Scottish Independence

[stoneyburn hibs]

So no facts, no figures, no quotes from any source but just a real life example of Scotland v Ireland. Irish friends of mine who lived in Alloa for a number of years due to work have moved home again to Ireland. Again this is down to work but mostly through choice. They could have stayed here, employed by the same company, paid the same salary, still having to travel Europe for their job. But hey chose to go home to Ireland. Better standard of living, better prospects for their kids, better way if life, better access to Europe were just some of the reasons they gave. Believe me when I say that Scotland is a poorer place without them as they gave so much to out community when here. They cannot believe that we as a nation only had to put a tick in a box to remove ourselves from the restrictions of Westminster and failed to do so.
I have been over to their town and area in Ireland and see a town, county, province and country so at ease with itself and so forward thinking and confident it makes me want to weep that we have up that chance.
As I said no facts, no figures, nothing more than a "feeling" of a small country finding its way and doing well for itself

I can't even say "great post ".
It is, but makes me angry.

The fact that you post other people's accounts,experiences. Let's just do this Scotland.

[James310]

So no facts, no figures, no quotes from any source but just a real life example of Scotland v Ireland. Irish friends of mine who lived in Alloa for a number of years due to work have moved home again to Ireland. Again this is down to work but mostly through choice. They could have stayed here, employed by the same company, paid the same salary, still having to travel Europe for their job. But hey chose to go home to Ireland. Better standard of living, better prospects for their kids, better way if life, better access to Europe were just some of the reasons they gave. Believe me when I say that Scotland is a poorer place without them as they gave so much to out community when here. They cannot believe that we as a nation only had to put a tick in a box to remove ourselves from the restrictions of Westminster and failed to do so.
I have been over to their town and area in Ireland and see a town, county, province and country so at ease with itself and so forward thinking and confident it makes me want to weep that we have up that chance.
As I said no facts, no figures, nothing more than a "feeling" of a small country finding its way and doing well for itself

I wish them the best of luck with their new life. They are bucking the trend though as more people arrive in Scotland to live and work than leave. The latest figures show even as recently as last year net migration was + 20,900. So Scotland remains an attractive prospect for many.

[Callum_62]

So do people think the same about the Greens, the Lib Dems and Labour now? Just because you vote for party A then party B, C and D are bad for the country. We have a Green voter on this board who I am sure would not agree with that logic, just because he votes for the Greens does he believe all the rest are bad for the country including the SNP? I don't think so.

Using your logic the majority of the country must think the SNP are bad for Scotland as they failed in the last Scottish Elections and General Elections to get a majority of the votes cast.So how many times have Scotland voted for a Tory Govt?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

So how many times have Scotland voted for a Tory Govt?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

The same times they have voted for a Green, Liberal Democratic, Brexit Party, Scottish Socialist Party etc. government.

At the last General Election in Scotland they were the second party. It's probably uncomfortable for you to be reminded they were only 8.3% behind the SNP in share of the vote. They increased their vote share by 13.7%.

[Callum_62]

The same times they have voted for a Green, Liberal Democratic, Brexit Party, Scottish Socialist Party etc. government.

At the last General Election in Scotland they were the second party. It's probably uncomfortable for you to be reminded they were only 8.3% behind the SNP in share of the vote. They increased their vote share by 13.7%.So how many?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I wish them the best of luck with their new life. They are bucking the trend though as more people arrive in Scotland to live and work than leave. The latest figures show even as recently as last year net migration was + 20,900. So Scotland remains an attractive prospect for many.

Ireland’s net migration was +34,000 last year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PeeJay]

The US Federal Reserves.

This is simply not true, but in this fake news world any stick you and your nationalist-populist nonsense cause and its proponents can use to beat the British serves you I guess and too many will swallow it unfortunately ...

Not sure what is worse the possibility you actually believe this crap or the possibility you don't actually know whether what you claim is wrong or not ...

[marinello59]

Money, money, money. Where are the social policies?

On your £950 million, care to elaborate on the £2.6 billion we're short on our budget over the last 10 years due to austerity. Just think what we could have done with that.

On tax, were already doing better, with the introduction of SRIT, and making those who can afford to, pay more.

What percentage of Scots benefited from this change? I'd guess, and it's only a guess, but 5%?

As I said the social policies forced on Scotland by the Tories are, disabled people being robbed blind, the hostile environment policy which is forcing people from our country due to unrealistic targets on profit. Teachers forced to give up jobs due to home office restrictions. The list is endless, but as long as your bank balance is fine and dandy, then all is well in, Janet and johns house.

Social policies, for the betterment of all our people is what I'm fighting for. I'll leave you to count your pennies.

A great question.

[Smartie]

I wish them the best of luck with their new life. They are bucking the trend though as more people arrive in Scotland to live and work than leave. The latest figures show even as recently as last year net migration was + 20,900. So Scotland remains an attractive prospect for many.

These figures are a lot better than I'd have expected them to be, I must admit.

Last year though. How do you see them holding up post-Brexit when freedom of movement around Europe becomes restricted?

Do you envisage Scotland's net migration figures holding up when Scotland's immigration policies are dictated by a section of the English electorate who are "concerned about immigration"?

The only opportunity I see going forward (and it isn't a bad one, to be fair) is that we stand to gain large numbers of decent folk from down South who are very concerned about the direction of travel down there and might fancy their chances a bit more up here.

[James310]

Money, money, money. Where are the social policies?

On your £950 million, care to elaborate on the £2.6 billion we're short on our budget over the last 10 years due to austerity. Just think what we could have done with that.

On tax, were already doing better, with the introduction of SRIT, and making those who can afford to, pay more.

What percentage of Scots benefited from this change? I'd guess, and it's only a guess, but 5%?

As I said the social policies forced on Scotland by the Tories are, disabled people being robbed blind, the hostile environment policy which is forcing people from our country due to unrealistic targets on profit. Teachers forced to give up jobs due to home office restrictions. The list is endless, but as long as your bank balance is fine and dandy, then all is well in, Janet and johns house.

Social policies, for the betterment of all our people is what I'm fighting for. I'll leave you to count your pennies.

In the main social policy is devolved as it generally falls under Health, Education and Justice remits. All in the control of the Scottish Government. In the case of welfare benefits that is being devolved as per the Scotland Act. It's just the SNP were not quite ready to take it on.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-to-apologise-as-devolved-benefits-delayed-to-2024/

[Mibbes Aye]

In your opinion, I'll stand by it thanks.

As per yourself, I think you have a perception of yourself as being the judge, jury and executioner of the Holy Ground.

Shameful and shabby, do one.

So you have managed to have a go at James 310 and when I call you out about it, you have a go at me.

It’s meant to be about debate, not personal attacks. Have a word with yourself.

[Mibbes Aye]

Yeah I'm sure I read they won it

How many times have Scotland voted for a tory Govt?

I guess the answer to that will tell you what the Scottish people in general think about the tories, their policies and how good they are for Scotland

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Whether you or I like it or not, many people who live in Scotland buy into the Tories, their vote share shows that. To dismiss them undermines your arguments for independence as you are effectively dismissing the opinion of a fair proportion of the electorate in order to make false claims about what the ‘Scottish people’ think. You aren’t able to speak for the ‘Scottish people’ and what they want, you are merely stating your views and trying to suggest it is a uniform view. It’s not.

[Callum_62]

Whether you or I like it or not, many people who live in Scotland buy into the Tories, their vote share shows that. To dismiss them undermines your arguments for independence as you are effectively dismissing the opinion of a fair proportion of the electorate in order to make false claims about what the ‘Scottish people’ think. You aren’t able to speak for the ‘Scottish people’ and what they want, you are merely stating your views and trying to suggest it is a uniform view. It’s not.

How many times have the tories formed a Govt in Scotland?

Thats the best indication of what the Scottish people want, isn't it?

The point was made on the back of some proclaimed victory. Yes they done better than usual last GE. A anomoly quite possibly based on lastest polls

We Have a Govt that's been in charge for 10+ years - I'm surprised there support hasn't fallen further given the usual cycles in voters thinking change is better

The fact we now have a the tory party effectively saying they know what's better for us and dismissing the current voted in develoved govts obvious mandate because they done a bit better last time round is smug beyond belief

Not quite as smug as saying the only way to enact there mandate would be possibly to get an overall majority in a system designed to stop that possibility.


Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[stoneyburn hibs]

So you have managed to have a go at James 310 and when I call you out about it, you have a go at me.

It’s meant to be about debate, not personal attacks. Have a word with yourself.

I was stating the obvious regarding said poster, hardly abusing him. But there you go again, scolding me.

[Mibbes Aye]

How many times have the tories formed a Govt in Scotland?

Thats the best indication of what the Scottish people want, isn't it?

The point was made on the back of some proclaimed victory. Yes they done better than usual last GE. A anomoly quite possibly based on lastest polls


Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

If you want to claim you are speaking for the Scottish people that means acknowledging a sizeable element vote Tory and that is unlikely to change.

Thats before we even start talking about how a clear majority of Scottish voters opted against separation.

I don’t think you can talk about what the ‘Scottish people’ want or think, if you are doing so through a prism of your own views.

[RyeSloan]

This is simply not true, but in this fake news world any stick you and your nationalist-populist nonsense cause and its proponents can use to beat the British serves you I guess and too many will swallow it unfortunately ...

Not sure what is worse the possibility you actually believe this crap or the possibility you don't actually know whether what you claim is wrong or not ...

Argh it’s painful but for this once it’s probably required to suggest the Fife actually does have a point here.[emoji2957]

A number of the British banks received funding from the Fed. Quite a lot of funding actually. If they were involved in the trading of US Treasuries then there was substantial loans / capital / funding / bail out (call it what you may) made available.

Iirc Barclays was one of the biggest users of the facility.

[Mibbes Aye]

I was stating the obvious regarding said poster, hardly abusing him. But there you go again, scolding me.

I’m genuinely sorry if that’s how it comes across, that makes it sound rather patronising.

I do think there is a bigger issue about certain posters being hounded however. The admins do a good job on here but I think we all have a responsibility to self-regulate and post in a reasonable manner. There is more than enough scope for debate without it becoming personal.

[James310]

I’m genuinely sorry if that’s how it comes across, that makes it sound rather patronising.

I do think there is a bigger issue about certain posters being hounded however. The admins do a good job on here but I think we all have a responsibility to self-regulate and post in a reasonable manner. There is more than enough scope for debate without it becoming personal.

The fact that I am subject to abuse, while unpleasant, just makes me think I must be doing something right.

[Mibbes Aye]

The fact that I am subject to abuse, while unpleasant, just makes me think I must be doing something right.

Shut it you Tory **** :greengrin

[James310]

These figures are a lot better than I'd have expected them to be, I must admit.

Last year though. How do you see them holding up post-Brexit when freedom of movement around Europe becomes restricted?

Do you envisage Scotland's net migration figures holding up when Scotland's immigration policies are dictated by a section of the English electorate who are "concerned about immigration"?

The only opportunity I see going forward (and it isn't a bad one, to be fair) is that we stand to gain large numbers of decent folk from down South who are very concerned about the direction of travel down there and might fancy their chances a bit more up here.

I would imagine immigration numbers will fall and as I have stated elsewhere that is a problem for Scotland who need migration to run our essential services. I think there is some merit in exploring how Scotland should have a separate immigration policy to the rest of the UK as we have different requirements.

I have also suggested previously why do we not do more to attract other people from the rest of the UK, they share similar values and there is no issue with language etc. But I just can't see the Scottish Government launching a 'Come to Scotland' campaign targeting the English for example.

[stoneyburn hibs]

I’m genuinely sorry if that’s how it comes across, that makes it sound rather patronising.

I do think there is a bigger issue about certain posters being hounded however. The admins do a good job on here but I think we all have a responsibility to self-regulate and post in a reasonable manner. There is more than enough scope for debate without it becoming personal.

No apology needed.
I agree, debate without getting personal. Of which I myself have been guilty of in the past.

[James310]

Shut it you Tory **** :greengrin

Reported.

[Callum_62]

If you want to claim you are speaking for the Scottish people that means acknowledging a sizeable element vote Tory and that is unlikely to change.

Thats before we even start talking about how a clear majority of Scottish voters opted against separation.

I don’t think you can talk about what the ‘Scottish people’ want or think, if you are doing so through a prism of your own views.Yeah against separation 5 years ago

The landscape has changed hugely since then

Which is probably why the UK are so against another vote

Its interesting--my uncles Chinese gf who moved here about 7 years ago now was very pro union and countries must stick together etc

Now she has switched 180 because of the way she thinks Westminster treats Scotland.
Its quite interesting to get a total outsiders view over the past years

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

No apology needed.
I agree, debate without getting personal. Of which I myself have been guilty of in the past.

All of us I suspect :aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

I would imagine immigration numbers will fall and as I have stated elsewhere that is a problem for Scotland who need migration to run our essential services. I think there is some merit in exploring how Scotland should have a separate immigration policy to the rest of the UK as we have different requirements.

I have also suggested previously why do we not do more to attract other people from the rest of the UK, they share similar values and there is no issue with language etc. But I just can see the Scottish Government launching a 'Come to Scotland' campaign targeting the English for example.

I don’t think people generally understand the desperate straits this country is in regarding social care and health care. We have an elderly population that is increasing exponentially, and a lack of capacity in the workforce, despite sustained effort to pay more, train more and value it more.

If social care doesn’t work then it stacks up demand on the front door of the NHS. We desperately need immigrants to staff these services.

[Mibbes Aye]

Yeah against separation 5 years ago

The landscape has changed hugely since then

Which is probably why the UK are so against another vote

Its interesting--my uncles Chinese gf who moved here about 7 years ago now was very pro union and countries must stick together etc

Now she has switched 180 because of the way she thinks Westminster treats Scotland.
Its quite interesting to get a total outsiders view over the past years

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I think that’s a fair point about how ‘outsiders’ view things, alternative perspectives are usually good, even if just to challenge our own normalised attitudes.

[RyeSloan]

Yeah against separation 5 years ago

The landscape has changed hugely since then

Which is probably why the UK are so against another vote

Its interesting--my uncles Chinese gf who moved here about 7 years ago now was very pro union and countries must stick together etc

Now she has switched 180 because of the way she thinks Westminster treats Scotland.
Its quite interesting to get a total outsiders view over the past years

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

An interesting perspective for sure.

I’m curious as to what things she sees as being under ‘how Westminster treats us’ that changed her mind as I must admit to not feeling the hand of Westminster on a daily basis in my life.

[Callum_62]

I think that’s a fair point about how ‘outsiders’ view things, alternative perspectives are usually good, even if just to challenge our own normalised attitudes.And to the contrary I'm sure there will be some who think - sod this independence, brexit is hard enough

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

An interesting perspective for sure.

I’m curious as to what things she sees as being under ‘how Westminster treats us’ that changed her mind as I must admit to not feeling the hand of Westminster on a daily basis in my life.

It’s not a hand, it’s a spiky fist soaked in hydrochloric acid and pebble dashed with Ebola virus and glandular fever :greengrin

I have posted this before and am in agreement with you.

I get up, I put the bins out some days. I drive to work, sometimes get the train. My children go to school. If I come home and it’s dark then the street lights are on. Sometimes me or my family need to go to a GP or a dentist, now and again we have all been to hospital for this or that. We eat out fairly regularly, safe in the knowledge that restaurants are regulated by environmental health inspectors.

I live in a a small town where crime is practically non-existent but we have a police station and there is a visible police presence most days. I can walk to my health centre and dentist, can walk to the leisure centre which has a gym and a swimming pool.

Everything I've just said has nothing to do with Westminster, it’s my day-to-day life and it is influenced by my council and my health board and by Scottish Government.

I don’t get the Westminster schtick either and call it out for two reasons.

One, it isn’t true, as my rather twee account of my day to day life indicates.

Two, it is bad semantics, creating some sort of false narrative. Westminster isn’t some ‘other’, the Commons are a democratically elected chamber that includes people we all voted for, against, or not at all. It is ours, whether you are from Aberdeen, Abergavenny, Antrim or Aldershot.

[southsider]

I voted No but with Boris about to become PM of the UK he will drive Scots into the welcoming arms of the SNP but I wonder if they wil go down the Catalan route of an ‘ illegal’ Indy Ref 2 and will wee Nicola due time for the vote.

[marinello59]

I voted No but with Boris about to become PM of the UK he will drive Scots into the welcoming arms of the SNP but I wonder if they wil go down the Catalan route of an ‘ illegal’ Indy Ref 2 and will wee Nicola due time for the vote.

All the No side have to do to counter a referundum with no legal standing is to boycott it.

[Mibbes Aye]

And to the contrary I'm sure there will be some who think - sod this independence, brexit is hard enough

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Almost certainly, you’re right.

I’m not ideological about this as I’m not a unionist and not a nationalist.

Hard not to think that cautious, small-c conservative voters will take the Brexit experience and view separation negatively as a consequence.

I’m not sure it is a vote swinger but will maybe entrench soft No’s.

[Callum_62]

An interesting perspective for sure.

I’m curious as to what things she sees as being under ‘how Westminster treats us’ that changed her mind as I must admit to not feeling the hand of Westminster on a daily basis in my life.In her broken English words--no country should tell you that you can't do something

I agree with the day to day life Analysis - you can forget Westminster exists

On the big decisions though- that's where Westminster is the judge jury and executioner and its where Scotlands voice is tiny

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

All the No side have to do to counter a referundum with no legal standing is to boycott it.
:agree:

Reminded of Brian Souter’s anti-gay ‘referendum’ which secured a massive majority because no one in their right mind voted against it.

Off topic but is he still donating millions to the SNP and does he still think homosexuality is a sin? :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

In her broken English words--no country should tell you that you can't do something

I agree with the day to day life Analysis - you can forget Westminster exists

On the big decisions though- that's where Westminster is the judge jury and executioner and its where Scotlands voice is tiny

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

That presupposes Scotland has a unanimous voice. It doesn’t.

There are many different voices in Scotland. Some unionist, some separatist, some meh.

They can’t all be represented consistently, can they?

Curiously, for ten years, Gordon Brown, as Chancellor, had the free run, not just of economic and fiscal policy, but domestic policy for the entire U.K. - the result of the deal that saw him stand aside and support Blair in his run for the Labour leadership.

In the thirteen years of New Labour, Scottish MPs were in the Cabinet in disproportionate numbers.

Scotland’s voice certainly wasn’t tiny..

[James310]

All the No side have to do to counter a referundum with no legal standing is to boycott it.

It would not have the support of the Electoral Commission so would be a pointless exercise.

I do wonder what Nicola Sturgeons next move is. She promised another referendum 3 years ago and kept the masses hanging on with more promises of it's coming, just not yet. She has been told by both Johnson and Hunt there will be no S30 so what's her next move?

I saw there was a motion proposed at the SNP conference by the untrustworthy Angus McNeil to just declare Independence anyway, but that was rejected.

[Callum_62]

That presupposes Scotland has a unanimous voice. It doesn’t.

There are many different voices in Scotland. Some unionist, some separatist, some meh.

They can’t all be represented consistently, can they?

Curiously, for ten years, Gordon Brown, as Chancellor, had the free run, not just of economic and fiscal policy, but domestic policy for the entire U.K. - the result of the deal that saw him stand aside and support Blair in his run for the Labour leadership.

In the thirteen years of New Labour, Scottish MPs were in the Cabinet in disproportionate numbers.

Scotland’s voice certainly wasn’t tiny..It's certainly tiny now

With the way English politics is going about to get even worsr

Thats what I can never accept - the UK is driven by the way England votes - its always going to be the case.

I can't be bothered going back to look but I wonder how many of the past 20 governments in Westminster represented the majority of the Scottish vote

Maybe my views are what they are due to me living overseas for 15 odd years in a small, progressive country too... I don't see the UK as socially progressive, certainly not these days

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

It would not have the support of the Electoral Commission so would be a pointless exercise.

I do wonder what Nicola Sturgeons next move is. She promised another referendum 3 years ago and kept the masses hanging on with more promises of it's coming, just not yet. She has been told by both Johnson and Hunt there will be no S30 so what's her next move?

I saw there was a motion proposed at the SNP conference by the untrustworthy Angus McNeil to just declare Independence anyway, but that was rejected.If the polls show Scotland wants it (which they are starting to show) I can't see how WM can keep saying no

Surely that would harden and increase the 'we want another vote' group

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

It would not have the support of the Electoral Commission so would be a pointless exercise.

I do wonder what Nicola Sturgeons next move is. She promised another referendum 3 years ago and kept the masses hanging on with more promises of it's coming, just not yet. She has been told by both Johnson and Hunt there will be no S30 so what's her next move?

I saw there was a motion proposed at the SNP conference by the untrustworthy Angus McNeil to just declare Independence anyway, but that was rejected.

She goes in to the next election making it clear that a vote for the SNP is a vote for another referundum within a specified timescale and she leads with that and not with fighting Brexit or asking people to lend them their vote to stop the Tories.

[James310]

She goes in to the next election making it clear that a vote for the SNP is a vote for another referundum within a specified timescale and she leads with that and not with fighting Brexit or asking people to lend them their vote to stop the Tories.

Say they win the majority of seats but not the majority of the vote, is that enough? I would say no.

[The Modfather]

Say they win the majority of seats but not the majority of the vote, is that enough? I would say no.

Could that not apply to any manifesto promises? Getting into power on a clear manifesto for a second referendum within a timeframe had to be a clear mandate. Whether that equates to enough of the electorate voting yes is a different matter.

[Mibbes Aye]

It's certainly tiny now

With the way English politics is going about to get even worsr

Thats what I can never accept - the UK is driven by the way England votes - its always going to be the case.

I can't be bothered going back to look but I wonder how many of the past 20 governments in Westminster represented the majority of the Scottish vote

Maybe my views are what they are due to me living overseas for 15 odd years in a small, progressive country too... I don't see the UK as socially progressive, certainly not these days

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Its an interesting point. I have family in NZ but don’t really follow the politics there, though your PM comes across as progressive.

I think, and have said before, that there has been a huge amount of legislation, since devolution, that has been progressive in Scotland, under all the parties that have held power.

I think the very first act was to outlaw businesses banning breastfeeding in public, very symbolic. Land reform followed. Scotland has subsequently been a trailblazer in legislation, especially around social policy.

Since inception, we have seen legislation around housing, mental health, incapacity, adult and child protection and scrutiny of public services that is generally positive. And the ‘Scottish’ approach to public sector reform is held up as an exemplar and attracts international interest.

It isn’t unique though. Wales are a bit of a poster child currently for care of the elderly, I think in residential care especially and people are rushing to emulate that. Likewise, parts of England have strong records. Torbay Council was also a poster child in recent years for promoting progressive, person-centred social care.

As for your question about the vote share in elections, it’s an interesting point. I think it would pretty much take us back to Attlee. I can’t see myself looking it up today, I’m too busy enjoying the cricket and popping in on here, but I might have a trawl at some point. If anyone else knows then feel free to share.

The caveat is that one falls into the same trap. There is no reason to complain if the Westminster Government doesn’t match up with the Scottish vote. The people of North-East Fife solidly returned a Liberal for however long but those voters had to lump it almost all the time. Likewise the Labour and Tory voters in North-East Fife didn’t see their candidate elected but sometimes got their government. That’s how it goes in a parliamentary democracy.

[marinello59]

Say they win the majority of seats but not the majority of the vote, is that enough? I would say no.

Of course it would be enough, that’s how Parliamentary democracy works. It would be down to the referundum to deliver a majority of the vote.

[southsider]

How many of us on here has ever voted for Boris ? Very few I would guess. Yet, he is about to get the keys to No. 10. He will be a disaster and Scotland will suffer, mark my words. Now I think the SNP in govt. here have been nothing short of useless. Perhaps a London free Labour Party on a independence ticket could be the answer.

[ronaldo7]

I’m genuinely sorry if that’s how it comes across, that makes it sound rather patronising.

I do think there is a bigger issue about certain posters being hounded however. The admins do a good job on here but I think we all have a responsibility to self-regulate and post in a reasonable manner. There is more than enough scope for debate without it becoming personal.

Do you think the post from 310 at the top of page 292 is fair and balanced, where he says,

"Balancing the independence diatribe and pretty grievance politics that many sprout on here".

Are you having a go about that, or is it that it sits well with you?

[ronaldo7]

In the main social policy is devolved as it generally falls under Health, Education and Justice remits. All in the control of the Scottish Government. In the case of welfare benefits that is being devolved as per the Scotland Act. It's just the SNP were not quite ready to take it on.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-to-apologise-as-devolved-benefits-delayed-to-2024/

Codswallop, and deflection.

Social policies. Come on, tory ones that benefit Scotland.

[Mibbes Aye]

Do you think the post from 310 at the top of page 292 is fair and balanced, where he says,

"Balancing the independence diatribe and pretty grievance politics that many sprout on here".

Are you having a go about that, or is it that it sits well with you?

Do you recall all your posts where you call him James, John or Janet?

Do you recall all the times where he makes his point, one which you and I probably don’t agree with, then half a dozen posters jump on him.

Its shabby and not really behaviour for grown adults, is it?

Even more silly that a Nat is pulling up a non-Unionist for calling out the treatment of someone I assume is a Unionist. What’s that all about? :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

Do you recall all your posts where you call him James, John or Janet?

Do you recall all the times where he makes his point, one which you and I probably don’t agree with, then half a dozen posters jump on him.

Its shabby and not really behaviour for grown adults, is it?

Even more silly that a Nat is pulling up a non-Unionist for calling out the treatment of someone I assume is a Unionist. What’s that all about? :greengrin

He's/she's changed their name that much, I just don't know who it is these days. Best to cover all bases.

So

The independence diatribe comment is fine by you, unionists. 😆.

I'm interested in this, "jumping on him", stuff. He makes comment, others follow. Isn't that what's supposed to happen.

[Callum_62]

The caveat is that one falls into the same trap. There is no reason to complain if the Westminster Government doesn’t match up with the Scottish vote. The people of North-East Fife solidly returned a Liberal for however long but those voters had to lump it almost all the time. Likewise the Labour and Tory voters in North-East Fife didn’t see their candidate elected but sometimes got their government. That’s how it goes in a parliamentary democracy.

That's where we will never agree

Regions are not countries


Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

He's/she's changed their name that much, I just don't know who it is these days. Best to cover all bases.

So

The independence diatribe comment is fine by you, unionists. 😆.

No proper answer then, but no surprise.

Im no unionist but I have a healthy distaste for nationalism.

You dont have any answers to that, do you?

[ronaldo7]

No proper answer then, but no surprise.

Im no unionist but I have a healthy distaste for nationalism.

You dont have any answers to that, do you?

It's called self determination. We covered it several years ago. You didn't like it then, and you've not changed.

Unionist to the core. 😆.

Independence diatribe?

[Mibbes Aye]

That's where we will never agree

Regions are not countries


Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I actually agree with you.

Lines in the sand are moot and constantly redefined. Scotland, as it currently gets constituted, was two different countries until a couple of centuries ago. I live in the Scottish Borders and most of the towns and villages around me exchanged hands between Scotland and England a dozen times. It is a simple twist of fate that dictates nationality, no more, no less.

Identity is a social construction, as is nationality. It’s essentially only passports that fix us to anything.

[Mibbes Aye]

It's called self determination. We covered it several years ago. You didn't like it then, and you've not changed.

Unionist to the core. 😆.

Independence diatribe?
:confused:

First line doesn’t tell me anything.

Second and third lines don’t really make sense. I think the second line is having a go at me but the third line I don’t understand at all.

[ronaldo7]

:confused:

First line doesn’t tell me anything.

Second and third lines don’t really make sense. I think the second line is having a go at me but the third line I don’t understand at all.

Have you forgotten already. The self determination we discussed several years back.😆

Still waiting on an answer about 310s post on page 292. I've only asked twice now.

[Mibbes Aye]

Have you forgotten already. The self determination we discussed several years back.😆

Still waiting on an answer about 310s post on page 292. I've only asked twice now.

I don’t see why you can accuse him of being unfair and unbalanced. Unless you aren’t open to being challenged in your thinking.

I am interested in you resurrecting some arguments you state are ‘several years back’. What’s that all about?

You have never made a credible and rational argument for why nationalism is appropriate, proportional or necessary in the 21st century. Ball‘s in your court.

[James310]

Have you forgotten already. The self determination we discussed several years back.😆

Still waiting on an answer about 310s post on page 292. I've only asked twice now.

I can just picture you at your laptop or phone getting angrier and angrier, face getting redder and redder. Take a rest for a few weeks.

[James310]

Of course it would be enough, that’s how Parliamentary democracy works. It would be down to the referundum to deliver a majority of the vote.

They have that now, say they get it again and still no S30, then what?

[Ozyhibby]

Almost certainly, you’re right.

I’m not ideological about this as I’m not a unionist and not a nationalist.

Hard not to think that cautious, small-c conservative voters will take the Brexit experience and view separation negatively as a consequence.

I’m not sure it is a vote swinger but will maybe entrench soft No’s.

Depends how brexit resolves itself. If there is a deal and trading relations with the Eu and Uk are maintained then it’s possible people will realise that there is nothing to be afraid of. In the last indyref campaign much was made of the trading relationship Scotland would have with rUk (border posts, immigration checks etc). In this campaign I would say that the public are a lot more informed now on the rules governing trade thanks to brexit. A lot of those scare stories won’t work and I don’t think anyone now doubts that the EU would welcome us with open arms. However brexit is settled, that will be the trading relationship Scotland has. However the Irish border is dealt with, that’s how Scotland’s border will work. It’s all to play for. While everyone seems to think a hard brexit is good for an independence campaign I actually think it needs a soft brexit or no brexit. People will not vote for any kind of border between England and Scotland. It’s all to play for still.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm reasonably sure this wouldn't have happened in an independent Scotland.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news/people/devastated-scottish-husband-told-wife-could-be-deported-by-the-end-of-the-week-1-4961880/amp

[Ozyhibby]

:agree:

Reminded of Brian Souter’s anti-gay ‘referendum’ which secured a massive majority because no one in their right mind voted against it.

Off topic but is he still donating millions to the SNP and does he still think homosexuality is a sin? :greengrin

He has not donated since Sturgeon became leader nor is he likely to. You regularly bring him up so I suspect you know that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

They have that now, say they get it again and still no S30, then what?

They don’t. The SNP lead with stopping the Tories in the Westminster election and of stopping Brexit in the Euro election. I can’t remember the wording but wasn’t their position at the last Holyrood election that there would be a referundum if there was a material change with no timescale mentioned. Without defining the change in advance, ( although we all know they meant Brexit),any claim to a mandate could be challenged.
A clear and unambiguous statement that a vote for the SNP ( or Greens etc) is a vote for a referundum would deliver a mandate that Westminster could not ignore.

[Callum_62]

They have that now, say they get it again and still no S30, then what?Pretty much proves how ridiculous the current set up is if the above comes to fruition

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

Pretty much proves how ridiculous the current set up is if the above comes to fruition

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

So what's next?

[Hibrandenburg]

No proper answer then, but no surprise.

Im no unionist but I have a healthy distaste for nationalism.

You dont have any answers to that, do you?

I'm pro independence but also have a healthy distaste for nationalism. When you constantly defend the Union and you throw around the term "Nats" at those who wish to see Scotland determine it's own affairs, then you shouldn't be surprised that folks think you're a unionists. Flying with the crows and all that. :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

They have that now, say they get it again and still no S30, then what?

If it comes to pass that the Westminster government say that there is no democratic path to independence and the people of Scotland have no right of self determination then that will indeed lead us into unchartered territory. Hopefully there will be legal remedies for this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I can just picture you at your laptop or phone getting angrier and angrier, face getting redder and redder. Take a rest for a few weeks.

After you complaining about getting bullied, I can't help but feel you reap what you sow.

[Mibbes Aye]

He has not donated since Sturgeon became leader nor is he likely to. You regularly bring him up so I suspect you know that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah, okay, so it was only the millions he gave until a few years recently and the massive change in policy on transport, that was nothing to do with his money, honest guv.

Why not refund the money that was donated by someone who has an anti-gay agenda and has spent much of their personal wealth on trying to prevent equal rights legislation. It’s an ethical thing, I don’t want his money influencing my supposed government.

[Callum_62]

So what's next?We will be unchartered territory.

I can't see WM just saying no continually as going down with with pretty much anyone in Scotland - union fans or not

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

After you complaining about getting bullied, I can't help but feel you reap what you sow.

You were one that had to delete a post about me as it was abusive, or was that someone else? Apologies if not you.

[Peevemor]

After you complaining about getting bullied, I can't help but feel you reap what you sow.

Given that he's on a Hibs fans' forum but diplays no interest whatsoever in Hibs, I don't know what he expects.

[Mibbes Aye]

I'm pro independence but also have a healthy distaste for nationalism. When you constantly defend the Union and you throw around the term "Nats" at those who wish to see Scotland determine it's own affairs, then you shouldn't be surprised that folks think you're a unionists. Flying with the crows and all that. :greengrin

Two things.

First, you have to get over ‘Nats’, I’m sure you are pragmatic enough that you don’t expect me to type ‘nationalist’ when ‘Nat’ will do. If nothing else it helps with my RSI :greengrin

Second, I have no love for the Union. If I challenge nationalist posts, it’s only because they are prevalent. If we had loads of unionists arguing the case then would no doubt challenge them.

[James310]

Given that he's on a Hibs fans' forum but diplays no interest whatsoever in Hibs, I don't know what he expects.

I would say I am as big a Hibs fan as you, just because I choose not to comment on the main board proves nothing.

[Peevemor]

I would say I am as big a Hibs fan as you, just because I choose not to comment on the main board proves nothing.

You also said that you'd put me on ignore.

What to believe?...

[weecounty hibby]

Ah, okay, so it was only the millions he gave until a few years recently and the massive change in policy on transport, that was nothing to do with his money, honest guv.

Why not refund the money that was donated by someone who has an anti-gay agenda and has spent much of their personal wealth on trying to prevent equal rights legislation. It’s an ethical thing, I don’t want his money influencing my supposed government.

How do you feel about the DUP having a huge say in the UK government? Soutar is one man with a bit of cash. The DUP actually have a say in UK policy and how the country is run. They are also a party who are against same sex marriage, are anti abortion amongst many many other beliefs that most of us wouldn't agree with. I would suggest that is worse.
I am no fan of Soutar other than is thinking on independence. I also think you are starting to use any tool to try to beat the SNP with at the moment. Using the term Nats all the time etc. You were better than that mostly so it is disappointing to see you do this as you usually do have a decent debate mostly.
Don't think it's just you as I have said similar to folk on the independence side of the debate as well.

[Fife-Hibee]

Good to see so much healthy debate going on in here without my input. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

I can just picture you at your laptop or phone getting angrier and angrier, face getting redder and redder. Take a rest for a few weeks.

I'm currently sitting by the pool at cabana bay resort hotel, getting redder, and redder. Florida is rather hot, this time of year. 😆

I'm not one for stropping off in the huff, and then coming back pretending to be someone else.

[The Modfather]

I would say I am as big a Hibs fan as you, just because I choose not to comment on the main board proves nothing.

You’re a member of the site solely to talk about independence, whether you’re a Hibs fan or not.

Can you see why it’s odd that you choose to exclusively post on the sub forum of a Hibs fans site and only post on one subject?

[Fife-Hibee]

Why not refund the money that was donated by someone who has an anti-gay agenda and has spent much of their personal wealth on trying to prevent equal rights legislation. It’s an ethical thing, I don’t want his money influencing my supposed government.

Because we live in a democracy and as much as you, I and i'm sure many many others don't like his views on these things. He's still entitled to have them.

[James310]

You also said that you'd put me on ignore.

What to believe?...

When I can back from my holiday I removed all the ignores. Maybe a mistake though.

[ronaldo7]

I don’t see why you can accuse him of being unfair and unbalanced. Unless you aren’t open to being challenged in your thinking.

I am interested in you resurrecting some arguments you state are ‘several years back’. What’s that all about?

You have never made a credible and rational argument for why nationalism is appropriate, proportional or necessary in the 21st century. Ball‘s in your court.

I'm not accusing him. I'm pulling you up for your wish to pull up anyone who decides to respond to 310, and your failure to call out his language which I've described to you, several times now.

You don't seem to want to answer the question though. No probs.

Self determination is where it's at, and you unionists can't or won't accept we have rights.

[James310]

You’re a member of the site solely to talk about independence, whether you’re a Hibs fan or not.

Can you see why it’s odd that you choose to exclusively post on the sub forum of a Hibs fans site and only post on one subject?

I am a Hibs fan so seems like a natural choice to post on the political board of a Hibs site? I enjoy reading all the other posts but as I get older and have kids now I find myself less interested in the day to day running of the club. I went home and away for years and have been abroad with Hibs but my interest has waned as I have got older and other priorities have come into my life.

It would not be much fun posting on some Pro Indy or Pro Union board would it.

I reckon I would beat most of you in a Hibs related quiz from 1985 onwards.

[ronaldo7]

They don’t. The SNP lead with stopping the Tories in the Westminster election and of stopping Brexit in the Euro election. I can’t remember the wording but wasn’t their position at the last Holyrood election that there would be a referundum if there was a material change with no timescale mentioned. Without defining the change in advance, ( although we all know they meant Brexit),any claim to a mandate could be challenged.
A clear and unambiguous statement that a vote for the SNP ( or Greens etc) is a vote for a referundum would deliver a mandate that Westminster could not ignore.

It specifically mentioned being taken out of the EU against our wishes.

[Ozyhibby]

Ah, okay, so it was only the millions he gave until a few years recently and the massive change in policy on transport, that was nothing to do with his money, honest guv.

Why not refund the money that was donated by someone who has an anti-gay agenda and has spent much of their personal wealth on trying to prevent equal rights legislation. It’s an ethical thing, I don’t want his money influencing my supposed government.

The change in transport policy stinks and you are correct to call it out. There is no evidence that his anti gay views had any affect on SNP policy. And there is no way he will donate to the snp now.
The funding of all political parties stinks although I think that the SNP are in a better place than Labour or the Tories. Have Labour paid back the money the received from Bernie Ecclestone? Or Lakshmi Mittal? Or the Tories paid back any of the money received from wealthy Russian oligarch in return for who knows what?
It’s good that you hold the SNP to a higher standard, I do too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

I'm reasonably sure this wouldn't have happened in an independent Scotland.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news/people/devastated-scottish-husband-told-wife-could-be-deported-by-the-end-of-the-week-1-4961880/amp

She's gone. Another victim of Tory policy.

[The Modfather]

I am a Hibs fan so seems like a natural choice to post on the political board of a Hibs site? I enjoy reading all the other posts but as I get older and have kids now I find myself less interested in the day to day running of the club. I went home and away for years and have been abroad with Hibs but my interest has waned as I have got older and other priorities have come into my life.

It would not be much fun posting on some Pro Indy or Pro Union board would it.

I reckon I would beat most of you in a Hibs related quiz from 1985 onwards.

But not a natural choice to have EVER commented on a signing or a Hibs game in your 1000 odd posts :confused:

[marinello59]

It specifically mentioned being taken out of the EU against our wishes.

Thanks for the correction. Was there a timescale mentioned?

[ronaldo7]

Thanks for the correction. Was there a timescale mentioned?

No. Leaving that one open was the right thing to do. Imo

[Moulin Yarns]

It would not have the support of the Electoral Commission so would be a pointless exercise.

I do wonder what Nicola Sturgeons next move is. She promised another referendum 3 years ago and kept the masses hanging on with more promises of it's coming, just not yet. She has been told by both Johnson and Hunt there will be no S30 so what's her next move?

I saw there was a motion proposed at the SNP conference by the untrustworthy Angus McNeil to just declare Independence anyway, but that was rejected.

Regards your first paragraph.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48772910

[marinello59]

No. Leaving that one open was the right thing to do. Imo

I’d agree it was then. I’d like to see one now though. It’s time to be bold, if we can’t deliver Independence on the back of Brexit and Boris as PM then we may have a very long wait to get it over the line.

[James310]

But not a natural choice to have EVER commented on a signing or a Hibs game in your 1000 odd posts :confused:

As I say I follow it but have little desire to comment on whether we should bring Efe back or if our League 2 signings are up to the job in the SPL. Happy to let others get all hot and bothered about it. If it makes you happy I can add to the McGeough thread as I think he is wasting his time down in Sunderland. I will do that now.

[Moulin Yarns]

Given that he's on a Hibs fans' forum but diplays no interest whatsoever in Hibs, I don't know what he expects.

Glory hunter 🤔😉

[Mibbes Aye]

I'm not accusing him. I'm pulling you up for your wish to pull up anyone who decides to respond to 310, and your failure to call out his language which I've described to you, several times now.

You don't seem to want to answer the question though. No probs.

Self determination is where it's at, and you unionists can't or won't accept we have rights.
I’m not a unionist.

Im sorry you don’t like James 310’s language but you are doing a **** job of challenging it if you are trying to find an argument with me, I am not on his side!

There is nothing wrong with his language other than it seems to rub up the separatists on here the wrong way. I have read his posts and repeatedly seen posters jumping on him in attack. Often personal, and petty, which you were particularly culpable for.

As for your last sentence, please don’t call me a unionist, I’m not. I might reject nationalism but that doesn’t make me a unionist.

And don’t say “we have rights”. You have no right to use the word “we”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.

[Fife-Hibee]

And don’t say “we have rights”. You have no right to use the word “we”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.

You have no right to use the word “nat”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.

(Psst.... We all know you'll still continue to use it anyway. :cb)

[James310]

Regards your first paragraph.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48772910

That's the question, not the actual referendum taking place. Different things.

Although I do have some objections to the same question being used as it has been proven Yes is a more positive option. It's needs further discussion.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm currently sitting by the pool at cabana bay resort hotel, getting redder, and redder. Florida is rather hot, this time of year. 😆

I'm not one for stropping off in the huff, and then coming back pretending to be someone else.

A lot cheaper to stay in Pitlochry and get lobstered 😁

[James310]

I have read his posts and repeatedly seen posters jumping on him in attack. Often personal, and petty, which you were particularly culpable for.

But he puts emojis after the personal and petty posts so it's just a laugh really.

[Ozyhibby]

Another unionist changes his mind.
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/15/theresa-may-dragging-uk-under-scotland-must-cut-rope?__twitter_impression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Modfather]

As I say I follow it but have little desire to comment on whether we should bring Efe back or if our League 2 signings are up to the job in the SPL. Happy to let others get all hot and bothered about it. If it makes you happy I can add to the McGeough thread as I think he is wasting his time down in Sunderland. I will do that now.

Did the Neil Lennon fallout or Hibs being sold for the first time in 28 years not pique your interest in the form of a football related post or were you to busy on the Holy Ground posting about independence?

You signed up to Hibs.net solely to post about Independence. Incidentally you might also be a Hibs fan, but that’s neither here nor there why you have an account on Hibs.net.

[RyeSloan]

In her broken English words--no country should tell you that you can't do something

I agree with the day to day life Analysis - you can forget Westminster exists

On the big decisions though- that's where Westminster is the judge jury and executioner and its where Scotlands voice is tiny

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Cool thanks.

Clearly though a lot of people don’t see Westminster as a country and not a country telling Scotland what to do.

Appreciate the reply tho so will leave it there [emoji736][emoji106]

[James310]

Did the Neil Lennon fallout or Hibs being sold for the first time in 28 years not pique your interest in the form of a football related post or were you to busy on the Holy Ground posting about independence?

You signed up to Hibs.net solely to post about Independence. Incidentally you might also be a Hibs fan, but that’s neither here nor there why you have an account on Hibs.net.

Neil Lennon leaving was no surprise, a blind man could have seen it coming. I am cautious about the new owner as I don't see what he gets out of it, and we have gone from a local owner with a clear connection to the club to someone who has no obvious connection and it looks like we are on similar budget player wise.

But that's nothing new is it, probably another 100 people feel the same as me. I just don't see the need to echo what lots of others think and repeat it again and again, while on the Holy Ground I am sure you would agree I have a different opinion to most? So I could post how I think Joe Newell is a poor man's Ivan Sproule but I bet you at least 20 others have already done that.

[Hibrandenburg]

You were one that had to delete a post about me as it was abusive, or was that someone else? Apologies if not you.

Don't think so. Can't recall ever having been told to delete a post, signature yes :greengrin post no. Apology accepted.

[The Modfather]

Neil Lennon leaving was no surprise, a blind man could have seen it coming. I am cautious about the new owner as I don't see what he gets out of it, and we have gone from a local owner with a clear connection to the club to someone who has no obvious connection and it looks like we are on similar budget player wise.

But that's nothing new is it, probably another 100 people feel the same as me. I just don't see the need to echo what lots of others think and repeat it again and again, while on the Holy Ground I am sure you would agree I have a different opinion to most? So I could post how I think Joe Newell is a poor man's Ivan Sproule but I bet you at least 20 others have already done that.

As I said before, you signed up to Hibs.net solely to post about Independence. Incidentally you might also be a Hibs fan, but that’s neither here nor there why you have an account on Hibs.net.

Others have called you out on it as well. I’ll leave it there let you get back to posting about Independence.

[James310]

As I said before, you signed up to Hibs.net solely to post about Independence. Incidentally you might also be a Hibs fan, but that’s neither here nor there why you have an account on Hibs.net.

Others have called you out on it as well. I’ll leave it there let you get back to posting about Independence.

Ok, but I bet you if I was pro Indy nobody would say a word.

[Mibbes Aye]

You have no right to use the word “nat”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.

(Psst.... We all know you'll still continue to use it anyway. :cb)

You will have to explain your logic there. Why am i not entitled to use the term ‘Nat’?

[James310]

Don't think so. Can't recall ever having been told to delete a post, signature yes :greengrin post no. Apology accepted.

The poster deleted it on their own accord, but only after I had replied so there was still evidence. Apologies then if not you.

[Moulin Yarns]

Ok, but I bet you if I was pro Indy nobody would say a word.

I think that's not the case. I'm sure there is a poster who is the mirror image of you that you may know, and it's been noticed.

[Callum_62]

Cool thanks.

Clearly though a lot of people don’t see Westminster as a country and not a country telling Scotland what to do.

Appreciate the reply tho so will leave it there [emoji736][emoji106]I certainly see WM as hugely English dominated (naturally due to population) but it reduces our influence in big decisions to essentially nill

I doubt I'd be the only one



Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

Two things.

First, you have to get over ‘Nats’, I’m sure you are pragmatic enough that you don’t expect me to type ‘nationalist’ when ‘Nat’ will do. If nothing else it helps with my RSI :greengrin

Second, I have no love for the Union. If I challenge nationalist posts, it’s only because they are prevalent. If we had loads of unionists arguing the case then would no doubt challenge them.

Apologies, I'll mistake you for a Yoon in future due to my pseudo dyslexia:greengrin

[James310]

I think that's not the case. I'm sure there is a poster who is the mirror image of you that you may know, and it's been noticed.

It's unfair to compare me to R7, I never use emojis.

[Fife-Hibee]

You will have to explain your logic there. Why am i not entitled to use the term ‘Nat’?

Because most people who support an independent Scotland don't consider themselves a nationalist, or a nazi, or a nat.... etc.

You say you're not a unionist, despite your reluctance to back an independent Scotland. Why can't it work the same in reverse?

[ronaldo7]

I’d agree it was then. I’d like to see one now though. It’s time to be bold, if we can’t deliver Independence on the back of Brexit and Boris as PM then we may have a very long wait to get it over the line.

I'd agree. If we'd had one in 2018 though, and lost, we'd have missed the goal scoring opportunity that will be before us soon enough.

Boris and Brexit breaks up the union.

[ronaldo7]

I’m not a unionist.

Im sorry you don’t like James 310’s language but you are doing a **** job of challenging it if you are trying to find an argument with me, I am not on his side!

There is nothing wrong with his language other than it seems to rub up the separatists on here the wrong way. I have read his posts and repeatedly seen posters jumping on him in attack. Often personal, and petty, which you were particularly culpable for.

As for your last sentence, please don’t call me a unionist, I’m not. I might reject nationalism but that doesn’t make me a unionist.

And don’t say “we have rights”. You have no right to use the word “we”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.

Ok I'll not call you a unionist. I'll shorten it to yoon. What's good for the goose and all that. Don't get too upset about it though.

There it is again in your post, "jumping on him".

And as for telling people what to say and what not to say, you're at it again.

We have rights you know. 😆😆😆

[ronaldo7]

It's unfair to compare me to R7, I never use emojis.

I could never be compared to you. I don't support hostile environments or the rape clause.

🚽

[Mibbes Aye]

The poster deleted it on their own accord, but only after I had replied so there was still evidence. Apologies then if not you.


Ok I'll not call you a unionist. I'll shorten it to yoon. What's good for the goose and all that. Don't get too upset about it though.

There it is again in your post, "jumping on him".

And as for telling people what to say and what not to say, you're at it again.
G your tune
We have rights you know. ������

Don’t call me a unionist or a yoon, That would just be lies.

And lay off the personal attacks on James 310, or anyone else who doesnt sing your tune.

But don’t get too upset about it :wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

It's unfair to compare me to R7, I never use emojis.

That's your interpretation of my post, not mine 😁😉

[ronaldo7]

Don’t call me a unionist or a yoon, That would just be lies.

And lay off the personal attacks on James 310, or anyone else who doesnt sing your tune.

But don’t get too upset about it :wink:

I've certainly not personally attacked Mr or Mrs 310, his/her political beliefs, yes.

Who gives you the authority to tell people what to do on here? Asking for some friends.

I think you should withdraw that.

[Just Alf]

I’m not a unionist.

Im sorry you don’t like James 310’s language but you are doing a **** job of challenging it if you are trying to find an argument with me, I am not on his side!

There is nothing wrong with his language other than it seems to rub up the separatists on here the wrong way. I have read his posts and repeatedly seen posters jumping on him in attack. Often personal, and petty, which you were particularly culpable for.

As for your last sentence, please don’t call me a unionist, I’m not. I might reject nationalism but that doesn’t make me a unionist.

And don’t say “we have rights”. You have no right to use the word “we”. It is not your word to use because you don’t speak for me or the majority. Get over it.Re your last paragraph, a few posts back you said that as Gordon Brown (and others) were in high office, Scotland had a larger voice. Feels contradictory that earlier post and what you're saying now? They're Scottish but NOT speaking for Scotland..... assuming I've picked you up correctly in the past.





Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[allmodcons]

No proper answer then, but no surprise.

Im no unionist but I have a healthy distaste for nationalism.

You dont have any answers to that, do you?

You voted for the Union in the 2014 referendum and spend a fair amount of time on here arguing for the preservation of the Union.

Just what is a "healthy distaste for nationalism"? I have a healthy distaste for nationalism when it comes in the guise of fascism or racism but, as I've told you before, have no qualms calling myself a Scottish Nationalist because it's a movement so far removed from white supremacy or race hate that it's embarrassing for you, or anybody else, to draw a comparison.

To me (politically) you are dreaming of some form of internationalism where no borders exist but do not appear to accept that a nation has the right to self determination and to happily co-exist with other like minded inclusive peaceful states.

As the term suggests, Internationalism can exist with borders. Your equating Nationalism to extremism and violence does you no favours.

[Ozyhibby]

If Scottish nationalism was anything like other types of nationalism then much would have been made of the fact that exit polls showed that a majority of people born in Scotland voted yes in 2014. Thankfully Scottish nationalism does not care about such things which is why it has my full support.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

Is Scottish nationalism being an escape from British nationalism really still nationalism? :dunno:

[Tornadoes70]

Is Scottish nationalism being an escape from British nationalism really still nationalism? :dunno:

Nationalism no matter how one attempts to dress it up remains extremely narrow minded and of hitler esque despotism.

Yes snp ism is indeed extremely nationalistic.

[Fife-Hibee]

Nationalism no matter how one attempts to dress it up remains extremely narrow minded and of hitler esque despotism.

Yes snp ism is indeed extremely nationalistic.

That's a pretty narrow minded view you have there.

[Tornadoes70]

That's a pretty narrow minded view you have there.

Nationalism and its despotism tends to lend itself to fair criticism.

Your'e a narrow small minded nationalist and should expect fair criticism from moderates albeit you don't see yourself for what others see you as Fife.

But however many folk are and you're not unlikeable ya wee rogue.

[Fife-Hibee]

Nationalism and its despotism tends to lend itself to fair criticism.

Your'e a narrow small minded nationalist and should expect fair criticism from moderates albeit you don't see yourself for what others see you as Fife.

So are the "moderates" the ones actively endorsing right-wing xenophobic British nationalism in order to avoid Scottish nationalism?

[Tornadoes70]

So are the "moderates" the ones actively endorsing right-wing xenophobic British nationalism in order to avoid Scottish nationalism?

I've no appetite to be drawn into which type nationalism is worse than the other.

Hitler was a small time Austrian/Bavarian area nationalist who caused millions of deaths from naked nationalism. Its all a disease.

[Ozyhibby]

I've no appetite to be drawn into which type nationalism is worse than the other.

Hitler was a small time Austrian/Bavarian area nationalist who caused millions of deaths from naked nationalism. Its all a disease.

And socialism? How many millions of deaths?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tornadoes70]

And socialism? How many millions of deaths?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The NHS is very likely the greatest gift anyone never mind Labour gave as a socialist policy among many others.

Nationalism is and always will be a disease that causes extreme poverty, death and destruction no matter how its dressed.

[Fife-Hibee]

I've no appetite to be drawn into which type nationalism is worse than the other.

Of course you don't. Because that would mean facing up to the fact that it's a choice between 2 different nationalisms and you don't want to admit that you secretly prefer the right-wing anti-immigration British nationalism, over an open, inclusive, independent Scotland.


The NHS is very likely the greatest gift anyone never mind Labour gave as a socialist policy among many others.

I agree with you. We better get out of the UK before it's flogged off to US markets under the British nationalist vision though.

[Tornadoes70]

I could never be compared to you. I don't support hostile environments or the rape clause.

🚽

You are undoubtedly a nationalist though. Not good is it?

Nationalists no matter their cause are in my opinion closed mind 'if you're not with us you're against us' types.

Thoroughly nasty element in my experience.

[Tornadoes70]

Of course you don't. Because that would mean facing up to the fact that it's a choice between 2 different nationalisms and you don't want to admit that you secretly prefer the right-wing anti-immigration British nationalism, over an open, inclusive, independent Scotland.



I agree with you. We better get out of the UK before it's flogged off to US markets under the British nationalist vision though.

Nationalism of whatever colour is abhorrent to me fife. Comeplete negatory turn offs and nasty bunch of people no matter their country of origin. It spreads like a virus and devours all thats good.

[Fife-Hibee]

Nationalism of whatever colour is abhorrent to me fife. Comeplete negatory turn offs and nasty bunch of people no matter their country of origin. It spreads like a virus and devours all thats good.

What's good for Scotland now remaining in the UK? What's left to be "devoured" if we leave?

[Tornadoes70]

What's good for Scotland now remaining in the UK? What's left to be "devoured" if we leave?

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

[Bangkok Hibby]

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

I was just coming round to understanding your viewpoint then you come out with that crap. His username is irrelevant to any discussion on here. Have a look at the membership. Loads of us have a place name associated.

[Tornadoes70]

I was just coming round to understanding your viewpoint then you come out with that crap. His username is irrelevant to any discussion on here. Have a look at the membership. Loads of us have a place name associated.

It was written in the context of Fife being an uber nationalist. I was simply inferring to the possibility that Fife may or may not have gotten out of Fife very much and could well be a reason for his naked nationalism.

:greengrin

[Fife-Hibee]

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

Why don't you make a positive case for Scotland remaining in the UK? Oh wait, you can't. Because to remain in the UK would be to accept the British Nationalist agenda. Something you don't feel comfortable addressing.

I've lived almost everywhere between Fife and Edinburgh. Not sure what that has to do with anything? :dunno: Although I really wish you were in a tornado. :bye:

[Tornadoes70]

Why don't you make a positive case for Scotland remaining in the UK? Oh wait, you can't. Because to remain in the UK would be to accept the British Nationalist agenda. Something you don't feel comfortable addressing.

I've lived almost everywhere between Fife and Edinburgh. Not sure what that has to do with anything? :dunno: Although I really wish you were in a tornado. :bye:

By all means pretend scottish nationalism isn't really nationalism.

I take it you haven't traveled around the UK then?

[The Harp Awakes]

The NHS is very likely the greatest gift anyone never mind Labour gave as a socialist policy among many others.

Nationalism is and always will be a disease that causes extreme poverty, death and destruction no matter how its dressed.

I don't think you're convincing anyone, other than yourself maybe. That is if you're daft enough to believe that nonsense.

[ronaldo7]

You are undoubtedly a nationalist though. Not good is it?

Nationalists no matter their cause are in my opinion closed mind 'if you're not with us you're against us' types.

Thoroughly nasty element in my experience.

I'd say with over 120,000 members in the SNP, and about 20,000 members in Scottish labour, there are more left leaning socialists in the SNP, than in Scottish labour.

Funny how things change eh.

Scot nat socialist v Brit nat socialists I know which one you choose

[Bristolhibby]

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

“Nasty Disease”

Provocative much?!?

J

[WeeRussell]

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

Would you prefer to stay within the UK as you're a UK nationalist? Or how are you going to dress that nasty disease up?

[Smartie]

I'm pretty sure Fife (the region, not the poster) was narrowly in favour of remaining in the Union in 2014.

That was the most mind-boggling result, in my opinion.

[allmodcons]

Nationalism no matter how one attempts to dress it up remains extremely narrow minded and of hitler esque despotism.

Yes snp ism is indeed extremely nationalistic.


Nationalism and its despotism tends to lend itself to fair criticism.

Your'e a narrow small minded nationalist and should expect fair criticism from moderates albeit you don't see yourself for what others see you as Fife.

But however many folk are and you're not unlikeable ya wee rogue.


I've no appetite to be drawn into which type nationalism is worse than the other.

Hitler was a small time Austrian/Bavarian area nationalist who caused millions of deaths from naked nationalism. Its all a disease.


Where does Indian Nationalism and Gandhi sit in your warped little world?

Presumably he too is "hitler esque" ?

[lord bunberry]

“Nasty Disease”

Provocative much?!?

J

I know, how does this guy get away with calling people nazis? His posts are becoming more and more offensive. He used to have comedy value, but that’s gone now.

[allmodcons]

I know, how does this guy get away with calling people nazis? His posts are becoming more and more offensive. He used to have comedy value, but that’s gone now.

None of his posts are funny.

Would we tolerate his comments if they were racially motivated rather than politically motivated?

[lord bunberry]

None of his posts are funny.

Would we tolerate his comments if they were racially motivated rather than politically motivated?

Agreed. I object strongly to being linked to hitler just because I support Scottish independence.

[James310]

Agreed. I object strongly to being linked to hitler just because I support Scottish independence.

I strongly object to being linked to orange men with bowler hats and flutes singing banned songs because I support the Union.

[Ozyhibby]

I strongly object to being linked to orange men with bowler hats and flutes singing banned songs because I support the Union.

You both are unionists? You just have to live with that. If it’s any consolation I’m not comfortable being linked with grown men who paint their face with Saltires and wave lion rampants at Indy marches but I accept they are part of the movement the same way the orange order are part of the unionist movement.
The Hitler chat though is that of an idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[allmodcons]

I strongly object to being linked to orange men with bowler hats and flutes singing banned songs because I support the Union.

Do you think the comments made by Tornadoes70 are acceptable?

[Mibbes Aye]

You voted for the Union in the 2014 referendum and spend a fair amount of time on here arguing for the preservation of the Union.

Just what is a "healthy distaste for nationalism"? I have a healthy distaste for nationalism when it comes in the guise of fascism or racism but, as I've told you before, have no qualms calling myself a Scottish Nationalist because it's a movement so far removed from white supremacy or race hate that it's embarrassing for you, or anybody else, to draw a comparison.

To me (politically) you are dreaming of some form of internationalism where no borders exist but do not appear to accept that a nation has the right to self determination and to happily co-exist with other like minded inclusive peaceful states.

As the term suggests, Internationalism can exist with borders. Your equating Nationalism to extremism and violence does you no favours.

I don’t think I’ve ever equated nationalism with white supremacy. I am quite happy to state that both ideas are rooted to some extent in ‘othering’ somebody and exceptionalism. That is what it is, doesn’t make your average SNP voter a foaming-mouthed Nazi, but I don’t think anyone can dispute there is a politics of differentiation going on.

As for self-determination, we have it. It’s simply that you don’t like the framework it exists in. 55% were happy enough though.

[Ozyhibby]

I don’t think I’ve ever equated nationalism with white supremacy. I am quite happy to state that both ideas are rooted to some extent in ‘othering’ somebody and exceptionalism. That is what it is, doesn’t make your average SNP voter a foaming-mouthed Nazi, but I don’t think anyone can dispute there is a politics of differentiation going on.

As for self-determination, we have it. It’s simply that you don’t like the framework it exists in. 55% were happy enough though.

We have self determination now but it’s possible that it is about to withdrawn.
I don’t see the SNP othering anyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Re your last paragraph, a few posts back you said that as Gordon Brown (and others) were in high office, Scotland had a larger voice. Feels contradictory that earlier post and what you're saying now? They're Scottish but NOT speaking for Scotland..... assuming I've picked you up correctly in the past.





Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I’m not sure of your point, probably me being thick.

The earlier post was a response to someone saying Scotland had no say in decision-making, I think. I cited the fact that under New Labour, Scottish MPs had a massively disproportionate influence in Government, including even the Home Office at one stage - English police and prisons run by a West of Scotland MP!

The later point is about the constant attempts by Nats to change the narrative and pretend they are talking for the electorate by using the language of grievance.

They don’t, they speak for a resentful minority. But they do like to speak!

[allmodcons]

I don’t think I’ve ever equated nationalism with white supremacy. I am quite happy to state that both ideas are rooted to some extent in ‘othering’ somebody and exceptionalism. That is what it is, doesn’t make your average SNP voter a foaming-mouthed Nazi, but I don’t think anyone can dispute there is a politics of differentiation going on.

As for self-determination, we have it. It’s simply that you don’t like the framework it exists in. 55% were happy enough though.

Politics of differentiation is what all politics involves.

As a democrat I was happy to accept the vote in 2014 but 5 years on don't think I should simply stop believing in what I think is best for Scotland.

You still haven't told me what it is you want.

[allmodcons]

I’m not sure of your point, probably me being thick.

The earlier post was a response to someone saying Scotland had no say in decision-making, I think. I cited the fact that under New Labour, Scottish MPs had a massively disproportionate influence in Government, including even the Home Office at one stage - English police and prisons run by a West of Scotland MP!

The later point is about the constant attempts by Nats to change the narrative and pretend they are talking for the electorate by using the language of grievance.

They don’t, they speak for a resentful minority. But they do like to speak!

You talk about policing the forum ourselves and then post this. I can assure you there is nothing resentful about my politics.

[Mibbes Aye]

You talk about policing the forum ourselves and then post this. I can assure you there is nothing resentful about my politics.

Those who use the language of grievance are resentful and I think that’s fair comment. We both know what this board has been like, especially in the aftermath of the 2014 result. No voters were branded as stupid, senile or cowardly by those who weren’t able to respond to the outcome in a dignified manner.

[Smartie]

I don't find very much about any of this offensive.

If you have ever derived any enjoyment out of chucking a barbed comment out there knowing it is going to ruffle a few feathers, you better be prepared to take a bit of it back.

You can call me pretty much anything you like, and when someone ventures into Nazi territory (along with the nastier equivalents chucked at our yoonchums) it tends to undermine the attacker's own credibility rather than actually enhancing it.

Childish insults don't really add much to the debate but I do think that people who take to any form of social media should do so in possession of a thick enough skin to be able to deal with what is inevitably going to come their way.

The mods on here are excellent at keeping it acceptable. The offensive and the racist is snuffed out quickly enough.

[allmodcons]

Those who use the language of grievance are resentful and I think that’s fair comment. We both know what this board has been like, especially in the aftermath of the 2014 result. No voters were branded as stupid, senile or cowardly by those who weren’t able to respond to the outcome in a dignified manner.

I genuinely believe that the most resentful 'group' pre and post the 2014 referendum were those I'd call "angry no voters".
Your default is always to blame Yes voters for everything citing Nationalism as the cause for all ills https://www.hibs.net/image/gif;base64,R0lGODlhDwAPANQAAAAAAOLeAPn0AL /v8DAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAACH/C05FVFNDQVBFMi4wAwEAAAAh QQBMgAfACwAAAAADwAPAAAFROAnikBZjuhXDoPgnijAuvQ7ynU uAGRb0r dqrUDAI0vnCAQoDGPumgw6gwic8YAL2vqMnkqF3P81N6i39T0C 06puqkQACH5BAEyAB8ALAMABAAHAAkAAAUW4CcIX/kBJVoGq m cCyOYwrcaqDrIQAh/ntUaGlzIGFuaW1hdGVkIEdJRiBmaWxlIHdhcyBjb25zdHJ1Y3R lZCB1c2luZyBVbGVhZCBHSUYgQW5pbWF0b3IsIHZpc2l0IHVzI GF0IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cudWxlYWQuY29tIHRvIGZpbmQgb3V0IG1 vcmUuAVVTU1BDTVQAOw==

PS - You still haven't told me what it is you want.

[marinello59]

Agreed. I object strongly to being linked to hitler just because I support Scottish independence.


I strongly object to being linked to orange men with bowler hats and flutes singing banned songs because I support the Union.

Its crap patter from both sides and I find it thoroughly depressing. There are extremists on both sides but the way so many on social media try and portray all who oppose them as blood and soil Nationalists or Orange Order style Unionists only increases the feeling that the country is becoming more and more divided.
It's even more depressing to see it happening here. Making a link between the SNP and Hitler just exposes the ignorance of those doing it. As does trying to portray anything other than a tiny west coast minority of No voters as bowler hat wearing Orangeman. Even the lazy use of terms such as Nat, Cyber-Nat, Brit-Nat or Yoon is destructive, it only gets peoples backs up needlessly and does nothing to advance the arguments on either side. Thankfully most of the posters on here keep it respectful. The ones who don't are probably best ignored rather than wasting any time getting upset over.

[Fife-Hibee]

You both are unionists? You just have to live with that. If it’s any consolation I’m not comfortable being linked with grown men who paint their face with Saltires and wave lion rampants at Indy marches but I accept they are part of the movement the same way the orange order are part of the unionist movement.
The Hitler chat though is that of an idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Although i'm not a fan of the marches with the face painting and the flags. I don't believe they're doing it to harm, or to cause harm to anyone. They're just people having a good time and mixing with others from many walks of life who believe in the same goal. There's just no comparison to the Orange Order.

[Fife-Hibee]

As for self-determination, we have it. It’s simply that you don’t like the framework it exists in. 55% were happy enough though.

Raising money, being given a fraction of it back as pocket money, then having the rest spent in your name by somebody else, who can also run debts up in your name and claim you're running a massive deficit is not "self determination". It's a system designed to make us feel weak, worthless and too feart to change anything.

[lord bunberry]

Its crap patter from both sides and I find it thoroughly depressing. There are extremists on both sides but the way so many on social media try and portray all who oppose them as blood and soil Nationalists or Orange Order style Unionists only increases the feeling that the country is becoming more and more divided.
It's even more depressing to see it happening here. Making a link between the SNP and Hitler just exposes the ignorance of those doing it. As does trying to portray anything other than a tiny west coast minority of No voters as bowler hat wearing Orangeman. Even the lazy use of terms such as Nat, Cyber-Nat, Brit-Nat or Yoon is destructive, it only gets peoples backs up needlessly and does nothing to advance the arguments on either side. Thankfully most of the posters on here keep it respectful. The ones who don't are probably best ignored rather than wasting any time getting upset over.
I agree it’s crap patter and it adds nothing to the debate. The fact is though that those in favour of the status quo side of the debate have to share a platform with the orange order. That doesn’t mean all people in favour of the union are the same as these clowns, but to suggest that those in favour of independence are akin to a man responsible for the most barbaric crimes in human history is utterly reprehensible.

[Fife-Hibee]

I agree it’s crap patter and it adds nothing to the debate. The fact is though that those in favour of the status quo side of the debate have to share a platform with the orange order. That doesn’t mean all people in favour of the union are the same as these clowns, but to suggest that those in favour of independence are akin to a man responsible for the most barbaric crimes in human history is utterly reprehensible.

:agree:

Lest we forget the unionist MPs, MSPs and councilors who have actively engaged with the Orange Order and even attended meetings with them. Not to mention giving them public funds (tax payers money) to help them fund events.

Fact of the matter is, at least some of the so called representatives for Unionism in Scotland have deep connections with the Orange Order as well as other masonic groups.

[Smartie]

When you have a binary yes/ no option and it splits the country roughly halfway down the middle, you have to accept that you are going to have a number of twats on your side, no matter what side that is.

We're getting into the ultimate straw man territory when we are starting to argue about which side has the bigger twats, and this stuff REALLY doesn't add anything to the debate.

Does anyone on here genuinely NOT think that the Orange Order are dicks?

Right, let's move on then.

[marinello59]

When you have a binary yes/ no option and it splits the country roughly halfway down the middle, you have to accept that you are going to have a number of twats on your side, no matter what side that is.

We're getting into the ultimate straw man territory when we are starting to argue about which side has the bigger twats, and this stuff REALLY doesn't add anything to the debate.

Does anyone on here genuinely NOT think that the Orange Order are dicks?

Right, let's move on then.

I agree with all of that, particularly the bit in bold.

[Mr Grieves]

Its crap patter from both sides and I find it thoroughly depressing. There are extremists on both sides but the way so many on social media try and portray all who oppose them as blood and soil Nationalists or Orange Order style Unionists only increases the feeling that the country is becoming more and more divided.
It's even more depressing to see it happening here. Making a link between the SNP and Hitler just exposes the ignorance of those doing it. As does trying to portray anything other than a tiny west coast minority of No voters as bowler hat wearing Orangeman. Even the lazy use of terms such as Nat, Cyber-Nat, Brit-Nat or Yoon is destructive, it only gets peoples backs up needlessly and does nothing to advance the arguments on either side. Thankfully most of the posters on here keep it respectful. The ones who don't are probably best ignored rather than wasting any time getting upset over.

:agree:

[JeMeSouviens]

When you have a binary yes/ no option and it splits the country roughly halfway down the middle, you have to accept that you are going to have a number of twats on your side, no matter what side that is.

We're getting into the ultimate straw man territory when we are starting to argue about which side has the bigger twats, and this stuff REALLY doesn't add anything to the debate.

Does anyone on here genuinely NOT think that the Orange Order are dicks?

Right, let's move on then.

To be fair and a bit off-topic, all sides in Scottish politics are guilty of ignoring Scotland’s sectarianism problem. The SNP consistently fails to take on the orange order because they’re scared to rock the boat and the Tories are guilty of casting a nod and a wink and the odd watp tweet to the bigots for perceived electoral advantage.

Not our* finest hour.


* collectively including all in Scotland.

[Fife-Hibee]

To be fair and a bit off-topic, all sides in Scottish politics are guilty of ignoring Scotland’s sectarianism problem. The SNP consistently fails to take on the orange order because they’re scared to rock the boat and the Tories are guilty of casting a nod and a wink and the odd watp tweet to the bigots for perceived electoral advantage.

Not our* finest hour.


* collectively including all in Scotland.

What can the SNP do to "take on" the Orange Order? If they attempt to place an all out ban on them in public spaces, they'll claim political censorship by a totalitarian regime with 99% of the British media offering themselves up as an echo chamber to spread their narrative far and wide.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I know, how does this guy get away with calling people nazis? His posts are becoming more and more offensive. He used to have comedy value, but that’s gone now.

I thought it was just me that was wondering when he'd be asked to rein it in a bit. Certainly back with a vengeance.

[marinello59]

To be fair and a bit off-topic, all sides in Scottish politics are guilty of ignoring Scotland’s sectarianism problem. The SNP consistently fails to take on the orange order because they’re scared to rock the boat and the Tories are guilty of casting a nod and a wink and the odd watp tweet to the bigots for perceived electoral advantage.

Not our* finest hour.


* collectively including all in Scotland.

Aye. Depressing isn’t it?

[Mibbes Aye]

To be fair and a bit off-topic, all sides in Scottish politics are guilty of ignoring Scotland’s sectarianism problem. The SNP consistently fails to take on the orange order because they’re scared to rock the boat and the Tories are guilty of casting a nod and a wink and the odd watp tweet to the bigots for perceived electoral advantage.

Not our* finest hour.


* collectively including all in Scotland.

Yes.

I have seen sectarianism described as Scotland’s shame.

It is the conspiracy of silence and refusal to challenge it which is the really shameful thing.

[Mibbes Aye]

I genuinely believe that the most resentful 'group' pre and post the 2014 referendum were those I'd call "angry no voters".
Your default is always to blame Yes voters for everything citing Nationalism as the cause for all ills https://www.hibs.net/image/gif;base64,R0lGODlhDwAPANQAAAAAAOLeAPn0AL /v8DAwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAACH/C05FVFNDQVBFMi4wAwEAAAAh QQBMgAfACwAAAAADwAPAAAFROAnikBZjuhXDoPgnijAuvQ7ynU uAGRb0r dqrUDAI0vnCAQoDGPumgw6gwic8YAL2vqMnkqF3P81N6i39T0C 06puqkQACH5BAEyAB8ALAMABAAHAAkAAAUW4CcIX/kBJVoGq m cCyOYwrcaqDrIQAh/ntUaGlzIGFuaW1hdGVkIEdJRiBmaWxlIHdhcyBjb25zdHJ1Y3R lZCB1c2luZyBVbGVhZCBHSUYgQW5pbWF0b3IsIHZpc2l0IHVzI GF0IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cudWxlYWQuY29tIHRvIGZpbmQgb3V0IG1 vcmUuAVVTU1BDTVQAOw==

PS - You still haven't told me what it is you want.

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

[marinello59]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

See if anybody asks you this again, please just tell them to **** off. I don’t have the attention span. :greengrin

I actually agree with a lot of this, probably because I see Independence for Scotland as a chance to deliver a real devolution of powers down to a local level.

[Ozyhibby]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

I’m not a million miles away from your thinking on levels. i.e. Europe for overall trade framework, Human rights issues etc Everything else local.
Where I differ is I think Scotland is the perfect size for local but crucially Scotland connects people more.
You say the border is a construct and you may be right but it is real even after 300+ years of union. I once saw a diagram that showed the traffic volumes of phone calls made in the uk on a daily basis and it was amazing how the number of calls across the border was a lot lower than for similar distances within England (I know I’ve not explained that well). Even living in Edinburgh, I know of lots people who travel to Aberdeen for work but almost none who travel to Newcastle for work yet they are very similar distances. Small business based Edinburgh almost always expand towards Aberdeen before they expand towards the North East despite the much bigger population (always puzzled me that).
Scotland may not have always been a country and may not be one in the future but right now it does exist and whether pro union or pro Indy most of the people who live here identify with it and that is important in any political set up.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

Aww shucks, thanks! I love you too [emoji12]

Good post though and credit for giving it a go [emoji736]

Not sure I have the time or wherewithal to post anything as cohesive...I’m still wandering about wondering why people believe governments and politicians can somehow fix all their ills, control economies, decide on top down education systems and run industries etc when the many many years of evidence from governments of all colours shows that they are rarely capable of even basic competence at such things...so my starting point might be a world without big government and central banks fixing the price of phoney money and work back from there! Might be a bit of a technocratic polemic though as well as taking me a while [emoji23][emoji23]

That said I like the localism thing but do wonder if there is enough capable and driven people at a local level to make sensible and informed choices. Most people I know that could do that are too busy earning a crust. The calibre of local politicians (Edinburgh council being a frustrating frequent example) suggests that may already be the case...

[NAE NOOKIE]

Nationalism no matter how one attempts to dress it up remains extremely narrow minded and of hitler esque despotism.

Yes snp ism is indeed extremely nationalistic.


Nationalism of whatever colour is abhorrent to me fife. Comeplete negatory turn offs and nasty bunch of people no matter their country of origin. It spreads like a virus and devours all thats good.

Every country that exists today or has ever existed is the result of nationalism in one form or another …. so instead of looking down on us mere mortals from your lofty perch can you tell us all what your alternative is to the current state of affairs in global terms?

I'm keen to hear it so that I can stop being a Nazi … thanks again.

[Fife-Hibee]

Every country that exists today or has ever existed is the result of nationalism in one form or another …. so instead of looking down on us mere mortals from your lofty perch can you tell us all what your alternative is to the current state of affairs in global terms?

I'm keen to hear it so that I can stop being a Nazi … thanks again.

I think they're just at the wind up in all honesty. Possibly a parody of a pre-referendum labourite from 2014.

[James310]

Changing the subject. (Not from the excellent posts recently, more the nazi/orange man ones)

The definition of independent is:

'free from outside control; not subject to another's authority'

So how does that tally with EU membership, how can you be independent and in the EU at the same time. Clearly does not meet with the definition of being independent.

[Hibrandenburg]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

I agree with a lot of that. Where we seem to differ is how we go about realising it. Westminster will never allow the devolution of power to the extent we both would like to see, the whole system of our Constitutional Monarchy is designed to reward the centralisation of power. England will never agree to change the status quo, therefore the only solution for Scotland is independence.

[Fife-Hibee]

Changing the subject. (Not from the excellent posts recently, more the nazi/orange man ones)

The definition of independent is:

'free from outside control; not subject to another's authority'

So how does that tally with EU membership, how can you be independent and in the EU at the same time. Clearly does not meet with the definition of being independent.

It's independence from Westminster. It's also the freedom to leave the EU if we ever chose to do so. Not on Westminsters terms but on our own terms.

You could argue that there really isn't such a thing as an independent country, as all countries around the world are dependent on other countries in some way or another.

But what else would you call it instead?

[Mibbes Aye]

See if anybody asks you this again, please just tell them to **** off. I don’t have the attention span. :greengrin

I actually agree with a lot of this, probably because I see Independence for Scotland as a chance to deliver a real devolution of powers down to a local level.

Utterly exhausted from typing that post. If any ****** calls me a unionist again I may do time.

There is an interesting debate about power and the locality it is devolved to, that isn’t party political.

Might start a thread about it and hope it can create a good debate,

[Hibbyradge]

Might start a thread about it and hope it can create a good debate,

:faf:

Ya deluded bam! :wink:

[Mibbes Aye]

I’m not a million miles away from your thinking on levels. i.e. Europe for overall trade framework, Human rights issues etc Everything else local.
Where I differ is I think Scotland is the perfect size for local but crucially Scotland connects people more.
You say the border is a construct and you may be right but it is real even after 300+ years of union. I once saw a diagram that showed the traffic volumes of phone calls made in the uk on a daily basis and it was amazing how the number of calls across the border was a lot lower than for similar distances within England (I know I’ve not explained that well). Even living in Edinburgh, I know of lots people who travel to Aberdeen for work but almost none who travel to Newcastle for work yet they are very similar distances. Small business based Edinburgh almost always expand towards Aberdeen before they expand towards the North East despite the much bigger population (always puzzled me that).
Scotland may not have always been a country and may not be one in the future but right now it does exist and whether pro union or pro Indy most of the people who live here identify with it and that is important in any political set up.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cheers C, I thought the points about the overarching framework might chime -there has to be some regulatory structure after all.

Likewise I take your points about the commerce, good examples. Though living in the Borders I know that trades and businesses stretch south into Northumberland and vice versa, rather than reaching into Edinburgh and the Lothians.

[Mibbes Aye]

:faf:

Ya deluded bam! :wink:

You are a card :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Aww shucks, thanks! I love you too [emoji12]

Good post though and credit for giving it a go [emoji736]

Not sure I have the time or wherewithal to post anything as cohesive...I’m still wandering about wondering why people believe governments and politicians can somehow fix all their ills, control economies, decide on top down education systems and run industries etc when the many many years of evidence from governments of all colours shows that they are rarely capable of even basic competence at such things...so my starting point might be a world without big government and central banks fixing the price of phoney money and work back from there! Might be a bit of a technocratic polemic though as well as taking me a while [emoji23][emoji23]

That said I like the localism thing but do wonder if there is enough capable and driven people at a local level to make sensible and informed choices. Most people I know that could do that are too busy earning a crust. The calibre of local politicians (Edinburgh council being a frustrating frequent example) suggests that may already be the case...

Think you have flagged up two or three potential threads. The obvious one is where the state or government (not always the same thing) draws its line in intervention. I reckon that would be a really interesting debate and I’m happy to admit I could change my opinion if faced with a decent argument.

I think you have suggested another in the relationship between government and central banks. I suspect you are suspicious?

And localism - it is really a trust thing IMO. You are right in your criticisms, though I think folk need to judge council officers as much as they judge councillors.

[Hibbyradge]

You are a card :greengrin

I tried starting a thread hoping for a "good debate".

I ended up ignoring it because it went the way most Holy Ground threads go these days.

Good luck, but I still think you're deluded if you hold much hope of a sensible, respectful discussion. :greengrin

I did notice, however, that your lengthy, but very interesting and well thought out reply on another thread didn't attract the same vandal(s) so maybe there's hope.

[Mibbes Aye]

I agree with a lot of that. Where we seem to differ is how we go about realising it. Westminster will never allow the devolution of power to the extent we both would like to see, the whole system of our Constitutional Monarchy is designed to reward the centralisation of power. England will never agree to change the status quo, therefore the only solution for Scotland is independence.

Thanks for the reply. I agree, the position I put forward isn’t one that’s likely to succeed in current climes.

I don’t actually believe that my approach is likely very soon. I think it’s right but it needs a shift in opinion on a pretty big scale.

[Mibbes Aye]

I tried starting a thread hoping for a "good debate".

I ended up ignoring it because it went the way most Holy Ground threads go these days.

Good luck, but I still think you're deluded if you hold much hope of a sensible, respectful discussion. :greengrin

I did notice, however, that your lengthy, but well thought out, reply on another thread didn't attract the same vandal(s) so maybe there's hope.

Yeah, I saw that thread.

You were right to do so, whatever the outcome. Kudos for trying.

There is always hope. I always get this wrong but there is a quote by John Stuart Mill or Edmund Burke or somebody. The first time I heard it it was attributed to Dr Martin Luther King Jnr and it said that when the day of atonement came, we would not be tried for the sins of the wicked but for the silence of the good.

I think it was a message put out long before Doctor King but it is a good message none the less.

Its a hard task and a hard ask but we need to keep posting reasonable and fair posts, otherwise this social world becomes a car crash.

[allmodcons]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

Someone got busy while I was asleep! Top post MA but I think Hibbyradge is correct when he says you are deluded :greengrin

Taking decisions at a local level is not something I disagree with but I still think there needs to be a 'hierarchy' and framework for this to work. Europe is too remote to be that 'hierarchy' and I don't need to tell you that I think Westminster is broken.

I get really pissed off when posters equate Nationalism to flag waving. That's not what it's about for me. Like it or not borders exist but that doesn't mean that people either side of a border can't co-exist as good neighbours, Norway and Sweden are a good working example.

To take it back to a starting point, in everyday life most of us care for, love and identify with our family. This does not mean that we hate our neighbours or see them as a threat. Nationalism for me is a similar concept, I think it's about creating a nation state (i know you don't like that term) where the individuals within it's boundaries genuinely care about their fellow citizens but don't see 'outsiders' as a threat. Nationalism shouldn't be viewed as something that breeds hatred or contempt of others. For me, it runs contrary to that viewpoint and can act as force for good where national identity creates a society where citizens value other's welfare as well as their own.

Nationalism gets a raw deal from academics and scholars like you :wink:. It's not all about flags and borders and, in many cases, acts as a force for good not evil.

[makaveli1875]

Someone got busy while I was asleep! Top post MA but I think Hibbyradge is correct when he says you are deluded :greengrin

Taking decisions at a local level is not something I disagree with but I still think there needs to be a 'hierarchy' and framework for this to work. Europe is too remote to be that 'hierarchy' and I don't need to tell you that I think Westminster is broken.

I get really pissed off when posters equate Nationalism to flag waving. That's not what it's about for me. Like it or not borders exist but that doesn't mean that people either side of a border can't co-exist as good neighbours, Norway and Sweden are a good working example.

To take it back to a starting point, in everyday life most of us care for, love and identify with our family. This does not mean that we hate our neighbours or see them as a threat. Nationalism for me is a similar concept, I think it's about creating a nation state (i know you don't like that term) where the individuals within it's boundaries genuinely care about their fellow citizens but don't see 'outsiders' as a threat. Nationalism shouldn't be viewed as something that breeds hatred or contempt of others. For me, it runs contrary to that viewpoint and can act as force for good where national identity creates a society where citizens value other's welfare as well as their own.

Nationalism gets a raw deal from academics and scholars like you :wink:. It's not all about flags and borders and, in many cases, acts as a force for good not evil.

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

[allmodcons]

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

Nationalism the root cause of all ills. Thanks for taking the time to 'read' my post.

Politics divides opinion.

PS - Your view of Scotland doesn't chime with mine in the least. If you always look to the extremes you'll always find issues. It's like saying that everybody in the Labour Party is anti-semitic.

[makaveli1875]

Nationalism the root cause of all ills.


Glad we can agree on something.

[lord bunberry]

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

Complete pish.

[Fife-Hibee]

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

Damn it. How dare we have disagreements, debate and arguments across the UK.

At least you understand what the UK is supposed to be about. A totalitarian regime where we all agree with one another.

[Just Alf]

Amazing how quickly a thread that jumps up big style in quality can suddenly be brought back down to the proverbial gutter by a single opinionated biased post that clearly was never intended to extend any debate but stifle it.


Sigh...



Thanks anyway MA, food for thought and broadly where I am.
My tweak to that would be to have a Scotland wide forum (parliament) and similar for grouped regions across the rest of the UK, then a vastly reduced UK parliament somewhere other than Westminster to pull together any truly UK wide (or maybe international) policies and decisions.

PS. I know I seem to be adding a layer or 2 but I'm envisaging a drastic reduction in people in the upper layers with direction coming 'up' the way, in a way the top layer should be serving the lower levels not directing as now.

In a way its why I lean towards independence for Scotland, its closer to your ideal than the current position and in theory at least is doable, I'd hope the rUK would then follow on. I just don't think we'd get to your ideal situation in one jump :-(

Hopefully that makes sense and isn't too contradictory!


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin


Missed this yesterday - great post (for a Yoon at any rate :wink::offski:)

I agree with the general thrust as well. However, to me, pragmatism and reality dictate that the next step in that direction can only come by either Scottish independence or an extremely unlikely wholesale reform of the UK. So the choice is a no brainer.

Long term, a loosely federal Europe with maximal subsidiarity gets my vote.

[Hibbyradge]

Damn it. How dare we have disagreements, debate and arguments across the UK.

At least you understand what the UK is supposed to be about. A totalitarian regime where we all agree with one another.

:faf:

[Mibbes Aye]

Someone got busy while I was asleep! Top post MA but I think Hibbyradge is correct when he says you are deluded :greengrin

Taking decisions at a local level is not something I disagree with but I still think there needs to be a 'hierarchy' and framework for this to work. Europe is too remote to be that 'hierarchy' and I don't need to tell you that I think Westminster is broken.

I get really pissed off when posters equate Nationalism to flag waving. That's not what it's about for me. Like it or not borders exist but that doesn't mean that people either side of a border can't co-exist as good neighbours, Norway and Sweden are a good working example.

To take it back to a starting point, in everyday life most of us care for, love and identify with our family. This does not mean that we hate our neighbours or see them as a threat. Nationalism for me is a similar concept, I think it's about creating a nation state (i know you don't like that term) where the individuals within it's boundaries genuinely care about their fellow citizens but don't see 'outsiders' as a threat. Nationalism shouldn't be viewed as something that breeds hatred or contempt of others. For me, it runs contrary to that viewpoint and can act as force for good where national identity creates a society where citizens value other's welfare as well as their own.

Nationalism gets a raw deal from academics and scholars like you :wink:. It's not all about flags and borders and, in many cases, acts as a force for good not evil.

Cheers for that. I don’t have a problem with the term ‘nation state’, I suppose my thinking is that it was an understandable and valid and to-be-expected manifestation over the last few centuries but I feel that the world has evolved and changed and we need to be thinking beyond concepts like that.

I appreciate the point you are making about a sort of civic nationalism and it is laudable. The issue for me is that I don’t see the need to link it to a constructed national identity. That puts me at risk of falling into a trap where I’m defining something like the classical definition of liberal democracy as the be all and end all, which doesn’t really sit right. I’m not confident that I am not doing what I challenge others about.

I will try and go easier on the flags and borders stuff though, with the emphasis on ‘try’ :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Missed this yesterday - great post (for a Yoon at any rate :wink::offski:)

I agree with the general thrust as well. However, to me, pragmatism and reality dictate that the next step in that direction can only come by either Scottish independence or an extremely unlikely wholesale reform of the UK. So the choice is a no brainer.

Long term, a loosely federal Europe with maximal subsidiarity gets my vote.

Cheers JMS, and I accept I’m saddled with being called a Yoon now despite just calling for the abolition of Westminster :greengrin

Can’t disagree with your second paragraph, the destination I described would take a huge amount of work to get to, but as it goes your third paragraph is where we want to be, at least for now, and I guess we just need to keep our eyes on the prize.

[makaveli1875]

Damn it. How dare we have disagreements, debate and arguments across the UK.

At least you understand what the UK is supposed to be about. A totalitarian regime where we all agree with one another.

I wholeheartedly agree 👍

[Hibrandenburg]

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

Scottish unionism has divided Scotland, British nationalism has divided the UK.

[ronaldo7]

I hope I’m better than default but if that’s your view then fair enough.

As for your final question I was trying to avoid answering it to be honest! I have been posting on here for a dozen or so years and I think I have posted a variant of an answer to your question three or four times and it’s always been a long, long post! In fact I’m fairly confident you asked me this before :greengrin. Anyway, here goes the long post.

First response is I’m not actually sure. I think too many times on here people just post dogmatically and treat it as a fight, no quarter given, 100% all the way depending on their stance. Our government and governance is a big thing and I’m happy to consider all and other viewpoints and accept my thinking might not be fully robust.

I’m quite happy to admit that I’m not absolutely certain but I certainly have a sense. First and foremost, I’m not ideological. I’m not a nationalist, Scottish or British, not a unionist.

Scotland and the United Kingdom are social constructions to me and very recent ones. Their existence is a mere fraction of the time the land they sit on has existed. The U.K. is only a few hundred years old, Scotland even subsequently was essentially two nations for another several decades, a century even. I live in the Borders and some of the towns and villages around me changed hands a dozen times. The notion of a border is utterly fluid and an accident of fate.

I would argue for pragmatism, work out what it is you want and work your way back from there to discern and decide what your government and governance look like.

That makes it not about the colour of a flag flag or some social construction of identity, it makes it about what you need to meet the needs of a populace.

This is where it gets interesting. It moves away from tribalism and enters into a realm of pure politics and the question of what government is meant to do or deliver. I have a huge respect for Rye Sloan as a poster as I know he gets this but I also know we are several degrees apart in what we think the role of the state should be and how far it extends. I think, stand to be corrected, that we both assume we aren’t getting rid of constitutional democracy and an economic model that sits anywhere between market socialism and moderated capitalism.

So given I don’t care about the colour of the flag on the civic buildings, what works?

I would start from the bottom-up. Local authorities aren’t representative enough. The SNP administration have actually done good work with the Community Empowerment Act and have supported the work of community planning partnerships. This needs to be extended and things like participatory budgeting need to be rolled out more widely, so that very local communities are more empowered to decide about what they need. These local communities are smaller than council wards, we are talking natural areas of 500-1500 people.

That obviously reduces the role of the current local authorities. No reason not to disband them to be honest, and create a tier of regional government. So, for example, the current council areas that are Edinburgh, West Lothian, Midlothian and East Lothian. Possibly Fife, or part of it, given it is in large part a commuter corridor to Edinburgh and the same with Scottish Borders. The upper part of Fife could link in with Perth and Dundee, potentially the Borders could link with Dumfries and Galloway, and even Cumbria and Northumberland.

That size of axis, South-East Scotland, is a large enough scale to make and shape local economic policies and also the right size for public sector bodies. It is telling that local authorities and health boards already work in regional collaboratives. It is simply more efficient. There are a number of statutory duties that sit with local authorities but no reason why they couldn’t be swept up into regions.

Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.

These regional administrations still need to operate within a broader legislative and social policy framework I think. To my mind the EU offers that. We don’t actually need a Westminster, if our EU partners can accept similarly giving up their Bundestags etc.

Still lots of questions to answer - what does our criminal and civil law system look like? English and Scots practice is based on common law whereas much of Europe has a codified system. As I say, I don’t have all the answers.

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.

I said it wouldn’t be a short post, please don’t ask me again for another few years :greengrin

Good post, and as an avid Scottish socialist I can see much which I agree on.:shocked:

Although, I'd abolish the Westminster parliament before the Scottish one.:wink:

[Mibbes Aye]

Good post, and as an avid Scottish socialist I can see much which I agree on.:shocked:

Although, I'd abolish the Westminster parliament before the Scottish one.:wink:

I am just away to lie down in a darkened room for a bit. When I get back up I am going to check I read this right. Then I will probably go for another lie down :greengrin

I don’t particularly mind what goes first. If we build from the bottom up then Holyrood is first in line and it is actually probably easier to dissolve that before creating some sort of regionalist, federalist ‘thing’ in Europe.

But, acknowledging your post and other posts, Holyrood has produced some very decent and progressive pieces of legislation in each of its administrations. I guess the trick is how to retain that, if we did have a jump from a SE Scotland to a Brussels.

I don’t pretend to have an answer, or at least I could think of one but no guarantee I am right. There is a fundamental issue in my proposal about how certain elements of domestic policy are handled, legislated and navigated and it all starts to get rather complicated, though not unresolveable.

Having said that, wanting to do it is the biggest thing. We, as a species, are incredibly adept at finding a way to do things or a workaround if we want to.

[Jack]

If you think Scottish Nationalism is so good as per Scotland being ripped out of the UK why don't you make a positive case for said nationalism instead of as per the norm for nationalists aggressively seeking to petty argue with those like myself who would much prefer to remain within the UK?

Nationalism is a nasty disease no matter how its dressed up Fife. Why do you feel the need to tell everyone you're from Fife? I understand folk feel a need to cling on to such small minded matters but really? Have you traveled around the UK?

What a stupid thing to say. There's no suggestion from anyone Scotland would be ripped out the Union. Unless of course Scotland declared UDI.

At the end of the day it would probably be one of the coziest divorces there's ever been - assuming Westminster don't act the dafty ... although admittedly that's touch and go as you can never tell what the mother of all parliamentary muck ups will do next as it lurches from crisis to crisis!I

Do they have a show on the Fringe?

[NAE NOOKIE]

Scottish nationalism has divided Scotland , British Nationalism has divided Britain . Its set off arguments all over the country , both are very much about flag waving and neither forms of nationalism have done any good for Scotland , England , Norn Ireland or Britain

I asked this question to another poster, so I'll ask you the same one. Absolutely every country that has ever existed or currently exists since some cave man somewhere grunted the words 'we' …. 'us' …. or 'border' has done so as the result of some form of nationalism. which either created the country in the first place or has enabled that country to maintain its existence.

So its unarguable that the 'division' of nationalism is as natural an occurrence in geopolitical terms, even human terms, as the basic need to survive is. Given that fact, what is your alternative? And I mean a realistic one, not some airy fairy utopian science fiction vision of a united Earth .. that's what we all want.

Unless you have a coherent and non fanciful plan or theory as to what replaces nationalism or nationalist thinking now, not 10 centuries from now if ever, your and other posters contribution to this discussion of 'all nationalism is bad' is just a load of meaningless hot air.

So I don't want to hear a load of pish about there being no such thing as civic benevolent forms of nationalism because its all bad … that's simply not true and certainly isn't refuted by arguments based on a utopia which will never exist.

[ronaldo7]

I am just away to lie down in a darkened room for a bit. When I get back up I am going to check I read this right. Then I will probably go for another lie down :greengrin

I don’t particularly mind what goes first. If we build from the bottom up then Holyrood is first in line and it is actually probably easier to dissolve that before creating some sort of regionalist, federalist ‘thing’ in Europe.

But, acknowledging your post and other posts, Holyrood has produced some very decent and progressive pieces of legislation in each of its administrations. I guess the trick is how to retain that, if we did have a jump from a SE Scotland to a Brussels.

I don’t pretend to have an answer, or at least I could think of one but no guarantee I am right. There is a fundamental issue in my proposal about how certain elements of domestic policy are handled, legislated and navigated and it all starts to get rather complicated, though not unresolveable.

Having said that, wanting to do it is the biggest thing. We, as a species, are incredibly adept at finding a way to do things or a workaround if we want to.

I knew I shouldn't have left the laptop open. :na na:

Now, where's that flag. :greengrin:saltireflag:saltireflag

[lapsedhibee]

I’m still wandering about wondering why people believe governments and politicians can somehow fix all their ills, control economies, decide on top down education systems and run industries etc when the many many years of evidence from governments of all colours shows that they are rarely capable of even basic competence at such things

I definitely want top down education systems. The bottom-up democratisation of the English language as experienced on social media has already gone too far by half.



Creating regional authorities like a South East Scotland, a Grampian, a Greater Glasgow and Clyde, would essentially make the Scottish Parliament redundant. So get shot of it.
….

But there you go, no Saltires and no Union Jacks, just a stab at an answer that might be the most efficient and effective.


Wouldn't one of the first things these new bodies do be adopt a badge/flag/logo on the side of their buses/etc to distinguish themselves from the others?

[James310]

What a stupid thing to say. There's no suggestion from anyone Scotland would be ripped out the Union. Unless of course Scotland declared UDI.

At the end of the day it would probably be one of the coziest divorces there's ever been - assuming Westminster don't act the dafty ... although admittedly that's touch and go as you can never tell what the mother of all parliamentary muck ups will do next as it lurches from crisis to crisis!I

Do they have a show on the Fringe?

You do know the Brexiteers said exactly the same in regards to the divorce from the EU?

"Getting out of the EU will be quick and easy, the UK holds all the cards"

"The free trade agreement we do with the EU should be one of the easiest in human history"

"There is no plan for no deal because we will get a great deal"

"The one thing that which will not change is our ability to trade freely with Europe"

Why do you believe a separation of a deeper and more significant Union will be easier? How long do you think it would take?

[makaveli1875]

I asked this question to another poster, so I'll ask you the same one. Absolutely every country that has ever existed or currently exists since some cave man somewhere grunted the words 'we' …. 'us' …. or 'border' has done so as the result of some form of nationalism. which either created the country in the first place or has enabled that country to maintain its existence.

So its unarguable that the 'division' of nationalism is as natural an occurrence in geopolitical terms, even human terms, as the basic need to survive is. Given that fact, what is your alternative? And I mean a realistic one, not some airy fairy utopian science fiction vision of a united Earth .. that's what we all want.

Unless you have a coherent and non fanciful plan or theory as to what replaces nationalism or nationalist thinking now, not 10 centuries from now if ever, your and other posters contribution to this discussion of 'all nationalism is bad' is just a load of meaningless hot air.

So I don't want to hear a load of pish about there being no such thing as civic benevolent forms of nationalism because its all bad … that's simply not true and certainly isn't refuted by arguments based on a utopia which will never exist.

Your question is a bit long winded for me to figure out what your actually asking , could you ask it again but straight to the point ? its been a long day

[Fife-Hibee]

Your question is a bit long winded for me to figure out what your actually asking , could you ask it again but straight to the point ? its been a long day

How can all strands of nationalism be bad, when the shape of the world as you see it today with all of the difference countries, were all formed by some nationalistic agenda?

[makaveli1875]

How can all strands of nationalism be bad when the shape of the world as you see it today with all of the difference countries were all formed by some nationalistic agenda?

Thanks Fife that makes more sense , well thats a tricky question to answer . Take the earliest nation states like Egypt , which came about by the union of 2 smaller nations , known as upper and lower Egypt . You'll see that even the earliest nation builders were infact unionists not nationalists :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

Thanks Fife that makes more sense , well thats a tricky question to answer . Take the earliest nation states like Egypt , which came about by the union of 2 smaller nations , known as upper and lower Egypt . You'll see that even the earliest nation builders were infact unionists not nationalists :greengrin

Yet earlier than the United Egypt there were no nations, until some nationalists created them, enabling them to later unite.

Ergo nationalists came first 😉

[RyeSloan]

I definitely want top down education systems. The bottom-up democratisation of the English language as experienced on social media has already gone too far by half.


Ahh language and education are two different things.

But I’m not so sure about the education bit. The one size fits all comprehensive system just seems rather unwieldy in my eyes and continues to fail a large part of the population it was designed to help.

Anyway a big digression from the topic of the thread so I’ll discontinue my musings and mumblings on this subject right here [emoji12]

[Fife-Hibee]

Thanks Fife that makes more sense , well thats a tricky question to answer . Take the earliest nation states like Egypt , which came about by the union of 2 smaller nations , known as upper and lower Egypt . You'll see that even the earliest nation builders were infact unionists not nationalists :greengrin

Aye, but how did those "earliest nation states" come about? :hmmm:

[Jack]

You do know the Brexiteers said exactly the same in regards to the divorce from the EU?

"Getting out of the EU will be quick and easy, the UK holds all the cards"

"The free trade agreement we do with the EU should be one of the easiest in human history"

"There is no plan for no deal because we will get a great deal"

"The one thing that which will not change is our ability to trade freely with Europe"

Why do you believe a separation of a deeper and more significant Union will be easier? How long do you think it would take?
Brexit is an almost unique situation.

A country gaining independence from another has lots of precedents, international law and conventions. It's not the same at all.

[James310]

Brexit is an almost unique situation.

A country gaining independence from another has lots of precedents, international law and conventions. It's not the same at all.

Fair enough, although I can't think of any recent examples where the conditions would be similar to Scotland leaving the UK. I think it would be a pretty unique situation as well. I am sure talk of a hard separation would soon crop up.

What we do know is that what was in the White Paper was a pile of nonsense suggesting a new infrastructure could be set up in 18 months and at a cost that was less than it cost the Scottish Government to put in an IT system for farmers. I am sure you will agree.

[makaveli1875]

Aye, but how did those "earliest nation states" come about? :hmmm:

I don't know I wasn't alive 5000 years ago

[NAE NOOKIE]

Your question is a bit long winded for me to figure out what your actually asking , could you ask it again but straight to the point ? its been a long day

Ha ha … Nah, you knew fine what I was asking mate, you just didn't know how to form a coherent answer as can be seen further down the page :aok: Still, fair play to you for giving it a go, unlike the other guy I asked the same question.

[Mibbes Aye]

Wouldn't one of the first things these new bodies do be adopt a badge/flag/logo on the side of their buses/etc to distinguish themselves from the others?

Why?

[Fife-Hibee]

I don't know I wasn't alive 5000 years ago

How convenient. :greengrin It must have all just fallen into place without any kind of nationalistic agenda.

[The Modfather]

Fair enough, although I can't think of any recent examples where the conditions would be similar to Scotland leaving the UK. I think it would be a pretty unique situation as well. I am sure talk of a hard separation would soon crop up.

What we do know is that what was in the White Paper was a pile of nonsense suggesting a new infrastructure could be set up in 18 months and at a cost that was less than it cost the Scottish Government to put in an IT system for farmers. I am sure you will agree.

The white paper was just the SNP’s proposal. We’d get to choose what kind of independent country we wanted to be based on the papers by all of the parties.

[James310]

The white paper was just the SNP’s proposal. We’d get to choose what kind of independent country we wanted to be based on the papers by all of the parties.

That was not what was sold in 2014. We even had Independence Day set as 24th March 2016.

Surely we should know what we are getting before we vote? Again a lesson from Brexit. Or maybe as Nicola Sturgeon is so keen on referendums we have a further referendum when the details of the separation deal are known and we vote on that. Leave on the deal negotiated or remain. She was happy to follow that process for Brexit.

[Fife-Hibee]

That was not what was sold in 2014. We even had Independence Day set as 24th March 2016.

Surely we should know what we are getting before we vote? Again a lesson from Brexit. Or maybe as Nicola Sturgeon is so keen on referendums we have a further referendum when the details of the separation deal are known and we vote on that. Leave on the deal negotiated or remain. She was happy to follow that process for Brexit.

That's because only the SNP were selling a vision in 2014. There was nothing to stop other parties coming forward with their own proposals. But they didn't want to be seen as actively endorsing independence. So they will have kept their own plans under wraps.

[James310]

That's because only the SNP were selling a vision in 2014. There was nothing to stop other parties coming forward with their own proposals. But they didn't want to be seen as actively endorsing independence. So they will have kept their own plans under wraps.

So what would change if we have another referendum next year? Again another 'vision' that proves to be fantasy?

The other parties will not be issuing anything prior to the referendum.

[The Modfather]

That was not what was sold in 2014. We even had Independence Day set as 24th March 2016.

Surely we should know what we are getting before we vote? Again a lesson from Brexit. Or maybe as Nicola Sturgeon is so keen on referendums we have a further referendum when the details of the separation deal are known and we vote on that. Leave on the deal negotiated or remain. She was happy to follow that process for Brexit.

The SNP didn’t do a good enough job of distinguishing the difference between independence and the white paper IMO. They would be wise to say that a second referendum is for independence and here is how we propose a newly independent Scotland should look but it will be the people who decide how we shape our country.

[Fife-Hibee]

So what would change if we have another referendum next year? Again another 'vision' that proves to be fantasy?

The other parties will not be issuing anything prior to the referendum.

Perhaps the realization that we don't have to follow through with the SNPs vision if we don't want to? Independence gives us the power to do that. All of those anti-independence parties would then have no choice but to present their own visions, despite keeping quiet about them before hand.

[Callum_62]

The gbp is going well.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/16/brexit-weakens-pound-worst-performing-major-currency-world-10352619/?ito=article.desktop.share.top.twitter

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

The gbp is going well.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/16/brexit-weakens-pound-worst-performing-major-currency-world-10352619/?ito=article.desktop.share.top.twitter

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I have a feeling "but if we leave, we'll be forced to join the Euro" won't be an overly used statement in the indy2 campaign. :wink:

[lord bunberry]

So what would change if we have another referendum next year? Again another 'vision' that proves to be fantasy?

The other parties will not be issuing anything prior to the referendum.
If the other parties don’t issue anything you can’t complain about the SNP having the only vision for an independent Scotland. Post independence there will be an election, the winners of that election will be the party that sets out the best plan for the country.

[Sylar]

It's going to be interesting to see what happens to the Scottish economy in the next few months as the new round of tariffs are introduced by the EU and USA on some of our key exports.

Whisky is about to get an absolute hammering, with tariffs rising to 100% in the US, and from 25% to 50% in the EU. And sadly, that's whether or not we're an Independent nation as part of the EU, or a continued part of the Union.

Obviously we have a diverse economy that's not reliant upon our whisky sector, but it's a substantial part of our national income.

[JeMeSouviens]

It's going to be interesting to see what happens to the Scottish economy in the next few months as the new round of tariffs are introduced by the EU and USA on some of our key exports.

Whisky is about to get an absolute hammering, with tariffs rising to 100% in the US, and from 25% to 50% in the EU. And sadly, that's whether or not we're an Independent nation as part of the EU, or a continued part of the Union.

Obviously we have a diverse economy that's not reliant upon our whisky sector, but it's a substantial part of our national income.

Do you mean after no deal Brexit or something else? There are no import/export tariffs in the EU customs union.

[Sylar]

Do you mean after no deal Brexit or something else? There are no import/export tariffs in the EU customs union.

After Brexit occurs JMS :agree: - it's why I gave the timeframe of the next few months.

Was chatting to someone from the Scotch Whisky Association this morning and they're really quite worried about it.

I don't post this with any "Indy Good" or "Indy Bad" narrative attached to it either by the way - it's a bad news story for Scotland regardless of our situation.

Edit: sorry, the specific figures I quoted (I didn't notice them in bold in your reply). Those are the new tarrifs the EU are imposing on imports from the US on bourbon/whiskey - given the close connections and supply chains (barrels, bottles, technology etc), it will also have a significant impact on our involvement with US bourbon manufacturers.

[JeMeSouviens]

After Brexit occurs JMS :agree: - it's why I gave the timeframe of the next few months.

Was chatting to someone from the Scotch Whisky Association this morning and they're really quite worried about it.

I don't post this with any "Indy Good" or "Indy Bad" narrative attached to it either by the way - it's a bad news story for Scotland regardless of our situation.

Edit: sorry, the specific figures I quoted (I didn't notice them in bold in your reply). Those are the new tarrifs the EU are imposing on imports from the US on bourbon/whiskey - given the close connections and supply chains (barrels, bottles, technology etc), it will also have a significant impact on our involvement with US bourbon manufacturers.

Got you. That is indeed worrying. The US situation seems to be an ongoing dispute related to Airbus/Boeing. To compound that with a no deal Brexit is just lunacy. :confused:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DVmRYwfX4AEUMZ1.jpg

[danhibees1875]

After Brexit occurs JMS :agree: - it's why I gave the timeframe of the next few months.

Was chatting to someone from the Scotch Whisky Association this morning and they're really quite worried about it.

I don't post this with any "Indy Good" or "Indy Bad" narrative attached to it either by the way - it's a bad news story for Scotland regardless of our situation.

Edit: sorry, the specific figures I quoted (I didn't notice them in bold in your reply). Those are the new tarrifs the EU are imposing on imports from the US on bourbon/whiskey - given the close connections and supply chains (barrels, bottles, technology etc), it will also have a significant impact on our involvement with US bourbon manufacturers.

Sorry, a little confused... You said "that's whether or not we're an independent nation as part of the EU"? Surely an independent Scotland within the EU wouldn't have tarrifs to trade within the EU? :confused:

[Moulin Yarns]

Thanks Fife that makes more sense , well thats a tricky question to answer . Take the earliest nation states like Egypt , which came about by the union of 2 smaller nations , known as upper and lower Egypt . You'll see that even the earliest nation builders were infact unionists not nationalists :greengrin


Aye, but how did those "earliest nation states" come about? :hmmm:


I don't know I wasn't alive 5000 years ago


How convenient. :greengrin It must have all just fallen into place without any kind of nationalistic agenda.

OR....


Yet earlier than the United Egypt there were no nations, until some nationalists created them, enabling them to later unite.

Ergo nationalists came first 😉

[Sylar]

Sorry, a little confused... You said "that's whether or not we're an independent nation as part of the EU"? Surely an independent Scotland within the EU wouldn't have tarrifs to trade within the EU? :confused:

But as a member of the EU, we would be impacted by the tarrifs the US are about to impose on imports from the EU bloc. As a continued part of the UK post-Brexit, the picture may improve depending on the trade deal between the UK and USA.

[JeMeSouviens]

But as a member of the EU, we would be impacted by the tarrifs the US are about to impose on imports from the EU bloc. As a continued part of the UK post-Brexit, the picture may improve depending on the trade deal between the UK and USA.

A UK-US trade deal is likely to be several years away if it happens at all (and if Brexit happens at all).

An iScotland-in-EU-post-no-deal-Brexit whisky industry would potentially be hit by tariffs into rUK as well. Although the Brexiters have talked about not imposing tariffs, so who knows?

[danhibees1875]

But as a member of the EU, we would be impacted by the tarrifs the US are about to impose on imports from the EU bloc. As a continued part of the UK post-Brexit, the picture may improve depending on the trade deal between the UK and USA.

I think I misread your post. :aok:

[Fife-Hibee]

It's cricket, football and the monarchy that "unites" the union. :agree:

https://twitter.com/lumi_1984/status/1152208385468784640

[Future17]

It's cricket, football and the monarchy that "unites" the union. :agree:

https://twitter.com/lumi_1984/status/1152208385468784640

He said "country" not "union".

[Fife-Hibee]

He said "country" not "union".

But the UK is one big country.

[xyz23jc]

But the UK is one big country.

Aye, United! :greengrin

Barrie, we'll jist keep aw yon worthless n' pesky whisky n oil tae ourselves, nae need tae wurrie aboot so ca'd £1 billion black holes n the likes!

I'm in! :agree: :greengrin

[Fife-Hibee]

Aye, United! :greengrin

Barrie, we'll jist keep aw yon worthless n' pesky whisky n oil tae ourselves, nae need tae wurrie aboot so ca'd £1 billion black holes n the likes!

I'm in! :agree: :greengrin

You mean the £737m "black hole" which was actually deducted from the block grant in 2017-18 due to the UK income tax intake being lower that expected that year?

https://twitter.com/DerekMackaySNP/status/1152180904250490880

[xyz23jc]

You mean the £737m "black hole" which was actually deducted from the block grant in 2017-18 due to the UK income tax intake being lower that expected that year?

https://twitter.com/DerekMackaySNP/status/1152180904250490880

Ken amigo, ken! Preachin' tae thi convertit! Viva Escocia! :thumbsup:

[Tornadoes70]

The answer to the OP is that Scotland would never be independent. Whether it remains within the UK alongside our nearest island neighbours or rejects them and instead sides with our further more distant ones within the EU is of course the pertinent one. We'd be beholden to someone or something. The question should of course ultimately be whether or not we should be in partnership within or outwith our UK and join an entirely different entity the more distant EU for example of which would of course very probably be far less generous than our UK is?

That's the real choice, not whether we in Scotland would be independent because that is not the reality as we'd be forced to join the EU and be held to its rules whether we liked them or not as a consequence thereof no matter the bs the separatists might fantasise about on here.

[Hibrandenburg]

The answer to the OP is that Scotland would never be independent. Whether it remains within the UK alongside our nearest island neighbours or reject them and side with our further more distant ones within the EU is of course the pertinent one. We'd be beholden to someone or something. The question should of course ultimately be whether or not we should be in partnership within or outside our UK and join a different entity the more distant EU of which would of course be far less generous than our UK is?

That's the real choice, not whether we in Scotland would be independent because that is not the reality as we'd be forced to join the EU and be held to its rules whether we liked them or not.

I like them.

[Tornadoes70]

I like them.

Tell us more?

How would they pay for us for example?

Or is it to you just one big party until the bill gets landed then everyone argues then goes their own way?

How would we balance our books as per public services expenditure etc v income just to illustrate one very simple economic fact?

The snp at the moment despite generous block grants continues to decimate our public services and if separatism occurred would hyper cut benefits, health, social services etc because of massively decreased income.

Would you still like that mr cuts to health and social services among many other to be defunct vital outreach services due to separatism>?

[1875godsgift]

Tell us more?

How would they pay for us for example?

Or is it to you just one big party until the bill gets landed then everyone argues then goes their own way?

How would we balance our books as per public services expenditure etc v income just to illustrate one very simple economic fact?

The snp at the moment despite generous block grants continues to decimate our public services and if separatism occurred would hyper cut benefits, health, social services etc because of massively decreased income.

Would you still like that mr cuts to health and social services among many other defunct vital outreach services.

Like the last labour government did so admirably? :faf:

[Fife-Hibee]

The answer to the OP is that Scotland would never be independent. Whether it remains within the UK alongside our nearest island neighbours or rejects them and instead sides with our further more distant ones within the EU is of course the pertinent one. We'd be beholden to someone or something. The question should of course ultimately be whether or not we should be in partnership within or outwith our UK and join an entirely different entity the more distant EU for example of which would of course very probably be far less generous than our UK is?

That's the real choice, not whether we in Scotland would be independent because that is not the reality as we'd be forced to join the EU and be held to its rules whether we liked them or not as a consequence thereof no matter the bs the separatists might fantasise about on here.

Please. Tell us all about this "generosity" that the UK Government glitters down on us.

[Tornadoes70]

Like the last labour government did so admirably? :faf:

Admirable deflection as per expected from separatists who avoid tough questions over the economy.

How would moving from the UK to the EU be economically advantageous?

Tell us as its a mystery to most of us.

[Tornadoes70]

Please. Tell us all about this "generosity" that the UK Government glitters down on us.

Again, admirable deflection, tell the Scottish public how they'd be better off moving from the UK to the EU?

[1875godsgift]

Admirable deflection as per expected from separatists who avoid tough questions over the economy.

How would moving from the UK to the EU be economically advantageous?

Tell us as its a mystery to most of us.

Well, if the UK leaves the EU (Jeremy Corbyn's wet dream), an independent Scotland in the EU would have guaranteed trade deals with the rest of the world.

Unlike the UK, which has only just managed to negotiate a prickly trade deal with Craggy Island (or somewhere similar).