It strikes me that people here are keen to debate anything other than the views of the Scottish electorate demonstrated clearly above by the detailed polling.
No one seems to have commented on the expressed desire for devomax or home rule, or the support for many devolved powers not yet considered by Smith or Westminster.
It probably won’t end up being Scottish land until the bases are replaced. Seems the most logical way to do it, and to allow the UK to deal with any “insurrection”…
Whatever happens, there won’t be any Independence unless the rUK is entirely happy with what happens with the bases, which will involve it having full control of them until they’re no longer needed.
What’s to debate? The Scots want devolution, not independence, and that’s what they’ll get. Possibly slower than some would like, but if support for it stays strong, and the nationalists shut the fuck up and let it happen, it will happen.
Around a foreign military base? Yes, it is.
When you learn what “straw man”, “colonialist”, or “anglocentric” mean, you can start lecturing others about definitions.
Wait, it’s not a “demonstrated clearly above by the detailed polling” for independence anymore? pjen, you’re quite the contortionist. You’ve spent months wiggling, and eeling, and obfuscating, and so on. And now it turns out that all this time all you’re doing is carrying water for the SNP theme of the day. You appear to have no actual beliefs of your own.
The discussion of whether any poster is excessively anglocentric has now ended. That sort ofad hominem does nothing to promote the discussion.
Further, Pjen, any more name calling, such as “little Englander” will invoke a Warning.
[ /Moderating ]
I thought this thread is about driver’s license graphics? It’s about devomax polling now?
The thread has no purpose other than as a venue for Pjen to harp on about her favourite subject and copy-paste opinion pieces reassuring us, weeks after a substantial defeat at the polls, that independence really is just around the corner.
Seriously, how many threads have there been with Pjen as a major contributor on this subject? Has she even once conceded a point, conceded that she was wrong on a matter of law, or that she has read the political situation wrong? This is yet another “agree with Pjen about everything or be called an English colonialist” thread.
There have been so many knee jerk unionist reactions to my position that the debate is being avoided. I will state it again.
I am a natural devolutionist, believing in the EU concept of subsidiarity. That is that I believe that all political decisions should be delegated to the most local level of government, subject to the necessity of coordinated joint action. So decisions should be made at European, state, national, and local level as appropriate.
I started the Referendum debate as a devolutionist with no real wish for independence. The persistent negative unionist campaign moved me slowly towards accepting the possibility of independence, though still reluctant.
I believe that separation, should it come, will not be agreed to one side’s demands only and will have an international element.
I believe that there is a persistent demand for considerable further devolution, maybe even home rule or independence.
I believe that the manner in which Westminster acts over the next decade will have an effect (quite possibly negative) that may lead to an increasing demand for home rule or independence.
If Westminster does not play its cards carefully, I think that they may drive sufficient soft unionists into the independence camp.
This could result in a separation undesired by the unionists, but caused by their acts.
The problem is you have no answer to those that disagree with you beyond “neo-colonialist” and “little-Englander”. Which is amusing because some people disagreeing with you are way, way more Scottish than you. That’s why there is no discussion.
Straw man. I never claimed to be Scottish. I am English born and, save for an Irish great great grandfather, English for ten generations.
The problem is that it will be those problems of neo- colonialist or anglocentric origin that will tip the balance. Forcing the Union Jack being one, suggesting that the Scottish electorate is not mature enough to understand the arguments, claiming smoked salmon as English, suggesting that enclaves on Scottish sovereign soil could be unilaterally carved out, and many other petty slights. On top of ignoring Scottish public opinion about welfare, tax and other non devolved issues, such faux pas may be the deciding factor.
To the barricades!!!
Well if they’re in the UK navy, it’s to be expected… Expecting Scots to look at their own flag, the Union Flag, occasionally, is neither an insult nor a burden.
No-one’s suggested that. What I’ve suggested is that, if a hypothetical Scottish government negotiating for independence refused to bilaterally accept a deal that involved the rUK keeping control of the bases, there would be no independence. Anything that happens will happen bilaterally, otherwise the status quo of Union will be maintained.
It would not be the rUK carving out part of Scotland, rather it would, should the bases remain part of the UK, be us keeping what is ours. There is, quite literally, no circumstance in which Scotland will become independent and the bases not remain in UK control for, at minimum, a couple of decades.
But then, any hypothetical Scottish state would need to have a defence treaty with the UK anyway, so it’s almost a moot issue.
Well, I look forward to the announcement that it will be enforced in the six counties then if it is so simple.
Ireland has no defence treaty with the UK.
Should there be stalemate over the bases, international law would decide if agreement could not be reached.
Straw man. He never claimed you claimed to be Scottish.
Slightly different situation, don’t you think? In Northern Ireland for a good portion of the population the Union Jack was a symbol of oppression and bloodshed. Scotland is an equal partner in an ancient and prosperous Union. The Union Jack is Scotland’s flag as much as it’s England’s.
If there’s stalemate over the bases, then the status quo will be maintained. That is, the bases - along with the rest of Scotland - will remain part of the UK. International law would only be relevant if Scotland decides to unilaterally secede from the UK, which won’t happen.
In your very humble opinion. You have no legal basis for the statement.
This is what’s so frustrating about this discussion. It’s not like people in England are flying the Union Flag on a regular basis (unless they’re insane nationalists), the only flag you’ll regularly see here is the flag of St George. Using the Union flag specifically on UK Government documents seems like the exact usage it’s designed for.
I’m beginning to think pjen really does believe that Scotland is being oppressed in the way Ireland was, which is an indefensible viewpoint. Otherwise, there’s no reason to bring up the issue in Northern Ireland.
Now, if anyone outside England was being expected to use the English flag, it would be a different matter, but the Union flag is not, and has never been, the English flag.