Implications for the rest of us if Scotland votes yes

[newbie]

It's getting quite close yet there seems very little discussion about the effect of a yes vote on what's being called rUK. Even that name is wrong, it will no longer be a united kingdom, just a single kingdom (well, queendom), untidily united with a principality, six counties and a few odd bits. As for the 'Great' in GB, well who knows.

We English have accepted, without demur, that enormous constitutional changes can be made to what we call 'our' nation without us getting any sort of say in the matter. Not just constitutional but more or less everything else significant is potentially being thrown up in the air, economic, defence, energy, diplomatic, political, boundaries and so on will all necessarily change.

That someone else can decide to alter such things for us is a very peculiar state of affairs, which we accept as being reasonable because they, the Scots, have the right to self determination. Personally I've heard very, very little in the way of challenges to that, which is fair enough though slightly surprising. I expected much more reactionary noise from the Little Englander right, especially about symbolic irrelevancies like the flag, the name of the nation, the coronation stone.

It's odd, there's a vacuum where discussion of what happens here, south of the border, if they vote yes should be. All we've really been told is that they'll put Trident in the home counties and we'll be blessed with a tory government forever.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

It's a kingdom it's united. It will still be the UK quite accurately.

 

[DotCommunist]

life will continue as normal.

 

[newbie]

the name derives from the act of union.

 

[brixtonscot]

I think part of the reason is Westminster-centric mainstream media usually ignores Scotland , doesn't understand what's going on and NEVER expected YES could win.
There will probably be more reactionary noise from the littleEnglander right in response to a YES vote - and they do have a bit of a popular base to build on.
The Left in England really need to get their act together with the prospect of a Johnson-Farage coalition at Westminster

 

[farmerbarleymow]

the name derives from the act of union.

As far as I know, there is no international law that requires the names of nations to be accurate. I guess England, Wales & NI would continue to use the name UK for simplicity sake.

 

[DotCommunist]

ith the prospect of a Johnson-Farage coalition at Westminster

lol if that ever happens I'll eat my hat

 

[DotCommunist]

We English have accepted, without demur, that enormous constitutional changes can be made to what we call 'our' nation without us getting any sort of say in the matter

aint that big of us

 

[J Ed]

As far as I know, there is no international law that requires the names of nations to be accurate. I guess England, Wales & NI would continue to use the name UK for simplicity sake.

I like the idea of taking the DPRK to Ofcom

 

[Chick Webb]

I expected much more reactionary noise from the Little Englander right, especially about symbolic irrelevancies like the flag, the name of the nation, the coronation stone.

I'd imagine a lot of those types don't believe it will really happen, and if it does, then they will start freaking out in earnest.
ETA: Whoops, Brixtonscot just said the same thing before me.

 

[albionism]

We would have to put news/issues about Scotland in the "
"world politics, current affairs and news"

 

[newbie]

I think part of the reason is Westminster-centric mainstream media usually ignores Scotland , doesn't understand what's going on and NEVER expected YES could win.
There will probably be more reactionary noise from the littleEnglander right in response to a YES vote - and they do have a bit of a popular base to build on.
The Left in England really need to get their act together with the prospect of a Johnson-Farage coalition at Westminster

I agree with all of that, especially the last line, but while .c may be correct in the short term, life will probably continue much as normal both north and south of the border, as time passes the implications and consequences will affect all of us.

For instance, there's been no discussion that I've noticed on whether sterling can survive as an independent currency when stripped of oil and its other Scottish components. I'll bet Mr Buffet is studying this, I wonder what preparations the Treasury has made .

 

[Chick Webb]

Does a yes vote automatically mean it will actually happen? I say this as an Irish person with experience of having had referendums put to me repeatedly until the "correct" answer is given.

 

[Frankie Jack]

I agree with all of that, especially the last line, but while .c may be correct in the short term, life will probably continue much as normal both north and south of the border, as time passes the implications and consequences will affect all of us.

For instance, there's been no discussion that I've noticed on whether sterling can survive as an independent currency when stripped of oil and its other Scottish components. I'll bet Mr Buffet is studying this, I wonder what preparations the Treasury has made .

The City clearly believes Scotland is necessary to prop up the economic status quo. But this isn’t just a question of yes or no – the Scottish referendum is an opportunity for the whole UK to force open a debate about our hideously imbalanced economy: its failure to create decent jobs, its hopeless dependency on debt, and above all the damaging impact of the City of London.

http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency

 

[newbie]

As far as I know, there is no international law that requires the names of nations to be accurate. I guess England, Wales & NI would continue to use the name UK for simplicity sake.

it is guesswork though, isn't it, because none of the politicians have put down markers or offered opinions. rUK isn't really plausible longterm, yet something to differentiate before and after seems necessary, otherwise the Scots will (rightly) feel slighted that the ever imperialist English are still making a notional claim on them.

Obviously nothing can be settled prior to the result, or the horsetrading that will follow, and we don't know what serious demands for further referendums will follow a yes result.

 

[DotCommunist]

Does a yes vote automatically mean it will actually happen? I say this as an Irish person with experience of having had referendums put to me repeatedly until the "correct" answer is given.

that was for EU membership wasn't it? a different question. Both countries have repeatedly agreed to honour the results here.

 

[nogojones]

I'd like to hope the Scots would be up for a Welsh / Scots union

 

[Chick Webb]

that was for EU membership wasn't it? a different question. Both countries have repeatedly agreed to honour the results here.

The Lisbon Treaty.

 

[danny la rouge]

As far as I know, there is no international law that requires the names of nations to be accurate. I guess England, Wales & NI would continue to use the name UK for simplicity sake.

Indeed.

- "Great Britain" is the name of the largest island of this archipelago (in contrast with "Lesser Britain", which is Brittany). The rUK will still have its capital on Great Britain.
- Ancient kingdoms united to create England.


The name will still make sense, even if it has to be redefined.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

it is guesswork though, isn't it, because none of the politicians have put down markers or offered opinions. rUK isn't really plausible longterm, yet something to differentiate before and after seems necessary, otherwise the Scots will (rightly) feel slighted that the ever imperialist English are still making a notional claim on them.

Obviously nothing can be settled prior to the result, or the horsetrading that will follow, and we don't know what serious demands for further referendums will follow a yes result.

It's going to be quite hard to continue this discussion if you refuse to accept that the UK will continue to be called the UK with or without Scotland.

 

[newbie]

http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency

interesting and timely article, but the thread that follows illustrates my point, because it's pretty much about a post-yes Scottish economy despite the wider, UK/rUK focus of what they were responding to.

 

[danny la rouge]

more or less everything else significant is potentially being thrown up in the air, economic, defence, energy, diplomatic, political, boundaries and so on will all necessarily change.

Exactly.

And: you're welcome.

 

[fishfinger]

Or not.

 

[newbie]

It's going to be quite hard to continue this discussion if you refuse to accept that the UK will continue to be called the UK with or without Scotland.

I'm not refusing to accept anything, though I don't see anything as a foregone conclusion. The name though symbolic (like the flag, what happens to that?) is an irrelevance compared to the economy.

 

[newbie]

Exactly.

And: you're welcome.

cheers mate

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm not refusing to accept anything, though I don't see anything as a foregone conclusion. The name though symbolic (like the flag, what happens to that?) is an irrelevance compared to the economy.

Who gives a fuck about flags?

The main thing is, if we vote Yes, you get a major earthquake right amongst your ossified establishment. Great holes will be riven in its ramparts. Breach those ramparts, people of England; storm them. This is our gift to you.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

rUK isn't really plausible longterm, yet something to differentiate before and after seems necessary, otherwise the Scots will (rightly) feel slighted that the ever imperialist English are still making a notional claim on them.

<snip>

If Scotland decides to become independent, then it would really be none of its business what England, Wales & NI decide as a name. And if they felt slighted, then tough.

By the way, the Scots played their part in imperialist games in the past, and were fully involved in the Empire. So they're not the only imperialistic ones.

 

[Chick Webb]

I don't know what will happen about the economy here. I presume that the English economy will take a bit a bit of a wobble, but that the Scots would be better off in the long run managing their own affairs and natural resources etc. But I don't actually have any idea how independence for Scotland would affect the economies of there or here, so economic factors aren't really informing my opinion on being pro a yes vote. You'd think I'd try to find out more about the economic implications and base my opinions on that, since I live in England and am having a baby, but I can't help feeling emotionally pro-yes for the sake of Scotland, hopefully trying to forge a better country for itself, and also strategically pro-yes from an Irish point of view. An independent Scotland would certainly have major implications for the six counties.

 

[Chick Webb]

I presume that the English economy will take a bit a bit of a wobble, .

Whoops, getting a bit ahead of myself there. I meant "would".

 

[Libertad]

lol if that ever happens I'll eat my hat

I'd like to see this hat Dottie, your hat may be a very small hat in which case your forfeit might not be too difficult to ingest. On the other hand if your hat is a very large hat, say a fedora,a topper or a diving helmet, then you would be faced with a greater problem. Of course this would be dependant upon the unlikely conjunction of a toff/man of the people parliamentary farrago necessitating a suspension of all accepted headwear conventions brought about by...

*trails off incoherently*