ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.Scottish Independence

19 2035
09philj
offline
09philj
2,917 posts
3,100

In September, people in Scotland will vote in a referendum that will decide whether Scotland will remain part of the UK. At the moment, it looks like the vote could go either way, but I sincerely hope that they vote in favour of remaining in the UK. Firstly, they haven't properly planned how an independent Scotland would work in real life. (No detailed political, foreign, or economic policies have been written) Secondly, it would damage the economy, which is still screwed up from 2008. Thirdly, it would mean that I would never live to see another Labour government. (Slightly selfish, but the other main parties make me homicidally angry)

I also somewhat disagree with referendums in principle, as it is a bit of a cop out from politicians who we chose to make such decisions for us, and puts the future in the hands of people who may well not fully understand the issues and/or are idiots.

Thoughts?

  • 19 Replies
MoonFairy
offline
MoonFairy
3,428 posts
535

I say why not? the wiki link you provided does a fine job of detailing how Scotland has essentially remained separate anyways. I know some people don't even realize that Scotland is distinct from England, but then again they also think that all of Ireland is part of the UK. But again, why not?

JACKinbigletters
offline
JACKinbigletters
9,876 posts
9,535

I believe the only problem is coming from the British side because at the moment the British have access to Scottish oil and gas deposits. If Scotland were to become independent the British would no longer have such access. This would drastically increase the debt of the UK as they would have to import the gas and oil instead of getting it for a much cheaper rate. These reserves also give Scotland a big incentive to become independent as they can finance themselves from the natural fuel reserves and make a huge amount of cash by exporting it to the UK. Also the expense for transporting such commodities would be fairly non-existent due to the infrastructure already in place. So economically it makes a lot of sense. The only negative, from this aspect, would be at the Brits expense. Even though this is only one aspect of the entire debate, it's one that can be overlooked.

So in my opinion, they can go for it.

Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,297 posts
1,945

I also somewhat disagree with referendums in principle, as it is a bit of a cop out from politicians who we chose to make such decisions for us, and puts the future in the hands of people who may well not fully understand the issues and/or are idiots.


But those same people who may well not fully understand the issues and/or are idiots chose those politicians...

I know nothing of Scotland. I just wanted to point the previous thing out.
Moegreche
online
Moegreche
3,410 posts
15,585

As a resident of Scotland (though not a citizen), I have some strong feelings on this. It's pretty clear that the independence movement hasn't thought things through. Here are some immediate problems for Scottish independence.

1) They wouldn't have access to the British Pound. As such, their currency wouldn't really have an established value, which would make getting credit as a country extremely difficult.

2) They would have a waiting period before being allowed into the European Union. This may not seem like a big deal, but it is. In fact, there has been quite a bit of effort from the independence movement to cover up this fact (at least locally).

3) I'm not sure if my visa would be applicable anymore. I know this is sort of a selfish point, but there are plenty of foreign people living here and it's wholly unclear what our residence status would be if Scotland becomes independent.

Kennethhartanto
offline
Kennethhartanto
248 posts
7,545

If they really want independence, then they should prepare for war just in case the Brits can't accept the fact that they will lose parts of their country.I imagine it's going to be a pretty bloody independence, just like what happened in East Timor state, the world's youngest state.

There are several problems i encounter with they're wanting to declare independence:
1. Historically, the Scottish was in bad relations with the Brits. The latter infiltrate Scottish government and proceeded into the assimilation of the Scottish government into the neighboring British government. This may make a feeling of differences in the Scottish people, but cause the British to think that both british and scottish people are the same ( because of assimilation ). This would in turn cause the same chain of events that happen in east Timor in my country, one hell of a bloody suppression by the central government and one hell of a fight from the freedom fighters, causing a bloodbath.

2. The scottish people aren't ready for independence. they haven't planned a separate currency, a "founding fathers" group and an army beside the IRA.

3. They need to have one hell of a foolproof plan to stop their newly formed state from becoming a lawless state prior to the event that a separate Constitution is drawn up by the new parliamentary. If they don't, then gangs and criminals is going to sabotage and undermine the whole nation. Also, that would create a reason for the brits to step in, effectively destroying the new government. This has happened in East Timor state from it's moment of conception and to this very day

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,473 posts
21,890

1. Historically, the Scottish was in bad relations with the Brits. The latter infiltrate Scottish government and proceeded into the assimilation of the Scottish government into the neighboring British government. This may make a feeling of differences in the Scottish people, but cause the British to think that both british and scottish people are the same ( because of assimilation ). This would in turn cause the same chain of events that happen in east Timor in my country, one hell of a bloody suppression by the central government and one hell of a fight from the freedom fighters, causing a bloodbath.


I.....disagree on this point. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that this independence movement is one of the most tranquil in contemporary times. Hardly any violence, hardly any dispute (less that in Parliament), and most protests/rallies/marches have been....peaceful strangely? Halcyon days before the coming storm anyone? In fact, to me at least, the responses have been nothing short of tepid. Less than half of the population supports independence, (although the number of people explicitly and violently opposed has reduced over the years), which when combined, gives an idea of lukewarmness, that peoples' hearts aren't always in it. More surprisingly perhaps, is that the British government seems on the whole, relatively accommodating on the matter, compared to say the Spanish with their Catalan/Basque problem.

I do strongly agree with Moe over the fact that the Pro-Independence leaders have clearly not thought through all things calmly enough, it seems very much a rushed and most likely, botched job. International memberships in the EU, NATO, etc, have these even been decided upon yet? The currency? Will Scotland have it's own currency, continue using the pound (Will the British support that completely?), or the Euro? Will Britian's nuclear weapons still be stored in Coulport and the Firth of Clyde? Ken brought up quite a pertinent point about their defense systems. They would have much reduced manpower and equipment, and also would lack the intelligence networks of the UK. (Oh dear, what would Bond do now haha?)

For Scotland's and the UK's sake, at least wait a while before rushing into a divorce. Salmond is just another populist cynic.

beside the IRA.


Them IRA are Irish mate.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
6,422 posts
14,255

2) They would have a waiting period before being allowed into the European Union. This may not seem like a big deal, but it is. In fact, there has been quite a bit of effort from the independence movement to cover up this fact (at least locally).

Can you elaborate on why this is a big deal? I may misjudge the situation due to not having read a lot about the details, but it interests me to see what you mean by that. It just sounds as if you were implying that it would be bad not to be part of the EU.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,473 posts
21,890

Can you elaborate on why this is a big deal? I may misjudge the situation due to not having read a lot about the details, but it interests me to see what you mean by that. It just sounds as if you were implying that it would be bad not to be part of the EU.


EU citizens would be forced to leave Scotland, and Scottish citizens cannot travel as freely to the rest of the EU states for one, which would have quite an impact on say business. It would also mean easier access to bailouts for poorer economies. It would also offer a single market for the Scots to exploit, for example, through free movement of goods, services, capital and persons.
Kennethhartanto
offline
Kennethhartanto
248 posts
7,545

@nichodemus

How do you know that history won't repeat itself? maybe this is just the "calm before the storm", history is heck full of bloody revolutions and bloody Independence attempts that most of them start peacefully. maybe the Brits don't make this much a big deal because they thought that Scottlands won't sever their bond with the British which i thought is because the majority didn't want independency, but once they thought otherwise, i imagine a supression by the central government,

09philj
offline
09philj
2,917 posts
3,100

How do you know that history won't repeat itself? maybe this is just the "calm before the storm", history is heck full of bloody revolutions and bloody Independence attempts that most of them start peacefully. maybe the Brits don't make this much a big deal because they thought that Scottlands won't sever their bond with the British which i thought is because the majority didn't want independency, but once they thought otherwise, i imagine a supression by the central government,


Because we live in a highly economically and politically developed country, and everyone knows that violence won't help anyone, as it just prejudices people against the cause you are being violent for.

If Scotland were to become independent the British would no longer have such access.


Westminster disagrees there.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,473 posts
21,890

Because the British government has long acquiesced to the Scots taking a referendum on whether there should be a referendum by the end of 2014, which reflects a largely tolerant attitude towards independence. Labour seems to want to keep the Union together, as do most Scots, but I think that the British are calm and sober enough not to go the route of ''bloody revolution'' or ''suppression by the central government'' (which in itself has seemed to give tacit permission to the referendum).

Moegreche
online
Moegreche
3,410 posts
15,585

A hilarious (in my opinion) so-called reason for independence is that Scots don't get an equal share of their pensions/social security benefits. The reason for this is that they don't live as long as other Brits. And the reason for that? Alcoholism!
So there's a motivation to pass the referendum so that Scots won't be paying for other Brits retirement. Of course, this is a terrible reason for a 'yes' vote (if you want your full pension, then live a healthier lifestyle!) but it's one that I've seen crop up in several newspapers.

Kennethhartanto
offline
Kennethhartanto
248 posts
7,545

Because the British government has long acquiesced to the Scots taking a referendum on whether there should be a referendum by the end of 2014, which reflects a largely tolerant attitude towards independence. Labour seems to want to keep the Union together, as do most Scots, but I think that the British are calm and sober enough not to go the route of ''bloody revolution'' or ''suppression by the central government'' (which in itself has seemed to give tacit permission to the referendum).


Wait a minute, did you just imply that the Brits will literally accept Scotland's independence without a fight? i haven't seen this in the history books, there has never been any peaceful accession from a central government, usually you have to fight for it.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,473 posts
21,890

Wait a minute, did you just imply that the Brits will literally accept Scotland's independence without a fight? i haven't seen this in the history books, there has never been any peaceful accession from a central government, usually you have to fight for it.


Yes we are saying that, the British government seems resigned to the fact that if the Scots want independence, they will grant it, but on the condition that the stuff is sorted out. There's no indication of a deep sated, simmering, festering feeling that would broil out into outright violence. The central government was the one that authorised and negotiated with the Scottish government over the referendum, with the tentative future referendum receiving Royal Assent soon after.

In any case, I'm not remotely worried, it doesn't seem like the independence movement has enough support, and whatever they have seems half-hearted.
ghost72807
offline
ghost72807
20 posts
0

Ok people... do you really think our country and support itself... do you really think we can. no we cant and we will not.

No 18/9/14

Showing 1-15 of 19