The distortion that produces in Westminster is even more disgraceful when applied to the SNP than to the current Conservative administration.
Yes and no. The Scottish results taken alone are more extreme, but unlike the tory majority don't give it almost absolute power. They excess acquisition of power seems to me a greater disgrace than mere arithmetic over-representation.
It gives them the power to obsess over independence rather than doing their best for the people of Scotland
Leaving aside your false dichotomy, the number of seats at Westminster doesn't affect anyone's ability to obsess about anything.
Never the less they continue to obsess over independence. They had their once in a generation referendum in 2014.
They should certainly be allowed to have a say. If we calculate a generation to be about 20 years, another referendum in 2034 would appear to be appropriate.
I can understand why many Scots are not too keen on still being part of the *United Kingdom*, given the sheer idiocy and incompetence of the current Westminster government.
The 2014 referendum may have been regarded then as once-in-a-generation, but the times they are a-changing. Ms Sturgeon seems to be determined to seek for another referendum in as legal a way as possible, so who knows?
The Scottish government does, of course, want to get on with addressing the big challenges of our time - the cost of living and climate chaos. But, is shackled by a UK government that's intent on pursuing a policy of austerity that's only ever suppressed the economy and increased the cost of living for the poorest - maybe expecting that this time the outcome will be different - and environment wrecking. To address the issues facing us, Scotland needs to at least gain further powers through devolution (at a time when the UK government is withdrawing powers the Scottish government has under the 1998 Scotland Act and subsequent revisions of devolved powers). How about letting Scottish Government set immigration policy so that we can employ the skilled people to fill our job vacancies? Or, setting a real windfall tax on excess profits made in Scotland to fund some of the measures to help people meet their energy bills and invest in insulation and renewables to cut dependence on expensive fossil fuels?
Never the less they continue to obsess over independence. They had their once in a generation referendum in 2014.
You voted to invalidate it and for Scotland to need another one. Thanks for that.
They don't need another one. They could start supporting all the Scots that want to stay in the UK
I wonder how many Scottish people still wish to remain within the UK? I suspect that it's fewer now than it was back in 2014, but polls are unreliable, I know.
There’s a legitimate question to be asked about who has a right to tell the Scottish electorate what they do or don’t need.
Clearly a large proportion of them feel they need independence otherwise they’d likely not vote for the SNP.
In Purgatory, however, it would be better to avoid personalising the question, especially in terms that look as if they really belong in Hell - however much provoked.
"The Scottish National party MP Tommy Sheppard, who took the train from London to attend, declared that Scotland did not need to be “enslaved” to a “decaying, post-Brexit isolationist” union any longer."
Isn't it good to know that he took the train from London - he did not fly or drive, he did not even walk. He took the train.
Why should Scottish unionists hazard a referendum?
We may think that democracy is more important than the union?
I wouldn't hazard a one-off mere majority advisory referendum though. We've seen the mess that leads to. Before Brexit came along and changed the situation Sturgeon was saying there needed to be a settled majority of 60% in favour of independence, which seems hard to argue with.
By the time a proper referendum is organised, it is becoming increasingly likely that a more accommodation with the EU will have been arrived at. Until then, don't go, canny Scots, we need you.
Why should Scottish unionists hazard a referendum?
We may think that democracy is more important than the union?
I wouldn't hazard a one-off mere majority advisory referendum though. We've seen the mess that leads to. Before Brexit came along and changed the situation Sturgeon was saying there needed to be a settled majority of 60% in favour of independence, which seems hard to argue with.
The acrimony, nastiness, dishonesty, hatreds, unpleasantness and overall damage - probably irreparable - that a 52/48 decision has imported into the body politic means that on that I agree with her.
Besides, like 'justice', 'democracy' is all too often just a slogan for 'what I want to impose on the rest of you'.
Kwesi: Why should Scottish unionists hazard a referendum? Dafyd: We may think that democracy is more important than the union?
Look, the reality is that those in Scotland who favour the union, who are, just to remind ourselves, currently in the majority, do not favour another referendum because their lead could disappear. They are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle. What then has to happen to get them to change their mind or that of the Westminster government? If the Scottish nationalists are serious then they need to cease acting like home rulers: withdraw from Westminster, refuse to govern from Holyrood, and render Scotland ungovernable. There has to be a point at which British state power is challenged by a popular movement for decolonisation. I doubt the Scottish nationalist constituency is up for it any more than the Catalans. Sturgeon knows this, but has to keep repeating the tedious kind of arguments presented ad nauseam in Purgatory to pacify her party.
those in Scotland who favour the union, who are, just to remind ourselves, currently in the majority
Depending on which polls you accept, some put the independence camp ahead - though the general trend before yesterday was about 45-46% yes and 47-48% no (the rest undecided) ... which is almost the same as 2014. There was a period in early 2021 where 'no' polled at about 40% with 'yes' close to 50%, which almost certainly reflected how badly the UK government handled the pandemic and the much better handling by the Scottish government. It will be interesting to see what the next few polls say - did the SC decision swing anyone from the undecided one way or the other?
Also, remember that in the 2021 election, more votes were cast for pro-independence parties than unionist parties, with the constitution being a major issue of campaigning.
Alan, I've no reason to question opinion poll variability, nor even defend my contention that remainers have tended to have a thin majority for most of the period since 2014, though I'm pretty sure is the case. I note that you do not address the main contention of my post that for Scottish independence to become a serious proposition its adherents and supporters need to show some seriousness.
What would you consider "seriousness"? In 2014 that took the form of a 670p white paper laying out the case for independence and what independence would look like - which looks much more serious than a slogan on the side of a bus written by someone who doesn't know how to divide £12b by 52. At the moment the SNP and SGP are in the process of producing a series of much shorter documents (though the overall length is still going to be a lot of pages) revising that vision for the very different circumstances caused by Brexit.
Kwesi: Why should Scottish unionists hazard a referendum? Dafyd:We may think that democracy is more important than the union?
Look, the reality is that those in Scotland who favour the union, who are, just to remind ourselves, currently in the majority, do not favour another referendum because their lead could disappear. They are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle.
Do you see that word 'We' in the sentence you quoted? I've put it in bold so you don't miss it. It's the first person plural pronoun and it is used as shorthand for a group of which the speaker is a member.
The correct pronoun for you to use when talking to me about Scots who wish to remain in the United Kingdom is not 'they' but 'you'.
When I tell you that as a Scot who favours the United Kingdom that I think another referendum is legitimate you may reasonably argue that I am in the minority or unrepresentative but it is rude and ill-evidenced to contradict me as if I don't exist.
People do not just vote in favour of their perceived interests. They do vote in favour of their values, particularly when those values are part of their identity.
Support for Scottish independence only grows when English supporters of the United Kingdom talk as if the Scots are some quaint irrational or ungrateful race who can be talked about as if they're not there.
Alan Cresswell: What would you consider "seriousness"?
As I wrote, Alan: "Unionists are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle. What then has to happen to get them to change their mind or that of the Westminster government? If the Scottish nationalists are serious then they need to cease acting like home rulers: withdraw from Westminster, refuse to govern from Holyrood, and render Scotland ungovernable. There has to be a point at which British state power is challenged by a popular movement for decolonisation. I doubt the Scottish nationalist constituency is up for it any more than the Catalans. Sturgeon knows this, but has to keep repeating the tedious kind of arguments presented ad nauseam in Purgatory to pacify her party."
Why should Scottish unionists hazard a referendum?
We may think that democracy is more important than the union?
I wouldn't hazard a one-off mere majority advisory referendum though. We've seen the mess that leads to. Before Brexit came along and changed the situation Sturgeon was saying there needed to be a settled majority of 60% in favour of independence, which seems hard to argue with.
It does indeed, and, in the light of present polls (yes, I know how unreliable these can be), it seems unlikely that a referendum would achieve that majority.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Bishop's Finger: True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
Isn't the point that it doesn't matter if she does or she doesn't? The question is where does she go from there? If "England says No" what does she do with her supposed mandate? At some point she needs a purchase on the British state, which probably means a Scottish public prepared to defy British rule. Is the SNP and Green-voting electorate up for a fight? Otherwise its another case of "the Grand Olde Duke of York" Scottish-style: a continuation of the status quo.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Although I understand that the Green Party in Scotland favours independence, Is it appropriate to consider that to consider that all green voters support independence for Scotland. I thought that their main purpose was green issues.
Bishop's Finger: True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
Isn't the point that it doesn't matter if she does or she doesn't? The question is where does she go from there? If "England says No" what does she do with her supposed mandate? At some point she needs a purchase on the British state, which probably means a Scottish public prepared to defy British rule. Is the SNP and Green-voting electorate up for a fight? Otherwise its another case of "the Grand Olde Duke of York" Scottish-style: a continuation of the status quo.
Well, maybe - but I'll leave it to more knowledgeable people to comment.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Although I understand that the Green Party in Scotland favours independence, Is it appropriate to consider that to consider that all green voters support independence for Scotland. I thought that their main purpose was green issues.
I doubt many people vote for the SGP ignorant of its position on independence. Doubtless some will be unionists who prioritise environmental issues but I suspect they're outnumbered by pro-independence Labour voters.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Although I understand that the Green Party in Scotland favours independence, Is it appropriate to consider that to consider that all green voters support independence for Scotland. I thought that their main purpose was green issues.
I doubt many people vote for the SGP ignorant of its position on independence. Doubtless some will be unionists who prioritise environmental issues but I suspect they're outnumbered by pro-independence Labour voters.
On such an issue, they would not be voting green. They would vote SNP.
No. When I vote green it is because I want a green independence. If the Greens were not pro Indy, I would not vote for them, even though I very much want a greener nation.
In my experience mentioning the Tories in front of Scottish Labour or the SNP gets roughly the same reaction as mentioning the Romans in front of the Judaean People's Front and the Campaign for Free Galilee.
No. When I vote green it is because I want a green independence. If the Greens were not pro Indy, I would not vote for them, even though I very much want a greener nation.
I'm inclined to think that you have a better knowledge of Scottish politics than Telford...
No. When I vote green it is because I want a green independence. If the Greens were not pro Indy, I would not vote for them, even though I very much want a greener nation.
I'm inclined to think that you have a better knowledge of Scottish politics than Telford...
Alan Cresswell: What would you consider "seriousness"?
As I wrote, Alan: "Unionists are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle. What then has to happen to get them to change their mind or that of the Westminster government? If the Scottish nationalists are serious then they need to cease acting like home rulers: withdraw from Westminster, refuse to govern from Holyrood, and render Scotland ungovernable. There has to be a point at which British state power is challenged by a popular movement for decolonisation. I doubt the Scottish nationalist constituency is up for it any more than the Catalans. Sturgeon knows this, but has to keep repeating the tedious kind of arguments presented ad nauseam in Purgatory to pacify her party."
OK, I don't consider those serious proposals. The Scottish government is seeking to do the best for Scotland - and even with the severe limitations of rule from Westminster, government is better for the people than no government. Of course, government from Edinburgh rather than Westminster is better still. We've lots of experience of Irish nationalists getting serious, but I don't see any appetite for that approach in Scotland. We can, of course, have rallies with 10s of thousands of people demanding independence ... but, then again we've done that.
... We've lots of experience of Irish nationalists getting serious, but I don't see any appetite for that approach in Scotland. We can, of course, have rallies with 10s of thousands of people demanding independence ... but, then again we've done that.
How much is any nationalism worth what Irish nationalism has inflicted on Ireland and its citizens since 1916? I accept that the intransigence of the English, and especially the Conservatives has also contributed a great deal to that. But as an English person, having seen the damage English nationalism has done both to the English and the rest of the UK, especially since it has been allowed to run rampant since 2016, as I've said before, I'm against nationalism in any other context than an expression of subsidiarity. Beyond an expression of the aspiration to subsidiarity, nationalism is a wicked, destructive and very nasty poison.
The SNP exist to get independence for Scotland. In the same way the DUP exist to keep NI in the union. It is foolish to ask them not to do it. They will always ask for it no matter how many referenda are taken, until they win. You cannot tell a bird not to fly.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Although I understand that the Green Party in Scotland favours independence, Is it appropriate to consider that to consider that all green voters support independence for Scotland. I thought that their main purpose was green issues.
Green Parties, in Scotland and elsewhere, believe in saving the planet - and, that means justice. In all forms. That is much more than just eliminating pollution. Green Parties would support local democracy, which is part of why the Scottish Greens have always supported independence. And, also a lot of typically socialist policies - real living wages, taxation of the rich, universal basic income, public ownership of public services. And, also a bunch of social justice issues - racial justice, gay rights, trans rights etc (although the Green Party in England and Wales is out of step on this). You may want to read a manifesto or similar before making assumptions about what political parties stand for.
... We've lots of experience of Irish nationalists getting serious, but I don't see any appetite for that approach in Scotland. We can, of course, have rallies with 10s of thousands of people demanding independence ... but, then again we've done that.
How much is any nationalism worth what Irish nationalism has inflicted on Ireland and its citizens since 1916? I accept that the intransigence of the English, and especially the Conservatives has also contributed a great deal to that. But as an English person, having seen the damage English nationalism has done both to the English and the rest of the UK, especially since it has been allowed to run rampant since 2016, as I've said before, I'm against nationalism in any other context than an expression of subsidiarity. Beyond an expression of the aspiration to subsidiarity, nationalism is a wicked, destructive and very nasty poison.
Irish nationalism isn't a great comparison to Scottish nationalism, it was the tactics used I was commenting on. English nationalism is also a very different beast from Scottish nationalism.
There's a big difference between seeking the best for the people who live in Scotland, and promoting one group of people above others based on apparent ancestry.
Comments
Never the less they continue to obsess over independence. They had their once in a generation referendum in 2014.
I can understand why many Scots are not too keen on still being part of the *United Kingdom*, given the sheer idiocy and incompetence of the current Westminster government.
The 2014 referendum may have been regarded then as once-in-a-generation, but the times they are a-changing. Ms Sturgeon seems to be determined to seek for another referendum in as legal a way as possible, so who knows?
BF, you beat me to it - and who could blame them if they did? The recent history of the British Parliament doesn't appear to be Britain at its
best.
They don't need another one. They could start supporting all the Scots that want to stay in the UK
You have come nowhere near answering my question.
Who the fuck are you to tell the Scottish electorate what we do and don't need?
I wonder how many Scottish people still wish to remain within the UK? I suspect that it's fewer now than it was back in 2014, but polls are unreliable, I know.
When I use the word 'They' I am referring to the SNP.
I am not going to answer that sort of agressive question.
Clearly a large proportion of them feel they need independence otherwise they’d likely not vote for the SNP.
In Purgatory, however, it would be better to avoid personalising the question, especially in terms that look as if they really belong in Hell - however much provoked.
BroJames, Purgatory Host.
"The Scottish National party MP Tommy Sheppard, who took the train from London to attend, declared that Scotland did not need to be “enslaved” to a “decaying, post-Brexit isolationist” union any longer."
Isn't it good to know that he took the train from London - he did not fly or drive, he did not even walk. He took the train.
I wouldn't hazard a one-off mere majority advisory referendum though. We've seen the mess that leads to. Before Brexit came along and changed the situation Sturgeon was saying there needed to be a settled majority of 60% in favour of independence, which seems hard to argue with.
But did it really need mention in the article in this manner? But perhaps the journalist was being paid by the word.
Besides, like 'justice', 'democracy' is all too often just a slogan for 'what I want to impose on the rest of you'.
Look, the reality is that those in Scotland who favour the union, who are, just to remind ourselves, currently in the majority, do not favour another referendum because their lead could disappear. They are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle. What then has to happen to get them to change their mind or that of the Westminster government? If the Scottish nationalists are serious then they need to cease acting like home rulers: withdraw from Westminster, refuse to govern from Holyrood, and render Scotland ungovernable. There has to be a point at which British state power is challenged by a popular movement for decolonisation. I doubt the Scottish nationalist constituency is up for it any more than the Catalans. Sturgeon knows this, but has to keep repeating the tedious kind of arguments presented ad nauseam in Purgatory to pacify her party.
Also, remember that in the 2021 election, more votes were cast for pro-independence parties than unionist parties, with the constitution being a major issue of campaigning.
Alan, I've no reason to question opinion poll variability, nor even defend my contention that remainers have tended to have a thin majority for most of the period since 2014, though I'm pretty sure is the case. I note that you do not address the main contention of my post that for Scottish independence to become a serious proposition its adherents and supporters need to show some seriousness.
The correct pronoun for you to use when talking to me about Scots who wish to remain in the United Kingdom is not 'they' but 'you'.
When I tell you that as a Scot who favours the United Kingdom that I think another referendum is legitimate you may reasonably argue that I am in the minority or unrepresentative but it is rude and ill-evidenced to contradict me as if I don't exist.
People do not just vote in favour of their perceived interests. They do vote in favour of their values, particularly when those values are part of their identity.
Support for Scottish independence only grows when English supporters of the United Kingdom talk as if the Scots are some quaint irrational or ungrateful race who can be talked about as if they're not there.
As I wrote, Alan: "Unionists are in no mind to hazard their perceived interests for a contested abstract principle. What then has to happen to get them to change their mind or that of the Westminster government? If the Scottish nationalists are serious then they need to cease acting like home rulers: withdraw from Westminster, refuse to govern from Holyrood, and render Scotland ungovernable. There has to be a point at which British state power is challenged by a popular movement for decolonisation. I doubt the Scottish nationalist constituency is up for it any more than the Catalans. Sturgeon knows this, but has to keep repeating the tedious kind of arguments presented ad nauseam in Purgatory to pacify her party."
It does indeed, and, in the light of present polls (yes, I know how unreliable these can be), it seems unlikely that a referendum would achieve that majority.
True, but I wonder if Ms Sturgeon is wise to use the next General Election as a de facto referendum on independence?
I don't presume to know much about it all, but it does sound like putting all one's eggs in one basket, IYSWIM.
Isn't the point that it doesn't matter if she does or she doesn't? The question is where does she go from there? If "England says No" what does she do with her supposed mandate? At some point she needs a purchase on the British state, which probably means a Scottish public prepared to defy British rule. Is the SNP and Green-voting electorate up for a fight? Otherwise its another case of "the Grand Olde Duke of York" Scottish-style: a continuation of the status quo.
Although I understand that the Green Party in Scotland favours independence, Is it appropriate to consider that to consider that all green voters support independence for Scotland. I thought that their main purpose was green issues.
Well, maybe - but I'll leave it to more knowledgeable people to comment.
I doubt many people vote for the SGP ignorant of its position on independence. Doubtless some will be unionists who prioritise environmental issues but I suspect they're outnumbered by pro-independence Labour voters.
On such an issue, they would not be voting green. They would vote SNP.
I'm inclined to think that you have a better knowledge of Scottish politics than Telford...
Outside of the Alba "can't pronounce our own name" Party? I doubt it.
There's a big difference between seeking the best for the people who live in Scotland, and promoting one group of people above others based on apparent ancestry.