| Topic: Unionist regime in Scotland |
|---|
| 61. Author: wee eck Date: Fri 24th May 2024. 13:23 Could you translate your question into English to give me a chance of understanding it? You`ll get Scottish education a bad name. Reply |
| 62. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Fri 24th May 2024. 15:56 Tenruh, Fri 24 May 09:25 Its actually painful trying to have a conversation with you on this……. Reply |
| 63. Author: McCaig`s Tower Date: Sat 25th May 2024. 16:03 wee eck Thanks for your response – I fear this forum had become a little moribund; you may be pleased to have opinions to discuss, although the recent actions of Messrs Sunak and Swinney have been helpful in this regard. You asked a question, I attempted to answer it (you probably don’t like my answer, but that is par for the course). In fact, I proposed two answers, one (which I termed “the Scottish Exceptionalist” explanation) I rejected. Note I didn’t accuse you of this, but perhaps you will agree this is an argument frequently used by others. The English are “not as intelligent” as the Scots and “have a high opinion of themselves” (not an accusation that could be levelled at any of us…) “Scottish voters saw through the lies of the Brexit campaign … but the majority of English voters didn`t”. Have the Tories “dominated” Westminster elections? How many GEs have there been since and including 1955? 18? Of which the Tories won 9, Labour 6 and no clear winner in 3. The score was 7-6 until the last decade or so. But why the difference in voting behaviour? There will be many reasons. One factor may be the predominance of electors in urban rather than rural areas. For some reason they tend to vote Labour (or did – I suspect a lot will swing back this time). Why do you think there is a difference? I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here. Note there are plenty of Tory voters in the shires, and plenty of fiscal and social conservatives in the SNP – look how popular Kate Forbes is. Reply |
| 64. Author: McCaig`s Tower Date: Sat 25th May 2024. 16:06 Second, the point about populism/nationalism. In broad terms, when people are satisfied with their lot, they vote for the status quo. When not, they seek change (even if the change would objectively make them worse off). After 60 odd years of almost continuous improvements to living standards (perhaps unparalleled in history) we’ve met a few bumps in the road – principally the global financial crisis, but also more laterally the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. This leaves people vulnerable to promises of “instant cures”. An easy fix. Lay the blame on others. Scexit and Brexit are/were essentially popular solutions that appear superficially attractive. Would you admit there are similarities? But why the difference in Brexit voting? Well, maybe we’re different. Maybe we saw through the lies better, (But why?). But I think the difference is probably more due to being a function of notional party loyalty – the Tories were neutral, so their votes split. Labour in England were a bit ambivalent. The Lib Dems were pro-Europe. The SNP a bit half-heartedly pro-Europe. Some voters would have voted on “party” lines. But I think there is a second factor – we’ve been told we’re different for so long that we begin to believe the propaganda, that we are more “pro-Europe”. Or whatever England isn’t. (I strongly suspect that if England looked like voting “remain” there would have been more of a temptation to vote “leave”.) And of course 45% were happy to leave the EU in 2014 so their commitment to the EU is questionable. But this is an interesting phenomenon – if you tell people they are different for long enough do they become different? Or do they just think they are? Reply |
| 65. Author: wee eck Date: Sat 25th May 2024. 17:27 I admire your indefatigability but, frankly, I`m not so much interested in why Scots vote differently than the fact that they do which means that being part of the Union takes us in directions we don`t really want to go in. On the question of who has been in control of the UK since 1955 I would simply look at the number of years since then each of the major parties has been in power and I reckon it`s 45 years of Tory governments and 24 years of Labour governments. Reply |
| 66. Author: Tad Allagash Date: Sat 25th May 2024. 22:15 So you ask a question umpteen times, but you’re ‘not interested’ in the answer. 😂 Reply |
| 67. Author: wee eck Date: Sat 25th May 2024. 22:33 I don`t find any of the explanations convincing and I don`t think MCT does either. They are just desperate stabs in the dark eg we vote differently from England just to be different! If we vote differently because of more urbanisation then why shouldn`t our government reflect that? Why should it reflect the make up of the population of our much larger neighbours? Reply |
| 68. Author: hurricane_jimmy Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 05:54 I find it interesting the inference that it is only those that support Independence that have been "subject to propaganda" and "conditioned into thinking they are different". Have people like McCaig, Parboiled and Tad Allagash not been conditioned all of their long lives into believing they are "the same" as the English/British? Is this not the message of much of the mainstream media in Scotland now? What is that if not conditioning? The simple historical facts are that the Kingdom of Scots traces its history back to 843, while the state of England dates back to 927. Scotland therefore outdates England by the best part of a century. Beyond that, Scotland was a politically Independent state up until 1603 or 1707 depending on your perspective which is either 760 or 864 years as an Independent state. Certainly far longer than the 317 years that we have been part of a United Kingdom. To say that Scotland and the Scottish people and their culture did not evolve separately from England is just absolute nonsense, particularly when you consider the even finer lines between the likes of (for example) Sweden and Norway and NOBODY tries to claim that they not "different". Sweden is a good bit younger than Scotland too having only recently celebrated its 500th birthday and you`ll find a lot more of the viking texts talk about Danes and Norwegians, yet nobody tries to gaslight them into thinking they are "the same". But yeah, let`s ignore the historical facts and precedents that make up the fundamental principals of our legal system! Frankly, trying to force Scots to believe they/we are the same as the English, is quite reminiscent of what the Russians` narrative regarding the Ukrainians. Only the overtly arrogant will refuse to acknowledge the parallels. The reality is that we`ve had 25 years of governance from Edinburgh and, for those under 55 or so, it is unthinkable that this institution would be removed. Good luck to anyone that tries to push that agenda or tries to strip if of any power! As for the notion that Scotland would have been out of the EU in 2014, this is absolute conjecture as McCaig well knows. Moreover, its factually wrong as there was to be a negotiation period of 2 years with the rUK, during which time Scotland would have been legally negotiating a separate membership from within. Especially now with the Ukraine war and considering the strategic importance of Scotland to both NATO and the EU it is almost inconceivable that Scotland would not be a member of both organisations. Prior to Putin attacking Ukraine, I would not have favoured the former and would have been open to a more Swiss- or Norwegian/Icelandic- relationship with the EU. Not now. Reply |
| 69. Author: wee eck Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 13:32 I`m sure we`re all grateful to you for bringing some historical perspective to the debate, hj! Independence is normal!😊😊😊 Reply |
| 70. Author: Parboiled Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 14:34 …hysterical more like! 🇬🇧 forever! Reply |
| 71. Author: LochgellyAlbert Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 15:24 Parboiled, Sun 26 May 14:34 Is that you finished for today, your carer got you back home?🤭🤣 Reply |
| 72. Author: wee eck Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 15:55 I bet Parboiled`s wishing he was 18 again so he could do his National Service! Post Edited (Sun 26 May 16:36) Reply |
| 73. Author: hurricane_jimmy Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 17:58 I`m still genuinely torn on whether Parboiled is a deluded extremist or simply a horrifically bad troll. Genuinely funny that he was a Scotland Office stooge though! 🤣 Reply |
| 74. Author: McCaig`s Tower Date: Sun 26th May 2024. 21:17 Have I suddenly become Saddam Hussein in this thread? wee eck – sorry, I didn’t realise “how else do you explain the fact that the Tories haven`t won any election up here since the 1950s whilst they have dominated Westminster elections in that time?” was meant to be rhetorical. But I always think that if you perceive that there is a problem to solve, it’s good to understand the cause first. It seems like independence is offered as a solution when it may not be appropriate. The weather’s rubbish, but it’s sunny in Antigua. Which is independent. So let’s have indy, the weather will improve… But if you are suggesting that a parliament is needed to reflect different voting behaviour, then what’s that building at Holyrood? And presumably there is a case to be made for parliaments in the North of England or London – they seem to vote differently – not to mention Aberdeenshire, the Borders, the Highlands or the islands. But you’ve never previously entertained this argument for some reason. HJ – fair point about conditioning, but are you saying that some are immune from this, and others are taken in? And are you saying being English and being British are the same? Thanks for the history lesson – I’m not sure what point you are making. Being older is better, perhaps? But here’s a question – if someone comes from England to live in Scotland do they become Scottish? A “new Scot” perhaps? And would the opposite happen? Regarding the EU, you are also speculating as to the results of putative negotiations. There are theoretically severe financial conditions to be met (and although the EU might have broken their own rules – although given Putin was yet to invade Ukraine, that point is moot) it is not clear that there is or was sufficient appetite to meet those criteria. People have gone off the idea of austerity. But you acknowledge that Scotland is of strategic importance to the EU and to NATO, And also to the UK, presumably? Reply |
| 75. Author: Back_oh_the_net Date: Mon 27th May 2024. 00:23 jake89, Sat 18 May 22:47 A sugarcoated version of a national socialist 😂 Reply |
| 76. Author: wee eck Date: Mon 27th May 2024. 00:45 MCT, your responses get more and more desperate. You`ve now resorted to the old chestnut that, if Scotland were granted independence because it votes differently from other parts of the UK, then so should any region of England or Scotland. It`s not the first time you`ve suggested this and it doesn`t even merit a response. And now you`re telling us we already have a Parliament at Holyrood which kind of denies there is an issue at all doesn`t it? The democratic issue is that we are locked into a union with no provision as to how one party can withdraw from it if its citizens wish to, unless they receive permission from the government of the largest party to the union to have a vote on it. It`s yet another scandal in a country which seems to specialise in them. I don`t see it being an issue in the General Election though. The media certainly won`t raise it. The attitude will be - `Let`s just ignore it and maybe it`ll go away`. Post Edited (Mon 27 May 00:46) Reply |
| 77. Author: hurricane_jimmy Date: Wed 29th May 2024. 10:21 MCT - It was actually you that was talking about people being conditioned into believing they are different - I didn`t raise that point. You`ve attempted to make quite a point on here over the years that Scotland and England are basically the same and this is why we should be part of the UK. The historical points show that Scotland actually has a longer history as an independent state than as part of the UK and thus that the Scottish people and culture evolved for a longer time and separately from that of England. Personally, I would say that to be Scottish you really need to grow up in the country and learn the culture that way. As someone who naturalised as a Swede but grew up in Scotland, I would say that I will never be Swedish in the same way that I am Scottish nor would I ever say that I was "more Swedish than Scottish". My son is half Japanese and I have spent considerable time in Japan, but I will never be and could never be Japanese, regardless of how well I might be able to speak the language. Scotland is of course strategically important the UK, namely because of oil, gas, water and electricity. I`m glad to see that you finally acknowledge that, as quite a lot of us know that our country is being stripped of resources by England and seeing less return than in should. Why else would they want to keep Scotland? Reply |
| 78. Author: jake89 Date: Wed 29th May 2024. 12:04 I`d suggest being any nationality is hard to say anymore given how much more transient the world`s population is. What matters is where you reside. If you live, work/study in Scotland then you have a say on how the country is run. Westminster doesn`t represent Scotland`s best needs IMO. I`m not suggesting Holyrood does either but WOULD suggest it`s more representative than Westminster. It`s just my view but I`d like to see more strategic thinking from our national bodies. What I see is massive wastage as multiple local authorities and health boards compete for money to do very similar things. Why not pool this funding and resource to develop national solutions and approaches? Of course, what works in the central belt may not work in the Highlands and that`s fine. Just stop having it so the like of Fife Council pays £1m to implement a solution whilst Dundee are paying it up again. I digress but I suppose what I`m saying is you need effective national oversight that encourages coordinated local decision making. We have that at Holyrood though it could be improved. We don`t have that at Westminster. Reply |
| 79. Author: wee eck Date: Wed 29th May 2024. 12:46 I saw an interview on STV last night with an FT journalist, Michael Peel, who has recently published a book called `What Everyone knows about Britain (except the British)`. He has spent much of his working life away from the UK so was able to take a more detached view of what`s been happening here. He reckoned that one of the main reasons for the UK`s decline was the failure to invest the proceeds from the discovery of oil and gas in the 1970s in a sovereign wealth fund as happened in Norway and Saudi. Instead, the Thatcher government simply spent it on current expenditure with no thought to the future. He said one reason for this was that the UK government didn`t want to draw attention to it as it might encourage ideas of Scottish independence. Of course this was borne out by the publication in 2005 of the McCrone Report which had been prepared in 1974 but suppressed for that reason. It only came to public attention after the Freedom of Information Act came into force. The Report stated :- "It must be concluded therefore that revenues and large balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps were taken either by carried interest or by taxation to secure the Government `take`. Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the Government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to a quite embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe with the exception perhaps of the Norwegian kroner. Just as deposed monarchs and African leaders have in the past used the Swiss franc as a haven of security, as now would the Scottish pound be seen as a good hedge against inflation and devaluation and the Scottish banks could expect to find themselves inundated with speculative inflow of foreign funds. "[ Reply |
| 80. Author: Tad Allagash Date: Wed 29th May 2024. 23:00 ‘The simple historical facts are that the Kingdom of Scots traces its history back to 843’ So not as old as the Kingdom of Fife then. Where’s our referendum to escape from our Weegie overlords? ‘Why else would they want to keep Scotland?’ Who says they want to keep us? Has England had a referendum on chucking us out? That might actually be your best chance. It’s interesting that you rail against religion but put so much stock in an imaginary line on a map. Reply |