Joe, your the only one who mentioned "isolationist" as for "separatist",we are currently part of a union from which some wish to separate,I think it's a fair enough to describe people who wish to separate as separatist, no?
Q: When is a separatist not a separatist?
A: When he wants to con people into believing that voting "Yes" isn't really any great deal so he calls it something else.
Basically, if the separatist lobby are saying, as above, "there would still be the same links to England as today"... then why bother with this whole pantomime of a referendum?
I mean I know there's been the strong suggestion that a separate Scotland would continue with the pound since no one in their right mind would go into the Euro and a separate Scottish Groat would quickly go the way of the Deutschmark in 1923 so that's their independent monetary policy up the spout from the start. That will continue to be governed by the Bank of England as it is now.
Then, for instance, I'm also wondering what they are going to do to achieve the worldwide network of embassies and consular services which we currently, as British people, enjoy. Are you REALLY going to have Scottish embassies with a huge picture of Alex Salmond in the front hall in every country in the world as Britain (but without the Salmond pictures - thank goodness!) currently has.
And that's just the start but I'll leave the rest to the Better Together campaign's manifesto which will presumably appear at some point during the mindnumbing two years we still have to suffer of this unsettling distraction.
For goodness sake, if things are working fine as they have been for 300 plus years as part of a bigger unit, why bother separating off from that simply to run all the risks which come with being a smaller one just to satisfy some kind of political dogma.
Talking of that period of history, we frequently and rightly criticise the Orange Lodge for glorifying battles which took place more than 300 years ago. But now we are going to be confronted with a referendum, the timing of which looks suspiciously manpulated to coincide with (among other things) the anniversary of a battle which took place no less than 700 years ago. How simplistic can you get?
Edited by Charles Bannerman, 17 August 2012 - 02:09 PM.