The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

I don't have anything to criticise about the rest of it, but don't you think that by emphasising a national identity, you're actually celebrating differences from others, even if there's not any sense of superiority about it?

I understand your point. Our national identity is part of how most of us define ourselves. But it's only a part. So although I define myself as Scottish, I also define myself by my beliefs and values. And I absolutely do not believe being Scottish makes me in any better than any other nation.

I'm sure the world would be a better place if we all considered ourselves citizens of the world first, but that isn't going to happen any time soon.

The other point I would make is that for most us our national identity is not something we choose. It's part of us. What we do with it & how we express it is a choice.

[eFestivals]

There's clearly a number of different issues.

"Do Scottish people want independence based on their national identity?"

"Do Scottish people want independence because they are tired of the governments that are elected into Westminster?"

"Do Scottish people want independence because they believe they'll be richer?"

Regarding each of them, the first I feel is based on a combination of nationalist racism. Even those like LJS who seem like decent, intelligent people still want to build borders up rather than weaken them. I disagree with this on a basic principle, I feel any form of national identity is misleading, and shouldn't be a part of the modern world. That's my naive optimism though.

The second is understandable, but still IMO selfish and naive. "Screw the English, they can be left with governments we think are terrible". I also don't think that any independent Scottish government, whatever flavour it will be, will be remarkably different from the flavour of politics we currently have in the UK as is.

The third however, is bollocks, but it's what Salmond's trying to sell. Scotland MIGHT be better off, but it's an incredibly stupid reason to vote for independence, it's selfish, misguided, naive, and ultimately being completely twattish. It's Thatcherism at its core. "Our oil pays for our services", "Our family pays for itself", not giving a damn about those outside who you consider "your people". I loathe this ideology, and it shows the rampant hypocrisy of the SNP.

Nice summary.

[eFestivals]

As you are well aware I am not fussed about a currency union myself & don't really get the Snp's obsession with it.

So what you're saying is that you're not fussed if Scotland is a basketcase or not - because the choice of currency makes a big difference to how things will pn out.

Fair enough if you're not bothered, but over half the people who might vote yes are - very much bothered.

Perhaps "honest" Alex ought to tell those people the truth, rather than allow them to vote stupid because "honest" Alex has allowed them to be misled?

And of course it would mean some loss of "sovereignty" But then so does eu membership & many aspects of the modern world.

A sovereign nation is of course allowed to choose to give up some of it's own sovereignty.

A sovereign nation is not allowed to demand the sovereignty of another nation as a "right". Anyone who does this doesn't not understand what sovereignty is.

Isn't it great that Scotland has a glorious leader to lead it to sopvereignty when he doesn't understand where he'#s taking you?

(or, if you refuse to accept that your glorious leader is so brain-dead, you have to instead accept that he's a deliberate liar - there are no other options).

[eFestivals]

Want to save the United Kingdom? Move the capital to Glasgow

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/19/save-united-kingdom-move-capital-glasgow

All that would do would be to make Glasgow officially a backwater.

I refer you to Holland, West Germany, Vichy France, Brazil, Burma, and all the other places where the seat of government is removed from the true power base.

[eFestivals]

You're being silly now - you think we should take advice from china on how to structure our democracy?

Is that more silly than taking advice from the deliberate liar Alex, or even from the hated Westminster which is who structured your democracy?

[eFestivals]

I love how you twist & oversimplify everything: CU=UK bailing out Scotland.

Yeah that is the whole story isn't it?

Yes it is.

Currency union is an English guarantee for iScotland's debts.

If you don't understand that, then you understand nothing at all about the currency issues.

[LJS]

Is that more silly than taking advice from the deliberate liar Alex, or even from the hated Westminster which is who structured your democracy?

Yes

[eFestivals]

because the UK government says it doesn't make it a fact - perhaps a more accurate phrase might be " iScotland will take on responsibility for part of the UK debt subject to negotiation

Such a statement would only be accurate if Scotland held no liability for the existence of those debts.

Does Scotland hold no liability?

If your answer is "yes, Scotland is liable for it's share" then you live on planet earth. If your answer is no then you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes and ignorance of that level guarantees that iScotland will be a disaster.

(iScotland is perfectly able to not be a disaster, but it depends on the intelligence of what iScotland might do).

It's maybe splitting hairs & in practice few are seriously disputing Scotland will take on a share of the debt. The legal liability will however remain with the rUK.

Alex has essentially said "if rUK doesn't hand over a part of its sovereignty to iScotland, iScotland will not pay its share of the debt". Has that passed you by? :blink:

And while I don't doubt that rUK will retain legal liability for those current borrowings, iScotland will be required to sign up to its own legal liability for a debt it owes to the UK.

If iScotland refuses to do so, iScotland will be bankrupt and a basketcase before it even reaches iDay - because Scotland needs £20Bn to be borrowed for it to even reach iDay.

[eFestivals]

it's called negotiation

and being told 'no' is being told 'no'.

Yes-ers can't accept an honest 'no' - it sends them into meltdown like a two year old throwing a tantrum. It's very very funny, but very very worrying for iScotland's future.

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Such a statement would only be accurate if Scotland held no liability for the existence of those debts.

Does Scotland hold no liability?

If your answer is "yes, Scotland is liable for it's share" then you live on planet earth. If your answer is no then you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes and ignorance of that level guarantees that iScotland will be a disaster.

(iScotland is perfectly able to not be a disaster, but it depends on the intelligence of what iScotland might do).

Alex has essentially said "if rUK doesn't hand over a part of its sovereignty to iScotland, iScotland will not pay its share of the debt". Has that passed you by? :blink:

And while I don't doubt that rUK will retain legal liability for those current borrowings, iScotland will be required to sign up to its own legal liability for a debt it owes to the UK.

If iScotland refuses to do so, iScotland will be bankrupt and a basketcase before it even reaches iDay - because Scotland needs £20Bn to be borrowed for it to even reach iDay.

Where is your £20bn coming from?

[eFestivals]

as far as I can see this is just complete nonsense. what it is based on is "A consultation on an interim constitution for Scotland"

So it's a consultation on an interim constitution which gives a proposed definition of Scottish citizenship but no definition of who might be entitled to vote. (or at least not as far as i could find) You may think this is a serious omission. But in fact it isn't, because the first election to an independent Holyrood will take place using existing entitlements to vote & the second election to an independent Holyrood will take place under our new official constitution.

I don't know where you have picked up your crazy idea that swathes of the population are going to be disenfranchised & only the true Scots will be allowed to vote. But this is clearly amongst the most bonkers of your ideas.

It might be an interim consultation, but it's the SNP trying to hi-jack the process by getting their version in first.

And if people like you are going to stop the SNP hi-jacking the process by changing things to ethnic nationalism, you have to be smart enough to notice what they're doing - and no one in Scotland is shouting about the sudden change to ethnic nationalism within the draft constitution!!!!

You can only make the right choice if you pay attention and understand the issues - things you're not doing.

Pretending I'm bonkers because i've noticed what you haven't only shows that you're madly stupid enough to deny anything which doesn't suit your prejudices.

Look at the facts, not the lies that Alex is telling you. Read - and UNDERSTAND - the draft constitution!!!!

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Where is your £20bn coming from?

Scotland has a deficit of £12Bn a year.

Don't you know this?

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I'm sure the world would be a better place if we all considered ourselves citizens of the world first, but that isn't going to happen any time soon.

It will only ever happen if that's how you consider yourself, and you're making a concious decision to do the precise opposite.

[LJS]

It might be an interim consultation, but it's the SNP trying to hi-jack the process by getting their version in first.

And if people like you are going to stop the SNP hi-jacking the process by changing things to ethnic nationalism, you have to be smart enough to notice what they're doing - and no one in Scotland is shouting about the sudden change to ethnic nationalism within the draft constitution!!!!

You can only make the right choice if you pay attention and understand the issues - things you're not doing.

Pretending I'm bonkers because i've noticed what you haven't only shows that you're madly stupid enough to deny anything which doesn't suit your prejudices.

Look at the facts, not the lies that Alex is telling you. Read - and UNDERSTAND - the draft constitution!!!!

I can't find your ethnic nationalism.

[eFestivals]

I can't find your ethnic nationalism.

It's more ethnic-based than indyref vote is. What of that aren't you getting?

People who can vote in the indyref will not qualify to vote post-indy, because voting in iScotland elections will use a more-restricted criteria.

[eFestivals]

And on a different subject from the constitution, I remember you or Buff saying there wouldn't be a Governor General.

Are you sure? It's very normal for Liz to appoint a representative in her place for the countries where she's head of state but not resident.

[LJS]

It's more ethnic-based than indyref vote is. What of that aren't you getting?

People who can vote in the indyref will not qualify to vote post-indy, because voting in iScotland elections will use a more-restricted criteria.

I cannot find anything in the draft constitution where it says this. Now I did kind of skim read parts of it.

But I'm sure you'll be happy to help me out

[LJS]

And on a different subject from the constitution, I remember you or Buff saying there wouldn't be a Governor General.

Are you sure? It's very normal for Liz to appoint a representative in her place for the countries where she's head of state but not resident.

Well he sure ain't in the draft constitution.

I suppose they might agree to have one but there is no way his role will be other than ceremonial.

[eFestivals]

Well he sure ain't in the draft constitution.

Liz is mentioned as head of state.

It's normal for Liz to appoint a Governor General to act in her place.

[eFestivals]

I cannot find anything in the draft constitution where it says this. Now I did kind of skim read parts of it.

But I'm sure you'll be happy to help me out

The easy way to do it is to google yourself who is eligible for vote in the indyref, then who is eligible to vote in UK general elections, then note what the differences are, and then re-read the draft constitution with those things in mind.

There's no point me me trying to explicitly explain it, because it's all bluster unless you work it out for yourself.

Edited June 20, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

The easy way to do it is to google yourself who is eligible for vote in the indyref, then who is eligible to vote in UK general elections, then note what the differences are, and then re-read the draft constitution with those things in mind.

There's no point me me trying to explicitly explain it, because it's all bluster unless you work it out for yourself.

I can find a definition of Scottish citizenship in the proposed constitution. I can't find anything very controversial in that.

I can not find anything that specifically defines who can vote.

One more time, prove me wrong or withdraw your claim.

Its ok to be wrong. I will not constantly remind you. We all make mistakes

[eFestivals]

I can find a definition of Scottish citizenship in the proposed constitution. I can't find anything very controversial in that.

I can not find anything that specifically defines who can vote.

One more time, prove me wrong or withdraw your claim.

Its ok to be wrong. I will not constantly remind you. We all make mistakes

Ah, that dots problem again. Never mind, it's your party, and if Scotland walks blind that's Scotland's look out.

And yes, I agree that the citizenship rules are much what would be expected, so I've no criticism of those in themselves. But there is another interesting consequences from those too, and that's that Scotland's citizens are likely to become significantly more 'ethnically Scottish' than is the case on the ground in Scotland.

-----

I've just seen some stuff that references the EU's views on what level of "democracy" should be used for the 'big' political issues such as constitution changes and independence votes.

If what i've just seen checks out, then that might make iScotland's approach to the EU for membership rather interesting.

Essentially, the EU appears to have the view (as I say, I've yet to check it out) that a simple 50% + 1 vote majority from those who have turned out to vote is not classed as democratic enough to meet their membership criteria. They (supposedly) believe that things like that need a more solid majority of the people in the country, and not merely those that vote.

I'll keep my fingers crossed that I remember to follow up on this post-Glasto.

[viberunner]

The easy way to do it is to google yourself who is eligible for vote in the indyref, then who is eligible to vote in UK general elections, then note what the differences are, and then re-read the draft constitution with those things in mind.

Has anyone translated this yet?

[Comfy Bean]

The easy way to do it is to google yourself who is eligible for vote in the indyref, then who is eligible to vote in UK general elections, then note what the differences are, and then re-read the draft constitution with those things in mind.

There's no point me me trying to explicitly explain it, because it's all bluster unless you work it out for yourself.

Or maybe it is all just bluster. Anyone on here could read and then pick holes in pretty much anything written by a politician. They are full of shit, it`s what they do. In my opinion they have a vote to win and a bit like a job interview, they are going to tell us what we want to hear. The job starts for real when / if they " win ".

Just for fun.........

Imagine Scotland had been independent for the past 50 years. For a laugh, lets just pretend that we had invested in a decent transport system with no death trap roads into our major cities creating jobs and that we had built lots of affordable housing to provide homes to over a million people on council waiting lists again creating jobs.

Lets just say we had taken advantage of some of the best natural resources in Europe creating jobs. Since it`s the weekend lets go crazy and imagine Scotland wasn`t having to rely on food banks to feed some of the less fortunate in our communities.

Now here we are in 2014 and the question is put to the good folks : Should Scotland be an independent country ?

Would you be arguing that " we " should vote to throw it all away and vote to be be lead by Cameron, Clegg, Osbourne and Alexander from London ?? Serious question.

Anywayz, enjoy Glastonbury and I hope this weather keeps up. Went down myself last year with the kids. Incredible scenes.

[Comfy Bean]

On the bluster front :

We will need passports for our parrot / poodle if we want to take them to Blackpool on our hols.

There will be passport control at Gretna.

We will all have £1400 in our banks if we vote NO ( thanks ).

Dark forces will get us if we vote YES.

It will cost £3billion to set up iscotland.

As I said before, there is some drivel coming from both sides.