Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Scotland will be the new Africa, I tell you.

Mali Circa 800?

[Owlbread]

More like Ireland circa 1999, except less likely to go belly up.

I often get quite angry when people start saying "What if England does X?" "What if England does Y?" and when you ask why England would do all these devilish things the only response you can really get is "badness". It's ridiculous. In any case, if England is prepared to stab us in the back as soon as we become independent why the hell are we in a Union with them in the first place?

[MonkeyHead]

I'm gonna mangle my metaphors and point out that no nation is an island any more.

Indeed, although some are more like islands than others - Switzerland, Norway and so on. If I was president of an independent Scotland, the first thing I would do is declare neutrality, use an independent currency and remain outwith the EU but within their various economic alliances/coalitions until it suits us to enter the EU again.

And what exactly is Scotland going to be doing to prop up it's economy.  England is definitely the commercial heart of the UK.  How would Scotland prevent England (or almost any other country) from annexing it through military means or diplomatic manoeuring?  Where would Scotlands diplomatic power come from?  How would you stop England screwing you over when it comes to currently shared infrastructure?  As much as I support Scottish independence ideologically, it doesn't seem like you'd be left in a strong position.

England "annexing" Scotland was the source of the problem to begin with! I assume Scotland would become a NATO member? Well, that would pretty much 100% keep it safe from being taken over barring some serious shenanigans at the UN I would assume.

[Owlbread]

England "annexing" Scotland was the source of the problem to begin with! I assume Scotland would become a NATO member? Well, that would pretty much 100% keep it safe from being taken over barring some serious shenanigans at the UN I would assume.

Yes. A year ago I would have argued with you from the viewpoint that we actually "married" England or something in 1707 but the Unionist parties have apparently agreed that Scotland was "erased" in 1707 and stopped being "a country", having joined a "greater England" under a different name. As in... the exact same thing everyone in the world thought happened except for us - hence Russians, French people, Germans and all sorts call us English rather than British because what's the difference?

That legal argument is the one the "Better Together" Unionist campaign will use against us when we claimthat we would be an EU member automatically when we become independent - i.e. we never left. You don't really need to debate with me on that point, even I know that's not really true.

Of course, when a campaign that's designed to keep down nationalist sentiment and convince people to vote no to their own country's independence starts claiming that the country was "erased" and joined "a greater England" you know they're in for a headache. Things like that give me little pangs of optimism, even though I doubt like auld Tam of Israel.

Just in case you didn't really pick up on that last point - the Unionists are trying to convince us that Scotland doesn't exist and that we're actually English, except with a different name. Ponder that.

Spoiler: Scotland doesn't exist, we're actually English... what the hell are they thinking? (click to show/hide)

[10ebbor10]

Our economy is also far stronger than people commonly understand it to be. Though England is the commercial heart of the UK, Scotland has some of the largest oil reserves in the EU, we have a flourishing tourist industry (which would grow enormously with independence - I have a thousand ideas for it), we have an excellent agricultural industry, we have a multi-billion pound whisky industry (whisky and oil usually go together in these debates in terms of importance). Our economy is more varied than Norway's and Ireland's. There's also the renewable energy if you want that old chestnut, seeing as it was the SNP's intention to make Scotland the "Saudi Arabia of Renewables".

Actually, the oil's not on Scottish soil, it's in parts of the maritime sea an independent Scotland would like to claim. Something says me however that the UK's not going to let those maritime areas go easily. Tourist industry could collapse rapidly, partly because tourist can no longer pay in euros, but especially if Scotland leaves/ is forced to leave Sjengen. After all, the UK doesn't have a passport system, so will demand serious controls from the Scottish, and on their borders to prevent excessive illegal immigration. A significant part of the agriculture appears to be animal farming. Export of these might be limited, should Scotland leave any economical zones. Renewable energy is fine, but expensive, and can only is certain parts form the basis of an economy. (Renewable energy powering the economy is fine. But living of energy exports is hard).

[Owlbread]

Actually, the oil's not on Scottish soil, it's in parts of the maritime sea an independent Scotland would like to claim. Something says me however that the UK's not going to let those maritime areas go easily. Tourist industry could collapse rapidly, partly because tourist can no longer pay in euros, but especially if Scotland leaves/ is forced to leave Sjengen. After all, the UK doesn't have a passport system, so will demand serious controls from the Scottish, and on their borders to prevent excessive illegal immigration. A significant part of the agriculture appears to be animal farming. Export of these might be limited, should Scotland leave any economical zones. Renewable energy is fine, but expensive, and can only is certain parts form the basis of an economy. (Renewable energy powering the economy is fine. But living of energy exports is hard).

Tourists can't pay in euros. Scotland uses the pound, good sir. Serious controls from the Scots is also another hackneyed myth - we have no such controls with the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands, neither of which are members of the EU, and during the period of time that Ireland and Britain were both independent and not members of the EU, we had no such border controls. As for the oil - we would undoubtedly win a realistic maritime boundary from the International Court of Justice that would at least give us a budget surplus of £1.9 billion. Just because we have to argue with the RUK doesn't mean we won't win.

[10ebbor10]

Still, that's 2 silly currencies to take care of. They are however, part of Shengen, and a crown colony. Also, really small and no land border with the UK.

[Gervassen]

Just in case you didn't really pick up on that last point - the Unionists are trying to convince us that Scotland doesn't exist and that we're actually English, except with a different name. Ponder that.

It's true, historically. Scots are Saxons who settled in Lothian. I mean, you'd all like to think that you're highlanders, but the overwhelming majority of people in Scotland historically were descended lowland Saxon settlers.

[Owlbread]

It's true, historically. Scots are Saxons who settled in Lothian. I mean, you'd all like to think that you're highlanders, but the overwhelming majority of people in Scotland historically were descended lowland Saxon settlers.

Nonsense. Genetic research in recent years has proven that the overwhelming majority of Scots are descended from Celtic peoples - just because we adopted their language doesn't mean we're their descendents. Just ask the English people who argue that England is a Celtic nation, it just forgot its language. 1 in 10 Scots is a direct descendant of the Picts. I am a direct descendant of Welsh (possibly Strathclyde British) people, or Irish - my marker has not been formally identified yet. Others are descendents of Highlanders, others are Vikings, others are Jutes, Saxons, Angles... the list goes on.

[Sheb]

Speaking of oil: The Shetlands now want to claim that oil for themselves.

[10ebbor10]

That's about 25% of the oil fields. Probably easily doubled if UK puts pressure and extends maritime borders a good way out. Also, the majority of the oil and Liquid gas infrastructure.

[RedKing]

Scotland will be the new Africa, I tell you.

Picturing poignant commericals begging for donations to feed Scottish childen.

"For only a dollar a day, your donation can put a haggis on the plate of a small child..."


Haggis:
Yo dawg, I heard you like sheep,

So I put a stomach in yo' stomach,
so you can bleat while you eat.


...sorry, I'll stop making fun of my distant cousins now.   

@Gervassen:
Lowlander Scottish are a mix of Saxons and later Norman French (who are themselves Danes and Vikings who settled in France for a few generations). Highlanders tended to be more Celtic in ancestry, except for almost anywhere near the coast in which case they're Norse.

So basically, your average Scot is a Scandinavian who was conquered by a Scandinavian who was conquered by a Scandinavian. There's a reason that Scotland has been proposed as a future member of the Nordic Council.

[Owlbread]

Speaking of oil: The Shetlands now want to claim that oil for themselves.

No, Tavish Scott thinks they should claim it for themselves. Tavish Scott is a non-entity and a complete tit who's only pulled this out of his arse because of the independence debate. It's always been SNP policy to deliver autonomy to the Northern Isles to give them more control over their oil - perhaps more so than they would get as a crown dependency, given that oil rights are generally delivered to the mainland i.e. Us.

@Gervassen:
Lowlander Scottish are a mix of Saxons and later Norman French (who are themselves Danes and Vikings who settled in France for a few generations). Highlanders tended to be more Celtic in ancestry, except for almost anywhere near the coast in which case they're Norse.

So basically, your average Scot is a Scandinavian who was conquered by a Scandinavian who was conquered by a Scandinavian. There's a reason that Scotland has been proposed as a future member of the Nordic Council.

It is nowhere near as simple as that. Even in the Lowlands the majority of people are descended from Celts (i.e. the Britons or Gaels or Picts or whoever), the original peoples who were there before any kind of Germanic settlement. I know it's surprising but that's what genetic research has shown. The average Scot is a Celt of some description with Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon and Norman-French influence. What you say about the Nordic Council is true, however. It is equally possible to find Scots who are indeed direct descendents of Jutes, Danes and so forth - look at the Western Isles.

Any MacLeod claims lineage to Lyott (I think), The Ugly One i.e. a Viking. They are often Vikings who took on the Gaelic language. The majority of us, however, are Britons, Gaels, Picts or similar. People like to forget that the entirety of Southern Scotland (Glasgow, Edinburgh) once spoke Old Welsh, perhaps my own ancestors. It's even visible in the surnames - good Scots names like Carruthers came from Caer-Ruthryis.

[RedKing]

While I'm partial to the idea of an independent Scotland for romanticist reasons (one of my GGGGGGG-grandfathers fought in the 1745 Rebellion and fled to America), I find that the modern, practical reasons just aren't that compelling. Anymore than are the reasons for Texas to secede, or Flanders and Wallonia to seperate.

[Owlbread]

While I'm partial to the idea of an independent Scotland for romanticist reasons (one of my GGGGGGG-grandfathers fought in the 1745 Rebellion and fled to America), I find that the modern, practical reasons just aren't that compelling. Anymore than are the reasons for Texas to secede, or Flanders and Wallonia to seperate.

To sort out our problems, to become strong, to endure as a nation (and not a province that will assimilate into a greater Britain) we must become independent.

In order to truly realise our full potential and give our people the country they deserve we must become independent - no question. It's that simple. No matter how far you take devolution it isn't going to go far enough to cover our needs - it'll never protect us from wars we never agreed to or laws from a government we never elected - like the bedroom tax. Bedroom tax is bad, but who knows what we may get in the future. We simply must have our independence - the alternatives are abysmal.