I don't know how many of you will be aware, but we are due to have a referendum in October 2014 on leaving the UK and becoming independent. Personally I am all for it but sadly, heartbreakingly really, current polls show only 32% support for full independence so it is extremely unlikely to happen. Any thoughts ?
its simply logical to run your own economy, we have different problems to the rest of the uk and need to be able to address them directly. our political dynamic is way to the left of england and we have the potential to embrace renewable energy in a big way at the same time as britain is about to go nuclear, while the rest of our thats scotlands oil runs out, which we should be using to rebuild our economy and infrastructure before it does, but cant cause the uk takes 90% of the revenue despite producing none of it.
I hope Schotland succeeds in gaining independence. Smaller states with less complicated government structures and a tighther bond between the governed and the governors are the future.
thats a good point about a tighter bond between the governed and those that govern, most in scotland dont identify with westminster its a long way away holyrood is much closer. great football team in belgium now btw, we play you soon we're not very good though.
If you'd asked me this question a few years ago I'd have said it was a bad idea. Now I'm not so sure. I know Scotland has a sense of independence from England and Wales and looking at the British government at the moment I'd say good on Scotland. But I'm also aware that the largesse that Alex Salmond is bestowing on the Scots is funded not just by Scotland. But no matter. I wonder, just wonder, if Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland may eschew the idea of a central national government (i.e. Westminster) and parliament and move to a sort of federation such as Australia has. It could even be that what is now the UK may benefit from a federation approach whereas in Australia (irony upon irony) a national government with no States/Territories might be best (but that is definitely another question).
At what scale though? The highlands and islands of Scotland have different problems to Edinburg and Glasgow - the latter probably have more in common with London than rural Scotland. As someone with a Scots father and English mother who has lived on both sides of the border, I can tell you that the idea that Scotland as a whole is fundamentally different to the rest of the UK as a whole is simply a myth. Political independence would be unlikely to bring economic independence anyway. Scotland would likely keep the pound or adopt the Euro, arguably giving Scottish people less influence. I doubt establishing a new currency would be feasible, at least in the short to medium term. None of that requires independence and there is no guarantee that independence will improve the chance of it happening. Quite frankly, it sounds more like wishful thinking than a logical plan. I see absolutely zero benefit for anyone in breaking up the UK. We're basically greater than the sum of our parts. There are certainly issues with imbalance of resources in different regions but as I've already said, none of that is marked by the Scottish/English border. There would also be huge costs and disruption from the process though, with all sorts of practical, legal and financial issues to deal with. So people seem to think (or want to create the impression that) it would be a simple process or signing a document and *bamf* independace. It would actually be a long, slow and difficult process.
can you ? I can tell you that is bollocks, scotland is completely different politically look at how we vote go and analyse voting trends we vote very differently, we have different environmental issues, socially very different issues we are the heart disease capital of the world the knife crime capital of europe we have problems with sectarianism and irish diaspora. your point about glasgow having more in common with london is laughable, london also has more in common with paris than the lake district so should france and england unite then ? what you doubt is irrelevant, its already been dealt with, we already have our own bank notes that wouldnt change our pound would shadow sterling while we decide whether to join the euro, and the currency issue is nothing to do with economic independence anyway its collecting and spending your own tax that is the issue explain why were are greater than the sum of our parts thats just saying something with no meaning, we always have had a raw deal out of union it is not in our interests, the scottish economy is run for the benefit of the south-east of england that is undeniable, maybe you are better off with us as part of the uk but we're certainly not there would be costs and difficulties, as there is now, though long-term we would be removing a layer of beaureacracy thus saving money, nobody said it would be easy but we're talking about the destiny of our nation for the next perhaps a thousand years its quite important, but if a yes vote is achieved independence is impossible to prevent legally and morally, you may not like that but tough titties
are you ? are you aware that scotland has been a net contributor to the uk economy for almost 40 years ? the 'largesse' as you put it, is entirely funded by scotland and an independent scotland would be able to fund even more
In a way, either way is ok. People are free to choose their destiny, even if it resembles one of doom. Its own fragmentation is the last thing UK needs right now and will not let it happen.
The more countries on a continent, the more sluggish and indecisive will they be in their interrelations. Making independent European countries now, in the 21st Century means dividing people. ...denying the truthfulness of one's democracy and your entire common past with them. Personally I believe that denying the unity that defined 2 nations for such a long time is like denying yourself and all you did in that time.
who cares what the uk needs, I'm scottish I only care about scotland, and the uk doesnt have to let it happen if the vote is yes its happening whether the uk government agrees or not
it was never unity that defined us, britain has never been particularly unified, and there are more than 2 nations involved anyway
No, I'm saying trying to build countries on the basis of these similarities or differences is ridiculous. Every nation has vast variations within it and an independent Scotland would be no less diverse than the UK is now. There are differences between England and Scotland but there are also differences between the North and South of England and differences between West and East Scotland. The idea that there is some kind of unique, special difference between all of Scotland and all of the rest of the UK is the myth. The bits of paper in your pocket are irrelevant. The key thing an independent Scotland looses is any influence on things like interest rates - thatÂ’s a key issue for Greece and Spain at the moment. Tax raising powers don't require full national independence. I'm personally all for more regionalisation including more localised taxation (on equal replacement with national taxation of course). Larger nations have disproportionate larger political influence and economies of scale give financial benefits. The UK also has a historical political and social influence that it's break-up would weaken (and Scotland would likely loose a lot more from that than the rest of the UK). There is an element of that but I think it's exagerated and again, full independence isn't the only solution. And what's to stop it just switching to the Scottish economy being run for the benefit of the south-east of Scotland instead? If you think MSPs care any more about Scottish people than MPs, you're kidding yourself. The extra layer only exists because of devolution (which was probably the worst way to address the question). The Scottish government effectively replaces the Westminster government, though with another set of fixed overheads. It's nothing to do with whether I like it or not. I just think it will cost a lot of money, achieve little, if any, benefit for anyone and, given the kind of wider financial crisis we're currently in, could bring down one or both parts of whatever the UK became.
every country is built on the basis of these similarities or differences, otherwise we'd be as well just having one big country for the entire world, they are built on shared heritage, history, culture, language, identity, this is what seperates scotland from the rest of the uk that is undeniably true we are different in all those ways and it is massively insulting for you to demean our nationhood to suggest otherwise the uk has no influence on interest rates in the ecb, neither would scotland no change there then, interest rates are always very close to domestic ones anyway you are clutching at straws, every country in the eu faces the same problem there an independent scotland or the uk it makes no difference, and you are just displaying your ignorance, tax raising powers DO require independence, tax VARYING powers dont, we currently have those. its as simple as we want to raise all our own tax and decide how we spend it, we cant do that as part of the uk. the uks political influence is zero today. culturally we would remain as closely linked to the uk as ever so we wouldnt lose anything there but our influence in intl affairs died 50 years ago, and we may even continue a shared defence policy so any influence the uk has we would share too even after independence. if the scottish economy ends up being run for the benefit of the south east of scotland (again displaying your ignorance dont lecture me on a country you know little about, what you mean is the central belt, glasgow is in the WEST of scotland) then that would be great, given about 70% of scotlands population lives there, a wee bit better than running it for the benefit of 10 million english people no ? thats why we want independence thats what every other country in the world gets to do run their own economy for the benefit of their own people why not us ? and of course msp's care more about scotland than mp's its natural, a scot is going to care more about scotland than a non-scot, if you cant see that youre an idiot. no the extra layer of government is westminster, a bunch of foreigners in a foreign country who have no place governing scotland, thats the one we have to get rid of well you can vote no then, I think youre deluded and making up nonsense to support your pre-designated position, which is influenced purely by having a parent from both countries, youre just trying to validate your own existence, dont project that onto my country, its a wee bit more important than you.
There certainly are more than 2 nations! There is a third way, too, which nobody is talking about, but the thought has occurred to me as an alternative. Some form of 'Celtic Union' betwen Scotland, Eire and Wales (and possibly the Isle of Man and Cornwall, of course). Just a thought - we have far, far more in common historically, socially and politically with each other than any of us do with our more populous near neighbour, and that neighbour has always been the major 'troublemaker' in these islands.
absolutely we are all celts they are not we're different people, they have bullied us all for centuries and plundered our wealth then told us we are parasites, one of the things they fear too is that if scotland became independent then wales would follow and theyd be left with a uk that consists of england and n ireland. I dont think a celtici union would work but would like to see wales and scotland leave the uk, and n ireland eventually become part of the republic.
I can certainly all for any state gaining full independence if that is what the people of that state want. Unfortunately its not always that simple. The US possession of Puerto Rico is in excellent example. Three times in my lifetime there have referendums where the voters of the island have been offered independence statehood or maintaining the status quo. Every time they vote to to keep the current status. There is another vote coming soon, and I suspect it will have the same result. Whatever the result of the vote in Scotland, everyone needs to respect the will of the people. Much of my own ethnic heritage is in the British isles, and I wish the people of Scotland the best.
Scotland has been a country for 2000 years, mate. Nobody is building a country. Despite having to put up with the union for a couple of centuries for economic expedience, it is still a country with a unique culture. I hate English soaps, btw. And comedies. We turn them off, muttering "ach it's one of those English things"...not interested, different culture. Go and frighten the weans elsewhere. Being part of the UK protected Scotland from nothing, the economic crisis fully evidenced the mire UK drags us into. Not to mention the wars it drags us into. Full independence is all we're interested in. UK is of no interest whatsoever any more. It's an irrelevance. And the worse that twisted, dishonourable, lying, cheating, Tory government gets, the more annoying it is. Regarding MPs, as Westminster is fully aware nobody here votes for them be they Tory or Labour, how much do you think any of them care about this country? Even that political system doesn't represent us. We voted neither Tory nor Lib into power, but here we are being irritated by both. For you. For us, it's going rather well. It is also entertaining to see how unhappy some are now it's England being disadvantaged for a change. How could this country be brought down? Everything in UK is focused on London. The economy here is shot, we have nothing to lose by losing that.
In a sense the interesting thing in the idea is the numbers. Populations: Scotland - 5.2 million Wales - 3 million Rep. of Ireland - 4.5 Million The biggest issue with the UK in its current form is the democratic dominance of England, but in a union of those three that wouldn't apply - no country would hold democratic power over the other two. That has always been the fundamental flaw with the UK as a union - it is a 'union' overwhelmingly dominated by one part, and run primarily for the interests of that part. We have, of course, many things in common beyond just our historical links, and some of those things are things that are important to us but that we don't share with England. For example we are all, to some extent, bilingual countries with a minority of native language speakers (but with native languages that have a great deal of popular support among non-speakers). We tend to have relaitively similar political ideals, but those have relatively little effect against the population dominance of the South East of England - we would agree with each other (and disagree with them!) on a great deal politically, and that could give us some added strength without swamping any of us, or allowing any of us to be effectively dictated to. Although small nations can certainly go it alone and survive in the world as 'Nation States' (by my reckoning, Scotland on its own would by the 116th largest country in the world by population, ahead of the likes of Singapore, Norway, New Zealand, Croatia, etc., and Wales would be about 137th, ahead of Albania, Jamaica, Latvia, etc.), and obviously nobody is suggesting 'towing Scotland (or Wales) out into the Atlantic' (we would undoubtably still be maintaining a close alliance of friendship with England, as we should be), there is, I think, some merit to the notion that working closely together in a the kind of loose 'Federal Union' of a small number of relatively equal partners (and those are the important things - 'small' and 'equal') could give us some additional influence in the context of being so close, so 'out on a limb' in European geographical tems, and still so closely physically and economically linked with our nearest neighbour. It's a slightly 'left-field' suggestion, I know, but I do think it's worthy of consideration about whether Scotland's (or Wales's, or even Ireland's) issue is that it needs to 'get out of the Union altogether', or whether the real problem is that it is so much a minority partner in the wrong kind of union with the wrong other country. In a way it could be said that we were once, a long time ago, effectively separate but closely related nations, joined together by one central Celtic sea (in days when land travel over long distances was much harder than it is now, and sea travel over short distances relatively easy). We really make little use of that sea now, because the focus has been dictated so much by the land link to London. Perhaps it's time we considered revisiting that concept of the Celtic sea joining us together - it would allow us less of a South Eastern focus, and more of a direct international focus stemming from that central sea out to the wider world (bypassing London on the way), if you see what I mean. As far as NI joining the Republic goes, as much as I don't think the situation should have been created in the first place, given that it has been (and you can't undo time!), I don't think that's ever remotely likely. I suspect it will always be tied to England, although in the context of the creation of a Celtic union perhaps it's people (considering that some of the loyalists have Scottish origin, rather than English) might one day consider joining that as a separate federal part from the Republic itself (with a population of 1.8 million, it wouldn't make a significant difference to the balance of power within such a union). That's obviously a matter for them, though.
Actually, by all accounts I won't be able to. The referendum will be limited to Scottish residents. Classy. If you're ever interested in an adult debate, do let me know.
interesting idea but I could never go for it, in scotland some people have been crying out for the chance just to govern ourselves, never once in modern history have we had the chance just to see how we would get on in a post-industrialised world so I wouldnt give that up for anything, it would be prefereable to being part of the uk and our interests would be looked after better but for me independence is the only game in town
Try to wake up to reality: many European nations have regained their independence in the last few decades.
