I suspect that the Irish Question will be a model for how Scotland will exit the union- not the question before 1922, but the method of achieving home rule and independence between 1922 and 1948.
Another straw man. As an Englishman through and through I have no attachment to Tartan emotionalism over the Saltire and myths of the glorious past. I do respect the Scottish modern culture of education, invention, hard work and communalism and wish to see that prosper. I have no interest in National myths.
The morals of someone who wants to abide by the express wishes of the population, who were decisively against independence. Nothing has changed in 3 months to change that, and the SNP agreed to be bound by that referendum. Were they lying? (Well yes, of course they were, but that’s hardly surprising given how much else they lie about).
Look up “in practice” and “equal”, please. That you would even attempt to compare Scotland’s position in the Union to Ireland’s is shameful. Either you know nothing of Ireland’s history, or you know nothing of Scotland’s, or you are truly blinded by your anti-English bigotry and can’t see how Scotland has prospered as part of the Union whilst Ireland was crippled, and lost the majority of it’s population to famine or emigration directly caused by the UK, or by actually being killed by the UK.
Oh, and then call me a blind fucking patriot again if you like. I could point out plenty of evil acts our country has perpetrated (yes ours, Scotland is as responsible as England, whichever one you consider yourself to belong to today).
You expect a Scottish Civil War? Really?
Or, you just don’t know Irish history very well.
ETA Irish Civil War - Wikipedia , for those following at home.
I suspect that you are reading from that strange history book again.
James I (VI) was half French 1/8 English. Only returned to Scotland once after the union of the crowns.
Charles I was half Danish, 1/4 French, 1/16 English.
Charles II was half French, 1/4 Danish, 1/32 English
James II was half Spanish, 1/4 French, 1/8 Danish, 1/64 English.
End of the Scottish line as William III was Dutch.
so 1/2 a Scottish king, then 1/4, then 1/8 then 1/16th.
And none of them identified as Scottish after James I!
As I made clear above I was talking about the period 1922-1948! Please stop the Straw Men.
All Straw men again. I did not compare Scotland to Ireland before 1922.
As to a democratic right to campaign- it is you that wished to cripple democracy.
Straw Man again- you just do not learn. I was talking about the relationship between Ireland and rUK between 1922-1948.
I know my Irish history very well thank you- and much better than you apparently know your own history- Ireland never part of the Union and so many ‘Scottish’ kings!
Ah, ok, you want peace with the UK during the civil war. That’s a much better desire…
You clearly don’t. I never claimed, not once that Ireland wasn’t part of the Union - I claimed that it was in practice an unequal member, and that it was repeatedly treated badly by the rest of the UK.
And if you want to pretend that the Stuart line wasn’t Scottish, or that a King of Scotland, born in Scotland, of a Scottish mother, is somehow not really Scottish… Well, I guess there really is no true Scotsman if he doesn’t count. Almost 100 years of Scottish Kings somehow doesn’t count? How silly.
I guess you’re forgetting the 7 Prime Ministers who were Scottish, plus the current half-Scottish one. Yes, Cameron is (unsurprisingly, from the name) more Scottish than you.
How do you figure half French? I’m not seeing it. His maternal grandmother was Mary of Guise, so there’s that, but I don’t see where you’re getting the other quarter from. Also, wouldn’t it be a quarter English (well, and Welsh and whatever from the Tudors), as one of James’ maternal and paternal great grandmother were both Margaret Tudor (On his mother’s side, with James V, and on his mother’s side, with the Earl of Angus)?
And, of course, while William was Dutch, he also had Scottish blood in him, as his mother was the daughter of Charles I (and, of course, both his wife and sister in law were children of James VII/II), and, then going forward, you know, George I was the great grandson of James VI/I, which is where the Hannoverians got a claim to the throne.)
And Charles II spent a bunch of time in Scotland, although his time there wasn’t entirely pleasant.
You have repeatedly compared Scottish Independence to Irish, and to pretend the the centuries leading up to it aren’t relevant is hugely ignorant. But even if we ignore the centuries of misrule, the civil war, and the Troubles, you still have to deal with the realities of partition (I’m assuming you don’t want that happening) and the massive internecine political fights in Ireland due to bad feeling due to the civil war. Hopefully any potential Scottish independence will look nothing like Irish independence, as that was a tragedy (albeit still better than remaining in the Union would have been) that was handled badly on every side, and basically crippled Ireland for a lifetime. It was only in the 90s that it managed to catch up with the UK, and would probably be doing better than us now but for joining the EU.
Nonsense. I respect the democratic choice of the Scots to remain within the Union, and I want the SNP and the minority of Scots who don’t wish to remain to respect their countrymen, and their pledge prior to the referendum to respect the result.
Yes, you have the right to campaign for any lost cause that has been democratically rejected that you please. But you are wasting your time and distracting from real, important issues as well as disrespecting your countrymen. That is not a good moral choice.
He was treated better by the Scots than by the English during the first 11 years of his reign…
Of course, all this goes to the question of identity, and what does a “Scottish king” mean in that sense, because the Scottish kings were always marrying foreign brides…James VI married a Dane, Mary, Queen of Scots first married a Frenchman, James V a Frenchwoman, James IV an Englishwoman, James III a Dane, James II a Dutch woman, James I an English woman, and the House of Stuart was itself originally Breton and Norman. So were any of the Stuarts “Scottish kings?”
Is Queen Elizabeth II an “English” Queen? Her mother was Scottish, her grandmother was the daughter of a German duke, her paternal line dates back to a German noble house and she’s married to a German who was born in Greece.
My point being, it gets difficult when you’re talking about nobility and nationality and national identity.
Agreed, but started by Steophan as one of his diversions.
Would you respect a vote by the Scots 51/49 for independence or for home rule?
If that were the terms of the referendum, and my government and the party I support had agreed to be bound by it, I’d not just respect it but support it, and I certainly wouldn’t campaign to have it overturned or have the referendum re-run.
I wouldn’t like it, and I don’t believe it’s right that a simple majority should be enough to gain independence - but as I’m clearly in a minority here I’ll respect the result.
There was a significantly wider gap in the real vote against independence. Why don’t you respect that result, and the fact that all sides agreed to be bound by it? And why do you want the SNP to go against their pledge of being bound by it?
It’s not a diversion to point out how much shared history and culture England and Scotland have, and to dislike the idea of throwing that away for, IMO, no good reason.
That isn’t what happened, now is it? :dubious:
You patently do not respect what did happen, although you certainly would consider it set in stone forever if it had gone the way you prefer, wouldn’t you? You’re fond of stating what democracy is, but you show no sign of recognizing that it also includes respecting the results of free and fair elections. The ink isn’t even wet on this one and you’re already trying to undermine its validity.
No. It is what is called a hypothetical.
I wanted to test steophan’s democratic credentials. He had already admitted being minded to ban nationalists from parliament and I wondered if be would also disrespect the electorate should they disagree with his views.
Here’s a hypothetical you’ve already ducked, then: If, in a hypothetical future newly-separate Scotland, there were to be a brief blip in the polls supporting reunion with the UK, would you be stridently insistent about having another referendum about it?
You refer to Steophan disrespecting the electorate, but with no hint of awareness of the irony there.