to wonder why the SNP aren't getting the same bashing that UKIP are?

[kinkytoes]

I'm not a political expert by any means and I know there has been a lot of discussion on both topics here.

But both these parties have the same ultimate aim - independence for their countries. Why is no-one calling SNP supporters racist? Not that I think they should be - just curious about the apparent double standard.

The problem is that whenever Anglophobia is pointed out, it is always dismissed or trivialised, not just by the Nats but Scots in general. Here we have another example: "I have been on the end of anti scottishness in England"; the implication being that two wrongs make a right, or that the level of abuse is somehow equivalent.

I met some real arseholes in Scotland - more than enough to make me feel that Scottish culture has a real problem with bigotry against the English. Now I live elsewhere and I have never experienced the same tendency. It has many forms, but writing one of them ("English cunt") off as a form of jocularity is no different to how words like nigger, nig nog, wog, paki and so on were considered harmless in the 1970s.

Furthermore, while there will be no blood on the streets in the event of a Yes vote (or for that matter a No vote, one hopes), the way the independence debate has been carried on has been riddled with wilfull blindness on the part of the Yes camp, and I ascribe this to old-fashioned nationalism that has nothing to do with the civic nationalism and rationalislm that the Yes camp like to ascribe themselves. Their belief that iScotland would be entitled to a currency union is not just wrong - it's not seriously arguable without the consent of the rUK. Continuing membership of the EU - not just wrong, but not seriously arguable without the consent of ever member state. And yet, repeatedly, pointing out these things results in deployment of the No True Scotsman fallacy by the Yessers or, if the person making the point is not Scottish, a sort of prickly hostility like something out of Ivor Cutler. Basically I see the same arseholes out on the march

Toad I'm Scottish , I have lived in England, I've suffered scotsphobe, from people,who are numpties not because they are English but because they are numpties.

There are numpties in every country. There are lovely people in every country.

Thank you Toad for a really insightful post. I wish I could put it so well myself but I feel that, being English, if I have involvement in the debate IRL, my views are dismissed (at best) and ridiculed or belittled (frequently).

I do feel that the Yes camp do not want debate, but to close down argument with dogma and bluff certainty, even where they have no evidence.

If the yes camp don't want a debate, why are they continually asking BetterTogether for a public natter?

The Yes camp want debate, but are incapable of keeping it rational. Every point made by the No camp has been responded to with an appeal to emotion or sentiment. This is not surprising, as it is in the nature of nationalism.

twilight

I take it that your attitude to Anglophobia is "so what". You ought to be concerned that it has affected the independence debate, because it clearly has. I think an example of this is the Yes camp's reaction to the currency union issue.

Every country has arseholes. I have been on the end of anti scottishness in England. I put it down to them being arseholes, not to them being English

Ditto, Monty. Big time.

And such people are deplorable. Unfortunately, this is what happens when national identity gets emphasised like it has been in the last 20 years. It is as if ethnic politics have replaced class pilitucs.

Pilitucs? Sorry, I think that must be Kiwi, for "politics".

I'm finding it so hard to make my mind up on independence.

My gut feeling has always been to despise nationalism - anywhere. To me, it's completely against the principles of collectivity and cooperation with other countries throughout the world which I believe in. I have never voted SNP and I doubt I ever will. My parents are socialists and lifelong Labour. I remember my mum asking me who I thought we had more in common with - a millionaire landowner in the Highlands or an unemployed steelworker's family in Sheffield, who got shafted by Thatcher as bad as my mum's mining family did. She asked me that to make me think about the problems with nationalism and separatism.

A friend from Liverpool who lives near me (in Glasgow) told me he was afraid of being left with the Tories post referendum if he moved back down south.

But then I think things will never change if we let things carry on as they are, and maybe things could improve if we vote Yes.

And, to my shame, when I see anti Scottish sentiment and generalisations which are nothing other than racist (not on this thread, or what I've read on it) on MN, it makes me think 'fuck it. If they think so badly of us, separation is for the best.'

I just don't know how to vote. I need to read more.

This blog is top reading, imo. Glasgow uni law professor.

I'd also recommend the Scottish Affairs Committee transcripts, which you can find here but are a bit wordy and technical in places.

And of course the Scotland analysis from the government.

If the yes camp don't want a debate, why are they continually asking BetterTogether for a public natter?

All the yes campaigners ask for debate and then shout bullying and or scaremongering when you actually do debate with them. Youv'e got to follow it through...

Aside from the self pitying, woe is me for i speak for all Scots victim rant Montysma, there are far better ways to encourage greater distribution of land ownership. Reform of the planning system for one, so that the only new developments that are affordable are not done by big developers in acres of zoned development land, for which a premium price is paid to those large landowners you despise so much. Perhaps 20% of all newbuilds could be compelled to be self builds?

How about tax incentives for small the sale of small parcels of land to individuals? Or a benchmark standard for large landowners to work towards with some kind of reward system for diffusing land ownership?

tbh though with the Highlands and the lack of transport infrastructure, much of the interest in housing seems doomed to be the despised holiday homes. Although since this is the norm in Scandinavia, I wonder what the SNP's problem is with it.

Furthrmore, who wants to buy landholdings of more than an acre? Certainly a few smallholders. Plus the equestrian community (though they might be regarded as too elite in the "new Scotland". I'm not convinced of the efficacy of community. It is a bizarre concept, and arguably puts one elite group (in terms of location) in place of another landowner, while the individual whose great great grandparents parents were dispossed during the Clearances and who now lives in a semi in Wishaw, remains equally dispossesed due to the need to live near the place of work.

Thanks for the links, Santana - I have a PhD from Glasgow and I work there now, but have been really disappointed with the lack of transparent debate happening on campus.

That's an interesting turn of phrase Corey...

In what way, Santana?

corey

You have highlighted what for me is the real tragedy. People have become so disillusioned about their ability to create a fair society that they are actually contemplating the dismembering of their country. While the Yes camp claim to be positive, it's actually a counsel of despair, with no evidence it will improve things.

I wonder what it would be like in an alternative universe where the SNP didn't exist, there was no sense of anti-English feeling at all (real or imagined), the Conservatives and Labour party were neutral and people just had a free vote.

The evidence is in the different policy directions of holyrood and Westminster.

Polls show that people in Scotland have high levels of satisfaction with the Scottish government but are dissatisfied with the condem coalition.

Toad -

I agree that people are feeling despairing.
The way the banks have been allowed to behave like modern day Robber Barons, with Royal Bank of Scotland being right up at the top of the list of criminal behaviour, whilst disabled people lose their benefits and significant numbers need food banks IS the State in despair.
I hope that Scotland can move away from this sort of status quo, but I hope we all can actually.

weatherall -

I should think any right minded person is unsatisfied with the current crew in Westminster, but it seems to me that too much of Holyroods output is a simple: 'we aint gonna be like them' tirade.

Merry -

As for the 'anti-English feeling (being) real or imagined' - do you think that the examples I have given on here are 'imagined' or somehow my fault for being English?

The evidence is in the different policy directions of holyrood and Westminster.

Polls show that people in Scotland have high levels of satisfaction with the Scottish government but are dissatisfied with the condem coalition.

No. I was just trying to avoid getting into an argument about whether they were real or imagined and wondering how the situation would be different if it wasn't an issue.

merry
I understand. Wouldn't it be amazing if it were no longer an issue.

We are all fairly mixed up, racially, on this small set of islands anyway.
I live in an area which historically changed hands between the Scots and English some 13 times, over the years.

I agree that there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the current condem coalition. I am not so sure whether 'people in Scotland have high levels of satisfaction with the Scottish government'. No doubt there are surveys which could show it (but then I expect the coalition could produce a survey showing satisfaction if they twiddled the figures hard enough).

I think people are less disaffected with the Scottish Gov so far, that's all.

And I really HOPE people stay less disaffected too.
I remember the hope when labour got back in the 1990's.
After many years of a regime which many had felt dissatisfaction with, there was SUCH hope.
It crumbled slowly and it did so much damage.
I hope the same doesn't happen in Scotland, I really do.

Evidence that Scots prefer the SNP administration at Holyrood to the Lib-Con government at Westminster is not evidence that life will be any better in an independent Scotland. A Scottish government's ability to deliver what Scots want will depend on its tax revenues which will in turn depend on the health of the Scottish economy. There are real questions about this, particularly if the rUK refuses a currency union.

But the Yes camp's response to these points is to make accusations of scaremongering. It is an appeal to emotion, not the mind, it is a tactic to divert voters' attention from the real issues, and it does nothing to promote a quality debate.

There are no real concerns about the health of indyScotland's economy. Not even BetterTogether are suggesting that, indeed Darling said himself there's no economic reasons to stay together. He also said that currency union is a good idea, before Osbourne decided to try to play hardball, and BoE heidbummer Carney says it's perfectly do-able.

That's not accurate.

The predictions given that an independent Scotland would be as wealthy as Scotland in the UK are premised on there being a currency union with the UK.

And there won't be a currency union. Not only have all three of the major parties ruled it out, but there is likely to be widespread opposition in the rUK.

I find it surprising that so many in the Yes camp believe that a currency union is something an independent Scotland would be entitled to.

Mark Carney limited his comments to how a currency union would work, and noted that it would have to involve a degree of fiscal union. In practice, that would mean Westminster continuing to control Scotland's taxation, spending and borrowing. How do you think that would be to Scotland's benefit, given that Scottish representation at Westminster would have ended?