IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 25th November 2022, 05:20 AM   #81
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
This reminds me of an issue that is rarely raised: Such polls tend to end up in two roughly equal parts. I believe that momentous decisions, such as leaving EU, or Scottish independence should not be decided by a simple majority, but by a larger majority, such as 60% or even more. Polls that end in 51 vs. 49, such as most do, has a huge consequence where almost half of the population is against.

As a Dane, i.e. an outsider, I do not have any real opinion on whether Scotland should be independent, but I do think it would be tragic if such a decision was taken with almost half of Scots being against it. Conservatism should rule.
I have no problem with a simple majority of the electorate voting for a dramatic change. A simple majority of voters is a different story.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 05:42 AM   #82
Carrot Flower King
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Northumberland, UK
Posts: 3,026
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Would any Scots trying to cross this hard border at Hadrian's Wall become "economic migrants"?
Oi! Hadrian's Wall is well south of where I live (see an earlier post in this very thread complaining about the lazy use of it as "the border"), in fact chunks of Scottishland are south of where I live...

And the Tweed doesn't work either, as it is only the border for a short stretch from just south of Paxton to slightly west of of Carham. Most of the Tweed is firmly in Scottishland...

ETA Using the Iapetus Suture would be closer, but even that runs south of Berwick. I would quite like that as it might make some politicians and journos think about geology.

Last edited by Carrot Flower King; 25th November 2022 at 05:47 AM.
Carrot Flower King is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 06:48 AM   #83
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 35,467
Originally Posted by Carrot Flower King View Post
Oi! Hadrian's Wall is well south of where I live (see an earlier post in this very thread complaining about the lazy use of it as "the border"), in fact chunks of Scottishland are south of where I live...

And the Tweed doesn't work either, as it is only the border for a short stretch from just south of Paxton to slightly west of of Carham. Most of the Tweed is firmly in Scottishland...

ETA Using the Iapetus Suture would be closer, but even that runs south of Berwick. I would quite like that as it might make some politicians and journos think about geology.
Speaking as someone from Oop North (though now living in Welsh Wales) but not that far Oop North, I'd be happy for the new Scottish border to run along the 54th parallel,
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 06:53 AM   #84
Gulliver Foyle
Muse
 
Gulliver Foyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cork baaaiii
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
I would ask: WHY does Scotland want independence? What is the goal here? To tell every sassenach to fook off? Or is it something else?

For example, is it to re-engage more closely with the EU, separately from England? Negotiate their own trade agreements with the EU, or even attain some form of membership? Perhaps have a Scottish MEP? If so, what is preventing that happening despite still being "part of the UK"?
To find their own way in the world, at the moment Scotland is a fief of a South East of England centric govenment and subject to the whims of whichever eejits the swivel eyed membership of the tory party picks to be leader. The mistakes of an independent Scotland would at least be its own.
Gulliver Foyle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 07:03 AM   #85
Gulliver Foyle
Muse
 
Gulliver Foyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cork baaaiii
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Wow. Socialist blinkers much?
No fan of governmejts working for the benefit of all, then.
Gulliver Foyle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 07:21 AM   #86
Gulliver Foyle
Muse
 
Gulliver Foyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cork baaaiii
Posts: 659
There's a perfectly legal* way for Scottish independence to be called:

"Whereas and Wherby, the Union with England Act, 1707 was effected through fraud, deception,bribery and the threat of violence by a foreign power, this Parliament, being the sole legitimate successor to the Soverign Parliament of Scotland, 1707, declares said to be invalid and thereby repealed."

Put it to a vote and see what happens.

*Which is not to say constitutional, hard to define constitutionality when a country doesn't have one.

PS those who say that International law supports the Supreme Court ruling are wong. A people's inalienable right to self determination is a cornerstone of the UN Charter and thus International law.
Gulliver Foyle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 11:04 AM   #87
Planigale
Philosopher
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 5,743
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
This is used as a term to scare the horses, Economic Migrants whoooooooooo!!

Economic migrants are highly motivated people who are willing to take immense risks to come to a country and work. A less blinkered populace would welcome them, they seem like exactly the sort of people you'd want to come to a country.
But concerns about migrants aren't just right wing. I have also heard union leaders expressing concerns that it is a way for employers to suppress wages by getting people who will work for lower wages.

Clearly some migrants are essential, evidence supports migration being good for the economy.

However it does need to be recognised that a significant part of the illegal migration is criminal. Illegal immigrants are imported to work as slave labour in cannabis farms and brothels.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 11:28 AM   #88
Planigale
Philosopher
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 5,743
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
An argument I have seen is that Scotland is now too different from the rest of the UK England for a harmonious union to be possible. Scotland needs and welcomes immigrants, the English believe that wogs begin in Calais. Scotland would like Northern European Social-Democratic government, the English want a libertarian free-for-all. Scotland would like to protect workers and the environment, the English are happy to hurtle to the bottom.

Some powers are devolved to Scotland but not enough to make enough of a difference.
Is this true?

There remains considerable anti-Irish sentiments in parts of the Scottish population. These are white immigrants settled for generations. Scotland has fewer immigrants as compared with England. Are there any majority non-white cities in Scotland? Scotland is 96% white as compared with England 85%.population are White.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60928666

As some one who is non-white English born, racism does exist in Scotland.

Any statement that gives a whole population certain characteristiscs e.g. 'English believe that wogs begin in Calais', is racist. The current right wing Tory government is more ethnically diverse than either the Scottish Government or the Labour leadership, but not all people in England of many diverse ethnicities voted for them, nor did they all vote for Brexit. You need to recognise that England is a far more diverse population than Scotland. It would be equally racist to think that all Scots are wanting a socialist utopia.

Last edited by Planigale; 25th November 2022 at 11:31 AM.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 11:39 AM   #89
Planigale
Philosopher
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 5,743
Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle View Post
There's a perfectly legal* way for Scottish independence to be called:

"Whereas and Wherby, the Union with England Act, 1707 was effected through fraud, deception,bribery and the threat of violence by a foreign power, this Parliament, being the sole legitimate successor to the Soverign Parliament of Scotland, 1707, declares said to be invalid and thereby repealed."

Put it to a vote and see what happens.


*Which is not to say constitutional, hard to define constitutionality when a country doesn't have one.

PS those who say that International law supports the Supreme Court ruling are wong. A people's inalienable right to self determination is a cornerstone of the UN Charter and thus International law.
There was a vote; the vote was to remain in the Union. That is self determination. The SNP ignoring the vote and trying to move to independence against the expressed will of the people of Scotland is not democratic.

There is no doubt the legitimate successor to the 1707 Parliament of scotland was and is the Parliament of the United kingdom.

That you do not like the outcome of the vote of 1707 nor the referendum does not make them illegitimate.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 12:45 PM   #90
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
If you seriously think Nicola Sturgeon or the SNP in its present form is trying to move to independence, I have a bridge to sell you.

Also, as a point of simple fact, the 2014 vote has not been "ignored". If it had been, Scotland would be independent by now. There is absolutely nothing illegitimate about a party or campaign group continuing to campaign for its stated objective after a defeat in the polls, a defeat that was acknowledged and accepted. It is now eight years since the independence referendum. In the legislation dealing with Northern Ireland seven years is explicitly stated as the time that should pass after a referendum before another may be held on the same issue.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 25th November 2022 at 12:54 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:06 PM   #91
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 12,909
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
if they are crossing at Hadrian's wall they
are already deep into England. They could be economic migrants, asylum seekers, students, tourists, or business visitors which is why the hard border would be needed.
I just assumed nobody was going to afford to build even a barbed-wire effort at the real border. Since Hadrian had already built a stone barrier precisely to mark and protect Roman Britain, that would still be sufficient to stop any "illegals" even today.

Anyway, moving on!

I'll offer this comment: In 1947, England was reasonably happy to give two whole countries, great swathes of the globe, and nearly a billion people their independence from the crown, after ruling them for a couple of hundred years. And yet in 2022 they baulk at a few million Scots living in a few rain-soaked mountains the same courtesy. What's the difference?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:20 PM   #92
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
I just assumed nobody was going to afford to build even a barbed-wire effort at the real border. Since Hadrian had already built a stone barrier precisely to mark and protect Roman Britain, that would still be sufficient to stop any "illegals" even today.

Anyway, moving on!

I'll offer this comment: In 1947, England was reasonably happy to give two whole countries, great swathes of the globe, and nearly a billion people their independence from the crown, after ruling them for a couple of hundred years. And yet in 2022 they baulk at a few million Scots living in a few rain-soaked mountains the same courtesy. What's the difference?
Those Scots asked for a once in a lifetime vote, were given one and chose to remain.
The costs of separation and rejoining are prohibitive (see brexit,). It is totally bonkers to, as Rolfe suggests, have a vote on leaving, and if they leave, rejoining every 7 years.

Of course she is being disingenuous. She wants a vote to leave every year and if Scotland does vote for independence she would not want any vote to rejoin.

Last edited by Lothian; 25th November 2022 at 01:26 PM.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:26 PM   #93
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
The Scots did not ask for (and were not given) a "once in a lifetime" vote. There was nothing whatsoever in the referendum legislation prohibiting a further referendum within any specific time.

And anyone who seriously thinks that Nicola Sturgeon has any desire for or intention of achieving another independence referendum needs to wake up and smell the coffee.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:30 PM   #94
Gulliver Foyle
Muse
 
Gulliver Foyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cork baaaiii
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Planigale View Post
There was a vote; the vote was to remain in the Union. That is self determination. The SNP ignoring the vote and trying to move to independence against the expressed will of the people of Scotland is not democratic.

There is no doubt the legitimate successor to the 1707 Parliament of scotland was and is the Parliament of the United kingdom.

That you do not like the outcome of the vote of 1707 nor the referendum does not make them illegitimate.
An Act of a Parliament will be put to a vote of parliamentarians. Oh and the parliament of the UK cannot by definition be the successor of the parliament of Scotland, because it represents a different country. That'd be like saying the US house of congress is the successor to the UK parliament of 1777.
Gulliver Foyle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:32 PM   #95
Gulliver Foyle
Muse
 
Gulliver Foyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cork baaaiii
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
I just assumed nobody was going to afford to build even a barbed-wire effort at the real border. Since Hadrian had already built a stone barrier precisely to mark and protect Roman Britain, that would still be sufficient to stop any "illegals" even today.

Anyway, moving on!

I'll offer this comment: In 1947, England was reasonably happy to give two whole countries, great swathes of the globe, and nearly a billion people their independence from the crown, after ruling them for a couple of hundred years. And yet in 2022 they baulk at a few million Scots living in a few rain-soaked mountains the same courtesy. What's the difference?
Without Scottish resources and the Scottish people's resourcefulness, England would be a third-world country. Look how their empire fell apart after they gave independence to part of Ireland.
Gulliver Foyle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:34 PM   #96
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The Scots did not ask for (and were not given) a "once in a lifetime" vote. There was nothing whatsoever in the referendum legislation prohibiting a further referendum within any specific time.
.
Of course there would be nothing in the referendum legislation. That would not be the place. I am talking about what Alec Salmons asks for and Cameron agreed to
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:34 PM   #97
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 12,909
It seems to me that while full independence remains problematic, it is the ability of Scotland to treaty and trade with the EU separately from England that is a prime issue. Northern Ireland already has a different status in this regard, as has been shown by the "border in the Irish Sea" debate.

Could a smarter and perhaps more realistic and achievable move be to push for the devolution of Scottish trading authority and abilities to Scotland?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:39 PM   #98
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
It seems to me that while full independence remains problematic, it is the ability of Scotland to treaty and trade with the EU separately from England that is a prime issue. Northern Ireland already has a different status in this regard, as has been shown by the "border in the Irish Sea" debate.

Could a smarter and perhaps more realistic and achievable move be to push for the devolution of Scottish trading authority and abilities to Scotland?
Yes it could happen but would require a hard land border.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:39 PM   #99
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
Of course there would be nothing in the referendum legislation. That would not be the place. I am talking about what Alec Salmons asks for and Cameron agreed to

That's pure Grauniad spin. There was no such agreement.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:42 PM   #100
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
It seems to me that while full independence remains problematic, it is the ability of Scotland to treaty and trade with the EU separately from England that is a prime issue. Northern Ireland already has a different status in this regard, as has been shown by the "border in the Irish Sea" debate.

Could a smarter and perhaps more realistic and achievable move be to push for the devolution of Scottish trading authority and abilities to Scotland?

At the time all that was being worked out it was suggested quite forcefully that Scotland (which voted strongly to remain in the EU should be treated in the same way as Northern Ireland, which would have had the advantage of there not being a border in the Irish Sea, which was seen as anathema at one point.

It could have worked, it would have worked better than the present arrangement I think, but unsurprisingly it was politically unthinkable. It would have been advantageous to Scotland, and if there is one thing the Westminster government is determined about, it is that Scotland should never be given any favourable terms.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:45 PM   #101
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Gundungurra
Posts: 12,909
Originally Posted by Lothian View Post
Yes it could happen but would require a hard land border.
Like in Northern Ireland?

If the Tories were smart, and realising that Brexit has been a massive fail but not wanting to lose face with the Kipper faction, allowing Scotland to be a de facto trading partner with the EU and not having a hard border with England could be an acceptable solution to resuming some form of re-engagement in the EU marketplace. Obviously, that would be clumsy, but it would be a start to resumption of "normality". And good for Scotland too.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:46 PM   #102
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
That's pure Grauniad spin. There was no such agreement.
The term 'once-in-a-generation opportunity' was used in the Scottish Government white paper and by Salmond and the independence campaign.

It has no legal weight but it was the message at the time.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:54 PM   #103
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
It has no legal weight. Thank you. Rhetoric designed to impress on people that this was a historic opportunity is a very different thing from a commitment to stop all campaigning for many decades. (Thank you also for correcting "once in a lifetime" to "once in a generation", which is a very different thing. In the context of Northern Ireland a political generation has already been defined as seven years, also referring to the frequency of independence referendums. It is now more than eight years since the previous referendum in Scotland, so we really should be hearing no more of this nonsense.)
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 01:55 PM   #104
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Like in Northern Ireland?

If the Tories were smart, and realising that Brexit has been a massive fail but not wanting to lose face with the Kipper faction, allowing Scotland to be a de facto trading partner with the EU and not having a hard border with England could be an acceptable solution to resuming some form of re-engagement in the EU marketplace. Obviously, that would be clumsy, but it would be a start to resumption of "normality". And good for Scotland too.
Like the Irish Sea border, the issue that has stopped the Irish Government from operating.


"Goods" entering the EU must be controlled in quality, and quantity by reference to the source.
If Scotland "joined" the EU like N. Ireland it would need to control goods crossing from England. That is the uncomfortable truth that the UK has "discovered" in N Ireland. There need not be a border to stop people but there would need to be a border for goods and border guards to stop smuggling.

P.S. The only time I expect to see 'Tory' and 'smart' in the same sentence is "Tories smart from general election humiliation"

Last edited by Lothian; 25th November 2022 at 01:57 PM.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 02:02 PM   #105
Lothian
should be banned
 
Lothian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside
Posts: 17,991
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It has no legal weight. Thank you. Rhetoric designed to impress on people that this was a historic opportunity is a very different thing from a commitment to stop all campaigning for many decades. (Thank you also for correcting "once in a lifetime" to "once in a generation", which is a very different thing. In the context of Northern Ireland a political generation has already been defined as seven years, also referring to the frequency of independence referendums. It is now more than eight years since the previous referendum in Scotland, so we really should be hearing no more of this nonsense.)
Good luck finding where I said the was a timed legal bar to another referendum.
I stand by my comment that your wish for a regular vote will disappear if Scotland gains independence and you would strongly oppose a rejoin vote 7 years later.
Lothian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th November 2022, 02:21 PM   #106
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 49,824
Relax, Lothian. You're winning. You have no need to be so anxious. You even have the First Minister and the Scottish Government fighting your corner, though you don't seem to realise it.

As regards an independent Scotland agitating for a vote to reunite with England seven years down the line, get back to me if that ever happens. So far the number of countries which have escaped from Westminster rule and have then thought better of it and petitioned to return is a big fat zero. I don't see any country bucking that trend, Scotland or anywhere else.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 04:19 AM   #107
Planigale
Philosopher
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: 49 North
Posts: 5,743
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It has no legal weight. Thank you. Rhetoric designed to impress on people that this was a historic opportunity is a very different thing from a commitment to stop all campaigning for many decades. (Thank you also for correcting "once in a lifetime" to "once in a generation", which is a very different thing. In the context of Northern Ireland a political generation has already been defined as seven years, also referring to the frequency of independence referendums. It is now more than eight years since the previous referendum in Scotland, so we really should be hearing no more of this nonsense.)
I do think that it is something that perhaps should be agreed prior to the next referendum? The last referendum was fairly definitive 55% to remain in the UK and 45% for independence. With an 85% turn out effectively less than 40% of possible electors voted for independence. Yet as soon as the loss happened rather than respecting the wishes of the people of Scotland and perhaps pursuing a Scotland first policy and making maximum use of devolved powers the SNP (and other pro independence groups) immediately strove to pursue an independence policy.

Perhaps ten years should be agreed as the minimum interval before there can be a call for another referendum. The UK government agreeing that if after ten years there is a majority vote in the Scottish parliament for a referendum then one should be delivered within e.g. twi years of such a vote resulting in probably just under twelve years between votes This would mean at least one Scottish parliament with a referemdum not being an issue and the parliament focussing on running the country not on independence.

Politics is not a big interest of mine. So if people tell me there are all sort of good reasons why this is stupid I should probably accept that. Rolfe in particular knows far more about the reality of Scottish politics than I do, and I have always though is probably right in what they write. That does not mean there is no reason not to test the argument.
Planigale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.