PDA

View Full Version : Scotland Independent



sufi
29-08-2014, 12:43 AM
It is this centralised, unitary state, meanwhile, that has gone to war repeatedly over the last decade. The legacy of its brutal Empire lives on its oversized military, and its willingness to use it. (Britain, with a population 0.89% of the world’s total, is the sixth largest military spender on the planet.) My entire adult life has been spent living in a country that is either bombing, invading, or occupying one place or another, with appalling consequences. It is only the immense, popular upsurge of the anti-war movement that has stayed the British state’s hand. Breaking up this warlike state, undermining its capacity to act abroad – as Scottish independence will – will be a huge gain for the world.http://www.counterfire.org/articles/opinion/17407-scottish-independence-referendum-no-excuse-for-no

paolo
29-08-2014, 09:13 AM
It's sort of ironic that a lot of people in Scotland (including me) are voting yes because they don't like the Tories, but they were the ones who have allowed the referendum to go ahead

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 10:28 AM
I don't really have strong feelings about it one way or another - except for the fact that not many Scots vote Tory, so it'll definitely strengthen the Tories in England.

But then, to put things in context, Scotland's whole population is something like 8% of the UK's total, so it's not going to radically change the balance of power in Westminster. In fact, could it be exactly the impetus English politics needs for the reinvigoration of a Labour Party that's not a complete waste of space, or a bigger role for the Greens?

Edit: if we can send George Galloway back, then I'm 100% behind a Yes vote.

droid
29-08-2014, 10:38 AM
Its almost inconceivable that any true scotsman (!) would vote against this? The scots seem to be heading in a relatively sensible, liberal, neutral, northern european european direction... an opportunity to reduce ties with a state thats pretty much heading in the opposite direction seems like an open and shut case.

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 10:48 AM
There's northern European...and then there's northern European European!

A potential stumbling block is the currency, of course. Seems like they'll be unlikely to keep the (UK) £, and the euro is looking less attractive than it might have done 10 years ago. How difficult would it be for them to create a separate Scottish pound? A poond, in fact?

droid
29-08-2014, 10:52 AM
lol.

From what Ive read all the sterling talk is scaremongering. There's no real reason I can see why they couldn't keep using it. Westminster has no real say on who uses their currency anyway (we pegged to it for years), and if it comes down to it I dont think there'll be any appetite to make trouble if/when the Scots decide to keep it. In fact, if it goes ahead, I imagine all these 'intractable' problems will somehow melt away in favour of good relations and continuing economic relationships.

griftert
29-08-2014, 11:10 AM
Yeah, there's a few different options. I'd imagine Westminister's favourite would be to share a pound over which it ultimately has control - I'm not sure that would be the best from a Scottish point of view but I can't see it being so unlikely.

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 11:13 AM
Anyone got any idea of how many years' good pickings are left in the North Sea oil/gas that Scotland will control most of if the Yes vote goes through?


In fact, if it goes ahead, I imagine all these 'intractable' problems will somehow melt away in favour of good relations and continuing economic relationships.

Let's hope so. If the price of a bottle of single malt in English shops increases significantly then I'm afraid a war of reconquest might be inevitable.

IdleRich
29-08-2014, 11:58 AM
I don't see why they couldn't keep the pound. I don't think they could become part of the Eurozone though because they have to have had their own independent currency that has met certain stability conditions for a number of years before they can be allowed in. I guess they could peg to the Euro if they wanted to though.

paolo
29-08-2014, 01:25 PM
Scotland wants to keep the pound, the UK want to keep nuclear weapons in Scotland. There's a deal to be made there

Also I don't get why the SNP want to keep the Queen as head of state in an independent Scotland. I'd be all for getting rid of the old bag

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 01:48 PM
Scots ran the British Empire

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 01:55 PM
Lack of support for the Tories doesn't equate to a lack of right wingers in Scotland (lots of Labour supporters hold socially conservative views)

Since they're going to join NATO I doubt it'll have much of an effect on Western interventions in foreign countries

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 01:55 PM
Scots ran the British Empire

I was thinking this as I read the quote in sufi's first post, which strikes me as ahistorical at best, if not a little disingenuous.

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 02:03 PM
I was thinking this as I read the quote in sufi's first post, which strikes me as ahistorical at best, if not a little disingenuous.

The argument being made to people outside of Scotland (which is less important as none of us will be voting but is being made nonetheless) doesn't seem to be aimed at Tories and UKIP supporters as they don't mind if Scotland becomes independent, it'll strengthen their support and produce a more Eurosceptic parliament.

So the independence campaign is focusing on portraying an independent Scotland as a socially democratic utopia to win support from English Labour voters, on the premise it'll produce some sort of trickle down socialism.

griftert
29-08-2014, 02:13 PM
Well, it would certainly be more left wing than Westminister. There is/was a number of avowedly socialist MPs in the parliament. I dunno if there's any in Westminister beyond a few the Labour party can't get rid of. Whether it produces a more progressive England is neither here not there. If your churlishness extends to the notion that just because you're stuck with a corrupt Westminister that means we all should be I don't know what to tell you.

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 02:33 PM
Well, it would certainly be more left wing than Westminister. There is/was a number of avowedly socialist MPs in the parliament. I dunno if there's any in Westminister beyond a few the Labour party can't get rid of. Whether it produces a more progressive England is neither here not there. If your churlishness extends to the notion that just because you're stuck with a corrupt Westminister that means we all should be I don't know what to tell you.

No, I just don't buy the idea that an independent Scotland will be more left wing than Britain (might be more left wing than what they'd leave us with). Either the SNP will remain as a coalition of social democrats and neo-liberals (bad for democracy) or Scottish politics will fragment into (slightly) left and (slightly) right.


The fact that UKIP can take votes off the Labour party in the North is telling. People don't necessarily vote Labour because they're socially (or even economically) left wing, they just can't stomach voting for a bunch of old Etonians from the home counties.

Why would it be less corrupt?

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 02:42 PM
If your churlishness extends to the notion that just because you're stuck with a corrupt Westminister that means we all should be I don't know what to tell you.

So people in the rest of the UK shouldn't have an opinion on something that'll affect them?

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 02:47 PM
The idea of a socialist nation built on oil revenues claiming to be less corrupt than its neighbours is an interesting one.

is the third world worth burning at the altar of western socialist democracy?

griftert
29-08-2014, 02:54 PM
Didn't you read my post? Well, for one thing it's already more left-wing. Free school meals, tuition, prescriptions etc were all spearheaded by the Scottish Socialist Party who got seats in the parliament. A socialist party would not win seats in England. The SNP is to the left of Labour on most issues, and people in Scotland overturned a generational loyalty to Labour because they were percieved to be 'just like the Tories'. Look at the figures.
People (and parties) in Scotland generally subscribe to political assumptions which more resemble the post-war settlement. People just don't espouse a radical individualism to the same extent that is common in England.

Also, on the notion that more democracy generally tends towards less corruption the fact that the partliament is proportional representation is also important. It's less likely for blocks of voters in Surrey to command all the power.

Also, there is less class stratification and snobbery in Scotland. There isn't a Scottish aristocracy that is looked on with fondness by large swathes of the populalation as there is in England.

People could get jobs of some note without having had to either have went to private school or Oxbridge (and preferably both).

griftert
29-08-2014, 02:57 PM
So people in the rest of the UK shouldn't have an opinion on something that'll affect them?
Well, it's a different country. That's usually how democracy works. We wouldn't be taking any democratic powers from the rest of the country (the opposite is true).

I take it you'd like to be able to decide what oil prices OPEC sets, or what kind of fishing policies the Scandinavian countries have. Unfortunately it's a different country.

griftert
29-08-2014, 03:00 PM
The idea of a socialist nation built on oil revenues claiming to be less corrupt than its neighbours is an interesting one.

is the third world worth burning at the altar of western socialist democracy?Yes, vastly impovrished Third World countries are a good comparison to make with an advanced Western economy.

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 03:04 PM
Yes, vastly impovrished Third World countries are a good comparison to make with an advanced Western economy.

I'm not making a comparison. I'm asking how nationalist you think Scottish 'socialism' can afford to be, without losing its character.

Can a nation call itself socialist when the funding of its social democracy is predicated on the destruction of the world's eco-system (the effects of which will be felt first, and most keenly, by the world's poorest nations)?

griftert
29-08-2014, 03:10 PM
Well, you're asking quite a lot now all of a sudden! Westminster is totally cunted mate. I dunno why you think the alternative would have to be perfect for it to be worthwhile doing. And incase you didn't notice, the whole world is doing precisely fuck all about ecological catastrophe. Just as well Scotland has 25% of Europes renewable potential and a growing wave power sector that no Westminster government has much interest in supporting.

Further, it's disingenuous to call Scotland an oil economy. I've no doubt that the rest of the UK would stake a claim to a large chunk of any future revenues, and at any rate our GDP would still be higher than UK average without it, so that's all a red herring, you can forget about that.

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 03:18 PM
Well, you're asking quite a lot now all of a sudden! Westminster is totally cunted mate. I dunno why you think the alternative would have to be perfect for it to be worthwhile doing.

Fair point.


And incase you didn't notice, the whole world is doing precisely fuck all about ecological catastrophe. Just as well Scotland has 25% of Europes renewable potential and a growing wave power sector that no Westminster government has much interest in supporting.

Yeah, but most of the rest of the world isn't simultaneously claiming to be socialist (apart from the Chinese). Will they be spending money on developing that potential? Haven't heard the Yes campaign talk about it much but might have just missed it.


Further, it's disingenuous to call Scotland an oil economy. I've no doubt that the rest of the UK would stake a claim to a large chunk of any future revenues, and at any rate our GDP would still be higher than UK average without it, so that's all a red herring, you can forget about that.

Why does Alex Salmond make such a big deal about oil revenues then?

griftert
29-08-2014, 03:34 PM
I'm not sure he does tbh. I think it's a good soundbite, but I think lately they've been keen to avoid the notion that the only thing Scotland has going for it is oil.

As for renewables, that has had a lot of play, the white paper talks about it a bit. The Greens in Scotland are pro-independence for that reason. Wave power is a big growth industry in Scotland atm. And people in Scotland are broadly in favour of windfarms polls suggest. I can see one from my window as it happens.

droid
29-08-2014, 03:45 PM
Scotland practically leads Europe in wind/wave power and are quickly heading towards renewable energy independence They're a shining example to those of us who live on windswept northern islands.

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 03:56 PM
Well, it's a different country. That's usually how democracy works. We wouldn't be taking any democratic powers from the rest of the country (the opposite is true).

Yes of course, and in a very basic sense, the smaller the democracy you live in, the more your individual vote counts for. It would also clear up the question of Scottish MPs being able to vote on matters only affecting England. My point was just that, with a huge number of people in the rest of the UK extremely dissatisfied with the clique currently running the country and no opposition worthy of the name, it's understandable that people here aren't thrilled about a change that could move the political centre of gravity even further to the right.

As you say, it'll be decided by Scottish people voting, so from your POV it's neither here nor there, but it's not unreasonable that English people have an opinion on it.


I take it you'd like to be able to decide what oil prices OPEC sets, or what kind of fishing policies the Scandinavian countries have. Unfortunately it's a different country.

Huh? I can't say either those things particularly concerns me.

Scotland may be a country but it's also part of the sovereign state of the UK, at present. Saying "Scotland should be a separate country because it's a separate country" is both circular and, for now, untrue.

griftert
29-08-2014, 04:12 PM
Ah, excuse me, of course you're allowed an opinion. I misread your statement. My point was really about who should or shouldn't be allowed to vote and exercise power on the issue. And it is a separate country. Just not one with political autonomy.

And yes, I'd agree it's unfortunate, as it happens I think it might give English radicalism a spark and perhaps cause some real debate about where the country is and is headed. How much more moribund does a system have to get before people might attempt a change? I mean it really is beyond a joke.

And as it happens, I've often found that even ostensibly lefty people down south hold some pretty reactionary views so I dunno.

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 04:24 PM
Ah, excuse me, of course you're allowed an opinion. I misread your statement. My point was really about who should or shouldn't be allowed to vote and exercise power on the issue.

OK, fair enough. I wasn't saying the vote should be open to people outside Scotland, if that's what you thought I meant.

Patrick Swayze
29-08-2014, 04:30 PM
Do you reckon Scottish independence is inevitable, either by referendum or more gradually as a consequence of devo-max, or do you think a more right wing (Boris) westminster govt would put the brakes on in the event of a no vote?

trza
29-08-2014, 04:31 PM
Is there some kind of "undo" button to keep this from happening if the vote goes for independence?

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 05:57 PM
If it does happen, will non-Scottish Brits living in Scotland at the time automatically get Scottish citizenship? Or will they have to apply for it and take some kind of test, presumably involving an assessment of tolerance to Irn-Bru and The Proclaimers?

griftert
29-08-2014, 07:23 PM
Tolerance??

Mr. Tea
29-08-2014, 11:32 PM
Tolerance??

OK, harsh wording. I do actually quite like Irn Bru.

Sectionfive
02-09-2014, 03:06 PM
From where I am standing, all the right people are opposed to Scottish independence. If that illustrious list are so anxious there must be something good in it. A yes vote will only be the start of a very long and unpredictable road but it could be the shake up that everyone on these islands need, or at least part of the catalyst for one. A fracture in the Union like this is the kind of seismic political change we just don't see any more. How seismic we don't know but just seeing it happen, the unthinkable, opens all sorts of possibilities. Still the no side's to lose though and there is an innate conservatism in modern electorates that is very hard to shake.

HMGovt
02-09-2014, 06:07 PM
A multipolar UK will be more interesting, possibly more economically active. If the northern counties looked more towards Edinburgh and less towards London it would do the English regions some good too. Visiting Edinburgh earlier this year the place felt like a foreign capital already - confident, bustling, proud. Good luck to them, I don't think Scotland has anything to lose.

Mr. Tea
02-09-2014, 06:41 PM
Just thinking about the quote in sufi's original post:


My entire adult life has been spent living in a country that is either bombing, invading, or occupying one place or another, with appalling consequences.

Makes perfect sense, I mean I can see why a peace-loving Scot would be unhappy about their country being ruled by a government headed by such belligerent English imperialists as Tony Blair and Gordon Broh hang on, let me just think about this a sec...

crackerjack
02-09-2014, 09:03 PM
Just thinking about the quote in sufi's original post:



Makes perfect sense, I mean I can see why a peace-loving Scot would be unhappy about their country being ruled by a government headed by such belligerent English imperialists as Tony Blair and Gordon Broh hang on, let me just think about this a sec...

The original quote is just awful puerile bollocks. What s/he should have said is that an independent Scotland would be too inconsequential politically, militarily and financially to play a significant part in any war that wasn't for its own immediate survival (which wouldn't rule out participation in some Iraq Redux – see Denmark, for example – just make it less likely). This would doubtless appeal to lots of people, but it sounds much less impressive written into a manifesto of chest-beating anti-imperialism.

griftert
03-09-2014, 08:59 PM
Haha. Don't think that quote is saying an independent Scotland would have anything like a concrete, determinative impact on any particular war or war-like situation (does the UK really?), but rather that something as drastic as the break-up of the union, take clearly in context of Iraq, Afghanistan etc, would be yet another challenge to the untramelled logic of endless war and imperialism. So puerile in what way, crackerjack? Scots getting a bit uppity..? I wonder why the US is so against it.

crackerjack
03-09-2014, 09:43 PM
So puerile in what way, crackerjack? Scots getting a bit uppity..?

Puerile in that kind of way, for starters.

And because stuff like this

It is only the immense, popular upsurge of the anti-war movement that has stayed the British state’s hand.
is just fraudulent... and this

(Britain, with a population 0.89% of the world’s total, is the sixth largest military spender on the planet.)
is misleading (nations spend according to their wealth and the UK is – guess what – the 6th-richest nation on the planet) and because his picture of foreign intervention is every bit as monochrome as that painted by the discredited likes of STWC. But maybe the writer shares Salmond's man crush on his fellow nationalist (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/30/alex-salmond-vladimir-putin-remarks.)

crackerjack
03-09-2014, 09:47 PM
Anyway, although I don't want Scotland to go indie, there are good reasons why people think otherwise – you've advanced some yourself on here – and I've been surprised by how many of the Scots I know (mostly ex-pats) support Yes. But none of them are in that OP.

Mr. Tea
04-09-2014, 10:26 AM
If I lived in Scotland I'd want to have as little to do with the shower of cunts currently running Westminster as possible.

droid
04-09-2014, 10:52 AM
Its a simple enough question. Is life in the UK going to get better in the foreseeable future, politically, socially and economically?

I think we all know what the trend is here and where things are headed. Scotland has a chance to get off the bus and take their chances towards an unknown, and almost certainly brighter destination.

paolo
05-09-2014, 09:07 AM
Is there some kind of "undo" button to keep this from happening if the vote goes for independence?

Not really, no

crackerjack
08-09-2014, 01:57 PM
Krugman on the currency question.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/opinion/paul-krugman-scots-what-the-heck.html?_r=4

trza
08-09-2014, 02:50 PM
I don't read the UK press but couldn't any central bank just buy a bunch of british pounds and print up one note scottish pounds on a one-for-one basis. Several small countries do the same with the US dollar. Unless the central bank in the UK seriously tried to keep any scottish bank from buying reserves of pound sterling, when there are billions sitting int he reserves of other country's banks. Seems like an odd issue.

Mr. Tea
08-09-2014, 04:09 PM
Is there an argument - that can be understood by the economics layman - why the SNP wants Scotland to remain in currency union with England, when that would seem - to this layman - to be a fairly serious concession of independence? Is it just to help keep it easy to trade across the border?

crackerjack
08-09-2014, 05:12 PM
Is it just to help keep it easy to trade across the border?

No. Or at least, not mainly. Currency strength is a good indicator of economic strength. And if investors think your economy is weak and your currency tumbles, you're either self-sufficient or you're fucked on import prices. At least that's my (very, very) layman's understanding.

edit: I'm assuming you mean why keep the £ rather than establish their own. Cos I guess joining euro is a tough sell to nervous voters right now.

droid
08-09-2014, 05:13 PM
AFAIK, its mainly just a real pain in the arse. Took us six years to come up with one after independence, and then we were directly pegged to sterling for another 50 years, and even after that it took the euro to break the bond completely.

IdleRich
08-09-2014, 07:39 PM
I don't think they could join the euro though so the choices are pounds or a new currency.
Loving the panic as the establishment suddenly wakes up to the fact that it might actually happen. I think it will in fact. If the headlines are to be believed then the Queen will be very upset.

droid
08-09-2014, 09:52 PM
Took us 80 years, so there's plenty of time.

Mr. Tea
08-09-2014, 10:58 PM
edit: I'm assuming you mean why keep the £ rather than establish their own. Cos I guess joining euro is a tough sell to nervous voters right now.

Yes, that's what I meant. But are those the only two options? What's to stop Scotland having its own pound? Or rather, poond? They've got their own banks, some of which - unlike banks based elsewhere in the UK, other than the BoE - already print their own notes. (Much to the chagrin of anyone who's ever tried to spend one in an English pub.)

Mr. Tea
08-09-2014, 11:02 PM
I don't think they could join the euro...

Do you mean, it wouldn't be economically feasible, or the European Central Bank wouldn't let them?

I understand there are - in theory - quite stringent criteria that a country has to meet before it can join the Euro. But I've also heard that only about two of the existing Eurozone countries ever strictly qualified in the first place, and some (Greece) weren't within a million miles of qualifying.

IdleRich
09-09-2014, 08:18 AM
In theory I think a country has to have had its own stable currency for several (I forget how many) years before it can join the euro. Maybe they can get round it but seeing as how the question seems to be whether a Scottish currency would be stable then you'd think not. The whole point is that you can join the euro once stability has been demonstrated, not that you can use the euro to save you from instability.

Mr. Tea
09-09-2014, 10:42 AM
...not that you can use the euro to save you from instability.

*hollow laughter from Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland...*

paolo
10-09-2014, 09:03 AM
Cameron, Miliband and Clegg are coming up here to persuade us to stay in the union

http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01997/SNN1202CAM---_1997615a.jpg

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/75506000/jpg/_75506566_022667108-1.jpg

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article9535130.ece/alternates/w620/cleggsun1306a.jpg

paolo
10-09-2014, 09:03 AM
(Salmond is Murdoch's pal as well now tbf)

craner
10-09-2014, 09:53 AM
So is Farage.

Patrick Swayze
10-09-2014, 11:41 AM
Miliband's idea of a relaxed facial expression is wild

Mr. Tea
10-09-2014, 12:29 PM
http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/01997/SNN1202CAM---_1997615a.jpg

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/75506000/jpg/_75506566_022667108-1.jpg

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article9535130.ece/alternates/w620/cleggsun1306a.jpg

Could you pick three photos that more succinctly sum up everything that's fucked about British politics in 2014?

crackerjack
10-09-2014, 06:56 PM
Could you pick three photos that more succinctly sum up everything that's fucked about British politics in 2014?

Yeah, this one. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11083111/How-The-Sun-is-shining-for-the-First-Minister.html

Mr. Tea
10-09-2014, 11:34 PM
Yeah, this one. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11083111/How-The-Sun-is-shining-for-the-First-Minister.html

Now I'm not saying Salmond looks like a sadistic mobster from Boardwalk Empire in that photo...but he totally does.

datwun
11-09-2014, 08:39 AM
https://soundcloud.com/deadbeatuk/scottish-notez-1000-followers
"If I took that to my local shop, they wouldn't say that it was legal tender, they'd be like yo what the fuck is that???" - Alistair Darling

craner
11-09-2014, 01:41 PM
I really hope this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/11089388/North-Korea-backs-Scottish-independence.html) is a black propaganda exercise, it would renew my faith in the secret state.

trza
16-09-2014, 08:12 PM
So whats going to happen on Thursday?

crackerjack
16-09-2014, 09:29 PM
So whats going to happen on Thursday?

There'll be a narrow No vote, though perhaps slightly less narrow than people think (54-46 ish).

Then we'll spend the next 10 years hearing representatives of English nationalism bleat on about how we're the true oppressed of the United Kingdom. 'English devolution' (i.e. excluding Scots, NI, perhaps Welsh from certain parliamentary votes) will become An Issue (if not under Cameron then under next Tory leader).

The SNP will have time to actually think about what their plans are before the next one in 20 years' time (which they'll most likely win). They never expected to win this, which is partly why they've been so badly exposed on currency.

Cameron may face an NC vote this year. He'll win (unless the Scottish vote is really narrow (51-49 or less), but he'll be even more damaged than he already is. So will Ed M, though less obviously and people won't talk about it so much – cos everyone knows already, right?

Oh, and people on the left will read this (http://www.itv.com/news/2014-09-16/i-have-a-confession-to-make-i-am-not-enjoying-covering-the-scottish-referendum/) and think twice next time before clambering into bed with nationalists in the name of socking it to the neoliberal man*. Paranoia, conspiracy theories and intimidation of media and opponents ain't no way to birth a social democratic paradise.

*This bit won't happen, but it should.

droid
16-09-2014, 10:33 PM
intimidation of media

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/16/media-shafted-people-scotland-journalists

crackerjack
16-09-2014, 10:45 PM
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/16/media-shafted-people-scotland-journalists

Yeah, I'm having this exact argument elsewhere as we speak, so can't be bothered duplicating too much. But always good to see George Monbiot holding forth on elites and gilded circles ;) (I assume it's Monbiot, I've not clicked).

droid
16-09-2014, 11:01 PM
Of course, but he makes the valid point that support of independence in the media was pretty much 0, and of course, much of the English coverage of the referendum has been appalling.

crackerjack
16-09-2014, 11:05 PM
Of course, but he makes the valid point that support of independence in the media was pretty much 0, and of course, much of the English coverage of the referendum has been appalling.

He picked the easy targets. The assailing of the BBC was a disgrace. But that's Nats for you.

droid
16-09-2014, 11:13 PM
From what Ive seen, the Beeb have a lot of questions to answer. I mean, its not as if the state broadcaster would act dishonorably to protect the interests of power. Thats never happened has it?

trza
16-09-2014, 11:18 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bxr2SolCAAEtP5O.png

crackerjack
16-09-2014, 11:26 PM
From what Ive seen, the Beeb have a lot of questions to answer.

From what I've seen the charges have been mostly pathetic (e.g. the John Lewis one), with one half-exception of that RBS thing (which I can't fully comment on cos couldn't make out NR's voice on video, but note a few people making similar point as him at the time). The absurd over-reaction and sneering hostility was an embarrassment, but entirely typical of the way Salmond operates.

crackerjack
16-09-2014, 11:27 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bxr2SolCAAEtP5O.png

Priceless. Think we can guess who leaked that story to Private Eye at the time.

droid
17-09-2014, 01:46 PM
Enjoyed this:

http://youtu.be/-YkLPxQp_y0

Sectionfive
17-09-2014, 07:56 PM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/7085_10202732023609610_2921592760029104384_n.jpg?o h=95b4493b6dfee64542828a352dd6952e&oe=54918F89&__gda__=1418746379_597285302deb48df092e084a56b064f 0

paolo
17-09-2014, 10:06 PM
This is really quite exciting

I predict the Nos will win it but I'm voting Yes.

griftert
18-09-2014, 04:23 PM
There'll be a narrow No vote, though perhaps slightly less narrow than people think (54-46 ish).

Then we'll spend the next 10 years hearing representatives of English nationalism bleat on about how we're the true oppressed of the United Kingdom. 'English devolution' (i.e. excluding Scots, NI, perhaps Welsh from certain parliamentary votes) will become An Issue (if not under Cameron then under next Tory leader).

The SNP will have time to actually think about what their plans are before the next one in 20 years' time (which they'll most likely win). They never expected to win this, which is partly why they've been so badly exposed on currency.

Cameron may face an NC vote this year. He'll win (unless the Scottish vote is really narrow (51-49 or less), but he'll be even more damaged than he already is. So will Ed M, though less obviously and people won't talk about it so much – cos everyone knows already, right?

Oh, and people on the left will read this (http://www.itv.com/news/2014-09-16/i-have-a-confession-to-make-i-am-not-enjoying-covering-the-scottish-referendum/) and think twice next time before clambering into bed with nationalists in the name of socking it to the neoliberal man*. Paranoia, conspiracy theories and intimidation of media and opponents ain't no way to birth a social democratic paradise.

*This bit won't happen, but it should.
Haha. Like tempers wouldn't fray elsewhere. Left-leaning English 'nos' have a remarkably high standard for social democratic movements that don't involve them. People associating this campaign with 'Nationalism' simply don't know what real Nationalism looks like. It certainly wouldn't advocate more broad-ranged immigration. But let's not get facts in the way of misreadings.

Mr. Tea
18-09-2014, 05:14 PM
An independent Scotland that wants to accept more immigrants could perhaps take some of the pressure off SE England, assuming immigrants want to live there.

paolo
19-09-2014, 09:07 AM
:(

crackerjack
19-09-2014, 04:13 PM
No, nothing remotely wrong about this (https://twitter.com/Mr_Eugenides/status/512979564147261440). It's a perfectly legitimate (https://twitter.com/Mr_Eugenides/status/512979751368417280) response which doesn't make them look like a petty-minded bunch of bullies (https://twitter.com/Mr_Eugenides/status/512980416681496576) who can't take hard questions. And absolutely not nationalists (https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/512980494146088960).

Mr. Tea
19-09-2014, 05:06 PM
Russia cries foul over Scottish independence vote (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/russia-calls-foul-scottish-referendum?CMP=twt_gu)

I'm reminded of the time Saudi Arabia criticized Norway for its "human rights record".

craner
19-09-2014, 09:06 PM
To be fair, the Yes campaign was not overtly Nationalist. But in that way it was misleeding and its non-Nationalist enthusiasts misguided, seemingly dismissing the existence of Scottish conservatives (there are lots of them, actually), or believing (or claiming) that the Scottish business class, or Scottish bankers, would be more ethical than the raptors of the City of London. It rested on the mistaken idea that independence would solve political problems, or would excise itself from an international financial system, class and culture. Or that, say, 10 or 15 years of SNP domination of a new state would not invite, eventually, a reaction, which could very well be neoliberal (this happens; it happened in Sweden, for example).

There is no reason why Scotland can't be a successful, independent nation, on the Northern European model, even if it did run out of oil (there would just be higher taxes, which might not be as popular). Whether that would be better for Scotland financially or in terms of defence is another argument altogther. The latter Yes position seems to rest on the idea of giving up a nuclear deterrent, which is a more esoteric and complex issue, although it comes down to politial preference at the populist level. There was also the NATO issue, dodged by the SNP.

Behind all of this, though, at core and stripping away temporal sympathies and assumptions, it is a Nationalist argument. It was an issue and a vote championed and triggered by the Scottish Nationalist Party. They may not have been pumping put Mel Gibson propaganda, but the basic attempt to argue that Scots are more socialist and ethical than, say, the inhabitants of South East England was a caricature and a judgement on two sets of geographically-determined populations that is not only disingenuous and false, but dangerous. The smaller you get, the more micro and vicious and ridiculous the arguments get. In an independent Wales (awful idea) the North and South would soon be squabbling (they have nothing in common), as would the urban centres and rural heartlands, as would (even more viciously) the Welsh and non-Welsh speakers.

I don't like the idea of Scottish independence because I abhor Nationalism, rather than conviction Pro-Unionism.

I will only concede that the argument is slightly different when you are talking about former Soviet states battling the political technologists exported by the Kremlin, or the small states ravaged and scarred by the Greater Serbia aggression of the '90s, or Kurdistan. I don't think that is to concede much, really, but I am sure most of you would disagree and call it hypocrisy.

droid
19-09-2014, 09:22 PM
Its completely different. Scottish nationalism as articulated by the yes campaign seemed to be as much (if not more) about social and political values than flag waving jingoism and atavistic ethnic tribalism.

There is also the inherent contradiction that nationalism in Scotland and possible independence would probably have led to increased regional independence and federalism in Europe, adding weight to potentially dozens of spin off movements in Spain, Italy and France. A nationalism that destroys nations.

Mr. Tea
19-09-2014, 09:24 PM
...but the basic attempt to argue that Scots are more socialist and ethical than, say, the inhabitants of South East England was a caricature and a judgement on two sets of geographically-determined populations that is not only disingenuous and false, but dangerous.

OK, forget the "ethical" bit for a moment, but as to the "socialist" bit: excluding the poorer London boroughs, how many places can you think of that are less socialist than SE England? It's the Tory heartland, the stockbroker belt, with one of the global epicentres of finance capitalism smack in the middle of it.

So saying Scotland is "more socialist than SE England" isn't really saying very much at all. It's like calling someone "fatter than Calista Flockhart".

craner
19-09-2014, 09:27 PM
I am always suspicious of Nationalist parties claiming to be left-wing from root to branch (in Western Europe anyway, in the Russian sphere you get suspicious for different reasons, mainly because they are often 'scarecrows' or fake parties created by the established regimes). They must be coalitions, because there is nothing inherently left-wing about Nationalism, to say the least (and most obvious). I don't know much about the SNP hinterland or culture, but know a lot about Plaid Cymru. They were fake-leftists for years, but now they really do have a left-wing leader in Leanne Wood, an ex-Labour exile who is in the Salmond populist Nationalist Socialist mould. What is not reported in the mainstream press is the ongoing infighting this has caused within Plaid because not all Welsh Nationalists and Plaid members are socialists. The spat between Wood and Dafydd Elis-Thomas over Wood's attack on UKIP was a clear indicator of this: see here (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/plaid-cymru-sack-dafydd-elis-thomas-6811955).

craner
19-09-2014, 09:37 PM
A nationalism that destroys nations

But that's what I'm saying, it doesn't get any less rancorous and poisonous the smaller you get. Micro-nationlism is not better than nationalism. Federalism is a different proposition. This can be seen in the conflicting attitudes to European Federalism within Nationalist camps.

As to Mr Tea's point, if you are basing pro-Nationalist or Indepedence arguments on social demographics you are in for a strange and sickening ride, I reckon.

I will reiterate my point: Independence does not solve the problem of politics.

craner
19-09-2014, 09:52 PM
There are nationalists in Wales, for example, who are not necessarily enthusiatic about the idea of winning sovereignty from Westminster only to hand back large chunks of it to Brussels. This is where the bizarre Nationalist/UKIP overlap within elements of Plaid come into play. Plaid is a mess of Nationalist Right and Populist Left schisms and intersections that is inherently fractious but also a good defintion of Nationalism, if there is any.

trza
19-09-2014, 10:04 PM
I feel sorry for all those Catalan people who made the trip from Barcelona to Scotland, like it was going to do wonders for their national movement.

craner
19-09-2014, 10:13 PM
Yeah, shame isn't it, I was really looking forward to going to Catalonia rather than Spain.

(In 1937 I might have meant that.)

Mr. Tea
19-09-2014, 11:25 PM
They must be coalitions, because there is nothing inherently left-wing about Nationalism...

But it doesn't therefore follow that all forms of nationalism are inherently right-wing, does it? Put yourself in the shoes of a Scot who feels that the policies of the current government are primarily benefitting the very rich while impoverishing the majority - which they unarguably, objectively are. You then have the opportunity to vote for independence, with the possibility of having your own government which could well be slightly less rabidly neoliberal than the one currently in charge. And which at any rate will be a lot more accountable to its far smaller and more local electorate. Now it may not be Leninism, but what's "inherently right-wing" about any of that?

droid
20-09-2014, 12:59 AM
And also, of course, bearing in mind that Scotland has consistently rejected the right and centre right in the UK, which TBF is currently probably the most right wing government in Europe (in economic terms at least).

And obv, I dont agree that 'micro-nationalism' is the same thing as Nationalism (with a capital N). Its a basic truth that the larger a state (or group of states) becomes, the less democratic it becomes. Devolution, independence and regionalisation have far more potential to offer genuine democratic change than the current scenario, especially in the context of established and wealthy 1st world states.

Mr. Tea
15-02-2015, 09:03 PM
Anyone seen what's happened to the price of petrol over the last couple months? Starting to look like Scotland really dodged a bullet lasy year...