Tories back vote on Independence

[Kingsmills]

To coin the now well worn phrase " I agree with Mantis".

[PullMyFinger]

30 year rule? Gad how many boilings does that make? :014:

Excellent posts from both Mantis and Kingsmills. :021:

[Scotty]

I was never that good at history so things like the act of union and what happened hundreds of years in the past are of no consequence to me other than for sentimentality or for stirring the 'braveheart spirit'.  I am not an SNP member or sympathiser but I am pro-independence for a couple of simple reasons.

1.I am old enough to remember the modern era raping and pillaging that has gone on within the country of my birth. It may not be physical violation in the criminal sense, but it is a violation nonetheless. It irks me that faceless corporations can extract much of the natural resources that would be within our land or territorial waters if we were independent without as much as a passing glance to Scotland as a country. The rules are set in Westminster, the cost of obtaining rights is set in Westminster and regardless of whether I am right or wrong, my perception is that the vast majority of the profits also end up outside Scotland. I do not blame England for this, as it is the oil companies and others (govt.) making the obscene profits but an independent Scotland would at least have a say in the process.

2.Again, this is not an 'England' thing but I have constantly been annoyed in years gone by with the way in which the Westminster government have used Scotland as a guinea pig for things or have allowed inequalities to continue .... think Poll Tax, think Cold weather payments etc etc etc.

At the end of the day, an independent Scotland would have a lot of work to do and the politicians would probably be no better than what we currently have at Westminster so would make mistakes and would still screw us. However, at least they would be our mistakes and we would be getting screwed from Edinburgh instead of London.

[note to those who aspire to the Scandinavian model - I dont like the Swedish/Danish model that has been mentioned ..... Sweden and Denmark have enviable health and welfare systems but would people in Scotland really put up with an income tax rate of over 50% and luxury taxes on things like alcohol and cars (100% tax on a car)]

[PullMyFinger]

Who did you vote for last time then? :cdn:  :023:

[Scotty]

not a Canadian citizen so not allowed to vote .... not a UK resident so not allowed to vote ..... I am what they call disenfranchised  :blah01:

[PullMyFinger]

I had that once, very painful. :001:

[Charles Bannerman]

Some time ago I referred to Jim Siller's comment that "the people of Scotland did not have the bottle to go for Independence".  That comment only applies to losers like CB!

Donmac... I actually took more exception to the first sentence there than the first! It implies, as I said, some kind of deficiency or moral inferiority on the part of the majority who did not hold Mr. Sillars' point of view and that in my book qualifies as narrow minded nationalist arrogance.

By the way It's just occurred to me to my horror that some people might think I am arguing this from a Labour party perspective or even a Tory one, which I most definitely am not. I support no party at all and only trust a small minority of politicians since there are so many who are only in the business out of self interest. However, without espousing any political party at all, I have been a convinced lifelong unionist with a small "u"!

[PullMyFinger]

Ok hun. :hiding03:

[Charles Bannerman]

I trust that's a joke and not a simplistic attempt to make a generalisation between belief in the union and the Lodge, which I dislike with a vengeance.

[PullMyFinger]

THat's why I'm hiding CB. :016:

[Charles Bannerman]

:015:

[ymip]

CB's devout unionists stance is clearly a pre-requisite for a career within the Corporation. 

Charles, can we expect a Wark-esque savaging of CC if he comes out in favour of independence?

  :004:

[Charles Bannerman]

I suppose I'd have to given the wonderful holiday I had at **** Campbell's villa in Spain. (Which I didn't declare to my employers.)

[Guest sophia]

Charles,

Sorry, but your arguments would be better placed in the "memories" board.

We are here and we are now.

If we had a clean slate I don't think we would settle for the present political set up.

I'm absolutely positive that we would not choose what we had post devolution.

During the election Alex Salmond said that Independence is reversible.

Very clever indeed.

What do you think the result of a referendum on London rule would be if put to the Irish?

Money, oil, Barnett...

It's all a smoke screen.

Scotland can make it's own way and prosper.

Scotland's wind and water gifts are exciting and renewable, the London solution of more nuclear is lazy and harks to the mid 20th century.

[Guest donmac298]

You're absolutely right sophia, there's no point in arguing about what happened 300 years ago.  We are in a totally different world now in comparison.  As for the oil arguement, the best days have gone now and when we talk of Independence we should be looking beyond the oil era.  In two generations time there will be less dependency on oil in any case as other means of energy will have been developed - look at the progress over the last 30 - 40 years.

As for the Barnet Formula it's just a convenient arguement and as you say it's a smoke screen as we will find out with the next 30 Year Rule. 

[Charles Bannerman]

The only reason for tracking back 300 years was in response to kcj's claim that one of the factors leading to the Union was that the English sabotaged Darien. Otherwise my arguments are vey much up to date and centred on the principle that it ain't broke so don't bother trying to fix it.

[Kingsmills]

An excellent argument for inertia if ever I heard it. If they had followed that principle Inverness Thistle and Caledonian would still be members of the "not broke" Highland League.

[Guest sophia]

Charles,

I asked a question. Would you do me the courtesy of a reply.

Henry Mcleish let known his intention of changing from the moniker "Scottish  Executive" to the "Scottish Government". All was well until the laird Gordon Brown put the kybosh on it.

What had it got to do with Gordon Brown?

With no argument at all from him, poor Henry was left hung out to dry. It for me, forever betrayed the relationship between the London imperialists and the "parish pump" Executive.

And what of the BBC, they don't yet know how to refer to our elected leaders.

We get..

The Executive

The Government

The Scottish Government

The SNP

The Scottish Executive

They just cannot get their collective head around that our complexion has changed.

Where is "The North"?

Free the Scottish Six!

[Charles Bannerman]

Sophia.. if the question you refer to is the one about the Irish, then if I had realised that it was other than rhetorical, I would most certainly have given you an immediate answer.

You cannot possibly use what the Irish think to create a case for independence for Scotland. The backgrounds and histories are so utterly different - for instance the only people in Scotland minded to form paramiltary organisations, keep guns in the attic and occupy Post Offices were the likes of Willie Bell's loony mates in the 1970s, whereas Irish nationalism was popular enough for all these things to have happened to a significant extent.

Indeed, is it not far more relevant to consider what the result of such a referendum in Scotland would be, which is where we started with this thread? I think we all know the answer to that question - a resounding preference for the status quo - and that's why the SNP are in no hurry to hold such a vote, hoping instead for some kind of Damascene conversion on the part of the Scottish people over the next few years.

Kingsmills....  your analogy with Thistle and Caley is intriguing and very relevant, but it's perhaps best looked at from the point of view of the "Act of Union" of 1994. It is far more likely that Inverness football being stuck in the Highland League would have happened in the absence of such a joining of forces. I would have thought that this comparison might have been quite compelling to a one time member of a smaller entity who is now enjoying the major benefits of Union with a larger merger partner. (Even if the merged body is sometimes annoyingly referred to as "Caley" ...rather like "England" - the analogies here are fascinating.)

Indeed, is the outstanding success of Caley Thistle following an unequal merger in 1994 not a wonderful allegory for the value of the Act of Union of 1707?!

[maimie]

a few answers to questions on the 'reasons for independence' link on here.......

http://www.radiofreescotland.webhop.org/

:003: :004:

[Mee]

Charles, You cannot judge the popularity of a political ideal on whether or not people are prepared to take up arms in support or against it. Scots have always valued political debate, and the rise of the SNP from being a small one issue party to the biggest party in government with a wide range of policies in a few decades without having to resort to terrorism is testimony enough. Do you think you might have missed the "Damascene conversion"?  :015:  Thank feck you don't teach history or modern studies!

[DJS]

As a fully paid up member of the SNP, naturally I'd vote for independence in any referendum.  I agree that how Alex Salmond's executive perform will be a factor in any such vote, though perhaps it should not be as an independent Scotland could have a right wing. left wing or middle of the road administration.  In fact what the role of the SNP might be in an independent Scotland is an interesting question.

If Scotland is the "best small country in the world" as the old Labour executive insisted then it is a total nonsense that this same country could not take care of all its own affairs.  The Danes, Irish and New Zealanders manage just fine and so could we.  Independence would not cure all of Scotland's ills but the Union is creaking and looking more unsteady as the years go by.  The English have every right to be unhappy about Scottish MP's voting on English issues at Westminster.  English tories will inevitably became less Unionist over time as they waken up to the fact that Labour would find it very difficult to win a General Election without all the Labour MP's returned from Scotland.  In fact I'm pretty sure that David Cameron would lose no sleep over Scotland voting "Yes" in any Independence Referendum though he might not admit to that.  Indeed, the rise in English nationalism is one of the most exciting developments in the fight for Scottish nationalism.

[RednBlackComeback]

Interesting thread and has reminded me of this Proclaimer's song.......

Cap In Hand

I could tell the meaning of a word like serene

I got some 'o' grades when I was sixteen

I can tell the difference between magarine and butter

I can say "saskatchewan" without starting to stutter

But I can't understand why we let someone else rule our land, cap in hand

I could get a broken jaw from being in a fight

I know its evening when day turns to night

I can understand why stranraer lie so lowly

They could save a lot of points by signing hibs goalie

But I can't understand why we let someone else rule our land, cap in hand

We fight - when they ask us

We boast - then we cower

We beg

For a piece of

Whats already ours

Once I thought I could make god a bribe

So I said I was in his lost tribe

Getting handouts can be so frustrating

"Get in line son, there's five million waiting"

I can't understand why you let someone else rule your land, cap in hand

I can't understand why we let someone else rule our land, cap in hand

I can't understand why you let someone else rule your land, cap in hand

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No doubt those in favour of the union don't like The Proclaimers !!! :rolleyes02:

[Charles Bannerman]

Mee.. you mean the SNP becoming biggest minority party by one seat at the end of a campaign where they totally hid the independence question, where there was a significant anti Labour protest vote completely unrelated to the independence question and in the background of a large majority who would vote "No" in any referendum (bring it on!) consitutes a Damascene conversion on the part of the Scottish people?

On your other point, I was merely stressing that the Scottish people as a whole don't exactly seem to be jumping up and down to become independent... the "political ideal" to which you refer just doesn't ever seem to have grabed a huge number of people up here. This is, of course, despite the repeated assertions Salmond used to make that every SNP win in a Community Council by election was "a referendum on the constitution."

Quite frankly, people in Scotland have far more important things to concern themselves about.

PS - you said "wide range of policies".. indeed, and all created with indecent haste in an attempt to obscure the SNP's sole raison d'etre which on its own is an election loser. In practice, is the SNP still not really a single issue pressure group whose latest tactic in its attempt to achieve electability (rather like Labour's abandonment of Socialism) is pretending to be intertested in other things too?  :015:

PPS - I too am glad I'm not a history or especially modern studies teacher because it would be so difficult to avoid the temptation of exposing the sillier aspects of all the political parties, not only the SNP! Fundamentally I am very sceptical about politics and politicians as a whole. It just happens that, given the subject matter of this particular thread, it's nationalism that's on the receiving end here and nationalists tend to be more easily wound up than most.  :004: I am equally scathing, for instance, about New Labour's incredible and opportunist departure from Socialism.

[PullMyFinger]

I expect you're a supporter of Tommy Sheridan then.  :010: