Scottish Referendum question(s)

Rocker

The referendum is soon guys.  What are the advantages/disadvantages to Scotland if they choose to go it alone and ditto if they choose to stay in the United Kingdom?  It would appear that the 'No' camp is in the ascendancy but you never know in an election.  The obvious question is why is there three separate countries on the island of Britain?  Not trying to stir up sh1t or to create controversy but rather attempting to get a better understanding of the situation in the United Kingdom.

fretmeister

My Scottish mates suggest that while they quite like the idea of independence they don't like the idea of Alex Salmond at all.

imalone

Scotland, please don't leave us alone with the English...

DiscoStu

The referendum is not a vote for Salmond and neither is it a vote for the SNP. It is a vote for the right to control our own finances and to be governed by the parliament we actually voted for.

Scotland did not vote for the people in Westminster but it is Westminster who control our money.

I am not a fan of Salmond but I cannot deny he is a very intelligent man. If we get independence, he will be the first one in but there will have to be a general election afterwards and at that point it's open season. It is my belief that the SNP will dissolve having achieved their mandate and a new breed of parties will appear, of which I will choose either Socialist or Green. But if Scottish Conservative or Scottish Labour win then so be it. They will be in charge of Scottish affairs and finances and looking after the people of Scotland. No funding of HS2, no Trident (hopefully) and no losing our wealth to Westminster.

The referendum is a gift. We have the choice to make real change, to gain independence, and without a war to get to this point 

I will be voting YES.

Phil_aka_Pip

You won't get the truth out of any politician or industrial magnate who has a vested interest in the vote one way or the other. People will vote with their gut instincts.

On the other subject, @Rocker, you might like to read Winston S Churchill's History of the English Speaking Peoples. Like any work, there are flaws in it, but it's a good read, and it will go some way towards explaining how the UK got to be the way it is.

Once upon a time, there were several localised chieftains. Then the Romans* walked in. Then they left, and various europeans walked in. They fought amongst themselves and against the indigenous people, some of whom had been romanised. Eventually the indigenous peoples were shunted westwards to Wales (IIRC that's an Anglo-Saxon not-very-nice way of referring to people), the Danes and the Vikings learned to get on with the Anglo-Saxons and all was good until the Normans* arrived. They messed us up good & proper but after a while the Plantagenets were finished and the Houses of Tudor & York fought over the crown. Tudor won, and it left us with one crown over England & Wales. After good queen Liz I croaked, James VI of Scotland was invited to rule England & Wales as well as Scotland, and approx 100 years later an act of the English Parliament created the UK. It's been like that since.

I'm not sure what possessed an English king to think he had rights over Ireland as well but it's been a madness that's been around for a long time.

The rest is, at they say, history.

* BASTARDS

hungrymark

DiscoStu;310932" said:

The referendum is not a vote for Salmond and neither is it a vote for the SNP. It is a vote for the right to control our own finances and to be governed by the parliament we actually voted for.Scotland did not vote for the people in Westminster but it is Westminster who control our money.I am not a fan of Salmond but I cannot deny he is a very intelligent man. If we get independence, he will be the first one in but there will have to be a general election afterwards and at that point it's open season. It is my belief that the SNP will dissolve having achieved their mandate and a new breed of parties will appear, of which I will choose either Socialist or Green. But if Scottish Conservative or Scottish Labour win then so be it. They will be in charge of Scottish affairs and finances and looking after the people of Scotland. No funding of HS2, no Trident (hopefully) and no losing our wealth to Westminster.The referendum is a gift. We have the choice to make real change, to gain independence, and without a war to get to this point I will be voting YES.

The Scots didn't vote for Westminster? Where did all those Scottish MPs come from then?

hungrymark

Rocker, once upon a time an independent Scotland decided to colonise Panama and, surprisingly, it didn't work out and they went broke so offered union with England.

Seriously.

Skipped

Yes Vote = More Bartering in the Classifieds.

Fretwired

DiscoStu said:

The referendum is not a vote for Salmond and neither is it a vote for the SNP. It is a vote for the right to control our own finances and to be governed by the parliament we actually voted for.

Scotland did not vote for the people in Westminster but it is Westminster who control our money.

Not strictly true as Scotland has its own parliament and can spent money anyway it chooses. And Scotland has major benefits wealth wise - the Scottish banks, work for the UK armed forces, the Westminster government has moved a lot of admin work to Scotland.

So if Scotland leaves you can say goodbye to the banks [they will need to relocate sout of the border - read RBS report], they'll be no more shipbuilding for the Royal Navy, goodbye to the naval bases and all the admin jobs will have to come back into the rest of the UK. How many jobs will be lost? What happens to the Scots who don't get a vote in England? Will they have to get a Scottish passport? Will they have to return to Scotland if the country is outside the EU? And what happens if the islands in the north decide they don't want anything to do with Scotland? They hate the SNP and Salmond and most of the oil is in their waters.

Could Scotland survive as an independent country? Yes. Would I vote to leave if I were a Scot? No. Not until Salmond and co have laid out all the facts. I have relatives in Scotland who like the idea of being independent but who will vote no as they don't trust Salmond as there are too many unanswered questions.

johnnyurq

It is indeed looking like an emphatic no as it stands but yes a lot could happen between now and then, given a week is a long time in politics and all that jazz.

Plusses

Sacking off Westminster and the corrupt useless fuckers on all sides of the commons.

Self Determination and control over the things important to Scots.

The chance to build a decent & fairer society, if the politicians will let us that is.

To hopefully stop us having to leave the EU if the tide against it grows further.

Not having to fund big projects (mentioned above) that have no impact or benefit tp us or indeed anywherer outside the SE corner and London (mainly).


Negatives

Less security and a smaller defence force. May be tempered by the fact no one will see us as a threat.

The various good aspect of the Union that may be lost. I would hope we could still be good friendly neighbours and co-operate where we have common ground and interests.

Possible tensions after a Yes vote and maybe even after a No vote.

Rankles over Oil and Currency.

Can we also get out of the way at the start that nobody bar the usual twonks you get all over the UK (small loud minoruty who get the most media attention) are wanting Yes as an anti English thing we are not that shallow or petty. Sorry but itr is a myth that needs dispelled.

Not saying there isn't some healthy and robust banter and leg pulling which is the way of all on these Islands.


There are many more good and bad aspects that would eat up time discussing.


As @DiscoStu has said there is no guarantee that Salmond will get in beyond the first term most likely and a vote for yes is most definitely not a vote for Salmond.

He is a shrewd politician but he is not for me because I have witnessed his change over the years whilst working various Scottish party Conferences when | worked in Theatre and had many discussions with him and Jim Sellars who I still admire.

They both were very much conviction politicians with some good potential policies between them. When Salmond ousted Sellars he bagan to change and I lost a lot of respect for him as have many up here in the Highlands have.

Stu is correct because even now the makeup of the SNP is a melange of the political spectrum whose only commonality is to achieve Independence. Once done they all seemingly intend to return to their grass roots political affiliations.

If Salmond after a posible Yes vote tries to cling to power desperately I suspect he will get short shrift from the electorate.

Most of my friends, family, peers and folks we discuss it with also do not see AS in power much after a first transitional period to attain stability. They also will most likely vote for him past that first period.

Having said that I would take a slightly slippery AS over the Westminster lot any day of the week which hopefully gives an idea of the contempt that ordinary Scots hold the Westminster Parliement in. He may be a bit of a twat but he has more about him and is (for now) less oily and corrupt.

My only concern is that our medium sized fish in a wee pond may get ideas above their station and start thinking they can behave like Westminster if a Yes vote prevailed (unlikely as it stands).

If so in a generation or so we will see the Highlands and other areas wanting to break free from Holyrood LOL.

The better together lot have already noised up the Orkney & Shetland Isles about pushing for self determination in the event of a Yes vote and further splitting the vote, Call me Dave was up a few days ago reiterate this and to try and sew discontent.

Fair enough if they do want to go their own way though as they are as much descended from Vikings etc as Scots.

Salmond is offering a more Isles focussed approch for them in the event of a Yes but who nkows how it will pan out up there as an alternative to the No lot.

Although there has been negativity from both camps the better together lot have conducted a hugely negative FUD & threat laden campaign from start to date, shows how twisted these Westminster professional politician types really are.

They cost themslves a lot of people to the Yes camp as a result of a strange startegy to win hearts and minds as they said they were attempting to.

They have also been told of a lot for cooking the books and misusing stats, AS did a wee bit of that too but not as blatant or as much.

Anyway that is the main points for me and I suspect most voters and I very much doubt it will be anything other than a no on the day.


LIke Stu I am minded to vote Yes but fully expecting a No.

Fretwired

imalone said:

Scotland, please don't leave us alone with the English...

If put to the vote I'm sure the English would like to be left alone .... who says we still want anything to do with Scotland, Wales and Nothern Ireland? I'm for a united Ireland, the Scots can vote yes and have independence and then the English can rebuild Offa's Dyke and blow up the Fourth Bridge and let the Welsh Parliemant continue their good work to date ... :-)

Next war with France ... :-)

Drew_TNBD

https://fullfact.org/scotland/

johnnyurq

hungrymark;310947" said:

Rocker, once upon a time an independent Scotland decided to colonise Panama and, surprisingly, it didn't work out and they went broke so offered union with England.

Seriously.

@hungrymark

Fair enough it was a disaster but one of the main reasons it was as such was due to the English leaders at the time stopping any other country helping or selling us anything that might make it actually happen.

No food and no supplies etc makes it very difficult to eke out a living and get a toe hold extremely different in an already hostile and difficult region.

This was done so that Scotland could not cultivate colonies and move towards being economic and empirical rivals.

Also you need to consider where the funding for the Darien scheme with monies from various countries including England and Englosh speculators who stood to make a shed load if it succeeded.

Maybe if the boot were on the other foot Scotland would have done the same given the times but to say it was a wholly Scottish venture and disaster is not really the correct story. History and these events as very rarely that black or white and are gilded by poepple with vested interests.

I would respectfully suggest that anyone trotting out the Darien Scheme at these moments go and read up on the accurate sequence of events of the time.

TimmyO

Fretwired said:

Next war with France ... :-)

Yes but what about AFTER lunch...? 

Fretwired

johnnyurq said:

hungrymark;310947" said:

Rocker, once upon a time an independent Scotland decided to colonise Panama and, surprisingly, it didn't work out and they went broke so offered union with England.

Seriously.

@hungrymark

Fair enough it was a disaster but one of the main reasons it was as such was due to the English leaders at the time stopping any other country helping or selling us anything that might make it actually happen.

@johnnyurg .. sorry but that's just not true. France and Spain were the major powers and they hated England. How could England have stopped Spain or France helping the Scots? In reality it was the other way round. A big issue was the Spanish claim on Panama. The English were threatened by Spain and didn't want to do anything to upset them so didn't help the initial colony.

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/unioncrownsparliaments/dariencolony/index.asp

DiscoStu

And no House of Lords!

johnnyurq

@Fretwired

Seriously I have read and watched various programs on it and that is exactly what happened and with France IIRC it was more threats than collusion.

Honestly go and look further into it and maybe watch the series Niall Ferguson among others did.

There was something on BBC 4 the other week where it was discussed and mentoined that although it would have most likely a disaterous overreach it was not given the chance.

The worry from England was that if it took hold we may have had a canal splitting USA & South America and would have been a different world if so, at least for a while in any case.

DiscoStu

johnnyurq said:

The better together lot have already noised up the Orkney & Shetland Isles about pushing for self determination in the event of a Yes vote and further splitting the vote, Call me Dave was up a few days ago reiterate this and to try and sew discontent.

Word from Shetland is that they have discovered the world's largest oil field and that was the reason for Cameron's visit. Oil workers have been sent home on full pay and told to keep quiet until after the referendum.

Hmmm.....

johnnyurq

On the local news he looked a wee bit like a fish out of water and not at all happy to be there, twonk.

To be fair though he was being more circumspect than the main ones from better together.

VimFuego

DiscoStu said:

johnnyurq said:

The better together lot have already noised up the Orkney & Shetland Isles about pushing for self determination in the event of a Yes vote and further splitting the vote, Call me Dave was up a few days ago reiterate this and to try and sew discontent.

Word from Shetland is that they have discovered the world's largest oil field and that was the reason for Cameron's visit. OIl workers have been sent home on full pay and told to keep quiet until after the referendum.

Hmmm.....

you guys wanna be careful, we all know what happens to small countries with lots of oil who upset us...

 

EDIT: though the budget cutbacks will have an effect on the nature of the false flag event. It'll probably be a microlight flown into the Cleethorpes chamber of commerce office.

Fretwired

johnnyurq said:

@Fretwired

Seriously I have read and watched various programs on it and that is exactly what happened and with France IIRC it was more threats than collusion.

Honestly go and look further into it and maybe watch the series Niall Ferguson among others did.

There was something on BBC 4 the other week where it was discussed and mentoined that although it would have most likely a disaterous overreach it was not given the chance.

The worry from England was that if it took hold we may have had a canal splitting USA & South America and would have been a different world if so, at least for a while in any case.

You'd better tell the Scottish education department whose website I posted the links to ... offending Spain which was the major power in South America was a major reason the small English colony did nothing. The English had their butts kicked many times in wars and battles in SA and were sensitive to the fact that Spain could kick England out of South America which happened in the end.