Independence

[four eyes]

Just what i was thinking

[Govangirl]

Just what i was thinking

But then I remembered that Ionns had much humour so maybe not, Four Eyes.

[baz]

@Govangirl
I rest my case.
Hot air & bluster .... you certainly validate the Unionist agenda.
Too bad.

[four eyes]

mmmStandard Life packing their bags,or maybe just gearing up to blackmail the salmon!
But hey that oil will kep us in the pink eh!

[Hume]

mmmStandard Life packing their bags,or maybe just gearing up to blackmail the salmon!

Just like they said they would do in 1992 if Kinnock got in and offered a devolution referendum. OK, Labour didn't win but they did in 1997 and I don't recall Std Life leaving in 1999 when we voted Yes Yes.

File it in the bin.

[Shona]

I recall the days when Salmond's vision was of Scotland being the shining light in an 'arc of prosperity' which included Iceland and Ireland, having adopted the euro as currency, ditched the Queen and left NATO. Economic meltdowns in the aforementioned countries put paid to the arc of prosperity concept.

The euro, of course, became shoogly as a currency. The more shaky it became, the more hated it became as a currency. What to do? Easy. Salmond decided that Scotland would keep the pound in a post-independence sterling union. Prob was, he never discussed this idea with anyone. It was hardly a surprise when the main political parties decided they didn't want the potential of an independent Scotland doing to the pound what Greece, for example, did to the euro. The 'we can have the pound, borrow as we see fit without any reference to youse lot'' rhetoric doesn't work for any currency union, be that a sterling union or a euro union.

Anyone who raises questions and concerns is met with a combinations of sneers and bluster accompanied by accusations of bullying. Trolling Cyber-Nats go into overdrive with their hateful attacks.

An independent Scotland would have to negotiate agreements with many countries and organisations around the world, including the rUK. Diplomacy is hardly the hallmark of Salmond and the nationalists. Continual attack does little to pave the way for meaningful dialogue. Not exactly the best recipe for making fiends and influencing people. It's a disastrous ploy when it comes to winning over Don't Knows, too.

I'm not a fan of nationalism, but that does not make me a sash-wearing unionist.

The countries that make up the UK are interconnected in a myriad ways. Unpick it at your peril.

[LANDROVER ROGER]

Shona.I have followed this thread without serious comment but having just read your post I feel that your final sentences hit the nail directly on the head.

[baz]

Divide & Conquer

In politics and sociology, divide and rule (or divide and conquer) is gaining and maintaining power by breaking up larger concentrations of power into pieces that individually have less power than the one implementing the strategy.

[Hume]

Shona.I have followed this thread without serious comment but having just read your post I feel that your final sentences hit the nail directly on the head.

Roger, not surprisingly, I reckon she has missed and skelped her thumb. The simple reason, in relation to the final line, is that the countries that make up the UK at present will continue to be interconnected in a myriad of ways post independence. What will change is that decision making will transfer from Westminster to Edinburgh and Scotland will get the Government it elects 100% of the time unlike at present when we get a Government we often don't vote for.

Its also not all about Nationalism. I openly admit there are not enough people in that bracket alone to secure a Yes vote, but there will be enough people who see this as a issue of democracy and will vote Yes to ensure Scotland moves in a direction that is aligned to the wishes of the people of Scotland and not those of right wing Tories and UKIP.

Shona, you have made a lot of points, which I probably don't have time to comment on but I will try.

Firstly you employ the common tactic of conflating Alex Salmond with a future Independent Scotland. Now, some might say he is the leader of the party that has brought us the referendum and that is fair but he and the SNP are not going to be around for ever. This is about something much greater than one man or one party. A dislike of Salmond and the SNP is a convenient reason for voting no, for those who really have no other. It may also prove to be an unwise tactic in the long run considering the popularity he enjoys in political terms.

Even accepting one's dislike of Salmond and the SNP, is it not a bit pointless to refer to previous pledges, when politicians on all sides change their minds as conditions change? At one point or another Labour and the Lib Dems have supported entry to the Euro 'when the time is right' so its not just the SNP who have held that view. I think it was on this thread I said I was no fan of the Euro anyway, but despite all the bad publicity and obvious difficulties, it is interesting to note the Euro has still managed to appreciate in value relative to Sterling meaning it is now more expensive for us to go the continent than is was before the banking crisis. This implies the markets believe the Euro is still a stronger currency than Sterling.

Furthermore, I believe Ireland and Iceland still have a higher standard of living than the UK. I don't want Scotland to be Ireland or Iceland or Norway for that matter. I want Scotland to be Scotland and right now, under the current set up, it can't.

Your comment on Greece is just being silly. I can't work out if you are trying a wee scare of your own or whether you really believe Scotland is so incapable of managing its own affairs to a competent degree? Surely it can't be the latter?

There is an unwelcome nasty element on both sides of the debate, which is mainly played out online. Its certainly not just 'cybernats' but in fairness to both camps, it probably is blown our of all proportion and the vast majority of stuff I see is good natured.

Of course an Independent Scotland would have to negotiate agreements with other countries, its what normal grown up countries do. Are you somehow implying we would not be capable of that? Again, you reference Salmond here, which I have commented on already.

Shona, the tone of your post is very much that we are not good enough. Can this really be the opinion of so many people in Scotland? If so I find that enormously depressing. Where is the self respect in that? Independence is the normal, natural state of affairs for countries and we are no different.

You have not given one single reason why Scotland should remain in the UK, in my view.

[four eyes]

Still waiting to hear why i should vote yes. I dont seem to recall great swathes of industry anywhere on my recent jaunt to the homeland.No silicon glen reawaking,no tourists rushing to be hit with anti English sentiment and midge infested showers.In fact i was depressed by the crappy tartan and shortbread filled wee shops still infesting high streets and looking and feeling as drab and miserable as ever.If the best we can do is parrot its our oil and expect visitors to buy shite in the shops and stay in sub standard accomadation with service thats as cheering as the weather then i am glad i dont need to return too often. Scotland needs to realise its shortcomings,no one is going to rush to set up a buisness here,we cant even convince our own people to stay and work.Look round the town,see any start ups lately? The dromes wind farm biz,its only here because its paid to be here. Nah! its a cold,wet and distant land ruled by a pompus ass and his ilk who have no idea how they got this far.Some one please enlighten me as to why i should put a cross next to the Salmon.

[baz]

Still waiting to hear why i should vote yes. ...... etc

Oh, the irony.

You have presented your observations of modern Scotland,
are they not reason enough to vote Yes?
It is Westminster you should challenge over this state of affairs.

Scotland's greatest shortcoming, is the "pompus (sic) ass and his ilk"
who rule Scotland and it's people from within Westminster.

Once again .... a Yes vote is for Independence, not Alex Salmond, nor the SNP.
It's a fairly rudimentary concept.

[EMDEE]

Some one please enlighten me as to why i should put a cross next to the Salmon.

What is the Salmon?

[bill]

Getting confused with "The Trump", "The Salmond's American puppet master.

[Shona]

You see, this is why I have serious concerns about independence. The default pro-independence position at the moment is that everything is the fault of Westminster and if only Scotland could divorce itself from Westminster, then all problems would fade away. This rather glosses over the fact that Scotland already has significant autonomy with responsibility for a wide range of policy areas - education, heath, social service, tourism, economic development, housing, law, agriculture, fishing, sport, arts. Not forgetting that the Scottish Parliament has tax-varying powers.

What extra would independence give? The 'we would be rid of Westminster' mantra does not answer the question for me. There are plenty of parts of England that feel remote from Westminster and never voted for the current incumbents in SW1. I reckon the population of the greater Manchester area and Birmingham is about the same as Scotland and they aren't known for voting for posh Etonian millionaires.

Apart from, as far as I'm concerned, unanswered questions with regard to currency and membership of the EU, there are unresolved issues about an independent Scotland's future with regard to treaty rights, obligations and membership of key international organisations. The current Scottish Government's position is that Scotland and rUK would split things equally. This is unlikely. International precedent and principle would support rUK as the 'continuing state' while Scotland would have to start everything afresh. It would have to apply to join the EU, NATO, replicate the work of the FCO, establish embassies and trade missions, set up an intelligence and security service, protect the nation, and much more.

The question: What extra would independence give? keeps going round and round in my head. The more I consider the 'What extra?' question, the more I feel that breaking away is the wrong move.

[Govangirl]

Shona, thank you for your wisdom. That's exactly how I feel and

You see, this is why I have serious concerns about independence. The default pro-independence position at the moment is that everything is the fault of Westminster and if only Scotland could divorce itself from Westminster, then all problems would fade away. This rather glosses over the fact that Scotland already has significant autonomy with responsibility for a wide range of policy areas - education, heath, social service, tourism, economic development, housing, law, agriculture, fishing, sport, arts. Not forgetting that the Scottish Parliament has tax-varying powers.

is just what I've been banging on about for years on here. England, like its three neighbours, would love devolution but of course that is never going to happen. I believe it gives the 'extra' you mention.

I personally want to see a No vote but I'm not a flag-waving staunch unionist - my 'hot air and bluster' is all my own. I have enjoyed reading Hume's posts (and have been educated at the same time) but it hasn't changed my mind.

However, regarding his earlier post about Standard Life, surely these companies are going to ask questions and doubt their future when Salmond won't even get off his fence regarding currency - he STILL hasn't a scooby-doo about where he's going with that! And he is not the only one: