PDA

View Full Version : FREEDOM!!!


Negative Sun
04-06-2007, 07:14 PM
The Scottish elections are coming up, and the SNP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party) definitely gets my vote, they are basically a party with Scotland's interests first, not those English ***** (no offence to the English population of this board)

"With the forthcoming elections to the Scottish Parliament to be held on May 3rd, the SNP aim to form the next Scottish Executive, with SNP leader Alex Salmond seeking to have the SNP returned as the largest party in the Scottish Parliament. (The SNP being boosted both by public opinion polls and several high profile financial donations). Mr Salmond has detailed plans that state that within 100 days of taking office, an SNP led Executive will issue a bill timetabling a referendum, proposing that the Scottish Executive enter into negotiations with the United Kingdom Government in order to repeal the Acts of Union 1707, thereby returning Scotland to its ancient status as an independent and sovereign state. It is proposed that such a referendum will be put to the Scottish electorate towards the end of the parliamentary session in 2010."

If you aren't familiar with much of Scotland's history beyond Braveheart, inform yourself here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland)

This country deserves it's independence, and here's why:
- The Scots print their own money in Edinburgh, as the English do in London, you can use English bank notes in Scotland, but you can't use Scottish notes in England...I hear you think "wtf?", and quite rightly so, it's pure ****
- The Olympics are being held in London in 2012, and a lot of money is being invested in it, Tax money, Scottish money as well, but who will reap the benefits of this all? London...Their hotels, bars, cafes, etc...the whole tourism sector there will get all the money from it, but who will be left out?
- The Scots deserve to have control over what happens to their military forces, so ****heads like Blair can't send Scottish divisions off to die in some pointless war in Iraq
- The Scots are too proud and strong to be tied to any other nation, they have fought long and hard to become he people they are, but they are now tied to the UK, which has been forced upon them, in an all out referendum, it has been proven that more than 66% of the population here would vote for Scottish independence.



There you have it, anyone willing to argue this be my guest ;)

Gargoyle King
04-06-2007, 07:24 PM
I'm English but no offence taken!
I definately feel that Scotland should have a more independant government, it makes sense really. I hope your party SNP are better than the political parties representing Britain such as Labour; that prat of a Prime Minister does no one any justice, he is somewhat of a poodle for Bush to take for walks on as whatever Bush is doing in the Land of the Free you can be sure Blair is not far behind him (the Iraqi War being a prime example of this!).

Pho3nix
04-06-2007, 07:46 PM
I hope this succeeds :)

I feel pretty misinformed, I thought Scotland got it's independence long ago.

Aash Li
04-06-2007, 08:46 PM
- The Scots deserve to have control over what happens to their military forces, so ****heads like Blair can't send Scottish divisions off to die in some pointless war in Iraq

Lets keep your personal opinions about the war over there out of such a nifty thread shall we?

With that said, I sure hope this party wins. Its long over do for the Scots to be their own country again. Now if only Ireland and Wales could do that... Wales is pretty much little-england now though, so I dont think it matters much. :S

igyman
04-06-2007, 09:09 PM
I'm generally against separating and pro uniting, but I see a lot of your points and I guess that in a situation like that I'd probably feel the same way.

Jae Onasi
04-06-2007, 11:24 PM
Seeing as this is serious political (and cool) stuff, I'm moving it to Kavar's Corner. Enjoy the discussion!

Yep, my only real Scottish 'knowledge' is what Braveheart had, plus the fact that James VI became James I of England too.

What's happening in the polls and such?

Negative Sun
04-07-2007, 07:30 AM
I hope this succeeds :)

I feel pretty misinformed, I thought Scotland got it's independence long ago.
No, we have our own parliament, but we are not an independent, sovereign state yet, the windbags in London still decide a lot of what happens here in Scotland, for example: building huge electricity pylons through the Highlands (hereby destroying some of the most beautiful countryside in Scotland), just so more "green" power can flow down to England...Sound fair?



Lets keep your personal opinions about the war over there out of such a nifty thread shall we?
Well it's not really my personal opinion, a vast majority of the Scots think the war in Iraq is pointless, yet Tony Blair decides we have to go, so innocent Scots are sent off to die for what this English **** decides...Sound right?
How would you Americans feel if Canada got to decide what happened to your military forces?

I don't want to talk about the war, I'm just pointing out that it's not right that someone else gets to decide what happens to our military here...

For the record, I'm Belgian, but I live in Scotland, so I have no reason to be biased besides the fact that I live here, and by doing so I think it's pure **** the way the Scots get treated.



Seeing as this is serious political (and cool) stuff, I'm moving it to Kavar's Corner. Enjoy the discussion!

Yep, my only real Scottish 'knowledge' is what Braveheart had, plus the fact that James VI became James I of England too.

What's happening in the polls and such?
Thanks Jae

Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_general_election,_2007#Opinion _polls) some opinion polls to give you an idea of what's going on Jae, I still don't get why Labout get such a high percentage while they have ****ed up time and time again...

Pavlos
04-07-2007, 08:19 AM
I still don't get why Labout get such a high percentage while they have ****ed up time and time again...

Why do Labour get such a high percentage? Because New Labour is a centre left party (surprising though it may sound) and unlike the South of England, Scotland is mostly dominated by centre left ideals. Blair was the one who implemented devolution of power and allowed Scotland to govern a lot of things on their own. Scotland has always maintained its own cultural identity, a sort of recompense for losing independence and I don't quite understand the need for independence. It governs many of its own internal affairs and receives a lot of funding from the forty million or so English taxpayers. What could be better?! Scotland is a gleaming example of a society which actually spends on public transport and so forth. Why give up a devolved parliament and a massive subsidy for independence? There is no guarantee that Scotland will be able to gain access to the EU in the first decade of independence and it may fall into an economic depression. Do not kid yourself into thinking that under five million people paying taxes will be able to maintain the kind of public spending you are seeing now - it just won't happen.

It is rather interesting that someone fighting for Scottish independence should be a member of the House of Commons. Alex Salmod MP, not Alex Salmond MSP.

Anyway, I think that the idea of independence is a romantic ideal that will never truly see the light of day; the sort of thing you dream about but don't really mind if it doesn't happen. Should push come to shove and Scotland decides to break from the Union, I wish them luck in all their future endeavours.

tk102
04-07-2007, 12:06 PM
How would you Americans feel if Canada got to decide what happened to your military forces?
But see, Blair's sending British forces. Scotland is part of Great Britain. It's more like Bush deciding to send forces from Massachusetts. :p

So let's say Scotland gets its independence, its nationalism, and its currency. What sort of economic, geo-political, or military clout would it have on the world stage? Much less than it did under the U.K. I'll wager. What about health benefits? Transportation (air/road/rail) infrastructure costs? What about Scotland's portion of the National Debt? Welfare? As Pavlos mentioned, Scotland as as whole does earn less per capita than Londoners, but your southern neighbors help shoulder the costs of government and Scotland gets benefits from that. Does the SNP address the possibilities of economic depression, deterioration of social benefits, and reduced international influence resulting from independence?

SilentScope001
04-07-2007, 12:23 PM
I'd agree with the anti-Succession crowd here.

You guys are getting rid of Scotland's beniefts in order to be 'free'. At the end of the day, does a title of Nation of Scotland really matter?

Venom750
04-07-2007, 01:03 PM
I'm english and i think you should have more control over you own country but i like the idea of a united kingdom and hope we stay that way i like being called english but don't mine people saying british plus i think we stronger together why can't we all just get along

Pavlos
04-07-2007, 01:20 PM
Another point is that Scotland exerts a massive influence over the Union. The West Lothian question still has no answer. 119 MPs from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales can vote in the House of Commons on affairs that affect only England (but often England and Wales are clumped together in schemes). The most notable example of this is Scottish representatives voting for the university fee changes - Scotland was not affected by this new policy, yet the MPs were allowed to vote. Is that fair? No, it is undemocratic. It is a question that needs to be answered but I don't think the secession of Scotland is the answer.

For how long will English constituencies and English Honourable members tolerate... at least 119 Honourable Members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercising an important, and probably often decisive, effect on British politics while they themselves have no say in the same matters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

For those of you who have never heard of it :).

With that said, I sure hope this party wins. Its long over do for the Scots to be their own country again. Now if only Ireland and Wales could do that... Wales is pretty much little-england now though, so I dont think it matters much. :S

Ireland has been independent for decades now. It was never truly a part of the union (there was no sharing of power as there was/is between Scotland and England) but more like a colony. If you are referring to the Northern Irish then I think you'll find that it is the only place in the UK where a huge proportion of people still call themselves British before anything else.

Gargoyle King
04-07-2007, 01:33 PM
Ireland has been independent for decades now. It was never truly a part of the union (there was no sharing of power as there was/is between Scotland and England) but more like a colony. If you are referring to the Northern Irish then I think you'll find that it is the only place in the UK where a huge proportion of people still call themselves British before anything else.

More than a few decades; since the 1800s Ireland have been independant from England and the rest of Britain.

Pavlos
04-07-2007, 01:59 PM
More than a few decades; since the 1800s Ireland have been independant from England and the rest of Britain.

I thought it was the 1920s... well, either way the Irish Republic is its own nation and has done remarkably well, mostly due to joining the EU - but that's one of the reasons the European Union exists, to further economic development.

lukeiamyourdad
04-07-2007, 04:00 PM
- The Olympics are being held in London in 2012, and a lot of money is being invested in it, Tax money, Scottish money as well, but who will reap the benefits of this all? London...Their hotels, bars, cafes, etc...the whole tourism sector there will get all the money from it, but who will be left out?

This, I don't understand. It's just how it has always been for the Olympics. When the Montréal Olympics went bankrupt, we, Montrealers, were stuck with the taxes. If it made profits, we would have gotten those profits. Vancouver 2010 profits Vancouver and Vancouver alone. If one day, Edinburgh hosted the Olympics, Edinburgh would profit, not Inverness.


I don't quite understand the need for independence. It governs many of its own internal affairs and receives a lot of funding from the forty million or so English taxpayers. What could be better?! Scotland is a gleaming example of a society which actually spends on public transport and so forth. Why give up a devolved parliament and a massive subsidy for independence? There is no guarantee that Scotland will be able to gain access to the EU in the first decade of independence and it may fall into an economic depression. Do not kid yourself into thinking that under five million people paying taxes will be able to maintain the kind of public spending you are seeing now - it just won't happen.

The same problem Québec faces. The state of Québec spends way too much and receives massive amounts of money from the federal government, most of it coming from the provinces of Ontario and Alberta. Incredibly unfair for the both of them, but as long as the federal system is in place...someone will get the extra money. If it's not Québec, it'll be the newfies.

Anyway, if Québec was to separate from Canada, the economic problems would be incredible. Leftists want the biggest state possible. With what money? Separating from Canada will remove tons of money that shouldn't be in the pockets of Québec in the first place. Goodbye huge badly managed social programs.


You guys are getting rid of Scotland's beniefts in order to be 'free'. At the end of the day, does a title of Nation of Scotland really matter?

Yes. The need to have a strong culture is always there. It's always going to be so. In a way, you'll never get rid of this nationalist ideal. It's certain that the Scots sometimes feel that their own culture is submerged by the English one. When you're not in any colonized or partly colonized groups, you don't really understand the feeling. Fear of assimilation. Granted, neither Québec nor Scotland is actually a colony or treated as such.

Another point is that Scotland exerts a massive influence over the Union.

This is a strange thing. Both Québec and Scotland exert huge influence over their respective unions. Why do people in the rest of England and Canada want those entities to stay? If I was sending my tax money, to one of those, I'd want to kick them out so I can keep the money for myself. So again, nationalistic ideals come into play. Uk has to stay the way it is or so they say.



I believe the only viable option for Scotland is more autonomy. Redo the model of the Union so that it's more like a Confederation. The entities, at the national level, would be perfectly separate but would speak with the same voice on the world stage. Unless their economy can start to perform as well as Ireland's, I don't see any economic reasons for Scotland to secede. It's mostly cultural and should be taken as it is. However, there is nothing that stops two cultures from living under the same nation. Belgium does it. Singapore does it. Switzerland does it.

Negative Sun
04-08-2007, 07:04 PM
There is no financial reason for Scotland to be a separate state...

All I'm going to say is: US Independence
Would you all like it if you were still a lap dog of England? Be "ruled" by a pathetic and ridiculous monarchy? Fine you might have an ass of a president, but at least he got elected (or let's assume he was)

It's got nothing to do with money and politics in the end, even though it's obviously there...It's about flippin Freedom!

It's time for the Scots to get what belongs to them, their own nation, their own mistakes, the point is not what is to be gained from being tied to England, the point is to have their own culture and freedom to rule their country the way they want...

What has being part of the UK ever done for Northern Ireland I ask you...

Same goes for Scotland, we'd still be part of the Commonwealth, the EU, NATO, etc... We just want our own country, I don't see why we can't separate peacefully, the Czechs and Slovaks have done it.

@ lukeiamyourdad

Belgium isn't a very good example, the two communities there are at each others throats all the time, and talks about a rupture have been and always will plague my home country...It's a sad thing really, I'm proud to be Belgian, I'm not proud of the way people treat each other there. I feel at home in both communities, and they would be so much better off trying to work together...

Btw, Belgium is the size of a peanut compared to the US, only has 10 million inhabitants, yet it still manages to survive OK, I'm pretty sure a country like Scotland could do the same.

Darth InSidious
04-08-2007, 07:27 PM
Yay! Up separatism! Up divisions! Up fracturing! Up our destruction!

lukeiamyourdad
04-08-2007, 08:16 PM
@ lukeiamyourdad

Belgium isn't a very good example, the two communities there are at each others throats all the time, and talks about a rupture have been and always will plague my home country...It's a sad thing really, I'm proud to be Belgian, I'm not proud of the way people treat each other there. I feel at home in both communities, and they would be so much better off trying to work together...


I don't doubt it, but it has managed to survive united up to now and perhaps for a long time. I don't believe any secession movement would succeed in Belgium as opposed to Scotland or even Québec. Just my personal evaluation of the chances of something happening. At any rate, Switzerland would be the best example of unity IMO.

Yay! Up separatism! Up divisions! Up fracturing! Up our destruction!

So, when is England going to accept the Euro as their currency? Or create a federal system in Europe, uniting every single country on the continent? Go unity right?[/sarcasm]

Negative Sun
04-09-2007, 06:28 PM
I don't doubt it, but it has managed to survive united up to now and perhaps for a long time. I don't believe any secession movement would succeed in Belgium as opposed to Scotland or even Québec. Just my personal evaluation of the chances of something happening. At any rate, Switzerland would be the best example of unity IMO.

You'd be surprised at how bad the situation in Belgium is, I would say it's almost the same as here in Scotland...The Flemish separatist movement has grown more and more popular over the years, the Walloons OTH are playing it defensively, saying it would destroy the monarchy and all that, but it's just in the Flemish people's cards cause they don't give a rat's about the monarchy lol

lukeiamyourdad
04-12-2007, 12:29 AM
Well, from what I know, the Flemish movement is a minority, at least for now. There's actually a very incredible separation of powers in the Belgian federation. I'm pretty certain the more radicals will never be satisfied until a total split but we'll see if it's actually doable.

Pavlos
04-12-2007, 06:35 AM
All I'm going to say is: US Independence
Would you all like it if you were still a lap dog of England? Be "ruled" by a pathetic and ridiculous monarchy? Fine you might have an ass of a president, but at least he got elected (or let's assume he was)

It's got nothing to do with money and politics in the end, even though it's obviously there...It's about flippin Freedom!

Wasn't one of the plans for separation to maintain the Queen as the Scottish head of state. Anyway, I'm not that big a fan of the monarchy, myself; waste of money, if you ask me but people do like their traditions.

Anyway, the monarch has no constitutional power, she is a puppet to the first amongst equals, Tony Blair. You speak of being ruled by English fat cats. Well, there are many, many Scottish cabinet ministers. Gordon Brown and John Reid are some of the most powerful men in the country so your statement is not entirely correct :).

I sympathise with Scottish independence, I just don't think it is the best idea, especially when one considers the very large probability that within one hundred years we'll all be back together again under a united Europe.

http://www.scottishlabour.org.uk/holyrood/


What has being part of the UK ever done for Northern Ireland I ask you...

I have no idea :). But the majority of people in Northern Ireland *want* to be in the UK and when it comes to these matters in a democracy it is the majority that will rule. This is exactly the same reason why if Scotland elects the SNP to power then there is no going back on it and separation is inevitable.

Same goes for Scotland, we'd still be part of the Commonwealth, the EU, NATO, etc... We just want our own country, I don't see why we can't separate peacefully, the Czechs and Slovaks have done it.

But there is no guarantee that Scotland could enter the EU from the get go; hell there's no guarantee that the UK would still be a recognised member, both places may have to reapply. I am very much in favour of federalising the union - now that we've started devolution let's go the whole way. It results in both parts ruling themselves, while sharing common ground on foreign policy and reaping the benefits of the, very strong, UK economy.

Negative Sun
04-12-2007, 06:43 AM
Well, from what I know, the Flemish movement is a minority, at least for now. There's actually a very incredible separation of powers in the Belgian federation. I'm pretty certain the more radicals will never be satisfied until a total split but we'll see if it's actually doable.
I don't think it will come to a split, cause like you said, the separation of powers is quite big as it is, there's an independent Flemish and Walloon government already, and Belgium as a unity has worked since the start.

Scotland on the other hand, never was meant to be part of the UK, we got forced into it, Wallace and Bruce fought for it centuries ago and obtained freedom for centuries, only for stupid monarchs to get back to England, stupid bleepers!

I see what you're saying Pavlos, but in the end it's not about the EU or a strong monetary unit or whatever, it's about our own independent nation, the way Scotland is meant and always has been meant to be...