Scottish Nationalists: Why leave one union to join another?

[FrancinePefko42]

From my understanding, the primary motive for Scotland leaving the United Kingdom is to have full autonomy as independent sovereign state - with all the freedom that would confer.

Why does being closely tied to Brussels have greater appeal than retaining the ties with England?

zsazsajuju
Francine- Brussels doesn’t mean anything. There isn’t any government of the EU. It’s not a country.

I’m afraid you both need to learn something about what you are talking about. Ranting and raving nutty things just makes you seem thick

zsazsajuju do you scream and stamp your foot whenever you here "Brussels" used by e.g. the BBC ?

Oh feck, don't mention the BBC! SNP no likey the BBC...

I think that the vote to stay in the eu was artificially inflated as SNP supporters were told that's what they should vote

I must have missed that memo...

zsazsajuju
I have other nationalities so will be off with my family
Off from where? Where do you currently reside? Scotland?

zsazsajuju
Wax and Francine seem quite proud that they have a low level of education
Actually zsazsajuju I am really, really ashamed. As I mentioned to prettybird earlier, the reason I have not been able to respond to every post immediately during the workimg week is because I am actually studying for my Highers (again). I have been inspired by prettybird and now you, zsazsajuju. Thank you.

But first, could you please tell me what university is like? Is it just like a dead, dead big school? Is it pure hard lessons? Do you get pure loads of homework? Are the teachers dead dead strict?

😂😂😂😂

WaxOnFeckOff
However, regardless of how you see it, the 4 countries don't exist as entities in the EU, only the UK does (I know you know this) so it's completely irrelevant what the individual countries voted. imo, they should never have allowed the figures to be broken down in that way

I could not agree with you more. The same point came up earlier

Thor86
Francine, by your logic, shouldn't Sheffield, having voted to leave the EU, now vote to leave the UK, then England then Yorkshire? Because apparently you can't have different views on different Unions

No. The residents of Sheffield did not vote in the EU Referendum as "Citizens of Sheffield". They voted as "Citizens of the United Kingdom" and the result was a United Kingdom result.

While we can arbitrarily see which town, city, county or even nation within the UK voted Remain and which ones voted Leave, these are pretty meaningless distinctions because in a democracy you first decide where you will draw your voting boundary.

For EURef the boundary was clearly around the whole of the United Kingdom (and the territories and islands whose membership is due to a historic link with the UK eg Gibraltar).

If you're not clear on the voting boundary, you could have individual wards within Sheffield saying "But wait! This ward voted Remain. Our democratic voice must be heard!"

And why stop at a voting ward? How about individual streets? How about individual houses?
32 Acacia Avenue voted Remain. Number 30 and 34 voted Leave. Mr & Mrs Miggins feel (of #32) have, for some years, felt like the "abused wife" in the way they have been treated by their neighbours at #30 and #34. They believe the EU represents an admirer /suitor / rescuer / kindly "prospective husband". While it is impossible to physically move the house (#32 will remain next to #30 and #34), they now say their democratic voice needs to be heard

"We never voted for Brexit" say Mr & Mrs Miggins. "Why should we put up with it?"

"We've been abused, mistreated and insulted like an abused wife"

"We just KNOW that the EU will is our knight in shining armour. We want to marry 'him'"

That about sums up the SNP position on this thread

Easy. Have you seen the state of the UK government?

This link to the Financial Times might be behind a paywall. See not all Brexiteers are Daily Fail readers..

www.ft.com/content/0cb0d682-0bc4-11e6-9cd4-2be898308be3

Interestingly, the SNPs historical position was far clearer...

The SNP had previously been highly sceptical of the European project. In the UK’s referendum on membership of the European Economic Community in 1975, all 11 SNP MPs voted against.

Gordon Wilson, a later SNP leader, recalled that party members fighting London control “saw little benefit in exchanging that jack boot for a European model”.

zsazsajuju
Francine- Brussels doesn’t mean anything. There isn’t any government of the EU. It’s not a country

You might want to have a word with New Statesman and Jim Sillars too.
www.newstatesman.com/politics/scotland/2017/10/how-spectre-alex-salmond-haunts-nicola-sturgeons-fractious-snp

Jim Sillars, a former deputy leader, wrote an article in Friday’s Daily Record criticising the First Minister’s "unhinged love that paints the EU in glorious colours", and the "error-strewn course taken by leaders with no strategic nous, out of their depth". He also criticised the way Brussels has treated weaker member states as well as Scotland’s fishing communities and rural and island services.

zsazsajuju
Francine- Brussels doesn’t mean anything
You will also need to have a word with Her Majesty Nicola Sturgeon herself and ITV...Do you think that in headline below, she wanted to have a conversation with a city?

www.itv.com/news/2016-06-25/sturgeon-scotland-to-seek-immediate-discussions-with-brussels/

That's almost 50 years ago. The SNP of today has moved on from that position. I'm sorry if I offend anyone, but I personally don't consider Jim Sillars as a legitimate 'SNP' voice any more. He hasn't held any elected office since 1992, yet is happy to be wheeled out as 'spokesman' by mainstream media. Quite frankly his recent statements have seemed deliberately damaging.

Aye, poor Jim has gone right downhill since Margo passed. :(

I feel sad when I hear him speaking now, he seems bitter.

Tony Benn was also considered a has been by many in New Labour. At least you always knew he would take a stand based on principles rather than political expediency. His clarity and precision of thought on the reality of the EU remains relevant today.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=nWnpbEMMsNw

"Members of parliament are lent their powers by the people who elect them, the ordinary people, the bus drivers and the postal workers who are you work for. At the end of their term, they must return those powers undiminished. It is not put to members of parliament to give those powers away to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels"

Sorry I didn't transcribe that quote quite right.
He also says "it is the most terrifying bureaucratic system in the world".

Politicians of his generation had integrity.

Here is an edited version. Anyone who believes the people should be the masters of the politicians should watch this.

He also makes an excellent point about MEPs (the one institution within the whole of the EU which is "democratic")...
"If I write to my MEP to say I'm not happy with you, I won't vote for you again. He could write back to me and say 'Well Tony, you didn't vote for me in the first place! You voted for the party. Blair selected me' "

Same applies to Theresa May.

Theresa May is accountable to the electorate of her constituency. They put her in parliament. They can replace her if they choose to.

So if the people of Maidenhead fail to boot her out, the rest of us are stuck with her? (Not that I’m complaining too much - most of the rest of her party are even worse.)

Wax, For me the main argument for independence that has an element of validity is about bring government closer to the people it's serves so that it should be more representative of what people want. That doesn't tie in with membership of the EU in it's current format. The people making the decisions are even more distant than Westminster and we've had no input in their appointment/election. I think the EU is about to go down the tubes anyway so there may be nothing of worth left to join.

I wouldn't see it like that at all. The people making the decisions and who set the policy for the EU are the elected leaders. There is a pooling of sovereignty on some issues.

Take for example how elected Irish politicians engaged at EU level and had it's concerns addressed on two previously rejected treaties. Nice and Lisbon.

The two EU referendums first rejected in Ireland were re run with different contexts the second time around. This was due to better endeavours by the Irish gov't to explain the treaties and and the addressed the concerns which worried people.

The Nice treaty was a concern because of neutrality issues. Background to the second Nice ref. was The Seville Declaration which had been sought by elected Irish politicians.

Irish concerns about The Lisbon Treaty were that the treaties would change Irish laws on abortion, lead to a loss of sovereignty, undermine Ireland’s military neutrality, and remove its permanent EU Commissioner. On 12 December 2008 the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen confirmed that a second referendum would be held, after an EU leaders summit agreed to keep 1 Commissioner per member state and to incorporate legally binding guarantees on abortion, taxation and military neutrality in the Croatian Accession Treaty.^ This led to the twenty eighth amendment to the Irish constitution.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-sixth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland

blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/10/19/asking-the-public-twice-why-do-voters-change-their-minds-in-second-referendums-on-eu-treaties/

Then the Irish electorate overwhelmingly voted in larger numbers to pass the second holding of the referendums against a background of protection for Irish neutrality, not losing our Commissioner etc. They didn't just vote under the same conditions. The treaties were explained in plain english the second time around, too. It is just a load of ignorant bs when people come out and say they were just a simple repeat.

And don't forget Brexit and Irelands concern about a hard border on the Island of Ireland. Ireland's interests are one of the 3 issues to be resolved. UK gov't are the ones to try to tread over this, not the 26 other EU member states.

And the "Kenny" Declaration was obtained by Irelands elected leader to allow for the seamless absorption of NI into the EU in the event of a unity vote under the GFA. Like East Germany.

What would help escalate any 'going down the tubes' for the EU is if there is disunity over Brexit. Or not supporting a member states interests over a soon to be non member third country.

Francine- not sure what you are ranting and raving about. As I said Brussels is a city. If you want to critique the EU, please be accurate instead of some rubbish you have read in the sun. I have no idea what all your links are about or if they are aimed at me. Maybe other people also are inaccurate in their descriptions of the EU. Doesn’t help your case any.

You were earlier trying to mock people with a university education as if that’s something to be ashamed of. It’s not. Not everyone with an education is wonderfully smart but an education is a wonderful thing and just having no idea what you’re talking about is pretty pathetic, even in the age of Donald Trump. Please try to learn about the EU and Scottish independence then get back to us.

And as for the weird links on Jim sillars/ what the SNP policy was in 1975, is that supposed to prove Wax’s weird statement about the SNP not really believing in the EU but just pretending because they think Scottish people are stupid? Jim Sillars who in no way is a spokesman for the SNP and something someone said over 40years ago. Somehow that means their current policy is a sham? Surely even you must realise that’s entirely irrational?

What?

LoveInTokyo
So if the people of Maidenhead fail to boot her out, the rest of us are stuck with her? (Not that I’m complaining too much - most of the rest of her party are even worse.)

At least there is a mechanism. It might not work to your personal desire but that is the nature of democracy.

There is no mechanism for ordinary citizen voters of Europe to get rid of Junker. Were it not for him, we may not have been in this situation.