What is Scotland?

Factual Questions
141

A significant minority of Scotland’s population would like to find a peaceful path to independence. The same is also true of Puerto Rico. But your assumption that most or all of the people of those countries [sic] are in favour of independence is unfounded, and is in fact contradicted by what evidence we have.

Incidentally, Scotland’s present pro-independence government has a majority (the first ever for any party) within the Scottish Parliament. Yet they have not declared independence from the UK, nor have they made a referendum on independence their first priority for their new term. That should tell you something about their perception of the level of popular support within Scotland for independence!

Canada, Australia, etc. are irrelevant to this discussion, since they never formed part of the United Kingdom (and were developing their own armed forces before the rest of the world perceived them to be independent states in their own right).

Incidentally, the UK does have experience of losing part of its core territory, with the recognition of the secession of most of Ireland in 1922.

Anyway, the armed forces don’t “belong” to the Queen. They’re raised across the UK for the defence, etc. of the UK, are paid for by UK taxes, and fall under the political direction of the UK’s central government.

Finally, no part of the UK has had conscription since around 1960.

I don’t think you know much about Puerto Ricans! They are, and view themselves as, a Latin American people. They do not consider themselves to be indistinct from the people of the United States.

Apparently you do not understand what the word “sovereignty” means!

By very definition, the granting of ultimate authority to Scotland’s own legislative, judicial, and executive “branches” is the establishment of sovereignty.

Your notion of shifting authority away from the Crown seems rather fantastical, too. I suggest you read up on the independence process followed by various countries formerly under the British Crown.

Your view on this is based on… what, exactly?

At the most recent election in Wales the nationalist party couldn’t even scrape 20% of the vote!

142

I don’t think you know much about Puerto Ricans! They are, and view themselves as, a Latin American people. They do not consider themselves to be indistinct from the people of the United States.

You just didn’t read the paragraph of mine that you yourself quoted. Or at least you didn’t read it carefully enough to warrant being critical. I didn’t say that Scottish Independence would mean a separate executive branch. At least not in any time frame that would be worth discussing. You can’t just separate the executive branch over night. Read my paragraph again and take a deep breath and respond to what I said - not what you think you would like to get angry about.

Puerto Ricans do not consider themselves to be “not American”. They don’t. THere are huge minorities of Puerto Ricans who would like to be independent and there are huge minorities who would like to become a state, but the largest minority would like to keep things just the way they are.

They’d all declare independence tomorrow if only they could take the Tristate area with them.

143

Do you go through Customs or need a passport to travel from New York to New Jersey? Or to travel from Ontario to Quebec?

I see the situation as similar to the US and Canada (though, I’ll admit that I know that the US is a Federation and the states have inalienable rights, while Scotland may not (for example, the UK Parliament could dissolve the Scottish Parliament, iirc, but the US Congress cannot forcibly dissolve the Virginia General Assembly.

There’s a definite sense of cultural identity. I’m American, with significant Scottish heritage, and I can definitely feel that there is a Scottish identity (cultural and ethnic) that is separate and distinct from an English identity (of which I also have ancestry). Certain US states do have some degree of identity, but it isn’t nearly so strong. I have ancestors who lived all over the US. Even though I have ancestors who lived in New York City around 1900, I do not consider myself a New Yorker. I do consider myself to be Scottish, albeit one without UK Citizenship.

144

I’m quite aware that you didn’t refer to the executive “branch”. Let’s just say that I gave you the benefit of the doubt, misplaced as that seems to have been.

At present, there are two executives with responsibility in Scotland. The Scottish Government is responsible to the Scottish Parliament, while HM Government is responsible to Westminster. The division of responsibility between the two governments/executives reflects the division of powers between the respective parliaments. If Scotland became independent, then Westminster’s legislative powers in respect of Scotland would have to be transferred to Scotland’s parliament, and of course HMG’s responsibilities in respect of Scotland would be transferred to the Scottish government. This would be true regardless of whether a newly independent Scotland was a monarchy or a republic.

It’s not necessary to be a political scientist to appreciate that being “independent” means “running your own country”; and that can only mean that the country is run by a Scottish government! It’s impossible to be an independent country and not have your own government; I would have thought this could not be anything other than blindingly obvious. And of course Scotland already has its own government, so it’s hardly a case of starting from scratch.

Clearly in the event of Scotland becoming independent, there would have to be a transitional period during which present-day “common services” were picked apart and divided between Scotland and the rump United Kingdom. But that’s hardly a process that either side is going to want dragging along for any great period of time. Much of the difficult stuff will be tedious administrative and technical detail, not really involving the political management of either country. India and Pakistan managed it all in no more than eighteen months, if I recall correctly.

145

Just as a nitpick, I’m not sure that the partition of India is the best model, what with the hundreds of thousands murdered and millions displaced. But there have been several partitions since with lower casualties – Czechoslovakia comes to mind.

146

We’re up to 100+ responses and no one’s mentioned that OP’s question is answered in Scotland’s own National Anthem?

147

It’s a load of sentimental guff?

148

And it’s also neither an official anthem or a historical text.

149

The machinery of government in the UK - the executive branch - is not going to be divided up any time soon. It ain’t happening in no 18 months.

Bottom-line is that the Scottish people view the English parliament as foreign rule. The acts of union and the history of the UK has given the (apparently correct) impression that membership in that club is optional.

Not so in the USA. If the federal government gave states a path to independence then you could be highly credible independence movements in at least 4 states. At least.

In fact, I’d predict that South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama would actually be independent within 5 years regardless of how high the bar was set.

These things will not come to pass. The only road to independence for a US State is to gather an army and attack the US military installations in your state. It’s been tried before. Expect blood… lots of it.

150

If the U.S. changed its constitution to allow any State to leave the union with a 50% referendum no state would come close. Especially not in 5 years time, your understanding of American politics is basically horrible.

151

Ditto samjones’ understanding of UK politics and government.

If Scotland voted for independence in the referendum in four years time (which I do not believe it will) there would be a swift move to pass all the remaining powers to Holyrood - maybe not 18 months but less than five years would be my guess. The machinery is all there - Scotland has a functioning executive, legislature, and judiciary - Scotland just needs the remaining powers now held at Westminster passed to it.

Saying “the Scottish people view the English parliament as foreign rule” is meaningless tosh. There is no “English parliament”. If anything Scotland is over-represented in the UK parliament and many English people resent Scottish MPs right to vote on English matters - look up the West Lothian question.

152

I don’t even know where to begin with this. It’s like beating one’s head off a brick wall.

Well done samjones, you have provoked the reaction you intended.

153

Putting aside the fact that this will not happen, there is good reason to believe your comments to be false. There has always been strong dissent in the deep south, both ante and postbellum and the few polls that are done that pose the question indicate strong support for independence - even if they don’t necessarily show a strong argument for majority support.

Again - secession will simply not happen. There is no legal path for it and there’s no way anyone can force the issue that that will not change in our lifetimes.

It seems that you would do yourself a favor to spend less time judging my knowledge of American politics and more time educating yourself.

154

As has already been pointed out, the “executive branch” has already been divided in relation to Scotland.

The Acts of Union assume a perpetual union; once again you’ve demonstrated your ignorance.

And the Irish have already provided us with a concrete example of secession from the UK.

155

National anthems can be “official” or “unofficial.” I left off the adjective so that hyper-literalists would have something to post about. :smiley:

I’m not sure what “[not] an historical text” means in connection with my obviously whimsical post. Surely you don’t deny the historical fact the Robert Bruce’s army did indeed give King Edward’s army something to think about? :smiley:

156

I wasn’t being as picky as I might in other situations, it was just that some non Scots might have taken your post to be serious (god knows there’s already been enough erroneous information in this thread!).

Also, although I like the song, I’m not sure which lost lands they are referring to, unless it means Berwick where the town was more important than the lands.

157

Maybe all the land north of Hadrian’s Wall!
I’m sure some people think that’s the actual border between the two countries.

158

Some? Pretty much all the English people I speak to think that if it does’t actually mark the border it goes pretty close to it. Worldwide it must be quite unusual for a people to write off such a large chunk of their own territory.

159

Have you ever actually been to Scotland, or spoken to a Scot? Not that either of these should be prerequisites to having an informed opinion, but I’m interested in where your impressions of the opinions of Scots are coming from.

I’m Scottish, and I certainly don’t feel this way, and I don’t know anyone who does. There may be some ultra-nationalists that do, but I don’t believe they even form the majority opinions of the pro-independence groups.

Mind you, now that there’s a Tory government again, I might start to hear it more often.

160

I have met Scotsmen who claim they want to have independence, but my impression is that in reality they are quite content with the way things are.