Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Scottish independence - as an Englishman, am I "wrong" not to give a crap?

Just to add, I'm not particularly pro-independence ( I think that whatever the outcome of the referendum a new generation of potential progressive activists will end up disillusioned ) but have to say this is one of those threads where it has been the other side, the pro-yes side that has made the most coherent arguments and I can't say I've detected any hostility even from steeplejack who can be a bit grouchy normally :p
 
I spoke to some Scots guys on the train back from our hols in York a few weeks ago - nice people, really friendly. I asked one of them about the whole independence thing and how he thought the vote might go. He said he thought it was in the balance atm, most of his family were voting yes but he was thinking of voting no but not completely decided. One of his main fears was finance; to his mind there were a lot of grand ideas being put forth with little or no substance behind them to back them up particularly those of a 'well how are we going to pay for it?' nature. Another was the sectarian thing which he felt was bubbling under the surface and wouldn't take too much to break out into real nastiness. It would have been good to talk to them for longer but they got off a few stops down from York to attend a footie match. I wished them all the best and said I hoped they voted yes if for no other reason (as an Englishman) that it would go some way to diminishing the power of Westminster.
 
it would go some way to diminishing the power of Westminster.
I think it would. I think it'd give Westminster a big shock to the system. It'd be weakened, and that's an ideal time for the working class to make demands. The Welfare State was won at a time when the state recognised that the demands of the people had to be acceded to. If the people of the rUK seize the moment, I think a similar realignment of the consensus is possible. Especially if looking north, the rUK sees WMD going, the mail service being renationalised, the NHS being defended from cuts etc etc.

(As to the point about how can Scotland afford it, we could take that to the Other Place if you like).
 
Wow. If I was in your position I'd be campaigning frantically against independence.

Surely you risk having your family split assunder as your wife is expelled and your children become stateless-persons :eek:
:D

Yes, if you believed the scare stories, I'd have to change to driving on a different side of the road every time I crossed the border to visit relatives; that there'd be passport booths set up where the M6 becomes the M74 at Gretna; that I'd need to go to England to watch Dr Who. Seriously - all those have really been uttered by top Labour politicians.
 
there is indeed no subject known where quartz is not found wanting.

And as you have just demonstrated there is no subject on which anyone who dares to question - let alone err from - an Urban Collective line is not bludgeoned, bullied, ridiculed, shouted down, and insulted. Facts, figures, etc seem to be beyond the reach of many. danny la rouge is the honourable exception in these threads (and I'll mention brogdale and ferrelhadley from other threads). I entered the Scottish independence threads to learn more and danny la rouge aside, the major participants have proved to be a bunch of arseholes. Do you wonder why Sasaferrato isn't in these threads defending the Union?

I reckon a Yes vote is pretty much a done deal absent revelations of shenanigans but will not decide myself which way to vote for some months.
 
And as you have just demonstrated there is no subject on which anyone who dares to question - let alone err from - an Urban Collective line is not bludgeoned, bullied, ridiculed, shouted down, and insulted. Facts, figures, etc seem to be beyond the reach of many. danny la rouge is the honourable exception in these threads (and I'll mention brogdale and ferrelhadley from other threads). I entered the Scottish independence threads to learn more and danny la rouge aside, the major participants have proved to be a bunch of arseholes. Do you wonder why Sasaferrato isn't in these threads defending the Union?

I reckon a Yes vote is pretty much a done deal absent revelations of shenanigans but will not decide myself which way to vote for some months.
there is no urban collective line. there is no cunts' collective. if you find yourself at the wrong end of a bludgeoning it is because you're wrong, not because everyone else is in a collective consciousness.
 
Thank you for your kind words, Quartz. I'm sorry you feel bludgeoned and bullied. As for Sass, I'd love to see him put a positive case for the Union.
 
And as you have just demonstrated there is no subject on which anyone who dares to question - let alone err from - an Urban Collective line is not bludgeoned, bullied, ridiculed, shouted down, and insulted. Facts, figures, etc seem to be beyond the reach of many. danny la rouge is the honourable exception in these threads (and I'll mention brogdale and ferrelhadley from other threads). I entered the Scottish independence threads to learn more and danny la rouge aside, the major participants have proved to be a bunch of arseholes. Do you wonder why Sasaferrato isn't in these threads defending the Union?

I reckon a Yes vote is pretty much a done deal absent revelations of shenanigans but will not decide myself which way to vote for some months.

Ah, the old "Urban Collective" card, the desperate last wriggle of someone who knows they've lost the argument.

You're not being ridiculed for your opinions, you're being ridiculed because your arguments are so weak, and in this latest case because you've made this claim about Salmond's anti-Englishness and then failed to provide a single example to back it up.

As an "exiled Scot", I'm not in favour of Scottish independence, though I'll accept it if it comes, but judging from this thread and the other one, the pro-independence side have won the argument hands down.
 
Ah, the old "Urban Collective" card, the desperate last wriggle of someone who knows they've lost the argument.

Point of order. I believe "I've had numerous private messages from people who agree with me" is the last wriggle tactic. "You're all ganging up on me" is far higher up the list.
 
So anyway, is there any appetite for discussing what effect Scottish independence might have on those of us in the rest of the UK? Does anyone think there will be calls for greater regional autonomy, for instance?
 
So anyway, is there any appetite for discussing what effect Scottish independence might have on those of us in the rest of the UK? Does anyone think there will be calls for greater regional autonomy, for instance?
Devolution hasn't really led to this, despite the glaring examples of tuition fees and old age care showing how we're losing out. So I don't know. I do think that someone smart in the Labour party could make a case for federalism, celebrating Scottish devolution and advocating the adoption of similar models across the UK. But they are so locked in to a pro-austerity narrative that they don't appear able to see past their noses on anything else.

It's hard to underestimate the abilities and vision of the Labour party. Their leadership has none at all. Ever since Kinnock, they have looked at the Tories and tried to see how they can do the same thing.
 
Ah, the old "Urban Collective" card, the desperate last wriggle of someone who knows they've lost the argument.

Umm.. no. I didn't have an argument to make. I came to this thread and the other one to learn.
 
Last edited:
Devolution hasn't really led to this, despite the glaring examples of tuition fees and old age care showing how we're losing out. So I don't know. I do think that someone smart in the Labour party could make a case for federalism, celebrating Scottish devolution and advocating the adoption of similar models across the UK. But they are so locked in to a pro-austerity narrative that they don't appear able to see past their noses on anything else.

It's hard to underestimate the abilities and vision of the Labour party. Their leadership has none at all. Ever since Kinnock, they have looked at the Tories and tried to see how they can do the same thing.

Leaving aside the idea of there being anyone smart in the Labour Party, I really can't see any case for federalism getting off the ground.

Firstly, there isn't any sign of any grassroots demand for such a thing.

Secondly, all of the Westminster parties are too tied to the UK state to even consider initiating such a thing.

I think that Scottish autonomy/devolution/independence is a special case within the UK, different even to Wales, which is the nearest possible comparison. Not only has Scotland been a seperate and independent country, it also retain at least vestiges of its own legal, financial and education systems. There has been sizeable support for greater autonomy/independence, with a specific geographical focus, for as long as I can remember.

None of that exists in, say, the north of England - there is no clear focus for what federal English regions would look like, whereas Scotland has always been identifiable and somewhat seperate as an entity.
 
It is possible to remain tied to the idea of a larger state and to advocate federalism. The Germans manage it. Yes, German federalism has deep historical roots, but local government had deep historical roots in the UK too before Thatcher dug them up. The current situation is a mess and it is horribly centralised for a country so populous.

As for the absence of an appetite for it, well here in London there are plenty of people who missed the GLC. And London at least has an assembly now even if its powers are limited.

Also, call me old-fashioned, but it is possible for politicians to lead, rather than just follow opinion polls. To make the case and attempt to inspire and persuade people - you latch on to a desire at grassroots for improvement in public services, for instance, and you attempt to persuade people that this is the best way to achieve those desires.
 
it would be easier to put a case for the union if it was in fact a union rather than - as it is presently - a rather imbalanced relationship.

Well england is a population of 55million plus, scotland 5million and falling how could it possibly be equal??????

Even if you added wales and the whole of ireland still less people and less gdp than london alone thats why the relantionship is so screwed
 
It is possible to remain tied to the idea of a larger state and to advocate federalism. The Germans manage it. Yes, German federalism has deep historical roots, but local government had deep historical roots in the UK too before Thatcher dug them up. The current situation is a mess and it is horribly centralised for a country so populous.

As for the absence of an appetite for it, well here in London there are plenty of people who missed the GLC. And London at least has an assembly now even if its powers are limited.

There will be others here with greater knowledge of Germany than me, but...

The various German regions weren't unified into a single state until 1871. The federal structure was set up to allow the previously existing states to retate some of their sovereignty. There aren't any historically existing states which could form the bases for English federal regions, far less currently existing ones.

Even before the trashing of local government, it never had the autonomy which would be implied/necessary in a federal structure. And we're not talking about counties getting federal status, are we? Even within federal structures (Germany, US, etc) there is still another layer of local government equivalent to our counties.
 
Well england is a population of 55million plus, scotland 5million and falling how could it possibly be equal??????

Even if you added wales and the whole of ireland still less people and less gdp than london alone thats why the relantionship is so screwed
i was thinking more of the fact that there are fuck all tory mps from scotland and precious few if any lib dem ones. so english parties govern scotland with no input into govt at westminster from scots within the parties in government.
 
It is possible to remain tied to the idea of a larger state and to advocate federalism...

Historically, isn't it the case that federal states have tended to come about by a voluntary (at least among their rulers) agreement between existing states, rather than by conquest.

This is not to say that a state which came together largely through conquest couldn't decide to become federal, but it doesn't seem very likely.
 
Back
Top Bottom