The Case For The Union Thread

[The Modfather]

Thought I’d re-visit a thread I started at the last referendum now we’re in a very different landscape and on the cusp of a second referendum.

This is a thread for those who favour the union. Would be good to have a thread where a positive case for the union is made and hear your thoughts on what shape you would like it to take. Be it in the short, medium or long term. There’s a lot of focus and scrutiny, as there should be, on what independence would look like, but never much talk of what the future holds for the union.

I won’t tell people what they can and can’t post on, but would ask for this to remain a thread mainly for unionists. I’ll just end up closing the thread if it ends up the same petty arguments from the same posters. The independence, SNP & Tories threads are the places for that.

So over to you unionists, be good to hear your thoughts and a chance to talk up the union.

[Jones28]

Good idea. Genuinely interested in the outcome of this.

[marinello59]

Are you a Unionist yourself?
Surely this should be on the Independence thread or are we only expecting one side of the argument to be heard on each thread? There’s a small but dogged group of pro-Union posters on here who respectfully make their case on the Independence thread despite being heavily outnumbered. I’m struggling to see how shunting their input off to a siding helps anyone.

[The Modfather]

Are you a Unionist yourself?
Surely this should be on the Independence thread or are we only expecting one side of the argument to be heard on each thread? There’s a small but dogged group of pro-Union posters on here who respectfully make their case on the Independence thread despite being heavily outnumbered. I’m struggling to see how shunting their input off to a siding helps anyone.

I’m not a unionist. I don’t think the independence thread is the place for talking up the union or any real debate about what it could be. I’ve tried to create discussions on it about what the union looks like today v what it could or what people would like it to look like. However people either don’t bother putting their opinion forward because they will be drowned out or the answers don’t actually address the question just focus on the post independence landscape rather than the question asked.

I didn’t think a thread for unionists to talk up the union without instantly being shouted down was a bad idea. There’s two of three other threads where the union can, and is, being shouted down.

[CropleyWasGod]

Exhibit A

The devil you know is better than the one you don't.

[Lendo]

Exhibit A

The devil you know is better than the one you don't.

Devil being the key word in that phrase.

[Moulin Yarns]

Exhibit A

The devil you know is better than the one you don't.

You've clearly not met my devils 😉

[Pretty Boy]

I think for the union to survive in the long term there has to be a realisation then an acceptance that the UK is a sum of many disparate parts. It's a lesson many other successful countries learned long ago.

The mindset in Liverpool is incomparable to that in Essex, Scotland is different from Wales and Northern Ireland has changed massively since both the time of partiton and again since the 70s and 80s.

An English parliament alongside increased autonomy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and regional assemblies with some of the powers of devolution handed to them. A form of federalism that places swathes of power in the localities where it will be enacted.

[Steven79]

I think for the union to survive in the long term there has to be a realisation then an acceptance that the UK is a sum of many disparate parts. It's a lesson many other successful countries learned long ago.

The mindset in Liverpool is incomparable to that in Essex, Scotland is different from Wales and Northern Ireland has changed massively since both the time of partiton and again since the 70s and 80s.

An English parliament alongside increased autonomy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and regional assemblies with some of the powers of devolution handed to them. A form of federalism that places swathes of power in the localities where it will be enacted.England will never accept federalism hence why the "Union" on slowly dying.

If It's so great why don't other counties have one?

I'm sure the Dutch would love to controlled from Berlin.

Or the Portuguese from Madrid...

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

England will never accept federalism hence why the "Union" on slowly dying.

If It's so great why don't other counties have one?

I'm sure the Dutch would love to controlled from Berlin.

Or the Portuguese from Madrid...

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

Not really comparable with Holland having their parliament in Berlin. As we have been a union for hundreds of years, shared a team in the Olympics and even fought wars as parts of one army. 55% of Scots voted to stay as one also.

I think devo max would stroll a referendum, but it won't get offered

[WhileTheChief..]

The Uk is fantastic place to live, I don't want to see it broken up.

I'm hugely proud of our history, and respect that of the other countries that make up the Union.

There are so many things to be proud of being Scottish and British.

I'm excited to see where we go post Brexit and I see a bright future ahead for us.

[Skol]

Short term we need to get rid of the worst prime minister we have ever had. We then need to replace the current government ideally with a left of centre government but maybe even a more central one as a step there.

If we can then get PR introduced so we never again see a massive majority on a minority vote then I think longer term we can set out a better future for the union

Sadly the chances of that remains slim and we are stuck with the status quo or one almighty gamble.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I voted against independence in 2014, but since Brexit and the subsequent direction it seems England is travelling I've changed my mind, and I don't think I will change it again.

[Smartie]

The Uk is fantastic place to live, I don't want to see it broken up.

I'm hugely proud of our history, and respect that of the other countries that make up the Union.

There are so many things to be proud of being Scottish and British.

I'm excited to see where we go post Brexit and I see a bright future ahead for us.

I’m guessing you don’t live in Shettleston.

[The Modfather]

I think for the union to survive in the long term there has to be a realisation then an acceptance that the UK is a sum of many disparate parts. It's a lesson many other successful countries learned long ago.

The mindset in Liverpool is incomparable to that in Essex, Scotland is different from Wales and Northern Ireland has changed massively since both the time of partiton and again since the 70s and 80s.

An English parliament alongside increased autonomy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and regional assemblies with some of the powers of devolution handed to them. A form of federalism that places swathes of power in the localities where it will be enacted.

Good post, and the kind of debate I was looking for.

I’ve said before I view independence as moving away from Westminster as much as anything. I’d be in favour of the rest of the UK breaking away from Westminster and the South East.

More realistically, I think there needs to be a grown up and constructive debate on immigration in England. It’s not something I can relate to, and not something that’s an issue in Scotland so not speaking with any real knowledge. From what I can see there are some valid concerns about immigration in amongst the hysteria and the right wing have been given license to run with the issue for their own gain. A constructive debate down south, stripping away the unfounded fears about Johnny Foreigner and educating on the benefits of immigration, might start to move us off this insular and intolerant path of self destruction we’re on.

[Jones28]

The Uk is fantastic place to live, I don't want to see it broken up.

I'm hugely proud of our history, and respect that of the other countries that make up the Union.

There are so many things to be proud of being Scottish and British.

I'm excited to see where we go post Brexit and I see a bright future ahead for us.

In attempt to understand this mindset…what about our history are you proud of exactly?

[Northernhibee]

I campaigned for No in 2014 even though I'd consider my political views as left of centre.

I did so for the following reasons:


EU membership. I still don't think that we could have gotten back into the EU in any sort of rush back then. I also didn't think the UK would be so stupid to vote to leave.
The NHS; I have a lot of friends down in England & Wales and they're passionately keen to defend the NHS at all costs. I wanted to stand side to side to help maintain a UK wide NHS. It's fair to say that although a devolved issue and we've been sheltered from some of the Tory inflicted ****show up here, large parts of the NHS have been completely vandalised and broken by the Tory government, perhaps beyond repair. Without freedom of movement staffing will be a huge issue.
Economic damage. Leaving a union and making it more difficult to trade, particularly with neighbouring countries, will always inflict economic damage. It's fair to say Brexit has caused more than its fair share of that and it's now a case of choosing whether we want to be a part of a failing UK or if we want to look to rejoin the European Union and gain frictionless trading with twenty-seven other countries.
I also felt that we had a lot more in common with our neighbours than what separated us. I think it's fair to say that the support of the Tories, Brexit and more has shattered that illusion.


Almost all of the things that caused me to vote no in 2014 has changed. I'll be using my free evenings to knock on doors and campain for the yes campaign this time around.

[Stairway 2 7]

In attempt to understand this mindset…what about our history are you proud of exactly?

Music from Merseyside beats, 70s rock, punk, ska, britpop,grime and dance. We punched higher above our weight than almost any.

Artists, Emin, constable, Turner, Freud, constable, bacon, hurst, Blake, hockney

Film ridley Scott, David lean, Alfred hitchcock, Ken loach, Charlie chaplin, Nolan, liz Taylor, Mike leigh, connery, sellers, Hopkins, geilgud, Oldman, Reed, Thompson, Kingsley, Swinton,

Literature Shakespeare, dickins, Dahl, Christie, Darwin, Austin, bronte, Orwell, jm barrie, ac Doyle, tolkein. Again not many better than our small nation

Scientists Hawkins, Darwin, r Franklin, Newton, Fleming, Faraday, Berners-Lee, lovelace, Turing, hodgkin, crick, brunel. Studied and shaped the world

James connoly, Tony Benn, Marie stopes, David Gray, nightingale, Aneurin Bevan, William Wilberforce, Emmeline Pankhurst,

Many more

[Jones28]

Music from Merseyside beats, 70s rock, punk, ska, britpop,grime and dance. We punched higher above our weight than almost any.

Artists, Emin, constable, Turner, Freud, constable, bacon, hurst, Blake, hockney

Film ridley Scott, David lean, Alfred hitchcock, Ken loach, Charlie chaplin, Nolan, liz Taylor, Mike leigh, connery, sellers, Hopkins, geilgud, Oldman, Reed, Thompson, Kingsley, Swinton,

Literature Shakespeare, dickins, Dahl, Christie, Darwin, Austin, bronte, Orwell, jm barrie, ac Doyle, tolkein. Again not many better than our small nation

Scientists Hawkins, Darwin, r Franklin, Newton, Fleming, Faraday, Berners-Lee, lovelace, Turing, hodgkin, crick, brunel. Studied and shaped the world

James connoly, Tony Benn, Marie stopes, David Gray, nightingale, Aneurin Bevan, William Wilberforce, Emmeline Pankhurst,

Many more

Isn’t most of that more cultural? Historical culture in lots of cases, and I’d agree with everything you say: but our actual history? Colonialism? The empire? Slavery?

[Stairway 2 7]

Isn’t most of that more cultural? Historical culture in lots of cases, and I’d agree with everything you say: but our actual history? Colonialism? The empire? Slavery?

Science isn't history? Fleming alone saved hundreds of millions of lives, the team at Oxford saved millions of lives a couple of years ago. Or is actual history only negative things.

Every empire before the last 200 years had slavery and colonisation. Without colonisation the world would be just separate villages.

It it just the uk that ignores all the good and thinks about the bad. The Italians, Greeks, Mexicans, Egyptians, Syrians, Scandinavians, Chinese ect, all seem proud of their big empires that profited of slavery and plunder.

My friend is going to Mongolia on Tuesday where his dad is from. You'd get lynched if you tried to take down the huge ghengis Khan statue in the capital. Even though he conquered slaved and murdered an estimated 11% of the world’s population.

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

[He's here!]

Isn’t most of that more cultural? Historical culture in lots of cases, and I’d agree with everything you say: but our actual history? Colonialism? The empire? Slavery?

All of which Scots played a significant part in (and were hardly unique to the UK). However, there's clearly far more to our shared history and for me being part of the whole is a warts and all approach. From science, medicine and engineering to the arts, music and sport, each nation has contributed richly to the greater whole and Scotland, if anything, has punched above its weight. Geographically there's also a wonderful diversity to the UK and having spent much of my life working and travelling in various parts of it there are fantastic areas of England I would happily move to in the right circumstances.

Somebody also mentioned the disparate identities you'll find across such a relatively small nation (in terms of its physical size) and I'd suggest that goes further than simply saying England is different to Scotland. Speaking from personal experience, you'll find as much of a change in vibe between, say, Glasgow and Shetland, Edinburgh and Dundee, Inverness and the Borders and Belfast and Cardiff as you will between Newcastle and Penzance. It's a really interesting and often dynamic melting pot. Sure, there are countless really grim parts of the UK but as I say, for me, it's a warts and all coming together.

Bottom line, I have always been content to be British and that's got far more to do with celebrating the diversity I've outlined than politics, which for me takes a distant back seat when debating the union's merits. The core fuel for the Scottish nationalist argument seems to be 'getting rid of the Tories', which always strikes me as pretty narrow mindset and underscores the crabbit, chip on the shoulder reputation some like to saddle Scots with (and in the SNP's case it's accurate IMHO). I've always agreed with the point of view that there's a lot more that unites us than divides us and cutting ourselves off from the rest of the nation because we don't like Boris Johnson seems short-sighted, especially as he's (surely) on borrowed time.

[He's here!]

Science isn't history? Fleming alone saved hundreds of millions of lives, the team at Oxford saved millions of lives a couple of years ago. Or is actual history only negative things.

Every empire before the last 200 years had slavery and colonisation. Without colonisation the world would be just separate villages.

It it just the uk that ignores all the good and thinks about the bad. The Italians, Greeks, Mexicans, Egyptians, Syrians, Scandinavians, Chinese ect, all seem proud of their big empires that profited of slavery and plunder.

My friend is going to Mongolia on Tuesday where his dad is from. You'd get lynched if you tried to take down the huge ghengis Khan statue in the capital. Even though he conquered slaved and murdered an estimated 11% of the world’s population.

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

Spot on.

[The Tubs]

Science isn't history? Fleming alone saved hundreds of millions of lives, the team at Oxford saved millions of lives a couple of years ago. Or is actual history only negative things.

Every empire before the last 200 years had slavery and colonisation. Without colonisation the world would be just separate villages.

It it just the uk that ignores all the good and thinks about the bad. The Italians, Greeks, Mexicans, Egyptians, Syrians, Scandinavians, Chinese ect, all seem proud of their big empires that profited of slavery and plunder.

My friend is going to Mongolia on Tuesday where his dad is from. You'd get lynched if you tried to take down the huge ghengis Khan statue in the capital. Even though he conquered slaved and murdered an estimated 11% of the world’s population.

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

I think you need to separate 19th and 20th century colonisation from ancient history. The nations and white elites within these former colonies that profited from this phase of colonisation would do well to understand how their current economic superiority has often been built on wealth gained from forced labour and that they continue to benefit from the structural racism that this colonisation left behind.

Many of these groups, not just in the UK, are starting to understand it. It seems to me that history classes in these countries failed to deal with the past properly but now seem to be looking at colonisation more truthfully.

[The Tubs]

I've always agreed with the point of view that there's a lot more that unites us than divides us and cutting ourselves off from the rest of the nation because we don't like Boris Johnson seems short-sighted, especially as he's (surely) on borrowed time.

Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but I detect a little intellectual dishonesty in your argument. The need to remove ourselves from the union is not due to Mr Johnson. The Conservatives will never have someone like Harold MacMillian, for example, as leader again.

After highlighting this deviation from the topic, please return to debating the benefits of the union.

[Berwickhibby]

Science isn't history? Fleming alone saved hundreds of millions of lives, the team at Oxford saved millions of lives a couple of years ago. Or is actual history only negative things.

Every empire before the last 200 years had slavery and colonisation. Without colonisation the world would be just separate villages.

It it just the uk that ignores all the good and thinks about the bad. The Italians, Greeks, Mexicans, Egyptians, Syrians, Scandinavians, Chinese ect, all seem proud of their big empires that profited of slavery and plunder.

My friend is going to Mongolia on Tuesday where his dad is from. You'd get lynched if you tried to take down the huge ghengis Khan statue in the capital. Even though he conquered slaved and murdered an estimated 11% of the world’s population.

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

Absolutely brilliant post

[Stairway 2 7]

I think you need to separate 19th and 20th century colonisation from ancient history. The nations and white elites within these former colonies that profited from this phase of colonisation would do well to understand how their current economic superiority has often been built on wealth gained from forced labour and that they continue to benefit from the structural racism that this colonisation left behind.

Many of these groups, not just in the UK, are starting to understand it. It seems to me that history classes in these countries failed to deal with the past properly but now seem to be looking at colonisation more truthfully.

Uk abolished it 200 years ago, so we are allowed to count that but not further back, no bother. Atlantic slave trade started in 1526 by the Portuguese, kublai Khan was alive about 200 years before that

Do the Portuguese, Spanish, French, Dutch, Danish and more who were involved in the Atlantic slave trade hate themselves too.

Scotland was as guilty as the rest in Europe, so it isn't really relevant to independence anyway. Unless we think of the uk as a slave owning nation, then separate and be depressed because Scotland was a slave owning nation. Most of the big beautiful buildings in Glasgow and Edinburgh came from Africans blood.

[marinello59]

Uk abolished it 200 years ago, so we are allowed to count that but not further back, no bother. Atlantic slave trade started in 1526 by the Portuguese, kublai Khan was alive about 200 years before that

Do the Portuguese, Spanish, French, Dutch, Danish and more who were involved in the Atlantic slave trade hate themselves too.

Scotland was as guilty as the rest in Europe, so it isn't really relevant to independence anyway. Unless we think of the uk as a slave owning nation, then separate and be depressed because Scotland was a slave owning nation. Most of the big beautiful buildings in Glasgow and Edinburgh came from Africans blood.

:agree:

[Just Alf]

All of which Scots played a significant part in (and were hardly unique to the UK). However, there's clearly far more to the our shared history and for me being part of the whole is a warts and all approach. From science, medicine and engineering to the arts, music and sport, each nation has contributed richly to the greater whole and Scotland, if anything, has punched above its weight. Geographically there's also a wonderful diversity to the UK and having spent much of my life working and travelling in various parts of it there are fantastic areas of England I would happily move to in the right circumstances.

Somebody also mentioned the disparate identities you'll find across such a relatively small nation (in terms of its physical size) and I'd suggest that goes further than simply saying England is different to Scotland. Speaking from personal experience, you'll find as much of a change in vibe between, say, Glasgow and Shetland, Edinburgh and Dundee, Inverness and the Borders and Belfast and Cardiff as you will between Newcastle and Penzance. It's a really interesting and often dynamic melting pot. Sure, there are countless really grim parts of the UK but as I say, for me, it's a warts and all coming together.

Bottom line, I have always been content to be British and that's got far more to do with celebrating the diversity I've outlined than politics, which for me takes a distant back seat when debating the union's merits. The core fuel for the Scottish nationalist argument seems to be 'getting rid of the Tories', which always strikes me as pretty narrow mindset and underscores the crabbit, chip on the shoulder reputation some like to saddle Scots with (and in the SNP's case it's accurate IMHO). I've always agreed with the point of view that there's a lot more that unites us than divides us and cutting ourselves off from the rest of the nation because we don't like Boris Johnson seems short-sighted, especially as he's (surely) on borrowed time.That is an excellent post... I totally agree with the 1st section.

I would take issue with the 2nd where independence is all about getting rid of the Tories.... in part that's right (would be more right if it was Westminster) but you're missing the rest..... "so that Scotland can make its own choices"

[The Tubs]

Uk abolished it 200 years ago, so we are allowed to count that but not further back, no bother. Atlantic slave trade started in 1526 by the Portuguese, kublai Khan was alive about 200 years before that

Do the Portuguese, Spanish, French, Dutch, Danish and more who were involved in the Atlantic slave trade hate themselves too.

Scotland was as guilty as the rest in Europe, so it isn't really relevant to independence anyway. Unless we think of the uk as a slave owning nation, then separate and be depressed because Scotland was a slave owning nation. Most of the big beautiful buildings in Glasgow and Edinburgh came from Africans blood.

It's not about hating yourself but understanding the luck you've had due to birth. Imagine it like a Rawlsian veil of ignorance. I've noticed over the past 20 years that, in Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries at least — though I'd imagine in France, etc. too, people are learning properly about the past and glorifying it a little less.

Anyway, rather than discussing the legacy of colonisation, as fascinating as it may be, please discuss the benefits of the union in the context of Scotland's future.

[Stairway 2 7]

It's not about hating yourself but understanding the luck you've had due to birth. Imagine it like a Rawlsian veil of ignorance. I've noticed over the past 20 years that, in Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries at least — though I'd imagine in France, etc. too, people are learning properly about the past and glorifying it a little less.

Anyway, rather than discussing the legacy of colonisation, as fascinating as it may be, please discuss the benefits of the union in the context of Scotland's future.

I did cultural history, the greats in uk culture, sports and science

I'm pro independence but not through a dislike of the uk. I just want the choice politically to choose our future. I have more in common with a working class guy from Sheffield, than I do an Edinburgh tory or borders farmer.

Devo max would be great but labour, tories and snp wouldn't touch it, even though the population would vote it through I think

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

Cough cough, ahem!

[marinello59]

Cough cough, ahem!

:greengrin

[Hibrandenburg]

All of which Scots played a significant part in (and were hardly unique to the UK). However, there's clearly far more to the our shared history and for me being part of the whole is a warts and all approach. From science, medicine and engineering to the arts, music and sport, each nation has contributed richly to the greater whole and Scotland, if anything, has punched above its weight. Geographically there's also a wonderful diversity to the UK and having spent much of my life working and travelling in various parts of it there are fantastic areas of England I would happily move to in the right circumstances.

Somebody also mentioned the disparate identities you'll find across such a relatively small nation (in terms of its physical size) and I'd suggest that goes further than simply saying England is different to Scotland. Speaking from personal experience, you'll find as much of a change in vibe between, say, Glasgow and Shetland, Edinburgh and Dundee, Inverness and the Borders and Belfast and Cardiff as you will between Newcastle and Penzance. It's a really interesting and often dynamic melting pot. Sure, there are countless really grim parts of the UK but as I say, for me, it's a warts and all coming together.

Bottom line, I have always been content to be British and that's got far more to do with celebrating the diversity I've outlined than politics, which for me takes a distant back seat when debating the union's merits. The core fuel for the Scottish nationalist argument seems to be 'getting rid of the Tories', which always strikes me as pretty narrow mindset and underscores the crabbit, chip on the shoulder reputation some like to saddle Scots with (and in the SNP's case it's accurate IMHO). I've always agreed with the point of view that there's a lot more that unites us than divides us and cutting ourselves off from the rest of the nation because we don't like Boris Johnson seems short-sighted, especially as he's (surely) on borrowed time.

Good post and there's absolutely nothing wrong with having emotional reasons at the forefront of your decision making regarding independence. There's definitely more that unites us on these islands than divides us, but imo the inequality of the relationship between the individual countries trumphs that. Once we've addressed that there's no reason Scotland and England can't share the label of being British, much like Denmark, Norway and Sweden share their Scandinavian identity, albeit as independent nations.

[Stairway 2 7]

Cough cough, ahem!

You'll know better obviously but I thought Germans dealt with it well. Face it head on but are proud to be German. The stadiums at the world Cup were a sea of German flags, where as the UK see that as jingoism. Cambodians shouldn't feel national hatred for the khmer ruige, or Chinese for there treatment of the uyghers right now. Can't blame the public for their rulers disgusting actions.

I hope when Putin gets a bullet the Russians get a liberal leader and can feel pride again

[The Tubs]

:greengrin


You'll know better obviously but I thought Germans dealt with it well. Face it head on but are proud to be German. The stadiums at the world Cup were a sea of German flags, where as the UK see that as jingoism. Cambodians shouldn't feel national hatred for the khmer ruige, or Chinese for there treatment of the uyghers right now. Can't blame the public for their rulers disgusting actions.

I hope when Putin gets a bullet the Russians get a liberal leader and can feel pride again

As we're continuing on past sins, the Germans did have some problems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction

I would imagine, however, that the RAF made them realise that they had to deal with their past rather than bottling it up. Am I correct?

[Jones28]

Loads of very good points. Not sure I have the energy to debate them. I still disagree and think the empire was a bad thing, and resulted in many millions of excess deaths. There were other empires yea but we aren’t discussing them, actually not even sure we should be discussing the British one either.

Thread back on track.

[marinello59]

As we're continuing on past sins, the Germans did have some problems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction

I would imagine, however, that the RAF made them realise that they had to deal with their past rather than bottling it up. Am I correct?

I don't know why you tagged me in this. I just saw the humour in Hibrandenburg's post. :greengrin

[The Tubs]

I don't know why you tagged me in this. I just saw the humour in Hibrandenburg's post. :greengrin

Neither do I. Some kind of bug in the forum?

[marinello59]

Neither do I. Some kind of bug in the forum?

I blame the Admins. :greengrin

[Stairway 2 7]

As we're continuing on past sins, the Germans did have some problems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction

I would imagine, however, that the RAF made them realise that they had to deal with their past rather than bottling it up. Am I correct?

They were telling their parents generation to face up to their own sins, not sins of past generations. Some Nazis ended the war and took up political roles

But they more than that were about left wing ideals, workers, women's rights, racism ect too.

[Steven79]

I did cultural history, the greats in uk culture, sports and science

I'm pro independence but not through a dislike of the uk. I just want the choice politically to choose our future. I have more in common with a working class guy from Sheffield, than I do an Edinburgh tory or borders farmer.

Devo max would be great but labour, tories and snp wouldn't touch it, even though the population would vote it through I thinkDevo Max would only work if all parts of the UK had it and England would see no point in it.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[greenlex]

Science isn't history? Fleming alone saved hundreds of millions of lives, the team at Oxford saved millions of lives a couple of years ago. Or is actual history only negative things.

Every empire before the last 200 years had slavery and colonisation. Without colonisation the world would be just separate villages.

It it just the uk that ignores all the good and thinks about the bad. The Italians, Greeks, Mexicans, Egyptians, Syrians, Scandinavians, Chinese ect, all seem proud of their big empires that profited of slavery and plunder.

My friend is going to Mongolia on Tuesday where his dad is from. You'd get lynched if you tried to take down the huge ghengis Khan statue in the capital. Even though he conquered slaved and murdered an estimated 11% of the world’s population.

I'm not saying you ignore the past mistakes and horrible actions, but uk seems to be world leading at self loathing for sins of our ancestors.

The way I see it we are happy to flag wave and celebrate our murky past whilst shouting from the rooftops how world leading we are. All the whilst trying to play one of the leading nations when in reality we are a small nation pretending to be of significance on a world stage. A bit like Aberdeen FC to be honest.
I’m happy to let it all wither away and forge forward as a small nation playing its part on both a European and world stage. See any smaller European country. Scandinavian ones in particular. Also take a look at any country anywhere in the world that was butchered and colonised by the British and subsequently became independent. There’s not a single one with regret in ditching the UK as a support. Not one .

[The Tubs]

They were telling their parents generation to face up to their own sins, not sins of past generations. Some Nazis ended the war and took up political roles

But they more than that were about left wing ideals, workers, women's rights, racism ect too.

The first sentence is true. What might be relevant to the point you made, and what I'd like to understand, is that, up until the 60-70s, had the war generation tried to brush stuff under the carpet? And not just their personal involvements?

The big difference, I suppose, is that the European empires' crimes were all committed 1000s of miles away and were rarely discussed in the metropolis. And that their countries weren't reduce to ruins at the end of it. Consequently, they didn't have to face any music.

That abolitionists actually were able to make their argument is something the UK can celebrate. Nevertheless, it's hardly reason to remain in the union.

[Stairway 2 7]

The way I see it we are happy to flag wave and celebrate our murky past whilst shouting from the rooftops how world leading we are. All the whilst trying to play one of the leading nations when in reality we are a small nation pretending to be of significance on a world stage. A bit like Aberdeen FC to be honest.
I’m happy to let it all wither away and forge forward as a small nation playing its part on both a European and world stage. See any smaller European country. Scandinavian ones in particular. Also take a look at any country anywhere in the world that was butchered and colonised by the British and subsequently became independent. There’s not a single one with regret in ditching the UK as a support. Not one .

Uk has the 5th biggest economy in the world behind US, China, Japan, Germany ahead of India, France, Italy and Canada. Its a g7 member. Its a permanent member of the nato security Council. It's the 8th biggest manufacturer with 2% of the world's goods. That's no reason to stay in it but it still punches above its population size

[Stairway 2 7]

The first sentence is true. What might be relevant to the point you made, and what I'd like to understand, is that, up until the 60-70s, had the war generation tried to brush stuff under the carpet? And not just their personal involvements?

The big difference, I suppose, is that the European empires' crimes were all committed 1000s of miles away and were rarely discussed in the metropolis. And that their countries weren't reduce to ruins at the end of it. Consequently, they didn't have to face any music.

That abolitionists actually were able to make their argument is something the UK can celebrate. Nevertheless, it's hardly reason to remain in the union.

The fact that it was over 200 years ago it isn't in anyway similar to a group trying to get Nazis out of German politics in the 70s.

And yes not relevant to independence as Scotland willingly took part

[The Tubs]

The fact that it was over 200 years ago it isn't in anyway similar to a group trying to get Nazis out of German politics in the 70s.

And yes not relevant to independence as Scotland willingly took part

Did they not end up being the German equivalent of the Manson family, only with a lot more innocent blood on their hands?

I can understand how it could happen, though. Imagine taking LSD and looking round and thinking what your elders got up to 20 years before.

[Stairway 2 7]

Did they not end up being the German equivalent of the Manson family, only with a lot more innocent blood on their hands?

I can understand how it could happen, though. Imagine taking LSD and looking round and thinking what your elders got up to 20 years before.

Bader meinhof complex is a good film about them. Although I thought they were cool as left wing when I was young and daft. Although they had some great politics, they ultimately murdered innocent people and went nuts as you say.

I'm glad Germany is out the other side as a sounder nation you'll not find

[The Tubs]

Bader meinhof complex is a good film about them. Although I thought they were cool as left wing when I was young and daft. Although they had some great politics, they ultimately murdered innocent people and went nuts as you say.

I'm glad Germany is out the other side as a sounder nation you'll not find

I saw this a while ago:

https://mubi.com/films/a-german-youth

Some of their early films weren't too bad.

[Stairway 2 7]

I saw this a while ago:

https://mubi.com/films/a-german-youth

Some of their early films weren't too bad.

Class I'll definitely watch that. Pretty incredible we are to soft in the uk for riots. Surely if there was ever to be one it would be now, actually placated us. Even the Americans are rightfully going tonto in the streets

[Hibrandenburg]

I blame the Admins. :greengrin

Pricks, the lot of them.

[Hibrandenburg]

As we're continuing on past sins, the Germans did have some problems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction

I would imagine, however, that the RAF made them realise that they had to deal with their past rather than bottling it up. Am I correct?

I think the RAF was based on youth rebellion, whipped up to a frenzy and armed by the Stasi. Certainly in the West during the seventies, the education system was piling on the shame of German recent history. Many Germans of that era were traumatised are still carrying the baggage they inherited.

[He's here!]

The way I see it we are happy to flag wave and celebrate our murky past whilst shouting from the rooftops how world leading we are. All the whilst trying to play one of the leading nations when in reality we are a small nation pretending to be of significance on a world stage. A bit like Aberdeen FC to be honest.
I’m happy to let it all wither away and forge forward as a small nation playing its part on both a European and world stage. See any smaller European country. Scandinavian ones in particular. Also take a look at any country anywhere in the world that was butchered and colonised by the British and subsequently became independent. There’s not a single one with regret in ditching the UK as a support. Not one .

We might be a 'small nation' in terms of physical size but even without an empire we remain one of the world's leading economic powerhouses.

Edit: I see Stairway 2 7 gas provided a more detailed post on this.

[WhileTheChief..]

Isn’t most of that more cultural? Historical culture in lots of cases, and I’d agree with everything you say: but our actual history? Colonialism? The empire? Slavery?

The industrial revolution, magna carta, ending slavery throughout the world...there's way too much to mention on a forum.

The British were involved with slavery for around 400 years before doing more than any nation on the planet to end it. This was despite objections from every other major country and it certainly wasn't economically beneficial for the British.

Remember, back then, it was the norm, and the African slave trade had been going on for thousands of years before any Europeans showed up.

There were way more slaves taken East than across the Atlantic throughout the years, for example.

No country has an unblemished history. You take the good with the bad though.

We have a rich and varied history and the list on an earlier post shows some amazing things to be proud of. The list could run for pages.

If you only look for the bad I guess that's all you'll see. Scottish history has some pretty dark moments too I'm sure but Im still a proud Scot.

[WhileTheChief..]

I’m guessing you don’t live in Shettleston.

:confused:

Why Shettletson? You could have named any of literally thousands of places in Scotland and you'd have been right.

[The Modfather]

Getting back to the devolution discussion, is there a plausible way forward to work towards that? Is there simply not the political will from any party as it’s for the greater good but not necessarily a vote winner and when do any parties ever do anything for the greater good an not self interest.

Probably veering into a different discussion but what about revamping the archaic parliaments like the Westminster system. In terms of making meaningful changes so all parties are on the same side and not driven by parochial reductive attitudes where all parties would rather play the man not the ball regardless of how good an idea might be. Is there more chance (still hovering above zero as those at Holyrood are just as self serving as Westminster) of meaningful change in a young parliament like Holyrood in an independent Scotland than there is at Westminster. Or am I being too idealistic and my disdain for politics and politicians on both sides of the border well founded.

[Skol]

Just read the attached which is broadly along lines of my post yesterday and I think is the way we should be going forward. I am sure there are plenty of holes to be found in it, but it’s got to be better than what we have right now.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/25/andy-burnham-says-labour-must-seize-moment-and-back-proportional-representation

[Keith_M]

Guarantee me the following and I might think about it...


A Federal UK, with each region equally able to stand up for, and defend, that segment of it's population.

In relation to this, a change to the current Government spending model which massively, and disproportionately, favours the South East of England

The removal of an archaic systems of government, where people are allowed to rule based on: 1) an accident of birth; 2) being a friend or relative of a person in power; 3) paying a person in power a vast sum of money; 4) doing favours for a person in power, either now or in the future.

The removal of the anachronistic, medieval system of monarchy, where people fawn over someone purely because they were born in to that position. This would then lead to a Government whose members pledge to serve the people of the country, not the Monarch

A Government that cannot arbitrarily ignore or override parliamentary rule, laws and ethics.

A fairer system of recruitment and promotion that doesn't favour an elite group that were educated in fee paying schools favoured by the rich, and/or attended a favoured University.



I could go on but this would at least be a start...

[Stairway 2 7]

Guarantee me the following and I might think about it...


A Federal UK, with each region equally able to stand up for, and defend, that segment of it's population.

In relation to this, a change to the current Government spending model which massively, and disproportionately, favours the South East of England

The removal of an archaic systems of government, where people are allowed to rule based on: 1) an accident of birth; 2) being a friend or relative of a person in power; 3) paying a person in power a vast sum of money; 4) doing favours for a person in power, either now or in the future.

The removal of the anachronistic, medieval system of monarchy, where people fawn over someone purely because they were born in to that position. This would then lead to a Government whose members pledge to serve the people of the country, not the Monarch

A Government that cannot arbitrarily ignore or override parliamentary rule, laws and ethics.

A fairer system of recruitment and promotion that doesn't favour an elite group that were educated in fee paying schools favoured by the rich, and/or attended a favoured University.



I could go on but this would at least be a start...

The majority of that isn't changing with independence. A good majority want the monarchy kept. Heriot boys will still get the top jobs ect. Politicians will still be Politicians in Scotland and self police each other.

We're no going to get socialist federalist state with independence or devo max. But we should be unshakled from tories constantly. Also away from fptp, so governments should be more accountable

[Stairway 2 7]

Just read the attached which is broadly along lines of my post yesterday and I think is the way we should be going forward. I am sure there are plenty of holes to be found in it, but it’s got to be better than what we have right now.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/25/andy-burnham-says-labour-must-seize-moment-and-back-proportional-representation

Would be great but they will need to be in power to get it

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

The case for the Union is currently being argued or defended by politicians who are hugely less credible it seems than those who want independence.

[Skol]

Would be great but they will need to be in power to get it

Yes, and that is a big problem. They would also need to win consensus across the party for it which is also a challenge albeit less of one

I still struggle to understand how anyone can look at the current government and the prime minister in particular and think yeah, this is the best guy for the job. In fact he is probably quite close to being the worst man out of the whole population for the job

[Ozyhibby]

Lots of good defences of the union that people think we should or could have but none of the union we actually have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Lots of good defences of the union that people think we should or could have but none of the union we actually have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s a bit like asking me to make a case for Harold shipman to get a job as GP for the local old folks home

There is plenty wrong with the current union, much of it down to the way the current government run things. However, I have yet to see anything that convinces me Scotland would have a better future if we removed ourselves from the union.

[Stairway 2 7]

Yeah it won't happen. But would the snp go for a devo max if it was promised

[The Tubs]

That’s a bit like asking me to make a case for Harold shipman to get a job as GP for the local old folks home

There is plenty wrong with the current union, much of it down to the way the current government run things. However, I have yet to see anything that convinces me Scotland would have a better future if we removed ourselves from the union.

I suppose that is why the SNP has chosen to compare Scotland to similar small countries in the same geographic region. Is there any reason why we would be such an outlier when compared to them? I doubt it.

[James310]

I suppose that is why the SNP has chosen to compare Scotland to similar small countries in the same geographic region. Is there any reason why we would be such an outlier when compared to them? I doubt it.

But they never compared Scotland to any of those countries, they compared the UK to those countries. The scene setter on Scotland has no facts and figures related to Scotland.

"This paper compares the UK's performance across a range of economic and social indicators with that of Scotland's neighbours in Europe: Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands – referred to as 'the comparator countries'. The choice of comparator countries is explained in the Economic and Social Context section of this paper."

[The Tubs]

But they never compared Scotland to any of those countries, they compared the UK to those countries. The scene setter on Scotland has no facts and figures related to Scotland.

"This paper compares the UK's performance across a range of economic and social indicators with that of Scotland's neighbours in Europe: Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands – referred to as 'the comparator countries'. The choice of comparator countries is explained in the Economic and Social Context section of this paper."

Thanks for the correction. I don't follow Scottish news closely enough. Nevertheless, I can't see any good reason for Scotland to be an outlier.

[Ozyhibby]

But they never compared Scotland to any of those countries, they compared the UK to those countries. The scene setter on Scotland has no facts and figures related to Scotland.

"This paper compares the UK's performance across a range of economic and social indicators with that of Scotland's neighbours in Europe: Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands – referred to as 'the comparator countries'. The choice of comparator countries is explained in the Economic and Social Context section of this paper."

Are you saying Scotland is performing better than the UK?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OldEast]

If I understand correctly the OP was asking for a case for the union, now, leading up to the next independence referendum whenever that may be. I see history, talk of other countries, pride in contributions to science, culture etc over the years, but no case for the union in 2022.
Just an observation and I apologise for my answer being as wayward as others. I have NO positive case for the union?

[James310]

Are you saying Scotland is performing better than the UK?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Scotland is part of the UK, if you look at the performance of the UK that includes Scotland.

If you have some Scotland v rUK then let's see what they say.

[Since90+2]

If I understand correctly the OP was asking for a case for the union, now, leading up to the next independence referendum whenever that may be. I see history, talk of other countries, pride in contributions to science, culture etc over the years, but no case for the union in 2022.
Just an observation and I apologise for my answer being as wayward as others. I have NO positive case for the union?

Does Scotland not currently get out more than it puts in? If so, that's a fairly obvious and big one as a case for the union.

[Eaststand]

Yeah it won't happen. But would the snp go for a devo max if it was promised

Why should we accept this so called devo max, which would still leave lots of powers for our country with Westminster.
How long would the list be of items which Westminster would want the final say on, as the Scottish people clearly can't be trusted to decide things themselves.

In my opinion Devo max will always be unacceptable as we need to have all decisions made by our own parliament in Holyrood, within the EU framework.

Devo Max still means we don't have control of our own country.

GGTTH

[Since90+2]

Why should we accept this so called devo max, which would still leave lots of powers for our country with Westminster.
How long would the list be of items which Westminster would want the final say on, as the Scottish people clearly can't be trusted to decide things themselves.

In my opinion Devo max will always be unacceptable as we need to have all decisions made by our own parliament in Holyrood, within the EU framework.

Devo Max still means we don't have control of our own country.

GGTTH

Why can Scottish people not be trusted to decide on things? We had the choice in 2014 and chose not to become independent, if the people of Scotland had chosen that course of action we'd be doing exactly that. The people didn't want it.

[Stairway 2 7]

Why should we accept this so called devo max, which would still leave lots of powers for our country with Westminster.
How long would the list be of items which Westminster would want the final say on, as the Scottish people clearly can't be trusted to decide things themselves.

In my opinion Devo max will always be unacceptable as we need to have all decisions made by our own parliament in Holyrood, within the EU framework.

Devo Max still means we don't have control of our own country.

GGTTH

But says who it's a hypothetical thing. What it was all taxes and laws separate, but in a recognised union. Similar to what we would have if we rejoined the EU

[Moulin Yarns]

Scotland is part of the UK, if you look at the performance of the UK that includes Scotland.

If you have some Scotland v rUK then let's see what they say.

The scene setter compared countries of similar size to Scotland which are outperforming the UK, a country 10 times bigger, population wise. It points out the possibility of what Scotland could achieve.

[Eaststand]

Why can Scottish people not be trusted to decide on things? We had the choice in 2014 and chose not to become independent, if the people of Scotland had chosen that course of action we'd be doing exactly that. The people didn't want it.

In my humble opinion, project fear being rolled out from a very patriotic right wing press played a very significant part in our last referendums result. Perhaps those of us on the nationalist side of the campaign should have tackled reducing people's perceived fears from this area with greater effort.

The previous result was very disappointing but lessons have been learned from that campaign, and those lessons will help us in 2023.

We all know an awful lot has changed since the last referendum hasn't it.
Scotland voted to remain in the EU but we have been removed from this massive marketplace much to the detriment of our people and businesses.

We are governed by a Westminster government who are moving further to the right than ever , who see no problem with continually ignoring international treaties, ignoring international decency and there is little thought or compassion shown for Scotland from Westminster, both in parliament and the House of Lords.

I know quite a few people who voted No last time, but intend voting for independence next time as they have now seen the light.
I can't wait for our next referendum as I look forward to a much more positive result for Scotland this time.

GGTTH

[makaveli1875]

There’s definitely a case for sticking with what you have and not gambling the house on some fantasy idea of how Scotland could be

[Moulin Yarns]

So far from what I've seen the only positive case for the union is that we know what it's like and people are scared of the unknown.

[Keith_M]

The majority of that isn't changing with independence. A good majority want the monarchy kept. Heriot boys will still get the top jobs ect. Politicians will still be Politicians in Scotland and self police each other.

We're no going to get socialist federalist state with independence or devo max. But we should be unshakled from tories constantly. Also away from fptp, so governments should be more accountable


It's telling that the first reply is Whittabootery...

[Ozyhibby]

There’s definitely a case for sticking with what you have and not gambling the house on some fantasy idea of how Scotland could be

What you have is reducing every day. The fall in the pound since 2016 has been pretty dramatic. Sticking with what we have isn’t really an option now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

It's telling that the first reply is Whittabootery...

Some independence voters seem to think Scotland will be left wing with no tories, no monarchy, no us and them. That's mental but no reason not to have independence

[Stairway 2 7]

What you have is reducing every day. The fall in the pound since 2016 has been pretty dramatic. Sticking with what we have isn’t really an option now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The pound will fall further due to independence uncertainty then further if we get independence, we'll effect Scotland too. Will we be going to the euro, that would be a negative to some

[James310]

The scene setter compared countries of similar size to Scotland which are outperforming the UK, a country 10 times bigger, population wise. It points out the possibility of what Scotland could achieve.

It never actually, because it had no details at all. It was a bunch of graphs. It never had Scotland is here in 2022, if we do X and Y we can be like Denmark.

[James310]

The pound will fall further due to independence uncertainty then further if we get independence, we'll effect Scotland too. Will we be going to the euro, that would be a negative to some

If we go to the Euro we would have 3 different currencies in a relatively short period of time (5 to 10 years), don't see that happening.

[Moulin Yarns]

If we go to the Euro we would have 3 different currencies in a relatively short period of time (5 to 10 years), don't see that happening.

I can only think of the euro and the pound?

[Stairway 2 7]

I can only think of the euro and the pound?

We'd need to set up a fully separate Scottish pound matched to uk rate. I doubt you'd be able to use it in ruk, maybe a fee when buying English goods in it

[James310]

I can only think of the euro and the pound?

You can't jump from the pound to the Euro. The pound would in that scenario be the currency of a different country, interest rates and monetary policy would set by a foreign central bank.

To join the EU/Euro you need to meet Chapter 17 of the Acquis communautaire, how do you for example treat exchange rates as a matter of common concern when you don't control the central bank and the monetary policy?

It would be pound and then a new Scottish currency that allows you to meet the criteria as you have set up a central bank and are in control of monetary policy etc. So it would be pound, new Scottish currency and then Euro.

[Killiehibbie]

:confused:

Why Shettletson? You could have named any of literally thousands of places in Scotland and you'd have been right.

A deprived area with the lowest life expectancy

[Kato]

The British were involved with slavery for around 400 years before doing more than any nation on the planet to end it. This was despite objections from every other major country and it certainly wasn't economically beneficial for the British.



That's an interesting aspect. It was hugely beneficial for British slave owners.

Wilberforce gave his first speech to parliament re abolishing in 1789. As well as the human suffering he had seen that developing our country meant stalling or ruining development in others so he recommended reparations to African nations. It took until 1807 for the bill to pass then until 1833 to end slavery in Britain.

Why the long pause?

Much of the ruling classes were vehemently against Wilburforce's plans until they found a way to direct the reparations away from Africa and towards themselves. The modern quievilant of two and half billion pounds was split up between UK slave owners, £20,000,000 back then.

It was financially beneficial for some British, handed lump sums like that the already rich could re-invest and make themselves even richer.

There is a nuance missing from your history that shows the class system existed back then as it exists now, and paths to wealth and wealth retainment isn't easily available to all British people.

Britain can proud of William Wilburforce but the execution of his ideals were just the usual UK upper class grift.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

That's an interesting aspect. It was hugely beneficial for British slave owners.

Wilberforce gave his first speech to parliament re abolishing in 1789. As well as the human suffering he had seen that developing our country meant stalling or ruining development in others so he recommended reparations to African nations. It took until 1807 for the bill to pass then until 1833 to end slavery in Britain.

Why the long pause?

Much of the ruling classes were vehemently against Wilburforce's plans until they found a way to direct the reparations away from Africa and towards themselves. The modern quievilant of two and half billion pounds was split up between UK slave owners, £20,000,000 back then.

It was financially beneficial for some British, handed lump sums like that the already rich could re-invest and make themselves even richer.

There is a nuance missing from your history that shows the class system existed back then as it exists now, and paths to wealth and wealth retainment isn't easily available to all British people.

Britain can proud of William Wilburforce but the execution of his ideals were just the usual UK upper class grift.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Scotland was involved too so..

[Smartie]

That’s a bit like asking me to make a case for Harold shipman to get a job as GP for the local old folks home

There is plenty wrong with the current union, much of it down to the way the current government run things. However, I have yet to see anything that convinces me Scotland would have a better future if we removed ourselves from the union.

In all fairness, a dead serial killer would do less harm in an old folks' home than Boris Johnson is likely to inflict on Scotland between now and the end of his tenure.

[Kato]

Scotland was involved too so..

I referred to Britain, British and UK throughout. Maybe you saw "England" in your imagination.

Scottish people owned more slaves proportionally within the UK BTW. The class system exists within Scotland too.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

I referred to Britain, British and UK throughout. Maybe you saw "England" in your imagination.

Scottish people owned more slaves proportionally within the UK BTW. The class system exists within Scotland too.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
So it's a draw and pointless to bring up slavery in the context of for or against independence no.

[Since90+2]

So it's a draw and pointless to bring up slavery in the context of for or against independence no.

Well said.

[The Tubs]

Well said.

I think we want to talk more about the future, or at least past trends that have a bearing on Scotland's future, rather than facts that may or may not make you feel more attached to a specific nationality. It's like trying to tell me to become a jambo because they won 5-1.

[Kato]

So it's a draw and pointless to bring up slavery in the context of for or against independence no.

I didn't bring the subject up.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[The Tubs]

In order to have something to discuss, I thought I'd get something that may give us an indication of the UK's future. I was disappointed to read about the SNP's analysis so I thought I'd do my own. I don't really like GDP but it sums up a lot for many people.


25975


I was surprised it was so bad. Obviously, the other big European nations had easy ground to catch up after destruction during the war. The trends pre and post EEC entry are interesting too:

25976

[Since90+2]

In order to have something to discuss, I thought I'd get something that may give us an indication of the UK's future. I was disappointed to read about the SNP's analysis so I thought I'd do my own. I don't really like GDP but it sums up a lot for many people.


25975


I was surprised it was so bad. Obviously, the other big European nations had easy ground to catch up after destruction during the war. The trends pre and post EEC entry are interesting too:

25976

I suppose the obvious question to that is, what actual evidence is there that Scotland would perform better than the UK?

[The Tubs]

You can do the same graph to show how we've been overtaken or caught up on in absolute terms:

25977https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/real-gdp-per-capita-pwt?country=GBR~DEU~ITA~FRA

[The Tubs]

I suppose the obvious question to that is, what actual evidence is there that Scotland would perform better than the UK?

EU membership is the simple answer. Look at the 2 slopes I identified.

[Since90+2]

EU membership is the simple answer. Look at the 2 slopes I identified.

And how long would it take for Scotland to gain EU membership?

[The Tubs]

A little bit clearer:

25978

[The Tubs]

And how long would it take for Scotland to gain EU membership?

I'm not Mystic Meg but it'll be far faster than Ukraine, Serbia, etc.

[Since90+2]

I'm not Mystic Meg but it'll be far faster the Ukraine, Serbia, etc.

So we don't know, it's all good showing predictive graphs but the answer is nobody knows, which makes the graphs redundant. It could take a decade, and to be honest I think that's probably about the likely timescale IMO.

[The Tubs]

So we don't know, it's all good showing predictive graphs but the answer is nobody knows, which makes the graphs redundant. It could take a decade, and to be honest I think that's probably about the likely timescale IMO.


History is often our guide. It took Finland 3 years. As we have just left, it shouldn't take more than that.

You can argue that we'd have to satisfy the euro adoption criteria about GDP/debt ratios, but that has often been overlook in the past

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union#Historical_enlar gements

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union#Historical_enlar gements)

[Since90+2]

History is often our guide. It took Finland 3 years. As we have just left, it shouldn't take more than that.

You can argue that we'd have to satisfy the euro adoption criteria about GDP/debt ratios, but that has often been overlook in the past

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union#Historical_enlar gements

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union#Historical_enlar gements)

Finland was already an independent nation though, it's not comparable at all.

The EU are not going to touch Scotland until our relationship with rUk is sorted. And whether we like it or not, rUK will remain a major trading partner of the EU so they are not going to jeopardise that relationship.

[The Tubs]

Finland was already an independent nation though, it's not comparable at all.

The EU are not going to touch Scotland until our relationship with rUk is sorted. And whether we like it or not, rUK will remain a major trading partner of the EU so they are not going to jeopardise that relationship.

What's your basis for this argument? Surely once the divorce is completed, you can make your formal application.

It would be interesting to see the jolt that it would give to England. Would they try to sort their relationship with the EU?

[Eaststand]

And how long would it take for Scotland to gain EU membership?

I was told by a reliable source that if we can get our application posted first class, we'd be accepted into the EU within 2 working days of the letter being received 😉

GGTTH

[Since90+2]

What's your basis for this argument? Surely once the divorce is completed, you can make your formal application.

It would be interesting to see the jolt that it would give to England. Would they try to sort their relationship with the EU?

You previously said "we've" just left. We haven't, the United Kingdom has. Scotland, as per how the EU recognises us, has never been a member.

It's not going to take 3 years from Scotland voting to leave to joining the EU. I don't think hear even the most ardent SNP supporter claiming it would be that quick.

[The Tubs]

You previously said "we've" just left. We haven't, the United Kingdom has. Scotland, as per how the EU recognises us, has never been a member.

It's not going to take 3 years from Scotland voting to leave to joining the EU. I don't think you'll even hear the most ardent SNP supporter claiming it would be that quick.

Most of the Scottish economy is already aligned with EU standards. The unknown would be how much adaption is required for the euro. However, in terms of the 3/4 key indicators they used at its inception, I don't think we'd be too far off.

By the way, I didn't say 3 years after any decision. This was the quickest that has happened from application to entry. Nonetheless, to a complete layman like me, it seems reasonable. Anyone got better information?

[Since90+2]

Most of the Scottish economy is already aligned with EU standards. The unknown would be how much adaption is required for the euro. However, in terms of the 3/4 key indicators they used at its inception, I don't think we'd be too far off.

By the way, I didn't say 3 years after any decision. This was the quickest that has happened from application to entry. Nonetheless, to a complete layman like me, it seems reasonable. Anyone got better information?

I suppose a more recent example would be a better comparison. Who is the last nation to join the EU and how long did it take before application to completion?

[Ozyhibby]

We’ve went from vote No to stay in to it would be too hard to rejoin.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Since90+2]

We’ve went from vote No to stay in to it would be too hard to rejoin.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This type of post adds absolutely nothing to the debate. Again, Scotland has never been a member. It's not a rejoin, it's a new application.

If the people of Scotland are being told EU membership is a key component of independence, it would be useful for people to understand a rough timescale of that.

[The Modfather]

Are we still talking about the positives of the union and constructive ways forward from the here and now for the union?

Or have all the positives of the union already been discussed and all constructive debate about the short, medium and long term been had? Back to championing/scrutinising, delete as appropriate, what an independent Scotland might look like.

[McSwanky]

This type of post adds absolutely nothing to the debate. Again, Scotland has never been a member. It's not a rejoin, it's a new application.

If the people of Scotland are being told EU membership is a key component of independence, it would be useful for people to understand a rough timescale of that.Given that Scotland leaving the UK is probably now a much more palatable scenario for the EU, maybe they'll be a little clearer as to the process and timescale for Scotland (re) joining in the lead up to Indyref 2?

If the Yes campaign can get some agreed specifics on that, that's going to help their cause immensely.

[Hibrandenburg]

Given that Scotland leaving the UK is probably now a much more palatable scenario for the EU, maybe they'll be a little clearer as to the process and timescale for Scotland (re) joining in the lead up to Indyref 2?

If the Yes campaign can get some agreed specifics on that, that's going to help their cause immensely.

I'm sure Sturgeon will have that sewn up and placed in the bottom drawer ready for counter acting the expected onslaught of fear and lies campaign from Westminster. She'll have learnt a lot about keeping her powder dry from the last referendum.

[Skol]

This type of post adds absolutely nothing to the debate. Again, Scotland has never been a member. It's not a rejoin, it's a new application.

If the people of Scotland are being told EU membership is a key component of independence, it would be useful for people to understand a rough timescale of that.

Are there not criteria to be met over a period of time including having your own currency before you are able to join. Given we don’t initially plan our own currency, and wouldn’t initially meet the criteria that suggest to me there is quite a long time before we would be able to join

[Ozyhibby]

Are there not criteria to be met over a period of time including having your own currency before you are able to join. Given we don’t initially plan our own currency, and wouldn’t initially meet the criteria that suggest to me there is quite a long time before we would be able to join

We do plan our own currency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

The EU is a rules based organisation, meet the rules and you are in.

Seeing as the SNP want to keep the pound for a number of years, let's say 3 years then you can't join the EU while you are using another countries currency. So in no way would it be 3 years.

As for the deficit you can join like Croatia did with a high deficit but they had to sign up to something called the "Excessive Debt Procedure" which is austeriy. Their economy suffered as a result. So some realism is required on what joining the EU actually means.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/03/28/fiscal-consolidation-policies-have-had-had-a-disastrous-effect-on-the-croatian-economy/

Here is an example of some of the stuff Croatia had to sign up for.

"In its first budget in 2012, the new government announced cuts to the wage bill, to subsidies, and to health spending. VAT was increased by 2 per cent combined with a 2 per cent reduction in social health contributions designed to ease the burden of social contributions on wages and boost employment. A personal income tax allowance was introduced for low earners, while a 12 per cent tax was introduced on profits and dividends, measures designed to change the balance of taxation away from labour and towards capital."

Stuff you won't hear anyone at the SNP talk about though.

[The Tubs]

As I mentioned in another thread, it's definitely harder to argue the case for independence after Brexit. In spite of this, I actually think the case is stronger.

In the UK, I think Scotland is guaranteed punishment by the UK government until devolution fails as well as the general economic malaise that is expected to fall on the UK. Outside, there is a huge amount of risks and obvious initial hard times. But there is hope and probable convergence, in my opinion, to being one of the wealthier nations. I base this last opinion on the economic history of EU entrants who haven't had to recover from communism or fascism.

I don't live in Scotland and have no intention of ever returning so it's really easy for me to have an opinion. Like the Brexit folk, I just want a new passport. Though I suppose Brexit isn't too bad — at least the British one isn't maroon anymore.

[Since90+2]

The EU is a rules based organisation, meet the rules and you are in.

Seeing as the SNP want to keep the pound for a number of years, let's say 3 years then you can't join the EU while you are using another countries currency. So in no way would it be 3 years.

As for the deficit you can join like Croatia did with a high deficit but they had to sign up to something called the "Excessive Debt Procedure" which is austeriy. Their economy suffered as a result. So some realism is required on what joining the EU actually means.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/03/28/fiscal-consolidation-policies-have-had-had-a-disastrous-effect-on-the-croatian-economy/

Here is an example of some of the stuff Croatia had to sign up for.

"In its first budget in 2012, the new government announced cuts to the wage bill, to subsidies, and to health spending. VAT was increased by 2 per cent combined with a 2 per cent reduction in social health contributions designed to ease the burden of social contributions on wages and boost employment. A personal income tax allowance was introduced for low earners, while a 12 per cent tax was introduced on profits and dividends, measures designed to change the balance of taxation away from labour and towards capital."

Stuff you won't hear anyone at the SNP talk about though.

This isn't meant to be dismissive, as healthy debate is what is required, but I genuinely don't think the most prolific SNP supporters on here have the knowledge to debate this kind of point rather than them just simply ignoring it.

That's an observation not a criticism. There's an obvious way to combat that observation.

[The Tubs]

The EU is a rules based organisation, meet the rules and you are in.

Seeing as the SNP want to keep the pound for a number of years, let's say 3 years then you can't join the EU while you are using another countries currency. So in no way would it be 3 years.

As for the deficit you can join like Croatia did with a high deficit but they had to sign up to something called the "Excessive Debt Procedure" which is austeriy. Their economy suffered as a result. So some realism is required on what joining the EU actually means.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/03/28/fiscal-consolidation-policies-have-had-had-a-disastrous-effect-on-the-croatian-economy/

Here is an example of some of the stuff Croatia had to sign up for.

"In its first budget in 2012, the new government announced cuts to the wage bill, to subsidies, and to health spending. VAT was increased by 2 per cent combined with a 2 per cent reduction in social health contributions designed to ease the burden of social contributions on wages and boost employment. A personal income tax allowance was introduced for low earners, while a 12 per cent tax was introduced on profits and dividends, measures designed to change the balance of taxation away from labour and towards capital."

Stuff you won't hear anyone at the SNP talk about though.

This last sentence may appeal to many on here. Having skimmed over the blog, the writer seems to attribute these decisions to domestic economic policy instead of EU imposition and is quite critical of the government's choices. Am I missing something?

I will concede that, later in the blog, the writer does describe subsequent EU structural intervention and much of this would be unpopular on here. Croatia does seem to be a complicated one for the EU.

[James310]

This last sentence may appeal to many on here. Having skimmed over the blog, the writer seems to attribute these decisions to domestic economic policy instead of EU imposition and is quite critical of the government's choices. Am I missing something?

I will concede that, later in the blog, the writer does describe subsequent EU structural intervention and much of this would be unpopular on here. Croatia does seem to be a complicated one for the EU.

It was only in the Excessive Debt Procedure because of joining the EU, the domestic economic policy has to reflect bringing the deficit to under 3% of GDP. Whether the EU would be so strict now I have no idea.

It did leave the Excessive Debt Procedure though, in 2017 I think. So not that long, but a good few years of quite extreme austerity.

We already have taxes on profits and dividends. In the space of a few posts on here though I have seen let's be like Ireland and have a really low corporation tax and then a few posts later let's tax companies like Amazon and Google more to raise more tax in an independent Scotland.

Montenegro applied to join the EU in 2008, it's still waiting.

[The Tubs]

It was only in the Excessive Debt Procedure because of joining the EU, the domestic economic policy has to reflect bringing the deficit to under 3% of GDP. Whether the EU would be so strict now I have no idea.

It did leave the Excessive Debt Procedure thought, in 2017 I think. So not that long, but a good few years of quite extreme austerity.

We already have taxes on profits and dividends. In the space of a few posts on here though I have seen let's be like Ireland and have a really low corporation tax and then a few posts later let's tax companies like Amazon and Google more to raise more tax in an independent Scotland.

Montenegro applied to join the EU in 2008, it's still waiting.

In that case, you quoted the wrong passage from the text as the EDP began in January 2014.

When did Turkey apply again? Some on here probably weren't even born. I'd imagine Scotland is more suitable to be an EU member than Croatia current is.

[Ozyhibby]

London school of Economics seem to think 3-4 years.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2021/03/31/scotlands-route-to-eu-membership/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

In that case, you quoted the wrong passage from the text as the EDP began in January 2014.

When did Turkey apply again? Some on here probably weren't even born. I'd imagine Scotland is more suitable to be an EU member than Croatia current is.

Croatia applied in 2003 and was in negotiations for about 6 years so the economic policy was in response to knowing they would have to meet the rules on excessive deficits. They joined the EU in 2013 so they could only be in the Excessive Debt Procedure after joining, and they were put on it within 6 months.

Turkey looks like it has been applying for a long time.

[The Tubs]

Croatia applied in 2003 and was in negotiations for about 6 years so the economic policy was in response to knowing they would have to meet the rules on excessive deficits. They joined the EU in 2013 so they could only be in the Excessive Debt Procedure after joining, and they were put on it within 6 months.

Turkey looks like it has been applying for a long time.

James, my friend, I'll have a look around for deficit rules and the compliance with them. My memory is that the EU was very flexible with them in 2000. I imagine they've been stricter in applying them with eastern European entrants, especially the poorer ones.

[Mon Dieu4]

Croatia applied in 2003 and was in negotiations for about 6 years so the economic policy was in response to knowing they would have to meet the rules on excessive deficits. They joined the EU in 2013 so they could only be in the Excessive Debt Procedure after joining, and they were put on it within 6 months.

Turkey looks like it has been applying for a long time.

You seem to forget pettiness, the EU would ignore the usual rules for joining and let Scotland in just to noise up Boris and his chums, of that I have zero doubt

[James310]

London school of Economics seem to think 3-4 years.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2021/03/31/scotlands-route-to-eu-membership/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think that's their view, it's the view of people like Kirsty Hughes who certainly knows her stuff. But she even admits the currency is the issue.

https://twitter.com/KirstyS_Hughes/status/1001014056306782208?t=BdhAU_sLdNEkrWwjENYoWA&s=19


"An accession country must have an independent central bank & a currency. It must have policies directed at price stability, make exchange rates a matter of common concern & an intention to join the euro. So using the £, Scotland can’t do this."

Ian Blackford was telling us not that long ago Scotland would use the pound for years.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/20157543.independent-scotland-keep-british-pound-years-ian-blackford-says/


You can't join the EU using another countries currency, so if we are to believe Ian Blackford then the 3 to 4 years timetable is not realistic at all.

The currency policy is still all over the place. I know some say it doesn't matter and we will use whatever currency we want, but it really does matter.

[ronaldo7]

Are we still talking about the positives of the union and constructive ways forward from the here and now for the union?

Or have all the positives of the union already been discussed and all constructive debate about the short, medium and long term been had? Back to championing/scrutinising, delete as appropriate, what an independent Scotland might look like.

It took the first page. From then on it was how difficult it will be for Scotland to become an Independent nation. I suppose that counts as a positive for the Unionists.

[James310]

You seem to forget pettiness, the EU would ignore the usual rules for joining and let Scotland in just to noise up Boris and his chums, of that I have zero doubt

I highly doubt that, UK/EU trade would still dwarf any potential Scot/EU trade. Boris will long gone by the time any negotiations take place.

[James310]

James, my friend, I'll have a look around for deficit rules and the compliance with them. My memory is that the EU was very flexible with them in 2000. I imagine they've been stricter in applying them with eastern European entrants, especially the poorer ones.

Yes, if everyone agrees then of course rules can be bent or changed. All we have to go by is the rules as they are today.

[The Tubs]

The currency policy is still all over the place. I know some say it doesn't matter and we will use whatever currency we want, but it really does matter.

We've found something we can agree on (not that I have any answers).

[Skol]

We do plan our own currency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You didn’t read my post properly !

[WhileTheChief..]

I didn't bring the subject up.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Someone brought up the British empire and slavery as a negative for the union. I was replying to them.

You replied to my post about it.

[WhileTheChief..]

Why’s the last 2 pages about Finland and the EU?

Why are you all turning this thread into the same as the Indy one?

If you’re an Indy supporter there are numerous threads for you to post in. This was meant to be for people in favour of keeping the union.

Pointless thread now.

[The Tubs]

You're quite right, while the chief. I've asked a few times to get onto the topic. I'd also prefer a discussion on the future rather than historically shameful events. I beg you to give it a chance.

[Stairway 2 7]

They are obviously going to be intertwined. Saying keeping the money you use and not needing to create Scottish pound or join euro, will be a positive for the union for some, whilst being negative to independence

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm pretty sure nobody would look at the constitutional hotch potch that is the UK with

- a constitution that has nothing written down
- an unelected 2nd chamber including bishops (ffs)
- a voting system that allows absolute majority rule via 40% of the vote, including doing anything it likes to the unwritten constitution
- an asymmetric devolutionary fudge that constantly swings between pretending to be a "union of nations" and actually being a unitary state, depending on the audience
- a head of state that is only a small plane crash away from being sweaty-nonce-boy
- that's turned its back on having influence within one of the world's most powerful trading blocs just as its moving toward hardening up its current soft power
- that's turned its back on that market thereby all but guaranteeing either decades of relative economic decline or a large erosion of standards in employment, the environment etc

and think, yes, you know that's the model of governance for me.

As far as I can see there's only really 2 arguments for the Union that are viable in the short term:

- an existential attachment to the UK; "Britain is my country" and I'm not giving that up
- a fear of personal hardship brought about by the economic shock of transition


The former works reliably for a chunky minority that are the bedrock of No, but is nowhere near enough to get over the line and it would take a decades long process of both rebuilding Britain and a Scottish attachment to the very idea of Britain to make it enough. There is currently zero sign of any move in that direction. If anything the Tories are hell bent on the reverse.

So, expect the latter to bring about Project Fear 2, big time, this time it's even scarier. And actually, it is scarier. I can't say I would judge anyone harshly for thinking I'm alright as I am or I'm personally doing well out of the current system, albeit the UK/Scotland is getting a little bit worse year on year, but it's not that bad and I can live with it.

The Yes side has to convince them to see the bigger picture for society as a whole and that it'll be worth it.

[lapsedhibee]

I'm pretty sure nobody would look at the constitutional hotch potch that is the UK with

- a constitution that has nothing written down
- an unelected 2nd chamber including bishops (ffs)
- a voting system that allows absolute majority rule via 40% of the vote, including doing anything it likes to the unwritten constitution
- an asymmetric devolutionary fudge that constantly swings between pretending to be a "union of nations" and actually being a unitary state, depending on the audience
- a head of state that is only a small plane crash away from being sweaty-nonce-boy
- that's turned its back on having influence within one of the world's most powerful trading blocs just as its moving toward hardening up its current soft power
- that's turned its back on that market thereby all but guaranteeing either decades of relative economic decline or a large erosion of standards in employment, the environment etc

and think, yes, you know that's the model of governance for me.

You're deliberately picking out the undesirable elements of the current setup to make your point. But what about voting for new laws, where you have to leave the room, wander around for a bit, then queue to get back in? Or that boy who rattles the parliament doors with his stick every year? How many other countries in the world have that? Very few.

[Skol]

You're deliberately picking out the undesirable elements of the current setup to make your point. But what about voting for new laws, where you have to leave the room, wander around for a bit, then queue to get back in? Or that boy who rattles the parliament doors with his stick every year? How many other countries in the world have that? Very few.

I agree and the position overlooks the real reasons.

I think very few people fall into the former category with the strong link to Britain. Also think very few fall into the latter category.

The reality is that most people in the No camp have not seen a case for change. Just being unhappy with the current situation doesnt mean Independence is the answer. For all its faulys, being part of the union still remains the best option until the SNP can make a rock solid case and that has not been forthcoming so far

[The Tubs]

I agree and the position overlooks the real reasons.

I think very few people fall into the former category with the strong link to Britain. Also think very few fall into the latter category.

The reality is that most people in the No camp have not seen a case for change. Just being unhappy with the current situation doesnt mean Independence is the answer. For all its faulys, being part of the union still remains the best option until the SNP can make a rock solid case and that has not been forthcoming so far

Why? Until now, I haven't seen any evidence to back up the claim, other than the English have made some good music, though mainly due to immigration I must add.

For me, likely relative economic decline is not the best option.

[WhileTheChief..]

I'm pretty sure nobody would look at the constitutional hotch potch that is the UK with

- a constitution that has nothing written down
- an unelected 2nd chamber including bishops (ffs)
- a voting system that allows absolute majority rule via 40% of the vote, including doing anything it likes to the unwritten constitution
- an asymmetric devolutionary fudge that constantly swings between pretending to be a "union of nations" and actually being a unitary state, depending on the audience
- a head of state that is only a small plane crash away from being sweaty-nonce-boy
- that's turned its back on having influence within one of the world's most powerful trading blocs just as its moving toward hardening up its current soft power
- that's turned its back on that market thereby all but guaranteeing either decades of relative economic decline or a large erosion of standards in employment, the environment etc

and think, yes, you know that's the model of governance for me.

As far as I can see there's only really 2 arguments for the Union that are viable in the short term:

- an existential attachment to the UK; "Britain is my country" and I'm not giving that up
- a fear of personal hardship brought about by the economic shock of transition


The former works reliably for a chunky minority that are the bedrock of No, but is nowhere near enough to get over the line and it would take a decades long process of both rebuilding Britain and a Scottish attachment to the very idea of Britain to make it enough. There is currently zero sign of any move in that direction. If anything the Tories are hell bent on the reverse.

So, expect the latter to bring about Project Fear 2, big time, this time it's even scarier. And actually, it is scarier. I can't say I would judge anyone harshly for thinking I'm alright as I am or I'm personally doing well out of the current system, albeit the UK/Scotland is getting a little bit worse year on year, but it's not that bad and I can live with it.

The Yes side has to convince them to see the bigger picture for society as a whole and that it'll be worth it.

How is this post making the case for the Union?

You should post it in the Indy thread instead no?

If you want to post something positive about the Union, this is the place to do it.

Not having a go at you btw, there’s plenty of Indy supporters have hijacked this thread, but it would be good if it could be left for it’s intended purpose!

[JeMeSouviens]

How is this post making the case for the Union?

You should post it in the Indy thread instead no?

If you want to post something positive about the Union, this is the place to do it.

Not having a go at you btw, there’s plenty of Indy supporters have hijacked this thread, but it would be good if it could be left for it’s intended purpose!

Yeah, there's no negative posting about indy in the indy thread. :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

How is this post making the case for the Union?

You should post it in the Indy thread instead no?

If you want to post something positive about the Union, this is the place to do it.

Not having a go at you btw, there’s plenty of Indy supporters have hijacked this thread, but it would be good if it could be left for it’s intended purpose!

We’d still be at two posts.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jones28]

As a pro independence, reluctant SNP voter who lives in a conservative constituency my positives for the union are as follows:

Music. I think England have produced the best music ever.

Pageantry. It is quite impressive, and if the 70th jubilee hadn’t taken place at great expense during a cost of living crisis I probably would have been more impressed. As it was I found it quite distasteful and not uplifting in the slightest.

History, though chequered there have been lots of good things about British history. It’s a bit like Winston Churchill: quite a repugnant racist but will go down as one of the greatest Britons ever - and rightly so.

Relative stability: the status quo is a safe option, but it means aligning ourselves with the rest of the UK, something that I find less and less appealing as time goes on. We’re already unstable economically and it’s getting worse. How much worse can it really get?

[WhileTheChief..]

From the OP…..


I won’t tell people what they can and can’t post on, but would ask for this to remain a thread mainly for unionists. I’ll just end up closing the thread if it ends up the same petty arguments from the same posters. The independence, SNP & Tories threads are the places for that.

[WhileTheChief..]

We’d still be at two posts.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then so be it.

It would show that nobody can defend the Union or at least be bothered to post about it!

Everything you Indy supporters are saying on this thread has been said already.

I want to read what others in favour of the Union think. I already know what guys like you think.

Can’t you leave us 1 thread to talk amongst ourselves? If I post something positive about the union I do t want my post to be jumped on by you guys. I want to discuss with other like minded people.

if I want to discuss the point with you, I’ll choose the appropriate thread.

[WhileTheChief..]

Yeah, there's no negative posting about indy in the indy thread. :greengrin

The Indy thread is for everyone to contribute to. This one is for people in favour of the union.

[JeMeSouviens]

The Indy thread is for everyone to contribute to. This one is for people in favour of the union.

Hang on a minute - I thought we were supposed to be the divisive ones? :wink:

[WhileTheChief..]

Hang on a minute - I thought we were supposed to be the divisive ones? :wink:

Take it up with the OP. I’m just trying to follow the rules 😛

[The Modfather]

Take it up with the OP. I’m just trying to follow the rules 😛

To be fair, while the thread has largely been more civil and constructive than I thought it would probably end up. I was also a bit disappointed at the lack of desire by some of the frequent pro unionists to talk about where the union goes from here. Pretty Boy made a good post about federalism, which would have been an interesting debate, but that strand withered away after a post or two. I made a post about the Westminster system, that never generated any discussion either.

There was some good posts about cultural history and emotional feeling, which are perfectly valid and probably closer to mirroring my pro independence views. However some of the posters happy to scrutinise what independence might look like to a granular level haven’t actually engaged in the spirit of this thread. Or have any desire to have a constructive discussion about what the union is today v what it could be tomorrow.

[Ozyhibby]

To be fair, while the thread has largely been more civil and constructive than I thought it would probably end up. I was also a bit disappointed at the lack of desire by some of the frequent pro unionists to talk about where the union goes from here. Pretty Boy made a good post about federalism, which would have been an interesting debate, but that strand withered away after a post or two. I made a post about the Westminster system, that never generated any discussion either.

There was some good posts about cultural history and emotional feeling, which are perfectly valid and probably closer to mirroring my pro independence views. However some of the posters happy to scrutinise what independence might look like to a granular level haven’t actually engaged in the spirit of this thread. Or have any desire to have a constructive discussion about what the union is today v what it could be tomorrow.

Federalism is something I could vote for if there was anyone who was offering it and someone could show me how it could possibly work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

To be fair, while the thread has largely been more civil and constructive than I thought it would probably end up. I was also a bit disappointed at the lack of desire by some of the frequent pro unionists to talk about where the union goes from here. Pretty Boy made a good post about federalism, which would have been an interesting debate, but that strand withered away after a post or two. I made a post about the Westminster system, that never generated any discussion either.

There was some good posts about cultural history and emotional feeling, which are perfectly valid and probably closer to mirroring my pro independence views. However some of the posters happy to scrutinise what independence might look like to a granular level haven’t actually engaged in the spirit of this thread. Or have any desire to have a constructive discussion about what the union is today v what it could be tomorrow.

You’re making the assumption that we want things to change though.

For a lot of people, we’re happy with the way things are.

Where does it go from here? It carries on as is.

You’re the ones wanting to change the country, it’s up to you to show us a vision of where you want to take us.

[Bostonhibby]

Then so be it.

It would show that nobody can defend the Union or at least be bothered to post about it!

Everything you Indy supporters are saying on this thread has been said already.

I want to read what others in favour of the Union think. I already know what guys like you think.

Can’t you leave us 1 thread to talk amongst ourselves? If I post something positive about the union I do t want my post to be jumped on by you guys. I want to discuss with other like minded people.

if I want to discuss the point with you, I’ll choose the appropriate thread.I completely agree with you here, not really any ambiguity about the purpose of the thread.

But can I just mention Morris Dancing, absolutely outstanding down here, just think how good it would be for the nation as a whole if we levelled up and took a one nation view............[emoji6]

Sorry

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

my positives for the union are as follows:

Music. I think England have produced the best music ever.

Not really a positive for the union though, is it? Would English musicians not have produced their good music, or stop producing their good music, if suddenly their neighbours next door stopped being a colony?

[JeMeSouviens]

Federalism is something I could vote for if there was anyone who was offering it and someone could show me how it could possibly work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I could've voted for it pre-2016 but I think Brexit has changed that for me (even if there was any chance of it being delivered, which I agree there isn't). I'm 52, I'll certainly be dead before the UK sorts itself out. There is some small hope I could see a better Scotland.

[The Modfather]

You’re making the assumption that we want things to change though.

For a lot of people, we’re happy with the way things are.

Where does it go from here? It carries on as is.

You’re the ones wanting to change the country, it’s up to you to show us a vision of where you want to take us.

It’s fine to be happy with what we have now. However is there nothing you’d like to see different about the union today or anything you’d like to see a change towards? E.g. a move towards investing in renewable energy. More power distributed evenly around the United Kingdom and away from the focus on London & the south east? Removal of trident and what good that money could do elsewhere? Etc etc.

[Jones28]

Not really a positive for the union though, is it? Would English musicians not have produced their good music, or stop producing their good music, if suddenly their neighbours next door stopped being a colony?

I’d love to respond but I don’t want to upset anyone.

[Hibrandenburg]

You’re making the assumption that we want things to change though.

For a lot of people, we’re happy with the way things are.

Where does it go from here? It carries on as is.

You’re the ones wanting to change the country, it’s up to you to show us a vision of where you want to take us.

Can we do that on this thread please?

[WhileTheChief..]

Can we do that on this thread please?

Ok, go for it. Over to you Indy guys!!

[WhileTheChief..]

I completely agree with you here, not really any ambiguity about the purpose of the thread.

But can I just mention Morris Dancing, absolutely outstanding down here, just think how good it would be for the nation as a whole if we levelled up and took a one nation view............[emoji6]

Sorry

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

Thanks.

I thought it could have been a decent thread.

I’ve nothing against reading the views of Indy supporters, I see it every day on here, but I’m keen to hear from others that think similarly to myself.

[Kato]

You’re making the assumption that we want things to change though.

For a lot of people, we’re happy with the way things are.

Where does it go from here? It carries on as is.

You’re the ones wanting to change the country, it’s up to you to show us a vision of where you want to take us.But the way things are aren't the way things are going to be, if Boris Johnson plans are taken to their final point. He wants to change the structure of almost everything in the country.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

But the way things are aren't the way things are going to be, if Boris Johnson plans are taken to their final point. He wants to change the structure of almost everything in the country.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Not sure what you’re referring to here but if it’s change for the better then I’m all for it.

I doubt he’s wanting to change things to make us worse off. Appreciate you’ll disagree with that last point!!!

[lapsedhibee]

Not sure what you’re referring to here but if it’s change for the better then I’m all for it.

I doubt he’s wanting to change things to make us worse off. Appreciate you’ll disagree with that last point!!!

He told reporters: "Forget about me, think about what this country, the UK could do and where it's gone.

"We've embarked on a massive project to change the government, the constitution of the country and the way we run our legal system, the way we manage borders, our economy, all sorts of things we're doing differently.

[Smartie]

Not sure whether or not this can be considered a "pro union" post from someone in favour of the continuation of the union and rather a concern about independence from an independence supporter, however...

I probably has my biggest wobble when it came to my support of independence when Russia invaded Ukraine. Since the initial shock we've kind of settled back into a sort of relatively normal state again although it is still appalling when we see shopping centres being shelled and the like.

At the time I freaked out a bit. It felt like something had pretty monumentally changed. What I really didn't like was when I read up a bit about what has been described as "Putin's playbook"...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

This would suggest that Ukraine was just the start of the plan. Obviously it now appears that Russia have made a bit of a pig's ear of it and attacking further countries (including Nato ones) is unlikely in the near future but on that first day, when the Russians were attacking Kiev and attempting to take control of the airport nearby, it felt like it might have gone a different way.

I was a bit unimpressed by the EU response early on and tbh remain so. Instead of a peaceful, unified bloc it looked to be fragmented and dominated by self interest - Germans protecting their industries and continuing to consume Russian gas, Belgians most bothered about diamond trade etc. France have remained in dialogue with Putin throughout, Orban has been re-elected - whilst we know all about the UK union being far from perfect, it brought to the fore the fact that the EU looked far from being impressive, and the EU has always been something I've admired and wanted to be part of. By contrast, since the early weakness and wobble whilst allowing prominent Russians to make plans and possibly (probably) being heavily corrupted by Russian money, as much as I hate him I think Boris has been fairly decisive, clear and consistent regarding what needs to happen regarding Ukraine.

So, I had my wobble. Someone made the reasonable point about one of the main arguments against independence being fear of the short term financial shock. I'd stick in that in a world that seems a bit less secure than it did a year ago in the geopolitical sense, there is probably now a fear that exists from the basic defence sense. Is now a great time to be splintering the UK from a defence perspective? I've been impressed by how different countries have collaborated under the Nato umbrella so don't think it should be impossible, but it would require a good bit of thought as to how we would do defence, at a time when that needn't necessarily be taken for granted as much as we possibly did during the (relatively) peaceful prior 70 years in Europe.

[WhileTheChief..]

He told reporters: "Forget about me, think about what this country, the UK could do and where it's gone.

"We've embarked on a massive project to change the government, the constitution of the country and the way we run our legal system, the way we manage borders, our economy, all sorts of things we're doing differently.

Sounds good.

Will wait to see the detail on what changes he means then I’ll happily comment on them.

There might even be stuff there you’ll be happy to see.

[lapsedhibee]

Sounds good.

Will wait to see the detail on what changes he means then I’ll happily comment on them.

There might even be stuff there you’ll be happy to see.

Detail of the desired changes to the legal system is probably already clear: 'we can do whatever we want without being challenged by leftie lawyers'.

[Kato]

Not sure what you’re referring to here but if it’s change for the better then I’m all for it.

I doubt he’s wanting to change things to make us worse off. Appreciate you’ll disagree with that last point!!!I thought you were happy with the way things are?

I don't know what you would deem "better". You are pro Neo Liberalism which benefits a tiny part of population at the expense of the majority. I you think more of that would be "better", then yes we disagree.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Sounds good.

Will wait to see the detail on what changes he means then I’ll happily comment on them.

There might even be stuff there you’ll be happy to see.

"Sounds good" without any detail when a few posts ago you were happy with the way things are.

I don't get it.

What would you be happy with if you could put detail on Johnson's plans yourself?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

I thought you were happy with the way things are?

I don't know what you would deem "better". You are pro Neo Liberalism which benefits a tiny part of population at the expense of the majority. I you think more of that would be "better", then yes we disagree.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Ok I’ll try and spell it out for you.

I’m happy with the way things are in a lot of aspects in my life.

I’m happy with what I do at work, it doesn’t mean I don’t strive to do better.

I went on a diet and lost over 5 stone. I still go to the gym because I want to get fitter.

As with almost everything, there’s room for improvement.

That applies to every single government in the world.

Your neo-whatever line is a nonsense. I made a throw away remark a few weeks ago when I asked what it was. I’ve not given it another thought since.

You remembered it though. You’re way too fixated on my views on here. Take a break!!

[Moulin Yarns]

The Indy thread is for everyone to contribute to. This one is for people in favour of the union.

First you quote the op as not wanting to tell people what they can and can't post, then you do exactly that!!!

A bit like Westminster 😉

[Moulin Yarns]

You’re making the assumption that we want things to change though.

For a lot of people, we’re happy with the way things are.

Where does it go from here? It carries on as is.

You’re the ones wanting to change the country, it’s up to you to show us a vision of where you want to take us.

But not on this thread?? 🤔

[Hibrandenburg]

Ok, go for it. Over to you Indy guys!!

Waste of time, you'd change your mind again anyway.

[WhileTheChief..]

But not on this thread?? 🤔

Exactly. Cheers.

[WhileTheChief..]

Waste of time, you'd change your mind again anyway.

Change my mind about what?

[WhileTheChief..]

First you quote the op as not wanting to tell people what they can and can't post, then you do exactly that!!!

A bit like Westminster ��

That’s a bit of a stretch, even for you.

I’ll not waste your time repeating the point I was making. You understand it full well.

[Kato]

Ok I’ll try and spell it out for you.

I’m happy with the way things are in a lot of aspects in my life.

I’m happy with what I do at work, it doesn’t mean I don’t strive to do better.

I went on a diet and lost over 5 stone. I still go to the gym because I want to get fitter.

As with almost everything, there’s room for improvement.

That applies to every single government in the world.

Your neo-whatever line is a nonsense. I made a throw away remark a few weeks ago when I asked what it was. I’ve not given it another thought since.

You remembered it though. You’re way too fixated on my views on here. Take a break!!Whatevs. My view on your political views is that you don't know the difference between midnight and mexico, or you are at the wind up.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

So it looks like the Case For The Union thread might have to wait until we see the vision of the Union that Johnson has.

What is the predictions for the finances of the UK in the short-mid term? Can any pro-Union posters tell us when the "highly skilled, highly paid" part kicks-in.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

That’s a bit of a stretch, even for you.

I’ll not waste your time repeating the point I was making. You understand it full well.

Go back and read what you said, you quoted the op, who said they weren't telling people what they could post. You then go on to tell all and sundry that they should only be posting positives for the union 🙄

Pretty clear what you mean. You are now the sole arbiter of what is allowed!

[WhileTheChief..]

Whatevs. My view on your political views is that you don't know the difference between midnight and mexico, or you are at the wind up.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

If what you say here is true, why do you, more than anybody else on this site, engage with me so often?

Why not just right me off as a total numpty that knows f all and completely ignore me?

[WhileTheChief..]

Go back and read what you said, you quoted the op, who said they weren't telling people what they could post. You then go on to tell all and sundry that they should only be posting positives for the union 🙄

Pretty clear what you mean. You are now the sole arbiter of what is allowed!

Not at all. You’re twisting things.

You know fine well the thread was meant for people in favour of the union to discuss it. The OP has said so in a subsequent post.

I was hoping you’d respect that and leave us to it. That’s all. No biggy. I’ve not decided anything.

[Moulin Yarns]

Not at all. You’re twisting things.

You know fine well the thread was meant for people in favour of the union to discuss it. The OP has said so in a subsequent post.

I was hoping you’d respect that and leave us to it. That’s all. No biggy. I’ve not decided anything.

I'm not the one twisting you in knots.

First you tell everyone to leave this thread for the small number of positives of the union then tell independence supporters to support their case! (2:31 reply to Hibrandenburg)

[WhileTheChief..]

I'm not the one twisting you in knots.

First you tell everyone to leave this thread for the small number of positives of the union then tell independence supporters to support their case! (2:31 reply to Hibrandenburg)

To quote someone else from earlier, whatever.

[Kato]

If what you say here is true, why do you, more than anybody else on this site, engage with me so often?

Why not just right me off as a total numpty that knows f all and completely ignore me?

I don't think the first paragraph is true.

The second one? That's up to me, maybe I don't think your numptiness is total.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Finally found a case for the Union. Stephen Daisley tells all those under 30 to get out. Committed Unionists are jumping ship.

https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/1591899526876786689

[Kato]

Finally found a case for the Union. Stephen Daisley tells all those under 30 to get out. Committed Unionists are jumping ship.

https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/1591899526876786689Better together but only if you're an old fart.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Better together but only if you're an old fart.

Hey!

:na na:

[Ozyhibby]

Finally found a case for the Union. Stephen Daisley tells all those under 30 to get out. Committed Unionists are jumping ship.

https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/1591899526876786689

What next, Pamela Nash applies to join the SNP?[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Finally found a case for the Union. Stephen Daisley tells all those under 30 to get out. Committed Unionists are jumping ship.

https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/1591899526876786689

Ironically 3/4 of Scots under want to leave the union but Daisley campaigns hard to stop them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

What next, Pamela Nash applies to join the SNP?[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alba. 😂