The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

[kaosmark2]

This was in relation to Neil's allegations of the SNP mugging the poor to fund the middle classes i think, which as ever is a gross over simplification particularly as the SNP government is unable to tax the rich whether they want to or not!

Not exactly "most of you are way off the mark most of the time. " is it? One (albeit repeated) stance by one person.

"Mugging" is a term I'd disagree with, but within the powers that are devolved to Holyrood, Scotland could be doing more to help the poor, and is instead funding free education/prescriptions, improved pensions even for the well off, etc. This isn't to say the rest of the UK are necessarily better, but the SNP have chosen vote-winning policies that help the middle classes as a higher priority than aiding the poor, so I understand Neil's point here.

but to a large extent I am judging labour on their record rather than their promises. I am also reacting to particular issues within the Scottish Labour Party which is now so anti SNP & so anti Independence that they woudl rather lose about 25-30% of their core vote than engage in grown up debate on the issues that concern its own members. ans woudl rather stand side by side with t he Tories than engage with their own members. There is no idealogical issue that should prevent you supporting the labour party & Scottish independence. The Labour Party has made it so

New-Labour's record is something Ed has made a genuine and concerted attempt to distance himself from. Criticisms of Scottish Labour are valid, however your overall criticism of Labour seems barely relevant, as I (and I believe Russy and Neil), despise a lot of what Blair said and did.

And yes, there is an ideological issue that should prevent supporting Scottish independence, the idea that a larger state, covering more people, can provide better than small states. Left-wind ideology is grounded in the principle of having a big state, and by taking one area out of that state and making 2 smaller ones, you're limiting the good that each can do.

I have no truck with Murdoch, never have had, never will. if you can find one word from me justifying Salmond's relationship with Murdoch, you will be doing well. But he is in no way exceptional in his pursuit of Rupert's affections. it may be unattractive but the path to Rupert's bedroom is a well worn one by politicians of every flavour. I have no idea how unsavoury Alec's dealings with Rupert were & neither do you or Neil. Neil of course makes it out to be the worst corruption in the history of European democracy. I suspect the truth is rather les sensational although not in any way admirable.

Ed Miliband has had far less to do with Murdoch than Salmond. You're criticising the current Labour prospective government on Blair's record. Prove they're the same.

Not really sure I followed you logic here. if they are a minority government labour will have a choice who they get support from to get legislation through parliament. If i understand you right, I'm a little surprised that you seem to be suggesting that they may get their support from the Tories - hardly the sign of a vibrant left wing party.

They won't have a choice, it'll depend on the MP spread, and what each party (and MP) believes in.

Any time a Labour vote gets defeated (and they will), they will amend the policy to make it more appealing to Lib Dems and Tories, as opposed to allowing themselves to be seen to be dictated by minority parties - particularly separatist ones. It's the only position they can take politically which won't guaranteeably cost them the 2020 election.

"tearing the UK apart"???? This is a typical inflamatory use of language to make what all of us nasty Nats want seem really unpleasant. i do not wish to tear anything apart. I wish to see Scotland & the UK come to an amicable agreement to end our 300 year union. Nothing needs to be torn apart.

Separation is unpleasant. Every independence movement is rooted in rejection.

So which is it Kaos? are we economically fucked by £4 or 6 or 8 billion a year or whatever today's figure is or are we selfish money grabbing bastards? make your mind up - you cannot have them both.

Ideologically selfish not financially selfish. Your argument is you want "to escape the Westminster cesspit." Now what this involves, is leaving the rest of us to wallow in it, to endure what you believe is an irredeemable institution. If it is as bad as you suggest, the answer is not independence, but revolution. Independence would be abandoning the rest of the UK to suffering.

Of course, maybe it isn't as bad as that, and the answer is to work within the system to change it, rather than revolution.

Either way, independence is not the answer to a corrupt/faulty democracy. To believe it is, is to selfishly make only Scotland being free of it important, and dismissing what the rest of the UK is put through by it.

[kaosmark2]

I mentioned the other day that we " could " see a situation one day where zero Tory MP`s are returned from Scotland, Wales Northern Ireland but......." we " still end up with a Tory Government in our Kingdom. Surely this is more than a little silly.

There are situations where zero Labour MPs are returned from the home counties, but they still end up with a Labour government.

Stop claiming that the government selected regions vote for matters. It's irrelevant, it's always been a crap point and always will be.

[LJS]

And yes, there is an ideological issue that should prevent supporting Scottish independence, the idea that a larger state, covering more people, can provide better than small states. Left-wind ideology is grounded in the principle of having a big state, and by taking one area out of that state and making 2 smaller ones, you're limiting the good that each can do.

I disagree with this point. I would argue that the ideology of the Labour Party does not require any particular size of state. The principles it stands for can apply within a small state as easily as within a larger one. Indeed, in its early years The Scottish Labour party campaigned for home rule for Scotland.

But leaving aside ideology, lets talk practical politics. why would you deliberately alienate a significant section of your support by making Indy into a party issue? And then mount such a negative campaign that you effectively insult your own supporters. That is just stupid politics.

There is precedent for labour not having a "party line" in referenda. In the EU referendum in 1975, the Scottish devo referendum in 1979 & the recent AV referenda, Labour allowed its members to campaign on either side.

​So both in terms of principle & plain old fashioned common sense there was no need for the Scottish Labour Party to get itself in to this position. But then they have been taking us for granted for years, it would have been bizarre for them to change.

Edited March 21, 2015 by LJS

[kaosmark2]

But leaving aside ideology, lets talk practical politics. why would you deliberately alienate a significant section of your support by making Indy into a party issue? And then mount such a negative campaign that you effectively insult your own supporters. That is just stupid politics.

So you moan at Labour for playing politics, not doing what the party stands for, and you moan at them for not playing politics, and alienating people by standing up for a belief. So what can they do?

[LJS]

Hey Neil,

Anti-racism campaigners hail no-show of supporters of far-right at rally

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/anti-racism-campaigners-hail-no-show-of-supporters-of-far-right-at-rally.1426959155

Yeah, we are just as racist as the rest of you, It's just that our racists are too lazy to leave the house.

[LJS]

So you moan at Labour for playing politics, not doing what the party stands for, and you moan at them for not playing politics, and alienating people by standing up for a belief. So what can they do?

Hmm, superficially a good point Kaos, but I think there is a difference between abandoning your principles & abandoning your supporters.

[LJS]

came across this again thought I would post it to annoy neil

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uk2015

to be fair, i have no idea what it means but I do know i posted it before (with me down beside the greens ) & Neil ignored it - somehow (presumably witchcraft it place the SNP well to the left of Right wing authoritarian labour.

How strange.

Edited March 21, 2015 by LJS

[LJS]

Any comment from anyone on the blatant sexism of the media's coverage of the SNP now they have a hot chick at the helm?

[Comfy Bean]

There are situations where zero Labour MPs are returned from the home counties, but they still end up with a Labour government.

Stop claiming that the government selected regions vote for matters. It's irrelevant, it's always been a crap point and always will be.

Fair enough Mark. I think we all agreed to park the whole Country argument and I don`t wish to start all that again but can you name any of theses home counties who are soon to be excluded from voting in Westminster on certain issues ?

[Comfy Bean]

Your argument is you want "to escape the Westminster cesspit." Now what this involves, is leaving the rest of us to wallow in it, to endure what you believe is an irredeemable institution. If it is as bad as you suggest, the answer is not independence, but revolution. Independence would be abandoning the rest of the UK to suffering.

Of course, maybe it isn't as bad as that, and the answer is to work within the system to change it, rather than revolution.

Either way, independence is not the answer to a corrupt/faulty democracy. To believe it is, is to selfishly make only Scotland being free of it important, and dismissing what the rest of the UK is put through by it.

The idea of leaving behind the folks in England to " wallow in it " is a good point mate and one we have debated on here before. I think the folks on here who think Scotland can easily be an independent country have made the point that it could in time prove to be a good thing for everyone and this is important to us. We are all trapped in a system where there is a direction of travel to the right and how many times have you read on here that an Indy Scotland could allow Labour to stop chasing the middle englander votes. Scotland showing that a different path is available is the last thing the establishment want. Imagine the scenes if Scotland made a success out of a direction away from austerity and we saw Labour up here returning to their roots. We could have seen politics turned upside down and for the benefits of the people you say would be left behind. Unfortunately the good folks in England seem to quite fancy a Tory Govt so perhaps they don`t want a different path. The polls in Scotland show that it is not the case North of the border. Hopefully you have read enough on these boards to know that no-one wishes to leave the UK out of spite. Let Scotland lead the way. It`s another way of looking at things and for my money it`s why the establishment ( led by Dave ) stepped in with 4 days to go. I`m assuming you don`t actually believe that Dave actually gives a shit about Scotland.

7am the day after the vote confirmed what most of us already knew. Just ask Darling.

[Comfy Bean]

Any comment from anyone on the blatant sexism of the media's coverage of the SNP now they have a hot chick at the helm?

Can I add this to the mix.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/labour-mp-s-tin-hat-nicola-sturgeon-jibe-mocked-1-3713589

[Comfy Bean]

Oh and this........

https://commonspace.scot/articles/626/reaction-round-up-the-guardian-s-nicola-sturgeon-incest-cartoon-causes-twitter-storm

[kaosmark2]

Fair enough Mark. I think we all agreed to park the whole Country argument and I don`t wish to start all that again but can you name any of theses home counties who are soon to be excluded from voting in Westminster on certain issues ?

Yeah, me neither.

And I've said before, I thoroughly despise the idea of excluding Scottish MPs from voting on issues. It's divide and rule politics and a blatant attempt by the Tories to manipulate a sense of rejection into engineering greater power for themselves. Anyone who thinks that Scotland should remain part of the union is being utterly hypocritical if they support the idea of English MPs voting on English laws.

[kaosmark2]

The idea of leaving behind the folks in England to " wallow in it " is a good point mate and one we have debated on here before. I think the folks on here who think Scotland can easily be an independent country have made the point that it could in time prove to be a good thing for everyone and this is important to us. We are all trapped in a system where there is a direction of travel to the right and how many times have you read on here that an Indy Scotland could allow Labour to stop chasing the middle englander votes. Scotland showing that a different path is available is the last thing the establishment want. Imagine the scenes if Scotland made a success out of a direction away from austerity and we saw Labour up here returning to their roots. We could have seen politics turned upside down and for the benefits of the people you say would be left behind. Unfortunately the good folks in England seem to quite fancy a Tory Govt so perhaps they don`t want a different path. The polls in Scotland show that it is not the case North of the border. Hopefully you have read enough on these boards to know that no-one wishes to leave the UK out of spite. Let Scotland lead the way. It`s another way of looking at things and for my money it`s why the establishment ( led by Dave ) stepped in with 4 days to go. I`m assuming you don`t actually believe that Dave actually gives a shit about Scotland.

7am the day after the vote confirmed what most of us already knew. Just ask Darling.

I genuinely believe that the steady shift to the right is reversing. Not heavily, but enough. I also believe that a separatist example of success is not the way - look at Scandinavia, the UK has long lauded their education systems and general government support for citizens, yet has been reluctant to pay the taxes (or cut the defence budget) required to fund such a society. A left-wing independent financially stable Scotland (something I don't believe would happen btw, I'm just using it as a hypothetical), would not drive the desire to pay taxes in England any more than Scandinavia does.

It's raw, unreasoned optimism that leads to such speculation. I don't dislike the hope, but then I see the utter resignation regarding changing Westminster, and it makes me wonder how it's so misplaced. I'm no fan of FPTP, or the House of Lords, or many aspects of our "democracy", but I feel the appetite for change is growing, and that all sensible British people being united in campaigning for that - as opposed to divided campaigning for independence or electoral reform or county devolution or whatever - will be much more productive than furthering any sense of division that already exists.

[eFestivals]

Alternatively

Our common National identity (Britishness) will remain as a geographical rather than a political identity.

Our economies will diverge although there would still be cooperation

Our joint ventures in helping each other will continue where appropriate & desirable

our ability to share the future will as friends & neighbours will remain

As we already have seperate legal systems there would be no change here

It's all about how you phrase things, Neil.

Nope, it's all about what you do rather than what you say which doesn't match the realities. Fancy that, eh, a fact-free snipper.

The political movement you support is all about division. Dividing the Scots from the English, and highlighting difference and not common cause.

All of the 'better' things you list are undermined by your own choices of division. We're back to the bullshit of Salmond where nothing would change - apart from everything.

[eFestivals]

its still better than the Westminster way.

it IS the Westminster way you pillock.

The politicians before the people. What part of that have you missed?

[eFestivals]

All your concern for " the poor " as you put it doesn`t really stand up though does it although I accept your concern is genuine. " The poor " in Dundee Glasgow etc voted to leave the UK behind.

The concern for 'the poor' I've been highlighting is LJS's, and not my own. That concern evaporates when gifted with middle-class privileges for himself, just as it has for so many Scots.

You stood / stand shoulder to shoulder with the Tories, Murdoch, the bankers and various other establishment types and denied them the opportunity to be independent of Westminster.

I stood shoulder to shoulder with those in Scotland ho don't want to be impoverished via a fanciful dream where the economics blow away those fanciful dreams.

YOU voted to impoverish your fellow Scot.

Unless you can show me the magic money tree?

Every Indy poll now shows a YES majority.

so does every poll for world peace and momma's apple pie.

The YES movement seems ( on the ground ) to be looking to the future in a positive, confident manner.

but still never looking at the facts.

The whole greed / jam / oil stuff has been shown up to be nonsense ( who knew ) as the oil price is down the stank but support for Indy continues to grow.

But the self-delusions continue unabashed.

You still can't admit that Scotland would be fucked and the poor would suffer for it.

Fair enough if you think that Scotland couldn`t be an Independent Country ( or even a country )

It can be an independent country. What part6 of me constantly saying that is your brain unable to process to cause you to constantly revert to posting bollocks?

The point is this: it would be a poorer country, as GERS proves every year.

but how do you explain the continuing rise in support amongst the people of Scotland ?

how do you explain your inability to accept the truth of GERS?

On the polls......if the graph of support continues duringthe next decade the way it has been rising over the past 10 years then the dream ( for some ) will be realised

I refer you to Quebec.

I mentioned the other day that we " could " see a situation one day where zero Tory MP`s are returned from Scotland, Wales Northern Ireland but......." we " still end up with a Tory Government in our Kingdom. Surely this is more than a little silly.

you don't have a "Kingdom", apart from the one where no matter how we might dislike it, the tories remain massively more supported than the SNP.

[eFestivals]

Fortunately, everyone on here on either side of the debate will know that this " little gang " exists only in your head.

No, it exists in reality, as proven by the public declarations by both Farage and Salmond (tho 'eventually' for Salmond, after some lies to try and hide these meetings)

Meanwhile, there's no meetings of Murdoch and Labour.

But don't let the facts stop you making it up, I'd lose the comedy I get from following indy and its facts.

I have never seen anyone on here defend Salmond over his relationship with Murdoch. Not once.

and I've never seen a snipper even own up to their being a relationship between Salmond and Murdoch.

Even here (just above) you deny there is one.

You keep bringing it up while forgetting the whole political system flashes the knickers at him ( to their shame ). A bit like our football clubs ( well not mine ).

But it doesn't. Even the tories no long lick his arse.

That's how it is with fact-free-ers. They certainly add to the comedy, but never the truth.

[eFestivals]

What's the story here?

Might it be "political leader seeks positive publicity from media"?

I do hope you're going to string up Salmond and Sturgeon for their flirtations with the Daily Mail, and The Telegraph, and more, as well as their love-in with Murdoch (including lies about how many times they meet)?

It's one thing to try and get a newspaper to feature them positively, it's another thing entirely to be Murdoch's puppet as Salmond is.

Edited March 22, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I disagree with this point. I would argue that the ideology of the Labour Party does not require any particular size of state. The principles it stands for can apply within a small state as easily as within a larger one.

I agree that a socialist ideal is not size dependent. But there's much more to it than just that.

It's about doing the best for 'the people', and you cannot do the best by abandoning one part to poverty and with lesser support.

This is the part you never address, about how Scotland cannot sustain its current levels of spending. And has already been proven, people in Scotland - just as with everythig you reject of England - get bought off by middle-class privileges and leave the poor to fend for themselves. Scotland under the SNP is everything bad about nuLabour, it's not something better.

But leaving aside ideology, lets talk practical politics. why would you deliberately alienate a significant section of your support by making Indy into a party issue? And then mount such a negative campaign that you effectively insult your own supporters. That is just stupid politics.

FFS - it's people like YOU who have made it that party issue.

The Scottish hatred of Labour existed before anything of the indy campaign started. What did you miss?

FFS. You can't even play the facts straight about your own thinking. No wonder the facts of Scotland don't stand a chance.

There is precedent for labour not having a "party line" in referenda. In the EU referendum in 1975, the Scottish devo referendum in 1979 & the recent AV referenda, Labour allowed its members to campaign on either side.

I see that nuances mean zilch to you.

Try some thought? Just an idea.

​So both in terms of principle & plain old fashioned common sense there was no need for the Scottish Labour Party to get itself in to this position. But then they have been taking us for granted for years, it would have been bizarre for them to change.

Bullshit.

When nothing of any position of labour impacts into your thinking, the issue is not with Labour but with your thinking.

I'm still waiting for that list of things that the SNP are to the left of Labour about. It's funny that you can claim it but can't detail it .... why is that?

And you still can't accept the truth of the Scottish economy. Only when people like you do will indy have any chance of progress.

[eFestivals]

Hey Neil,

Yeah, we are just as racist as the rest of you, It's just that our racists are too lazy to leave the house.

yeah, cos the EDL always protest in the numbers they claimed they'd get beforehand, yeah...?

And that Pegida march in Newc was massive, yeah?

FFS. If you can't properly reference proven Scottish opinions, why do you think indy is well supported?

[eFestivals]

came across this again thought I would post it to annoy neil

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uk2015

to be fair, i have no idea what it means but I do know i posted it before (with me down beside the greens ) & Neil ignored it - somehow (presumably witchcraft it place the SNP well to the left of Right wing authoritarian labour.

How strange.

stranger still, you're still not able to give me any SNP left wing policies, and yet you suggest it's all so very easy.

Why is that?

[eFestivals]

Any comment from anyone on the blatant sexism of the media's coverage of the SNP now they have a hot chick at the helm?

Can I suggest an eye test, LJS?

Is "The Sun is sexist" news? Why do you think it is?

And why do you think the distinctly-Scottish political narrative you're working to is what everyone else is working to? It's not even what most of Scotland is working to.

[LJS]

No, it exists in reality, as proven by the public declarations by both Farage and Salmond (tho 'eventually' for Salmond, after some lies to try and hide these meetings)

Meanwhile, there's no meetings of Murdoch and Labour.

But don't let the facts stop you making it up, I'd lose the comedy I get from following indy and its facts.

and I've never seen a snipper even own up to their being a relationship between Salmond and Murdoch.

Even here (just above) you deny there is one.

But it doesn't. Even the tories no long lick his arse.

That's how it is with fact-free-ers. They certainly add to the comedy, but never the truth.

So, tell us about Sturgeon's relationship with Murdoch. Salmond is history like Blair & Brown & of no relevance today.