Scottish Independence

[Boggit]

Well I disagree - but differences of opinion are expected and welcome.

Westminster is broke and has been for more than 3 decades now. What's more is the people of rUK will know it and find their voice again. That's what the 3 stooges are really worried about.

But I digress. It's for the people of Scotland to decide. I think I said on here, two of my sisters are YES voters, one is NO as is my mother and my wee brother. Opinion is divided within households - but they'll hold up - as will the Scottish people after the 19th

If it goes to court both parties are usually repesented in a divorce. 90% of the UK population get no say in what happens to the UK, although there a huge implications for the rest of the UK, and especially so if Scotland goes into an economic spiral if the yes vote succeeds. Since 1999, Scotland's onshore economy has generated 8.3% of the UK's tax receipts, while at the same time Scotland has received an average of 9.4% of UK public spending. Offshore revenue is a whole moot point, and while terrestrial territorial sovereignty is a given, the partition of UK territorial waters regarding oil, and fishing is not definite, and a future source of vexation both for the Scots and the rest of the UK.

OK, I understand the point that Westminster is London-centric, and the Tories have no interest in anyone who doesn't fit their club, but this criticism rightly affects all the UK - not just puir wee Scotland. Boo-hoo. That criticism is felt just as strongly here in the South-West of the UK.The SNP also say that Scotland is not represented in Westminster, but the last three UK Prime Minister's were either Scots - Blair, Brown, - or of Scottish parentage - Cameron, which suggest some disingenousness on the part of the SNP. The social spending and benefits in Scotland already are better than than for the rest of us in the UK - free prescriptions, free Higher Education, etc, so the Scots (outside of London) are already the favoured child of the union. Ironically, I am a supporter of some of the SNP's social policies, and I think there is a bigger role, and potentially a lot of support for them elsewhere in the UK providing they can develop from their parochial world view.

Do the Scots honestly think that all will be sweetness and light if they tell the rest of the UK to fuck off, which is essentially what independence amounts to? Why the hell should the rest of the UK then roll over to make it easy for the Scots if a 'yes' vote is successful? Both countries will have their national interest to consider, and in some respects both countries will be chasing for the same resources. Do you think the UK will just roll over without a fight for their own national interest? There are huge costs involved in effecting the result of the "Yes" outcome for both Scotland and the UK - defence, border control, trade dislocation (what will be the situation on cross border duties for example?) and I don't think this has entered the debate that much - both John Swinney, and Alex Salmond both seem to be in denial on the point.

I personally think that the sum of the UK is better than its parts, and I bear the people in Scotland people no ill will (like many people in the UK my family are part Scot [on my mother's side]), and I don't really want to see Scotland end up like Greece, because a bunch of hopeful 'yes' voters think that by voting 'yes' then romantically and magically all their problems will go away. They won't, and if it happens they'll still face the same shit the day after independence, only with 90% less taxpayers to help out if/when things crumble, or to be more diplomatic - don't go according to plan.

Moreover, if the 'yes' vote succeeds Scotland will be regarded by many in the rest of the UK as sticking two fingers up at the rest of the UK, with the same reaction that many Scots would feel if the role was reversed. It seems emotional, and naive to think that splitting up the UK will make things better. It won't. The identity argument is a load of bollocks. The people of the UK living in Scotland are Scottish anyway - with a clear cultural identity that they are rightly proud of (same as the people of Northen Ireland, Wales and England), but also have an alternate identity of "British" that we have jointly have the benefit of. I see myself as English first (British second), but I'm also proud of my Scottish ancestry too. However, the rejection of the rest of the UK is an uncomfortable feeling for us, and doesn't generate a positive attitude towards the yes voters in Scotland.

Less is not always more. In this case I think less is just less.

My $0.02... :(

[undercovergeek]

And then someone arranged an international 'friendly' football match between England and Scotland.... it's going to be carnage

[Boggit]

And then someone arranged an international 'friendly' football match between England and Scotland.... it's going to be carnage

[endfire79]

Well spoken Boggit.  I find many parallels with the subject of Quebec separation in This debate. 
The Scottish pro-separation leaders are just as evasive on important questions as the pro-separation leaders here.

[Boggit]

Well spoken Boggit.  I find many parallels with the subject of Quebec separation in This debate. 
The Scottish pro-separation leaders are just as evasive on important questions as the pro-separation leaders here in Quebec.

Thanks Endfire. You are right to point out the parallels with Quebec, as there are a lot of similarities, the same passion etc. I'm not saying Scotland hasn't the capacity to go it alone, nor that they shouldn't choose their path.

I do say that the ramifications are huge, uncertain, and that divorce is not a good way to endear yourself to others, who have not been consulted when you are looking for their cooperation in the divvying up of benefits. As Scotland only provide 8.3% of taxable revenue at present, but takes an average of 9.4% in public spending arguably they don't have a great case for a higher proportion of resources, and why in the world would the UK prejudice its national interest for a group of people who don't want to be part of it any more?

Like most divorces this is a sad thing for many in the UK who see the nation as stronger, with more opportunity together. But post divorce why would you concern yourself overly with your ex? The "Yes" Scots just don't seem to recognise the disappointment of most people in the UK at the potential break up of our nation. They also don't seem recognise that whilst it is their choice to say "Yes" they will lose close friends in consequence, and needn't expect the UK to make any more than the lightest concession without hefty argument based on the UK's own national interest. Just as in divorce with real people - it might be one partner's choice to go ahead, it doesn't mean the other likes it, or will meekly submit if they are disadvantaged in any way. Many divorces start friendly and turn out acrimonious especially when it gets down to the money. It just seems naive wishful thinking to think otherwise.

[JudgeDredd]

This says more than I ever could about the independence debate...

...favoured child of the union...

and

...not just puir wee Scotland. Boo-hoo...

Even with the "puir" to get the accent in their is demeaning.  :(

Good day.  :-\

[endfire79]

I've got buddies across the country that always take a piss on me because I live in this part of Canada, and the news sites have comments a plenty that appear to say they'd be better without us.  I take it all in good humor, most of those are Leafs fans, so they probably don't know better ( ;), light hearted joke, no offenese).  The point is, they know it and I know, breaking up is harder than it sounds and harder to deal with the consequences. 

[bayonetbrant]

Should The U.S. Deploy Troops To Scotland?

A tragedy is unfolding in Scotland.

One glance at this week's headlines reveals that the region's fractious political situation is intensifying, with separatist activists gaining more and more support every day. Barring something drastic, Scotland seems bound inexorably for a cataclysm.

Can the United States stand idly by as Scotland descends into civil war?

Scotland has just 5,000 combat troops, hardly enough to defend its government against the more than 1 million rebels claiming allegiance to the radical group YES who already are taking to the streets in droves.

In such circumstances, is inaction justifiable? How many Scots need to die before Obama says "Enough is enough" and steps in?

The United States has a moral imperative to intervene, starting immediately with air raids to break the militant separatists before they gain a stranglehold on power. But that will not be enough. We need boots on the ground as soon and in as great numbers as possible.

Scotland may yet recover from the devastating strife that has rent its populace in two. But it will take nothing less than a full-scale U.S. ground invasion to secure even a faint hope that years down the road, the Scots may govern themselves and, perhaps, hold democratic elections.

[JudgeDredd]

Ok - maybe a better retorte

Boggit - I totally understand your position. And I absolutely agree with the sentiment that Scotland can't be expecting the vast majority of the rUK to cow tow to their demands. I certainly hope that Salmond drops the attitude. I wasn't a fan of his "We'll get a currency union" statement after being told it wasn't going to happen. To be honest, I'd rather they just went with their own currency or unsecured pound.

I know that would hit the economy in terms of borrowing, but maybe that would cut the borrowing bonanza governments seem to be getting into. As for no bank being behind the banking system - that's actually been reported by several "experts" that it could be a good thing - without a "lender of last resort" covering your back, you may not take the risks that banks world wide have been doing.

Regardless...to your point about puir wee Scotland. If the people of the UK (and I include Scotland in this) would get the hell out of their beds and vote, maybe those buggers in Westminster might just look and think "wow...we are actually being watched" - the people do care and maybe, just maybe they will wake up and make change.

You have been represented though. You have been represented by Better Together and by the full weight of Parliament - threats of doom and gloom and all. You have been represented. Though I whole heartedly agree you have been represented atrociously. First by a very negative campaign rather than pointing out the benefits of the UK, then by BT commander being pushed to the side for the one everyone loves south of the border (Gordon Brown) and finally by the 3 stooges coming up with whacky plans and vows that the UK people haven't been consulted on - never mind the fact that their parties haven't been consulted!

If, on the other hand, you mean "You didn't get a vote"...there are two things about that...
1. It's not a referendum about should the UK break up - the referendum is whether the people of Scotland believe they can be better represented by home rule. It's a sovereignty question for the people of Scotland.
2. If the rUK got the vote in this referendum, your wanting to keep Scotland would be a moot point. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that rUK would vote to let Scotland go

But as long as I can remember, successive governments have done nothing but sell out to the money. Yes...some of those were Scottish and I'm certainly not proud of it - as I said somewhere else, idiocy in politicians doesn't recognise borders or nationalities.

I hope the Scottish do not go to the negotiating table shouting the odds. I hope - if it's a yes vote - that they are humbled when they approach Westminster. It definitely wouldn't sit well for them to make demands and I do not want them to - and if they do, I would totally understand a hard hitting backlash from Westminster and the people of rUK.

Making demands will only create animosity and, contrary to belief, that is something I personally have never wanted. IT may be an inevitability - but that doesn't mean it's something I wanted and it's certainly something I would distance myself from.

I do not want the rUK to roll over and play ball with the Scots. I live here. I want them to be tough and stand their ground. But I still think Scotland should be independent.

Both Scotland and rUK will settle down. It will be different - but it will settle down. Not on Friday. Not a year on Friday maybe not even 5 years on Friday - but it WILL settle down and there'll be a better balance - imo.

As you pointed out - Scotland contribute to the tune of 8.3% of taxes and receive 9.4% of monies. I think that may depend on the figures you choose to read - but we'll go with those. That means rUK will be better off to the tune of having 1.1% more of taxes to spend. Essentially - from a purely financial perspective, the rUK will be better off. Sure - the world standing might be affected - and I say might. But is that a bad thing? The UK Government has promoted the idea of leaving the EU in 2017 through a referendum. Now isn't that the same as "leaving something bigger"? Becoming "smaller in a bigger pond"? It's almost the same thing. The same arguments for leaving the EU can be turned to arguments for Scotland leaving.

You ended your post with

Less is not always more. In this case I think less is just less.

And yet the UK is holding a referendum in 2017 to leave the EU - and it's HIGHLY likely that exit will be successful.

I want both sides to thrive from this - and I genuinely think - over time - they will. But each in their own way.

I'll butt out now. The vote is tomorrow and the result on Friday. I will never say another word about it regardless of the result...but I will end by saying please rUK - this might be difficult to do - but I don't want any of you to take this personally. Some of the people of Scotland (if you believe the polls) 48% believe Westminster and it's wreckless politics of boom and bust and round the merry go round we go.

I promise I'll be here to help you sort out the rUK - at least until I retire.

Good luck to us all - whatever the result.  :-*

[Boggit]

This says more than I ever could about the independence debate...

...favoured child of the union...

and

...not just puir wee Scotland. Boo-hoo...

Even with the "puir" to get the accent in their is demeaning.  :(

Good day.  :-\

With all respect to you Judge Dredd at a personal level, I'm expressing a view held by many in England. This is not intended to be personally insulting/patronising, nor a slight on the Scottish people as a whole, but to get your attention as to some of the realities. The issue of independence is highly emotive south of the border too. We get no say, but you in the "yes" camp seem to expect us to lap up the break up of our country without criticism? Even in Scotland the debate seems pretty much 50/50, and why shouldn't we support the 50% that say no if we feel our interests run better together?

It's becoming increasingly apparent from the media that the "yes" campaign are either in denial about serious issues, widely intimidating "no" supporters, or dealing with deeply felt "no" concern in the 'well what else do you expect of opponents to independence' attitude that you take yourself. I'd have respected your comment about being demeaning more if you'd said "What do you mean about puir wee Scotland? Explain yourself Boggit." Well, I will because whilst I'm proudly English, and you're proudly a Scot we have common interests, and in many cases blood ties (certainly in my family) that drives us to look out for each other, and sadly sometimes die for each other, because we are a country where the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. What are we without each other? Small regions each pursuing their own petty self interest, or part of something better, something stronger? I have no intention of insulting Scotland. Half my mothers family are Scots descent, and to do so insults my own kin. But I don't want the "yes" campaigners portraying Scotland as some kind of lone victim, which must have independence if it is to have any future because it simply isn't true.

What will you have in Scotland if it votes "yes" - a people that can say what they want so long as it's said the right way - the SNP way? Alex Salmond and John Swinney were talking about a day of reckoning for businesses that are talking about relocation just the other day. What sort of Scotland are you going to wake up to with that kind of rhetoric, from politicians that make threats, but don't engage with the uncomfortable truths? I have friends and family in Scotland, and I'm genuinely am concerned for their future wellbeing, as well as for rest the country as a whole. We ARE ALL going to be affected by a "yes" decision, yet 90% of the country have no say in it - don't expect the disenfranchised not to have a view on what will fundamentally affect their country.

The same people with the aforesaid view do empathise with Scotland regarding the Tory London-centric policies that favour the rich, while stitching up the poor in our country. The fact remains that as a region of the UK Scotland DOES get a better deal than the rest of us, so yes, Scotland is the favoured child of the union (save perhaps for London, which is where Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and the rest of England do have common cause). It can be proven on the tax/public spending statistics, the level of devolution already, that Scotland gets a better deal by and large than the majority of people in the UK. Look at university funding, for example - you guys get it free on application. The rest of the UK either pays for it if they can afford it, gets heavily into debt, or does without. There are plenty of other inequalities in favour of Scotland, so when I say 'puir, wee Scotland' I say it in that context. You have priviliges not available to the rest of us, yet you're so hard done to your "yes" campaign can see no option but to say we need independence as there is no democracy in Scotland, fuck off UK.

Sure you can do an Alex Salmond style denial, and play the Hollywood "victim" in the piece. But this isn't "Braveheart" telling England to shove it (which incidentally IS historically inaccurate, despite what the romantics may think). The 'puir wee Scotland - Boo hoo' comment is deliberately made as provocative because the SNP DO hold up Scotland as the "victim" of UK policies. Stop playing the victim, and engage with the rest of us to make the changes we need for a fairer society in our country. There is much more common cause that we should be dealing with as a united nation. Running away from the social realities in the guise of independence to create this new utopia is a nice thought, but frankly it weakens us all. We need people with passion like you to help us make a better, more egalitarian society for all the people in our country, not just the select few (and I honestly have my doubts as to how that new paradise will turn out if t does)- don't break up the country for short term euphoria at scoring points over the Tories and the English whipping boy.

[bayonetbrant]

Just out of curiosity - and Smcuk can certainly weigh in here - but what were the mechanics of the Czech-Slovak split with regards to military, spending/currency, central banking, laws & courts, etc etc.

Are there lessons to be learned there?

It's certainly got to look better than the Yugoslavia-Croatia split!

[bayonetbrant]

don't break up the country for short term euphoria at scoring points over the Tories and the English whipping boy.

Isn't this pretty much the summation of every UK-wide "leave the EU" campaign?

[JudgeDredd]

This says more than I ever could about the independence debate...

...favoured child of the union...

and

...not just puir wee Scotland. Boo-hoo...

Even with the "puir" to get the accent in their is demeaning.  :(

Good day.  :-\

With all respect to you Judge Dredd at a personal level, I'm expressing a view held by many in England. This is not intended to be personally insulting/patronising, nor a slight on the Scottish people as a whole, but to get your attention as to some of the realities. The issue of independence is highly emotive south of the border too. We get no say, but you in the "yes" camp seem to expect us to lap up the break up of our country without criticism? Even in Scotland the debate seems pretty much 50/50, and why shouldn't we support the 50% that say no if we feel our interests run better together?

It's becoming increasingly apparent from the media that the "yes" campaign are either in denial about serious issues, widely intimidating "no" supporters, or dealing with deeply felt "no" concern in the 'well what else do you expect of opponents to independence' attitude that you take yourself. I'd have respected your comment about being demeaning more if you'd said "What do you mean about puir wee Scotland? Explain yourself Boggit." Well, I will because whilst I'm proudly English, and you're proudly a Scot we have common interests, and in many cases blood ties (certainly in my family) that drives us to look out for each other, and sadly sometimes die for each other, because we are a country where the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. What are we without each other? Small regions each pursuing their own petty self interest, or part of something better, something stronger? I have no intention of insulting Scotland. Half my mothers family are Scots descent, and to do so insults my own kin. But I don't want the "yes" campaigners portraying Scotland as some kind of lone victim, which must have independence if it is to have any future because it simply isn't true.

What will you have in Scotland if it votes "yes" - a people that can say what they want so long as it's said the right way - the SNP way? Alex Salmond and John Swinney were talking about a day of reckoning for businesses that are talking about relocation just the other day. What sort of Scotland are you going to wake up to with that kind of rhetoric, from politicians that make threats, but don't engage with the uncomfortable truths? I have friends and family in Scotland, and I'm genuinely am concerned for their future wellbeing, as well as for rest the country as a whole. We ARE ALL going to be affected by a "yes" decision, yet 90% of the country have no say in it - don't expect the disenfranchised not to have a view on what will fundamentally affect their country.

The same people with the aforesaid view do empathise with Scotland regarding the Tory London-centric policies that favour the rich, while stitching up the poor in our country. The fact remains that as a region of the UK Scotland DOES get a better deal than the rest of us, so yes, Scotland is the favoured child of the union (save perhaps for London, which is where Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and the rest of England do have common cause). It can be proven on the tax/public spending statistics, the level of devolution already, that Scotland gets a better deal by and large than the majority of people in the UK. Look at university funding, for example - you guys get it free on application. The rest of the UK either pays for it if they can afford it, gets heavily into debt, or does without. There are plenty of other inequalities in favour of Scotland, so when I say 'puir, wee Scotland' I say it in that context. You have priviliges not available to the rest of us, yet you're so hard done to your "yes" campaign can see no option but to say we need independence as there is no democracy in Scotland, fuck off UK.

Sure you can do an Alex Salmond style denial, and play the Hollywood "victim" in the piece. But this isn't "Braveheart" telling England to shove it (which incidentally IS historically inaccurate, despite what the romantics may think). The 'puir wee Scotland - Boo hoo' comment is deliberately made as provocative because the SNP DO hold up Scotland as the "victim" of UK policies. Stop playing the victim, and engage with the rest of us to make the changes we need for a fairer society in our country. There is much more common cause that we should be dealing with as a united nation. Running away from the social realities in the guise of independence to create this new utopia is a nice thought, but frankly it weakens us all. We need people with passion like you to help us make a better, more egalitarian society for all the people in our country, not just the select few (and I honestly have my doubts as to how that new paradise will turn out if t does)- don't break up the country for short term euphoria at scoring points over the Tories and the English whipping boy.

I know Boggit - which is why I tried to come back with something a little more understanding.

[Boggit]

@Judge Dredd
I've just seen the post you got in just before me. We have a lot more in common than may have first appeared. We disagree over the independence issue for different reasons, for the reasons we both state. I honestly believe that the independence issue is an emotive con on the Scottish people by politicians in Scotland (SNP) who want to be big fish in a small bowl, and make their names in history. I genuinely fear for the future of my countrymen in Scotland, so I hope you'll forgive me if I express some thoughts intended to resonate harshly with the overly optimistic view of the SNP.

As to the bigwigs of Westminster getting involved when they are part of the whole problem - I get it. But we are both agreed they are a bunch of wankers, and that the politician problem is not for just Scotland but for the rest of the UK as a whole. Independence is going to drive a wedge between the people of this country, which is in the nature of the beast. I wish it weren't so, but I'd be deluding myself if I thought otherwise. I hope that the vote will be a "no", and if it is then the independence issue is a good thing as it will have shaken up Westminster and engaged our people in the political debate about what sort of country we want to live in. If that happens then we all need to demand change - together, so that everyone outside London does see more social justice, and a better say in our regional affairs. Better together, I say - but stuff the Westminster politicians who want to keep the status quo in their own self interest.

However it goes, JudgeDredd, I sincerely hope that things work out very well for all concerned - including yours truly, and your family. I am not anti-Scottish, quite the reverse, but this is a huge undertaking with a huge amount of unknowns that people are being asked to vote upon. I still feel the issues raised in argument for independence resonate well with the rest of the UK, but we should be working to resolve these issues together, not separately. Divided we fall, united we stand.

'nuff said. Good luck. :)

[bob48]

Boggit, you have put exactly how I feel much more eloquently than I ever could have done.