Terror threatens the greatest monarchy on Earth today, as the Scottish foolishly endanger British power in Europe by attempting to break up the world's 6th largest economy, perhaps hoping to follow this up by selling the entire island to the French.
Anything that fucks over the British can only be a good thing.
...Tiki the Scots ARE British.
Find me a place that isn't, fuck them and their colonizing and genocide and raping, the sooner every aspect of them crumbles the better off the planet is, I just hope the Scots get free of them soon.
>fuck them and their colonizing and genocide and raping
Pretty sure they stopped that a long time ago.
Of course, but still fuck them.
Aren't the Scots the ones who said that they're torn on the subject of global warming because on the one hand, it'd cause sea levels to rise and cause global catastrophe, and on the other hand they could sit on the tops of the mountains and watch the English drown?
Delighted. Self-determination is the right of all peoples. Alba gu bràth!
I'm surprised, most of the Scottish people I know don't object to the devolution part of Salmond's plan but think he's rather cuckoo for wanting complete separation from the UK.
Hmm. It's been pointed out to me that if Scotland gains independence, it's going to really fuck them over economically because they intend to keep the pound as currency. Meaning if they run out of money, they can't print more. Admittedly, it's a situation that's not good for the economy if you have to print money to save yourself from bankruptcy, either, but it's better than actually running out of money.
This entire discussion is causing the Pound to tank as it is, and the very concept is stupid. Ethnicity is irrelevant. You are not Scottish or English, you are British. You are a member of one of the strongest nations on the planet and you want to ruin that. Further, you are causing a secessionist crisis in the West while the West is ostensibly opposing secessionist in Ukraine. IF you back this ridiculous movement, you weaken the Isles against France and Germany, weaken the West against Russia, and weaken the currency in your own damn wallet.
Even regardless of the pound issues, I'm wondering what exactly Scotland will have to gain economically from splitting with England. What sectors does it excel in that's worth losing the backing of English firms? Isn't the average Scottish person supposedly a lot poorer than the average English person? If that's the case it's like letting Detroit and Manhattan become their own citystates. I'm not the most knowledgeable of the nuances of UK economic policy though so I might be wrong.
No, the average income in NI, England, Wales, and Scotland is actually more or less level, mostly due to the careful economic and social integration of the country and its famous nanny state policies.
Splitting gives Scotland nothing and costs them everything.
Ethnic it is not irrelevant. There can be no democracy without a demos, and the people of Scotland and Britain have historically been separate peoples. They didn't form a union by a vote, but because of the whims of a king and a bunch of self-interested nobles. The result was 300 years of exploitation by nobles and capitalists in the south who viewed the Scots as inferior if not subhuman. Now the people are being given a say, and it's the same ruling class screaming the loudest. They may not be as blatant as the 19th century followers of scientific racism, but their sneering, dismissive condescending "poor dumb Scots don't know what's good for them"/"good riddance, filthy parasites" language shows that they still think little of their fellow subjects.
Nations have a right to determine their destiny. If the Scots, the Kurds, the Basque or the East Ukrainians want their own nation (or, in Ukraine's case, to be part of a different nation) they should be allowed.
Sixth largest economy in the world it may be, the UK is still country that presently has no constitution or bill of rights, a hereditary head of state with power over the judiciary and armed forces, a nation in perpetual war, with immense and increasingly expensive debt, mass-surveillance, and a restive, poorly-integrated immigrant population. Scotland can and will do much better alone. Let's see the RUK do as well without her.
Of all the things you brought up I don't think the royal family is that much of a problem. Even most leftists don't really care and it's only the radicals and Morning Star fans who seriously push to get rid of them. These days they mostly act as celebrities who bring in more income than they're paid, and serve as a symbolic alternative to having to swear allegiance to the potentially autocratic de facto heads of state.
And for the longest time even Scots with a lot of national pride saw Alex Salmond as a bit of a laughingstock for advocating full Scottish independence and were fine with being part of the UK in name if they were otherwise left to their own devices. Not sure where the change of heart suddenly came from unless Salmond is that good of an orator.
Certainly they should have the RIGHT to decide if they want to be part of the UK. But the question is--is it wise for them to EXERCISE that right?
Geez Europe isn't going to immediately fall apart because Scotland decided it didn't want to be part of the UK anymore because some of the higher-up Scottish political figures have been considering and have been in the political position to raise the question for quite a while now. It's not really going to set any precedents any more than say, the Jeffersonites want to get out of California, due to their immense cultural and political differences. It's a totally different situation than Donetsk.
That said I honestly don't know if it will be wise in the long run for Scotland to be apart from the rest of the UK, especially if Ireland and the UK have substantial legal barriers to each other and whatnot it could cause more problems than good things since they're right next to each other. They'll lose a lot of English and Welsh resources, and I don't know if their own will be good enough or last once the divorce-moon period is over. IIRC either their overall taxation policies are very high or they want it to be, which often puts a damper on economic development unless you've have patriotic Scottish Americans aggressively chipping in to make up for it or something.
As a murrican, of course my default is to say "freedom from the UK is always a wise choice."
Beyond oil, Scotland has sufficient resources to be a successful nation (http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/5-reasons-why-an-independent-scotland-will-be-one-of-the-worlds-wealthiest-nations/). They'll manage fine as long as they can balance between a humane welfare state that provides for the less fortunate and a business climate that's able to attract and maintain business. They could tax oil and other natural resources for social spending, for example, and yet have low (or at least lower that the UK) corporate taxes. Remember, Scotland's economy is inextricably linked with the UK's, with the south buying some 70% percent of Scottish exports. Add geographic proximity and the costs of moving to a tax-shelter on the continent, and it's unlikely they'll lose that much business if the tax and regulatory situation remains the same. Cut taxes a bit, and streamline start up regs, and businesses will hop across the border.
Remember, this does have precedent. The Czech Republic and Slovakia split peacefully in 1993. There was, as in Scotland and The UK now, disagreements over who was paying more and who was taking more, and historic and cultural differences that hindered national harmony and efficient governance. After some wrangling over money, they split, both had to adjust, but in the end, they did alright, and the two countries make better neighbors than bedfellows.
"On New Year’s Day a small, mountainous European country of just over five million people celebrated its 21st anniversary as an independent nation. Since independence, it has enjoyed some of Europe’s highest growth rates, with strong inward investment encouraged by low taxes, and has become an active member of the European Union, stoutly defending its own interests.
The country in question is Slovakia, known until its “Velvet Divorce” from the Czech Republic in 1993 as the smaller, less developed and weaker part of Czechoslovakia. Now it scores higher in almost every economic indicator."
In short, it's been done, and can turn out well, and Scotland has the resources to do well. It's just a matter of which country you like better.
Also, speaking of independence:
està succeint !
First Minister Alex Salmond responds to the BBC’s political editor Nick Robinson’s attempt at stirring the pot. However, when broadcast during the 6 oçlock news, Robinson did not play any of Salmond’s ~7 minute response to his questions - instead cutting away with a voice over claiming he did not answer.
As the vote for Scottish independence draws ever closer, the BBC and other major media outlets are moving on from subtle anti-independence bias into outright lying and manipulating; Salmond even points some of this out in his response. Westminster lies to us, the media lies to us - this is not what the Scottish people want or deserve. If we were given the truth, there would be no contest: independence is the only answer for a fairer, more prosperous Scotland.
>independence is the only answer for a Scotland utterly buggered by currency issues and half of their major companies jumping ship southward
Here I fixed your post Canada.
I'd like to think Tooth played a hand in this. Nocked on some doors to get support. Then nocked down other doors in a Scottish rage to get rid of their competition. That special rage that makes them uncontrollable fighting machines and yet so adorable at the same time.
Scottish secession will Balkanize Europe. Then Motherland will truly be strong.
As long as the EU and NATO remain things, Balkanization will not be too harmful. Borders mean little, people and goods will be able to move about freely, commerce will continue using the common currency. If anything, the EU makes it harder to justify not giving self-proclaimed nations independence.
Russia had best be careful as well. If they promote self-determination and the right of the "motherland" to defend her people within the borders of other nations, and if Scottish independence (and Catalonian, et al.) bolsters other independence/reunion movements, they'll look rather hypocritical insisting that Chechnya must remain part of Russia whether they like it or not, and they'll be unable to clamp down on a separatist movement in Karelia (and Finnish support of the separatists) without looking like two-faced jackasses.
Not that Putin knows shame or cares about global opinion or anything.
>commerce will continue using the common currency
...which is exactly why Spain had such a horrible economic meltdown. Them using a currency that they don't control meant that when their government ran out of money, they had no way to pay for anything anymore. If they had had their own currency, they could have printed a bunch of money to cover the government's needs--it would have caused inflation, yes, but inflation hurts the economy less than a government shutdown does.
That's exactly what the economic concern facing Scotland is.
I think I don't have any real say in what they do with their country. I'm not a citizen, I've never visited, and the only thing I really take from them is fantasy books and the occasional sitcom.
That being said, after such a history of conquest, I think they can handle giving one of the remaining territories a little overdue independence. But that's just my immediate moral reaction.
It's also the situation throughout most of Europe, you know.
I do. And it's one of the biggest problems with the EU as a whole, and why the UK didn't agree to take on the Euro as their national currency.
Of course that's another benefit to independence. When I was in Ireland back in '09, with the economy tanked and political tensions running high over NAMA and the Lisbon Treaty, leaving the euro received some public discussion, as Ireland's export and tourism-dependent economy was very much hampered by their inability to devalue. I just that meant that, in terms of independence being a major disruption, as long as Scotland is permitted to remain in the EU, trade and the movement of capital and people won't be seriously affected. Also, I was just generally thinking, based on what I've read (which could very well be wrong/outdated), that Scotland would stay with the pound.
...Yes, and that's why that ISN'T a benefit for an independent Scotland, because whether they stay a free agent or go whole hog on the Eurozone, they can't print more. Currently? Not an issue at all because when disruptive agents aren't trying to destroy the country, the UK is a stable economy and the pound a stable currency.
This idea could be even worse than I think it is, but could Scotland try supporting Bitcoin or developing a fully decentralized classic Ripplepay system?
Also, since I saw it on /co/: http://youtu.be/W6vDzf-wSbk
A decentralized currency would have the same problems as adopting the Pound or the Euro, plus all examples we've seen of the concept, including Bitcoin itself, have proven to have fairly unstable fluctuations in value that are really not well suited to use as a national currency.
What a detailed, thoughtful argument. Clearly not at all biased towards the complete destruction of 4 nations!
>He also dismissed concerns about currency arrangements, saying the fact Scotland has different "vision and values" to the rest of the UK was more important.
Well then that right there tells you that the fact that he's a "Top Economist" means nothing in this particular op-ed. He's outright telling us that he is more concerned with cultural things than economic things--which is perfectly acceptable, prioritizing culture over economy is not WRONG or anything. It's just that using your credentials as a "Top Economist" only to say that your argument isn't based on the economic concerns means that you may as well just be some random schlub in a bar saying this.
Salmond apparently intends to just default on all outstanding debts.
>It was within a public meeting that I realised there was no absolutely no debate within the Yes camp. Zero debate – the focus was instead on attacking the enemy and creating an impenetrable shell to protect the unquestionable entity. In its place was a kind of shopping list of desires that was being added to daily. So there was: Get rid of Trident, raise the minimum wage, lower corporation tax, promote gay and lesbian rights, create a world leading Green economy, exploit oil to the full and become a world leading petro-chemical economy, nationalise the banks, nationalise BP, be more attractive to foreign investment. The shopping list of ‘positive’ ideal goals could never tally up, the desires of the Yessers were incompatible and contradicted each other, but to raise this was seen as being ‘negative’. Every kind of Yes had to be included, and this meant there could be no debate. Instead there was a kind of self-censorship and conformism. The Yes camp had turned itself into a recruitment machine which had to silence dissent and differences between the many clashing interest groups under its banner. This was what YES had started to mean – it meant YES to everything – everything is possible – so don’t question anything. You couldn’t talk about what would happen after the referendum because then all the conflicts between all the different desires and factions would emerge. Questioning even triggered a self-policing process – The Yes Thought Police – rather like the Calvinist one in which doubters started to hate themselves and became fearful of showing signs of their inner torment.
God I'm getting anxious for the vote tomorrow. Who the hell thought it was a good idea to put the destruction of a country up for a vote?
I love that some of this even got more headway because England started the finger wagging. Had England just shut the fuck up it probably wouldn't have gone anywhere.
David Cameron, right around the time he laughed in the faces of Scots after they asked if they'd see any money back on THEIR OWN FUCKING OIL THAT HE'S STEALING
Well technically, they could mine bitcoins, though now that mining slowed down it's less profitable than printing money, if at all.
Classic Rippleplay, though, would let it print as much as it wants, because it's a system for managing credit lines that lets anyone run their own.
>THEIR OWN FUCKING OIL THAT HE'S STEALING
Most British oil is in English waters. Also it's heavily, HEAVILY exploited.
From a pro-independence booklet:
Q: “But what happens if Orkney and Shetland
decide to stay in the UK, or to become independent
A: Orkney and Shetland are legally part of Scotland, and
no more entitled to their own “local” referendum result
than Falkirk or Peterhead or Sauchiehall Street.
Would make a lot more sense in the theoretic case of British royalty choosing to break off Scotland in exchange for having more influence over it at the risk of losing even more power in the rest of the island.
I expect that not to happen.
>mfw the Lochmonkeys stay in their cage
The votes aren't all counted yet, but it seems the brave and patriotic Scot has resisted the influence of villainous agents attempting to weaken Britain against continental forces. Nice try Paris, but your agents have failed once again!
Yep they get to stay with the Britons who's complaint against this was "if they leave we won't have a place to put our shit." And Ireland just looks up and shakes their head.
I know this wasn't the first referendum on the subject but it seemed to get a lot more press this time than it has in the past. I do have a concern about future legislative measures to curb such "foolishness" in the future. Something tells be I'm not far off seeing how Twitchy Britain has been about losing its seat at the big boys table.
So the Scots voted against formal independence, but get to have more devolved powers, which according to the Scots I know is all what a lot of them really wanted in the end. I feel bad for Northern Ireland though.
The whole time I didn't realize this thing was a big deal, because I thought we were talking about the Irish. Now I feel stupid.
I do wonder if part of this is the what I've seen one on the NO side talk about is the lack of a strong Scottish Governmental Body. I've seen talk of them wanting a Republic but nothing existing for it at the moment.
Bunch of Nationalist flagwavers are refusing to accept a vote that doesn't go in their favour, complaining and shouting in protest until they get their way.
The riots were started when "no" voters attacked "yes" voters. Not by the "yes" voters sore over losing.
Except no one's talking about that since it happened awhile ago, whats being mentioned is about the RALLYING happening at Holyrood which are occurring recently and a week after the referendum.
Its about the protesting infront of the Scottish parliament with Yes voters trying to demand a re-vote because they didn't win.
Well of course Yes voters are evil people attempting to undermine democracy itself.