Scottish Independence

[JAGZ1876]

pretty much any statement from from salmond, that do

No JB, that won't do. I asked for one example, so surely between yourself and The Mighty Quinn you can come up with something. You said any statement from Alex Salmond is Anglophobic, yet just last month in an interview with the Guardians John Harris, the FM said "England's a great nation". How can you say that's Anglophobic nonsense?.

[jaggybunnet]

No JB, that won't do. I asked for one example, so surely between yourself and The Mighty Quinn you can come up with something. You said any statement from Alex Salmond is Anglophobic, yet just last month in an interview with the Guardians John Harris, the FM said "England's a great nation". How can you say that's Anglophobic nonsense?.

 

 

bloody hell you are deluded if you think he meant that

[andyconnor]

why does wanting an independent scotland make you anti-english?

some people may just think that the union has run it's course.

[Jaggernaut]

why does wanting an independent scotland make you anti-english?

some people may just think that the union has run it's course.

Folk who resort to the "anti-English" view of wanting independence typically have no other arguments; they do clearly have "pro-British" feelings which they are fine with, of course.

[sigesige00]

As a proletarian internationalist, I do not advocate Scottish independence. However,I do not support the United Kingdom either. There are many legal/educational differences between England and Scotland. I advocate an active boycott of the referendum, since the proletariat has no side to choose.

[Jaggernaut]

As a proletarian internationalist, I do not advocate Scottish independence. However,I do not support the United Kingdom either. There are many legal/educational differences between England and Scotland. I advocate an active boycott of the referendum, since the proletariat has no side to choose.

Err,..... right you are.

[alx]

After being puzzled at the Tories putting greater store in being Unionist than in being Conservative I've started thinking the same about the 'Scottish Labour Party' (whatever that is, as they are still ran directly from London). Since when did the Union become so important to Labour that they will be in the No-camp at the referendum, shoulder to shoulder with the Tories? That's not going to be much fun for Labour activists. All the left of centre parties (socialist parties, greens and SNP) will be supporting the Yes campaign. The Labour party will be stuck with the coalition parties who'll be privatising the NHS! And then they need to explain why they support prescription charges, student fees and trident missiles. That's a nasty combination and not an easy sell to their dwindling membership.

[twinny]

After being puzzled at the Tories putting greater store in being Unionist than in being Conservative I've started thinking the same about the 'Scottish Labour Party' (whatever that is, as they are still ran directly from London). Since when did the Union become so important to Labour that they will be in the No-camp at the referendum, shoulder to shoulder with the Tories? That's not going to be much fun for Labour activists. All the left of centre parties (socialist parties, greens and SNP) will be supporting the Yes campaign. The Labour party will be stuck with the coalition parties who'll be privatising the NHS! And then they need to explain why they support prescription charges, student fees and trident missiles. That's a nasty combination and not an easy sell to their dwindling membership.

 

I thought all that would be fairly obvious. Labour have an interest in keeping Scotland part of the union as they ARE a unionist party, and rely heavily on Scottish seats to have any chance of getting into parliament. Their desired outcome of the referendum has no influence on their other policies regarding the opposition to the breaking down of the NHS or any of the others you have listed. Just because they feel the same as the Tories regarding the union does not mean they agree with the tories/libdems in every policy they peddle.

[honved]

This guy is a laugh

[JAGZ1876]

After being puzzled at the Tories putting greater store in being Unionist than in being Conservative I've started thinking the same about the 'Scottish Labour Party' (whatever that is, as they are still ran directly from London). Since when did the Union become so important to Labour that they will be in the No-camp at the referendum, shoulder to shoulder with the Tories? That's not going to be much fun for Labour activists. All the left of centre parties (socialist parties, greens and SNP) will be supporting the Yes campaign. The Labour party will be stuck with the coalition parties who'll be privatising the NHS! And then they need to explain why they support prescription charges, student fees and trident missiles. That's a nasty combination and not an easy sell to their dwindling membership.

Scottish Labour party members have always resisted a break up of the union. When they are asked the question, " would you prefer a left of centre government ruling in an independent Scotland"? or a "right wing Conservative government ruling Britain"?, their preference is always for tory unionist rule. Just like the Old Firm, perhaps they are not as different as they would like the rest of us to imagine.

[twinny]

Scottish Labour party members have always resisted a break up of the union. When they are asked the question, " would you prefer a left of centre government ruling in an independent Scotland"? or a "right wing Conservative government ruling Britain"?, their preference is always for tory unionist rule. Just like the Old Firm, perhaps they are not as different as they would like the rest of us to imagine.

 

That's a ridiculous statement. Just because they believe in the Union doesn't mean they are the same as the tories. Looking at it from a fundamental (or traditional) Labour viewpoint, the country is stronger as a union where the assets of each part can be used for the benefit of everyone in the union. The only issue is when the sections of the union are not equal, and it seems to me more than ever that Scotland is getting the raw deal.

 

I am still on the fence regarding the whole debate, I used to be very pro-union and am almost convinced to get off the fence on the other side, however as a Scotsman living in England I'd feel a little silly as a supporter of independence. My only real opposition now is that while recovering from a recession it wouldn't be the smartest move to become independent requiring an upheaval in infrastructure (i.e. separating Scottish sections of UK departments). As a referendum won't happen for a few years then this isn't such a big worry.

 

You are right though, Labour have been responsible for perpetuating the myths that Scotland can't look after itself for x, y and z reasons, and now the evidence is starting to back up the arguement for independence. As an aside, I occasionally speak about this issue with my English girlfriend, who seems to think that Scotland should also consider what they would leave behind in the UK. She suggested that 'we' would have a responsibility to not only see that Scotland could benefit from independence, but that the rest of the UK would do well (or at least not suffer as a result). I'm not convinced myself, but I thought I'd see what others thought.

[honved]

That's a ridiculous statement. Just because they believe in the Union doesn't mean they are the same as the tories. Looking at it from a fundamental (or traditional) Labour viewpoint, the country is stronger as a union where the assets of each part can be used for the benefit of everyone in the union. The only issue is when the sections of the union are not equal, and it seems to me more than ever that Scotland is getting the raw deal.

 

I am still on the fence regarding the whole debate, I used to be very pro-union and am almost convinced to get off the fence on the other side, however as a Scotsman living in England I'd feel a little silly as a supporter of independence. My only real opposition now is that while recovering from a recession it wouldn't be the smartest move to become independent requiring an upheaval in infrastructure (i.e. separating Scottish sections of UK departments). As a referendum won't happen for a few years then this isn't such a big worry.

 

You are right though, Labour have been responsible for perpetuating the myths that Scotland can't look after itself for x, y and z reasons, and now the evidence is starting to back up the arguement for independence. As an aside, I occasionally speak about this issue with my English girlfriend, who seems to think that Scotland should also consider what they would leave behind in the UK. She suggested that 'we' would have a responsibility to not only see that Scotland could benefit from independence, but that the rest of the UK would do well (or at least not suffer as a result). I'm not convinced myself, but I thought I'd see what others thought.

 

The bit left behind is something that most nationalists are keen to see flourish not diminish as a result of *ahem* separation. It will be our biggest trading partner by far and if the Daily fail is to be believed, its economy will thrive when freed from the shackles of Scotland's benefit culture. ,

[Yellow & Redneck]

This is the first time I've stumbled across the Main Forum, so I may as well chip my 2cents into this debate.

 

As an active member of the SNP my view on independence is obvious. However it is clear that from the 15mins or so that I have trawled through the various posts that at least half of the people, both nationalist and unionist, have a very limited knowledge of politics, legislation and the possible secession of Scotland from the Union.

 

Independence, in my opinion, is absolute necessary to see Scotland reach it's full potential. The UK is a political union that wasn't fit for purpose 300 years ago, never mind in today's contemporary society. Politics has changed dramatically in that time, yet the old stuffy UK refuses to change with it. I simply can't see why people would be proud to stay part of the Union. Britain's legacy is a violent fascist nation, that took half the world over, while downgrading native people, enslaving the population and pillaging land. And even today we are still involved in illegal conflicts around the globe.

 

If Scottish troops are to never again be involved in illegal wars, if Scotland wants rid of nuclear weapons (the greatest threat to the human species), if Scotland is to ensure the free eduction of it's people and if the Scottish people want to have a voice on the world stage, they need to vote for independence. It's that simple.

[Allan Heron]

If Scottish troops are to never again be involved in illegal wars, if Scotland wants rid of nuclear weapons (the greatest threat to the human species), if Scotland is to ensure the free eduction of it's people and if the Scottish people want to have a voice on the world stage, they need to vote for independence. It's that simple.

 

These would be choices to be made by a Scottish government if we were independant. But there's no way that independance on its' own can guarantee any political outcomes.

[JAGZ1876]

That's a ridiculous statement. Just because they believe in the Union doesn't mean they are the same as the tories. Looking at it from a fundamental (or traditional) Labour viewpoint, the country is stronger as a union where the assets of each part can be used for the benefit of everyone in the union. As an aside, I occasionally speak about this issue with my English girlfriend, who seems to think that Scotland should also consider what they would leave behind in the UK. She suggested that 'we' would have a responsibility to not only see that Scotland could benefit from independence, but that the rest of the UK would do well (or at least not suffer as a result).

How is it a ridiculous statement Twinny?. They are both staunch unionists, in my book that make's them the same. As for their policies, over the last 15 years you would struggle to get a fag paper between them, i cant be the only person who thought Tony Blair's government was further to the right than John Major's. Neither Blair nor Brown have hidden their admiration for Thatcher, so like i said, their not as different as they would have us imagine. As for your girlfriends concern about the rump of the UK that will be left post independence, (Honved touched on this in his last post about the Daily Mail) when visiting England, my wife, who is also English will tell anyone who comes out with the "English subsidise Scotland" routine, that if that's the case then they won't have anything to worry about after we leave the union. But you live down there, so you must read in the local press how England will be quids in when the whinging Jocks go.

[twinny]

As for your girlfriends concern about the rump of the UK that will be left post independence, (Honved touched on this in his last post about the Daily Mail) when visiting England, my wife, who is also English will tell anyone who comes out with the "English subsidise Scotland" routine, that if that's the case then they won't have anything to worry about after we leave the union. But you live down there, so you must read in the local press how England will be quids in when the whinging Jocks go.

 

I was hoping for a more reasoned debate on that reasonable question, but never mind. No need to get your knickers in a twist. Neither me nor my girlfriend believe the subsidy line (as I alluded to in my saying that Labour perpetuate such myths). In fact my question was based more with the fact that Scottish industry (mainly oil and the progress in renewable energy) are vital to the UK, and without these England and Wales would be at a disadvantage. So, if Scotland left the rest of the UK, and it damaged the UK economy as a result, would Scotland be culpable (for want of a better word)? As I said, I don't think so, but as Honved says it would be in Scotland's interest for the UK to be doing well.

[alx]

In fact my question was based more with the fact that Scottish industry (mainly oil and the progress in renewable energy) are vital to the UK, and without these England and Wales would be at a disadvantage. So, if Scotland left the rest of the UK, and it damaged the UK economy as a result, would Scotland be culpable (for want of a better word)? As I said, I don't think so, but as Honved says it would be in Scotland's interest for the UK to be doing well.

 

There's an easy answer to this, simple population size. If Scotland does a bit better than break even, or even quite a bit better than break even, the difference is substantial for 5 million people. But the effect on england gets divided by 60 million, thus watering it down to a mere bagatelle. The one doubt I have is that we can negotiate our way out of our share of the national debt (like Ireland did) because we'll get first sight of the asset sheet, which could (could, no one knows) be astronomical. Having said that, one quick one-off tax on the banks by Westminster could cover that, easy. It's not our fault that they are Tories who let the banks steal all our money all the time.

[Vladimir Putin]

I thought all that would be fairly obvious. Labour have an interest in keeping Scotland part of the union as they ARE a unionist party, and rely heavily on Scottish seats to have any chance of getting into parliament.

 

That patently is untrue. Look at the size of Labour's recent majorities and then look at the number of Scottish Labour MPs. Labour won those three elections because they appealed to the marginal seats in England, it had nothing to do with Scottish seats.

[Lambies Lost Doo]

How is it a ridiculous statement Twinny?. They are both staunch unionists, in my book that make's them the same. As for their policies, over the last 15 years you would struggle to get a fag paper between them, i cant be the only person who thought Tony Blair's government was further to the right than John Major's. Neither Blair nor Brown have hidden their admiration for Thatcher, so like i said, their not as different as they would have us imagine.

 

Could you tell me what is so different with the SNP? They have frozen council tax - right of centre policy. They attract support from Monaco living Jim McColl, and support from Section 28 supporter Brian Soutar and Salmond has just been round Gulf States of differing levels of democracy and human rights to get the petrol fuelled money. He also admitted that he did not mind the economic side of Thatcher policies. http://www.scotsman.com/news/alex_salmond_scotland_didn_t_mind_thatcher_economics_1_1086679

He is not as different as he would have us imagine.

[JAGZ1876]

Could you tell me what is so different with the SNP? They have frozen council tax - right of centre policy. They attract support from Monaco living Jim McColl, and support from Section 28 supporter Brian Soutar and Salmond has just been round Gulf States of differing levels of democracy and human rights to get the petrol fuelled money. He also admitted that he did not mind the economic side of Thatcher policies. http://www.scotsman.com/news/alex_salmond_scotland_didn_t_mind_thatcher_economics_1_1086679

He is not as different as he would have us imagine.

First of all the issue was the similarities between Labour and the Tories, as for the SNP support, of course they are going to have right wing minded supporters, just as they have left wing and all points in between support. The difference is the SNP is the only party who can deliver their goal of an independent Scotland. Once that has been achieved they will most probably go back to their opposite ends of the political spectrum, perhaps start new Left and right wing parties, that will put the country and her people first. As for the FM going round Gulf states looking for investment, he wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't visit other countries, but i suppose it's ok for the UK's PM to visit Gulf states of differing levels of democracy and human rights to get the petrol fuelled money. Finally, as for your Scotsman article of three years ago, Alex Salmond Didn't say he didn't mind Thatcher's economics, he said "Scotland didn't mind Thatcher's economic's".

[twinny]

That patently is untrue. Look at the size of Labour's recent majorities and then look at the number of Scottish Labour MPs. Labour won those three elections because they appealed to the marginal seats in England, it had nothing to do with Scottish seats.

 

True, but Scotland has traditionally been 40 odd free seats to Labour for years now and despite the current strength of the SNP I doubt they would lose too many seats to them in a UK election. Those 40 seats could make a difference in a closer election, and if it was held today it probably would make the difference.

[Lambies Lost Doo]

First of all the issue was the similarities between Labour and the Tories, as for the SNP support, of course they are going to have right wing minded supporters, just as they have left wing and all points in between support. The difference is the SNP is the only party who can deliver their goal of an independent Scotland. Once that has been achieved they will most probably go back to their opposite ends of the political spectrum, perhaps start new Left and right wing parties, that will put the country and her people first. As for the FM going round Gulf states looking for investment, he wouldn't be doing his job if he didn't visit other countries, but i suppose it's ok for the UK's PM to visit Gulf states of differing levels of democracy and human rights to get the petrol fuelled money. Finally, as for your Scotsman article of three years ago, Alex Salmond Didn't say he didn't mind Thatcher's economics, he said "Scotland didn't mind Thatcher's economic's".

 

So you want independence for us to go back to having a Labour and Conservative party? Big changes. Do you really think the SNP would go away? They would be battering us with the stick, like they are already doing, that they are Scotland's party. As for Salmond saying "Scotland didn't mind Thatcher's economic's". The SNP act like they are Scotland. If anyone criticises their policies they are "talking down Scotland". They are Nationalists and at the very core and heart of their message no matter how they dress it up it's a case of them and us. If you are not with us you are defering to the English. Salmond visiting the Gulf States shows he is like any other politician. The SNP paint themselves as whiter than white but they are not. The SNP policy of "independence in Europe" is diluted now with all the Eurozone problems and their mythical "Arc of Prosperity" which is now a busted flush. They say Scotland do not get fair funding from London but Glasgow does not get fair funding from Edinburgh. Our business rates raised in Glasgow are not put back into Glasgow. Edinburgh gets special funding for museums etc because it is the capital. I couldn't give a flying f*ck about Edinburgh and yet what they complain about from London Glasgow gets stiffed by Edinburgh.

[honved]

So you want independence for us to go back to having a Labour and Conservative party? Big changes. Do you really think the SNP would go away? They would be battering us with the stick, like they are already doing, that they are Scotland's party. As for Salmond saying "Scotland didn't mind Thatcher's economic's". The SNP act like they are Scotland. If anyone criticises their policies they are "talking down Scotland". They are Nationalists and at the very core and heart of their message no matter how they dress it up it's a case of them and us. If you are not with us you are defering to the English. Salmond visiting the Gulf States shows he is like any other politician. The SNP paint themselves as whiter than white but they are not. The SNP policy of "independence in Europe" is diluted now with all the Eurozone problems and their mythical "Arc of Prosperity" which is now a busted flush. They say Scotland do not get fair funding from London but Glasgow does not get fair funding from Edinburgh. Our business rates raised in Glasgow are not put back into Glasgow. Edinburgh gets special funding for museums etc because it is the capital. I couldn't give a flying f*ck about Edinburgh and yet what they complain about from London Glasgow gets stiffed by Edinburgh.

 

There's a good pile of inaccuracy in that post which would take ages to dissemble. I take it you are not a fan of the current Scottish Government?

 

Scottish Development International is maybe worth a look to see how inward investment is dealt with at government level. You would also learn some good stuff about the Edinburgh/Glasgow thing that is bugging you. For example, it's a fact that Edinburgh has a highly skilled financial services workforce. That's attractive to the likes of Tesco Bank and Virgin Money. Glasgow, however benefits from Regional Selective Assistance, a big labour pool and a supply of good large office stock, which is why many contact centre operators are in the city.

 

As for special funding for museums, yes to a degree the existing museums in Edinburgh do attract money, but was there not a huge big museum just opened in Glasgow earlier this year?

[JAGZ1876]

So you want independence for us to go back to having a Labour and Conservative party? Big changes. Do you really think the SNP would go away? They would be battering us with the stick, like they are already doing, that they are Scotland's party. As for Salmond saying "Scotland didn't mind Thatcher's economic's". The SNP act like they are Scotland. If anyone criticises their policies they are "talking down Scotland". They are Nationalists and at the very core and heart of their message no matter how they dress it up it's

LLD, i'm not sure if i'm understanding you right, are you of the opinion that after independence Scotland will be a one party state (SNP) with no opposition parties. No wonder some people are anti independence if this is the level of political ignorance.

Edited November 16, 2011 by JAGZ1876

[Barney Rubble]

There's a good pile of inaccuracy in that post which would take ages to dissemble. I take it you are not a fan of the current Scottish Government?

 

Scottish Development International is maybe worth a look to see how inward investment is dealt with at government level. You would also learn some good stuff about the Edinburgh/Glasgow thing that is bugging you. For example, it's a fact that Edinburgh has a highly skilled financial services workforce. That's attractive to the likes of Tesco Bank and Virgin Money. Glasgow, however benefits from Regional Selective Assistance, a big labour pool and a supply of good large office stock, which is why many contact centre operators are in the city.

 

As for special funding for museums, yes to a degree the existing museums in Edinburgh do attract money, but was there not a huge big museum just opened in Glasgow earlier this year?

 

Honved, that's a very good response to what was a poorly presented rant from LLD.

 

I look forward to reading his response to your reasoned argument.

 

Should he do so, I hope he uses paragraphs this time round.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Barney Rubble