being part of the Scottish identity is under threat.

And the Anglo centric corrupt Westminster Tory government you talk about could be gone in a few years given the way they are going.

So what will drive independence if the culture is not under threat?