Indyref Part 4

[SantanaLopez]

Evening all :)

deeedeee

You don't really think he'll won't stay around for long do you? He's very experienced at slipping out of embarrassing situations.

Do you remember when he said the pound was ''a millstone round Scotland's neck'' ?

www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/salmond-in-call-to-dump-millstone-of-the-pound-1.263204

I want to ask some questions as to why people want to vote yes.
I asked earlier in the thread what nationality people considered themselves to be. Scottish first - British second or what.
People gave varying answers of course.
Now, (bear with me, this will get weird) - I would like to draw an analogy, in order to explore further the concept of "Identity".
Lets Hypothesize about the North of England. I am from there, and there are quite a few parallels, some of which I will exagerrate for the sake of argument so forgive me. So we draw a line say 50 miles south from the Mersey to the Humber for arguments sake, to make it viable, and the top border is obviously Scottish border.
Population - Grtr Manchester alone has about 3 million - add on Liverpool, Leeds/ West Yorkshire conurbation you have something probably in excess of Scotlands.
We have large conurbations and rural areas - like Scotland
We have Shale Gas which looks likely to provide some kind of a "windfall".
We have historically mostly voted Labour, so have much more "Socialist" tendencies compared to "The South".
We had lots of heavy industry that has disappeared Steel, Coal, Heavy Manufacturing.
"Most" people dislike the Tories.
We grumble about lack of representation at WM.
There is a feeling that WM does not care about us.
You could argue that interest rates are set for the benefit of the South East not the North.

I see quite a lot of basic similarities - and yet.. there is absolutely no desire to become independent. I know some have mentioned regional assemblies on here but there is really no or very little appetite for that.

I think the reason for that is that we consider ourselves English, so we are part of England. It just doesn't enter peoples heads to be independent. You would be looked at as crazy if you suggested it.

So why - given the apparent similarities listed above, is there a massive difference in outlook.
Is it down to "Identity" - Is it the case that Yes supporters feel that they are Scottish above all else, and Scotland is hard done to, and because you were a separate country 300 years ago you want to be again?
There are plenty of regions in the UK (even England) who could use much the same arguments for independence: "better representation", "Better social care", "Our votes don't make a difference" .. anything you like really from any malcontent.

England itself was divided up into small kingdoms several hundreds of years before the Union - but there is no wish to "regress" back to that situation.
The Union happened well before anyone here or even their grandparents were alive, so (to me anyway) there is no difference between 300 years and 600, 700 years. It is in the distant past.

I am also curious as to why some Yes'rs seem keen to rid themselves of a union with UK WM on the grounds "it does not represent Scotlands wishes and is remote" when they want to throw themselves into the European Union which would be even LESS representative and more remote.. does not make sense to me.

Interestingly, a PP who is "Yes" said that her grandfather I think felt "British" but she felt Scottish and would be voting yes. This says to me that there has been a change in "identity" in Scotland over the years - I would be interested in viewpoints on that.

Also, to put it bluntly - why is it that Scottish Nationalism = Good but English Nationalism = bad. Surely Nationalism of any flavour is to be regarded as "suspect" as it fosters negative attitudes.

Sorry if this is all too weird and maybe not relevant, just I would like to understand and maybe open some things up for constructive debate.

Surely Nationalism of any flavour is to be regarded as "suspect" as it fosters negative attitudes

It certainly does. Looking back through history, nationalism in any country always seems to have developed into extreme forms.

Good job that there's over a thousand artists, writers and musicians signed a letter supporting a yes vote. We'll need this utter disaster documented so when we have to sell the national collection to fill the deficit there's something to fill kelvingrove other than crying children.

By the way, I've come up with a solution! We tax scottish football and all the footballers and managers etc work for minimum wage and give all the rest of the money to the government to offset the fluctuating oil revenue. Scottish football, good job that's reliable

I wrote a long post then my phone died!

Grand theft manual- yes I think the political landscape will changes after yes.

The people on the right of the snp will probably join ex Tories to Forna new centre left party.

Labour will break away from WM labour.

The socialists and greens will have a resurgence.

I don't see a place for the lib dems.

One of the things that has encouraged me most to vote yes is the amount of non native scots from all round the world who are voting yes. It's not about feeling scottish or English or British for me. ( says the girl who was born and grew up in England)

The desire to stay part of the UK is nationalism.

So many people one on these threads and say they are voting no because they are British.

Davros- I think England will break up this century. London is steadily heading to become a city state.

Davros to answer your question about Scottish vs English nationalism, one is right wing and racist the other is left wing and internationalist. They are not comparable but it is an interesting academic point how they have developed differently. I imagine future I essays will be written on that.

StatisticallyChallenged What is it with some Yes voters telling people they're too rich to have a valid opinion? At what point, out of interest, does one become too wealthy to have a legitimate view?

Well, I gather from the treatment of LadyCordelia that it is not so much how much money you have, but how you make it. If you are a lottery winner, then you can be expected to be invited round to the First Minister's home on a regular basis (even though before you had that lottery win he wouldn't have known you from Adam), but if you a high earning woman going out to a job every day, one which you have studied and competed for, obviously your views count for zilch. Because you might just have the intelligence not to believe the nonsense the SNP pedal out.

Because obviously the views of an intelligent, hard working, well educated women are of less importance than someone on housing benefit who might have to move house if they have too much room. The SNP seem only to approve of women who work hard, but preferably for pin money. Or maybe the public sector.

But then I find any grown woman who refers to themselves as "girl" a bit untrustworthy.

Crickey Chelsy!!! :-D

I'm a girl, lady, woman, lass or bird depending on what I fancy.

Hello. Where've you been? Missed you!

I've been at work. Doing a well paid job. Half day today.

Excellent nice to have you back!

Been wanting to ask you, what's your opinion of the Common Weal?

Using her other name aha! that makes sense *

Ps before anyone asks - her mind is still 100%

Jesus H Christ weatherall. Will you please tell me wtf my "other name" is, and when it last posted? A link to a post by it would be most helpful, because I can't find it.

Actually no, I might as well come clean. The coven remarks are true. All the No supporting posts are by me. I have over 40 different usernames, and the "job" I refer to is in fact maintaining multiple identities on multiple computers with multiple different IP addresses.

Actually if you are obsessed enough by usernames to think someone is posting with multiple identities weatherall, I suggest you contact Mumsnet HQ to make some form of complaint against them, because due to the nature of the debate that would be dishonest.

"So who does this leave for us to vote for - labour? You're now arguing that you disagree with many labour policies. Or will a Scots labour party be completely different?"

Hi grandtheft. Yes, I would have (modest) hopes for a reinvigorated Labour party in an independent Scotland. At the moment the Scottish Labour Party are hamstrung by the policy direction of WM Labour. That's not a gripe, just a fairly obvious statement of fact. Lately this has led to JL's wildly out of touch "something for nothing" speech, and repudiation of universal services. You'll also notice that Jim Murphy refused to comment on whether Labour in Holyrood (post no vote) would retain free tuition fees in Scotland. Understandably, Labour politicians are in a difficult position. I can't imagine what it must be like to spend a day campaigning in England, telling voters that the Tory government that England voted for is a complete disaster and utterly destructive, then hoofing it north of the border to tell voters in Scotland, who rejected a Tory government, that the Tory government they have is...err..fine, actually. Not a problem. Madness.

I don't think the SNP would "vanish in a puff of smoke". A lot of people voted for the SNP in the last Scottish elections because they perceived them as a safe pair of hands, and more credible than Scottish Labour at that point in time. I'd imagine that a lot of people would continue to vote for them on that basis.

I can't see much of a future for the lib-dems either.

I think minority parties would do well out of the AMS. At one point the GP held 7 seats in Scotland and the SSP (whatever you think of them) held 6.

Given that there is a fairly consistent minority vote for the Tory party in Scotland, I'd imagine that this would hold. However, it remains to be seen whether a Tory party, decoupled from WM politics, would represent a concerted neoliberal agenda, or a more patrician form of conservatism. In either case, it would likely be heavily constrained by a left-of-centre political consensus and pro-European public opinion.

On the subject of 'optimism'. I'd say that the No voters who do state that they are voting no in order to secure social justice, are equally optimistic. If you want to tell me that voting No is worthwhile in order to sustain the 2014 status quo, then fair enough. I'll accept that. But the idea that a No vote will magically bring about a Labour Government; help to eradicate poverty around the UK; result in meaningful voting reform; greater devolution across the UK; significant moves towards a federal system... It's pie in the sky.

Notice none of you can actually justify or explain your 'too rich' opinions. Far better to distract from such an ill considered view point by calling another regular poster a troll. I

I can see why the Yes side is struggling with the female vote. You detest any woman who earns well, or who is intelligent. You don't believe that any woman has a job (as opposed to posting under multiple identities on an internet site - to what purpose?). You're doing really well with that one, aren't you? As a No voter, I would definitely encourage you to continue with that line. Its such a vote loser.

I haven't expressed any 'too rich' opinions, so I don't think I need to justify or explain them...

A troll? I've posted numerous explanations of EU membership issues. Oh my goodness, I don't use my personal name on an internet site potentially full of nutters because its not clever from a personal safety point of view.

I'm still waiting to be told what my other username is, and a link to its co-terminous posts, which is what seems to be implied. That I have used a different username, whilst I haven't been able to post, due to being busy at work!

So who is it that I am meant to be?

A no vote would make a labour government more likely than a yes vote.