English opinion of Scotland?

General election is coming up and, as a wee present for all your hard work in keeping the UK solvent, Scotland has decided to send you Alex Salmond.

I'm curious about how you guys feel about this because, from what I've seen on t'internets, the English press is displeased with this development. What is the general political mood like down there?

We hate that fat bastard and his Braveheart bollocks. There's really not much else to say about it.

My understanding of English-Scottish relations:

Andy Murray wins: A glorious day for Britain! Never has Britain been so proud of its son! Britan > dirty immigrant world!
Andy Murray loses: The Scot flopped AGAIN, that Scottish loser from Scotland. Boy, I'm glad he isn't English.

Is a bit more complicated than that.

Traditionally, Scotland has been more socialist than our revered English neighbors. Which means we get the government we vote for about 20% of the time; for the other 80 years of the century, we get Thatchered to fuck and back with bugger all representation or protection in government. To cope with this, we murder conservatives and have started murdering people who have been seen in the same room / bed as the conservatives.

Labour and the Lib Dems joined forces with the Tories last year to combat the Nationalist threat. Which worked, because we're still a part of the UK. Unfortunately for the Labour / Libs, they had to sup from the poison chalice of the Conservatives to achieve victory and they are now, in the traditional Scottish method of Hilarious Vindictiveness, getting their parties wiped out North of the border.

This is no joke. Even now we have summoned the bus to throw our last Tory Minister under. Labour are looking at 5-10 seats maximum. The Liberal Democrats will be lucky to get their deposits back, because their treachery has been well and truly noted. The SNP are looking at 40 to 50+ seats in Westminster and it is their *express* intention to fuck the English democracy.

Previously, SNP ministers have abstained from voting over exclusively English matters. Which is probably fair; the Irish do the same thing, assuming they even bother to show up. But now Salmond has reversed this stance, on the back of the bullshit that happened 24 hours after the referendum result. The 'Vow to Scottish Voters' was not even discussed in parliament the next day. Instead, Cameron moved to enshrine 'English Votes for English Laws' in legislation and fuck us entirely.

On the back of six months of 'oo we love you Scotland, don't leave, we are stronger with you and value your wisdom' came 'lol fuck you stupid cunt get back in the kitchen'.

And that is why England is now getting a double decker full of Scottish trollface nationalists. It is glorious .

darknation said:

Labour and the Lib Dems joined forces with the Tories last year to combat the Nationalist threat. Which worked, because we're still a part of the UK. Unfortunately for the Labour / Libs, they had to sup from the poison chalice of the Conservatives to achieve victory and they are now, in the traditional Scottish method of Hilarious Vindictiveness, getting their parties wiped out North of the border.

This is no joke. Even now we have summoned the bus to throw our last Tory Minister under. Labour are looking at 5-10 seats maximum. The Liberal Democrats will be lucky to get their deposits back, because their treachery has been well and truly noted. The SNP are looking at 40 to 50+ seats in Westminster and it is their *express* intention to fuck the English democracy.

And as an English voter who despises the tories, but at the same time isn't particularly trusting of Labour either, I couldn't be happier with this. Keep up the good work, Scotland! My personal ideal outcome for this election is some sort of SNP/Green/Labour coalition. I feel confident that the SNP and Greens would do a better job of keeping Labour honest than the Lib Dems have done with the tories. Although in fairness, the tories were never honest to begin with, so that wasn't going to be an easy job.

In all the jobs I've worked in there's always been a Scot on the team and they've always been awesome to work with. Love you guys and I'm sorry you didn't get your independence.

If Napoleon Bonaparte had invaded Great Britain with a sea-to-land expedition force, I don't think he would have concerned himself with a direct conquest of Scotland. He might make them a vassal or tentative partner. You don't just go mucking about there.

I can't speak for my countrymen, but on the basis on this article, Salmond is alright by me.

TheCupboard said:

If Napoleon Bonaparte had invaded Great Britain with a sea-to-land expedition force, I don't think he would have concerned himself with a direct conquest of Scotland.

He'd have revived the Auld Alliance.

If it wasn't for Scotland and their fine whiskeys, England would only be known for its self-destructive gin-addicted alcoholics.

This is only tangentially related to the topic, but how have Scotland and Ireland traditionally gotten along? I don't know a whole lot about the internal history of the British Isles but I watched The Wind That Shakes the Barley the other day which at least gave me some grasp of how messy Irish-English relations were/are. I don't think that Scotland was even mentioned though, and darknation's mention that Scotland has been more socialist than England makes me wonder if there was a similar Red Scare at some point that the Scottish would have a communist revolution.

I have no problem with the Scottish and in my experience the English don't in general. There is a perception in England that the Scottish don't like us though, which seems like little brother syndrome to me.

where I live is very strongly pro Labour, so is probably quite politically aligned with many parts of Scotland, or were if the shift in landscape that darknation describes is accurate. Personally, I was curious about how things would change if Scotland voted for independance but I was pleased they didn't because to be honest I expected they would blow it and need a bail out.

darknation said:

Is a bit more complicated than that.

Traditionally, Scotland has been more socialist than our revered English neighbors. Which means we get the government we vote for about 20% of the time; for the other 80 years of the century, we get Thatchered to fuck and back with bugger all representation or protection in government. To cope with this, we murder conservatives and have started murdering people who have been seen in the same room / bed as the conservatives.

Labour and the Lib Dems joined forces with the Tories last year to combat the Nationalist threat. Which worked, because we're still a part of the UK. Unfortunately for the Labour / Libs, they had to sup from the poison chalice of the Conservatives to achieve victory and they are now, in the traditional Scottish method of Hilarious Vindictiveness, getting their parties wiped out North of the border.

This is no joke. Even now we have summoned the bus to throw our last Tory Minister under. Labour are looking at 5-10 seats maximum. The Liberal Democrats will be lucky to get their deposits back, because their treachery has been well and truly noted. The SNP are looking at 40 to 50+ seats in Westminster and it is their *express* intention to fuck the English democracy.

Previously, SNP ministers have abstained from voting over exclusively English matters. Which is probably fair; the Irish do the same thing, assuming they even bother to show up. But now Salmond has reversed this stance, on the back of the bullshit that happened 24 hours after the referendum result. The 'Vow to Scottish Voters' was not even discussed in parliament the next day. Instead, Cameron moved to enshrine 'English Votes for English Laws' in legislation and fuck us entirely.

On the back of six months of 'oo we love you Scotland, don't leave, we are stronger with you and value your wisdom' came 'lol fuck you stupid cunt get back in the kitchen'.

And that is why England is now getting a double decker full of Scottish trollface nationalists. It is glorious .

Glorious indeed. But then, at least you actually get the opportunity to stick it to Westminster come election day. We here in Norn Iron are not so lucky - we get absolutely NO SAY in who gets to run Britain. Election day in Northern Ireland is something of a Morton's Fork - we already know who will be in power in Stormont thanks to the way the NI assembly is structured, and neither side has any real clue how to effectively make decisions, leaving whoever is sitting in Downing Street to pretty much impose their will. There is a reason NI is lagging behind the rest of the UK when it comes to the economic recovery - our local MLA's are too busy whining about flags, parades, the Irish Language, gay cakes, etc etc ad infinitum that actual issues such as housing, healthcare and job creation fall by the wayside. And the fact that they are currently in the process of axing 20,000 (count'em) jobs from the public sector here doesn't help matters.

fraggle said:

Love you guys and I'm sorry you didn't get your independence.

Worth pointing out that the majority of those entitled to vote said no (albeit by a fairly small margin).
Worth pointing out that, by area, only Glasgow and Dundee said yes.

I don't really understand why people keep saying "sorry you didn't get your independence" when it would seem that, when asked and able to answer via the polls, most people didn't want it. Whether I like that result or not, that is the reality of the outcome: for better or worse, we said no to independence when we were asked.



I have been, and will continue to be, publicly neutral on this complex issue but there have been extreme levels of nonsense spouted by both sides. Much of what was said during the campaigns - by both camps - was light on substance and heavy on rhetoric. There was very little discussion of true politics and policies and a great deal of threatening and counter threatening. It frequently got personal and nasty. It has been hugely divisive and I know of long standing friendships and family relationships that have been soured by it.


My impression of what the English think of Scotland is somewhat of a disappointment. We are not considered anything like as important or as much of a separate entity and identity as we like to think we might be. My experience is that, to the English (as a sweeping generalisation) England and Britain are basically synonymous. So, effectively, Scotland is a part of Britain and therefore basically an extremely northern part of England. They know we are here, they know we make a lot of noise every now and again, they know we have shitty weather and nice countryside but they don't really get the whole independent nation or "we're different" thing because, on a day to day basis and by default, they don't really think we are, if they think about us at all. A good illustration of this was when I was working offshore during the football world cup a number of years ago. When Scotland played, the English fans on the oil rig supported and cheered at the TV for Scotland. When England played, the Scots supported and cheered for whoever played against England. Importantly, however, the reaction of the English was that many of them were surprised and/or simply didn't understand why this was happening because "we are all British". (Of course, I was more pissed off that I was stuck on a tiny steel island in the middle of the North Sea with a few hundred people watching and talking about football all the time. :P )


As for the often-heard "winning Scottish sportsmen are British but losing ones are Scottish" thing, I can't count the number of times I have heard that one repeated over and over and over in pubs, at clubs, at work, wherever. We say it. We believe it. If fuels and justifies our need for self-righteous indignation. However, a few years ago I also read a survey where a researcher had spent time to actually go back through hours or news casts and sports reports to get actual figures on how much of a problem it was and, shock horror, it's basically not true. Scots were described as British and Scottish equally when winning and when losing.


And here's a potentially inflammatory suggestion: although Scots do often identify themselves as generally socialist in outlook, and the extreme lack of Conservative seats in Scotland certainly seems to be testament to that, a great deal of the political rhetoric and posturing that you hear from Scots - i.e. the opinions that they offer; what they actually say - is actually really quite strongly right-wing and even Nigel Farage-like racism. If you listen to the things people actually say, it's frequently not about the politics of social responsibility and social ownership and more like the "what's in it for me" and "I'm all right Jack" sentiment more associated with right-wing politics. Scottish "socialism" is, in reality, more like "we're not the Conservatives (strongly identified with the English in the eyes of many Scots) so we'll vote for Labour or anyone else" and less about actual socialist viewpoints.

For a long time, Scotland was actually traditionally viewed as reasonably Tory and right-wingish, particularly in rural areas (many farming communities have quite Conservative-like politics to this date). It wasn't until the Thatcher government and policies such as experimenting on the Scots with the poll tax that Scotland effectively became a no-seat zone for Conservative politicians.

david_a said:

This is only tangentially related to the topic, but how have Scotland and Ireland traditionally gotten along?

Yeah, generally (stereotypically) speaking we get along just fine. Rows *can* erupt over Scotland's role in policing Ireland during The Troubles; the Black Watch, a Scottish regiment, were pure bastards to the Irish by most accounts, yet in Perthshire they are revered and adored by the populace that sends their sons to join them.

Interestingly, the Black Watch were heavily involved during the Highland clearances (read: genocide) in Scotland, but revisionist history tends to gloss over that fact. Point this out in a debate / argument involving the Irish and you have made a friend for life.

purist said:

I have no problem with the Scottish and in my experience the English don't in general. There is a perception in England that the Scottish don't like us though, which seems like little brother syndrome to me.

Less little brother, more Master / Servant syndrome. Those who perceive themselves to be powerless tend to lash out when they think their masters aren't looking, curse and swear them etc. Think Upstairs and Downstairs, but the Downstairs where you feel safe gobbing in someone's food is the size of an entire country.

purist said:

Personally, I was curious about how things would change if Scotland voted for independance but I was pleased they didn't because to be honest I expected they would blow it and need a bail out.

Unlike Westminster, whose soft-touch regulation blew our economy and needed a bail out. Please mang, if we shat the bed financially then England would have to join the queue of people wanting to bail us out at Wonga-sized interest rates. The Chinese just love buying debt. Fuck, the entire system works on debt. World Bank 3rd world politics ftw.

scalliano said:

Glorious indeed. But then, at least you actually get the opportunity to stick it to Westminster come election day. We here in Norn Iron are not so lucky - we get absolutely NO SAY in who gets to run Britain. Election day in Northern Ireland is something of a Morton's Fork - we already know who will be in power in Stormont thanks to the way the NI assembly is structured, and neither side has any real clue how to effectively make decisions, leaving whoever is sitting in Downing Street to pretty much impose their will.

Yeah, Irish politics is still stupidly sectarian. Interestingly, I was speaking to an SNP bloke just after the indy referendum who predicted that the general election would end up with Scotland's nationalists holding the balance of power, akin to the way the Irish held it back in the early 1900's. The SNP guy's thoughts were to form a 'Nationalist Collective' between all parties (Labour candidates that could be trusted to vote independent included) that would emulate the Irish model.

Was gonna do more, will reply to Enjay later; my tea is burning on the stove and I'm fucked if I'm setting my house on fire again.

darknation said:

Traditionally, Scotland has been more socialist than our revered English neighbors. Which means we get the government we vote for about 20% of the time; for the other 80 years of the century, we get Thatchered to fuck and back with bugger all representation or protection in government.

I've never understood this whole Scotland isn't getting the government it voted for thing - Scotland forms part of the UK wide democracy. In a democracy, the party or proposal with the most votes wins, and the views of the whole (not just yourself) have to be taken into account. To some degree it always has to be a big compromise, or otherwise if the party you're voting for tries to be 'purer' in terms of policy to what it's core vote wants, it will end up narrowing it's appeal and sacrificing it's popularity.

Enjay said:

My impression of what the English think of Scotland is somewhat of a disappointment. We are not considered anything like as important or as much of a separate entity and identity as we like to think we might be. My experience is that, to the English (as a sweeping generalisation) England and Britain are basically synonymous. So, effectively, Scotland is a part of Britain and therefore basically an extremely northern part of England. They know we are here, they know we make a lot of noise every now and again, they know we have shitty weather and nice countryside but they don't really get the whole independent nation or "we're different" thing because, on a day to day basis and by default, they don't really think we are, if they think about us at all. A good illustration of this was when I was working offshore during the football world cup a number of years ago. When Scotland played, the English fans on the oil rig supported and cheered at the TV for Scotland. When England played, the Scots supported and cheered for whoever played against England. Importantly, however, the reaction of the English was that many of them were surprised and/or simply didn't understand why this was happening because "we are all British".

As an English person, I have never viewed Scotland as anything but culturally distinctive and would certainly not see Scotland as just another part of England. I thought that kind of thing was restricted to lazily generalising foreigners who treat England and Britain as synonymous? If the English can have a distinct sense of cultural identity in the union, without needing to belittle Scotland why is it that the reverse is apparently not possible?

Maes said:

If it wasn't for Scotland and their fine whiskeys, England would only be known for its self-destructive gin-addicted alcoholics.

Were you even trying with this one?

DooMAD said:

And as an English voter who despises the tories, but at the same time isn't particularly trusting of Labour either, I couldn't be happier with this. Keep up the good work, Scotland! My personal ideal outcome for this election is some sort of SNP/Green/Labour coalition. I feel confident that the SNP and Greens would do a better job of keeping Labour honest than the Lib Dems have done with the tories. Although in fairness, the tories were never honest to begin with, so that wasn't going to be an easy job.

these are also my feelings as an English person who wants to move further north

It was only in the last general election where we started to see a strong divide between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Before then Scotland effectively got the government they voted for (Scotland voted labour like the rest of the UK). Of course due to Thatcher the conservative vote has been in constant decline since the late 70s on a irreversible slope.
I view Scotland as its own entity, not an extension of England. They have difference culture and I am kind of envious of the fact that they have a left/centrist government up there as opposed to the centre/right or even right wing government down here. I could certainly see the SNP being helpful in driving a more socialist agenda post the election if they do hold the balance of power. Of course they could very well use this as a way to get another indy referendum and deliberately manipulate the situation for their own means.

I like Scotland and I'm glad the independence vote failed (even if it was a case of bottling it) but what fucks me off monumentally is how it's ok for Scotland - and Wales - to have their own parliaments, but it's still ok for Scottish and Welsh MPs to come and stick their oar into how England is run. It's bad enough that there are colossal differences in health and other provision throughout English counties before considering how different things like tuition fees are between the countries - it's just nuts.

You have either equally independent parliaments throughout all union members, or you don't as far as I'm concerned.

I do not want Nicola Sturgeon at Westminster any more than you want David Cameron up there, DN.

pritch said:

what fucks me off monumentally is how it's ok for Scotland - and Wales - to have their own parliaments, but it's still ok for Scottish and Welsh MPs to come and stick their oar into how England is run.

I'm not saying that you are making this mistake but I have heard similar comments from people who misunderstand the situation.

Their argument is usually along the lines of: "if Scotland has it's own parliament where English MPs have no say, how come Scottish MPs have a say in the English parliament." The misunderstanding there, of course, being that there is no English-exclusive parliament. There is the UK parliament where MPs from all over the UK can and should have their say on matters that can affect the whole of the UK. It is also relevant that the MPs and the MSPs are elected to their respective parliaments to do their business in those places and under the rules and responsibilities of those parliaments.

However, I do agree that there is no reason why Scottish MPs should have any say in matters that are purely English when they are being discussed in Westminster. Cameron is, of course, trying to put things in place to prevent that. I suspect he would like to get it done a bit sharpish too given the number of SNP Westminster MPs that some commentators are predicting. Some people have suggested that an English parliament/assembly might be a better solution. Of course, then will the Cornish, the Geordies, the good folk of Yorkshire... all want their own assemblies?

pritch said:

I like Scotland and I'm glad the independence vote failed (even if it was a case of bottling it) but what fucks me off monumentally is how it's ok for Scotland - and Wales - to have their own parliaments, but it's still ok for Scottish and Welsh MPs to come and stick their oar into how England is run.

I agree, and it's basically evidence that the whole thing is creaking at the seams and probably ought to just be completely rethought from the ground up.

If you look at what's happened in the past 2-3 decades, there have been some massive political changes. Devolution of powers to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland is just one of them. These are changes that have happened gradually and they've been enabled by small reforms, like the establishment of the Scottish Parliament. We're now in a situation where the system is pretty much incoherent, a mess of the old structure and the reforms that have been put in place.

The reforms are good for the most part (Scotland deserves to have a Parliament of its own!) but these reforms need to happen at a wider scale so that the system as a whole continues to make sense. I'm thinking something along the lines of Switzerland's system of cantons, Germany's system of federal states, or even (gasp!) the USA's federal system.

But this is only one of several big changes that have happened in recent decades. The change to a multi-party system instead of (effectively) a two party system is another, yet we still have a voting system that can't support it in a fair way. You've also got things like the incomplete reform of the House of Lords, which still includes hereditary peers (really!) and which is now so full that it's unable to do its job.

Sui Generis said:

I've never understood this whole Scotland isn't getting the government it voted for thing - Scotland forms part of the UK wide democracy. In a democracy, the party or proposal with the most votes wins, and the views of the whole (not just yourself) have to be taken into account.

Right, but the First Past The Post voting system doesn't take the views of the whole into account. Many of the MPs in Parliament have far less than a 50% majority nowadays.

Enjay said:

I'm not saying that you are making this mistake but I have heard similar comments from people who misunderstand the situation.

Their argument is usually along the lines of: "if Scotland has it's own parliament where English MPs have no say, how come Scottish MPs have a say in the English parliament." The misunderstanding there, of course, being that there is no English-exclusive parliament. There is the UK parliament where MPs from all over the UK can and should have their say on matters that can affect the whole of the UK. It is also relevant that the MPs and the MSPs are elected to their respective parliaments to do their business in those places and under the rules and responsibilities of those parliaments.

However, I do agree that there is no reason why Scottish MPs should have any say in matters that are purely English when they are being discussed in Westminster. Cameron is, of course, trying to put things in place to prevent that. I suspect he would like to get it done a bit sharpish too given the number of SNP Westminster MPs that some commentators are predicting. Some people have suggested that an English parliament/assembly might be a better solution. Of course, then will the Cornish, the Geordies, the good folk of Yorkshire... all want their own assemblies?

Absolutely, it's really about the "West Lothian Question" and beyond - somewhere therein lies the point - there needs to be a properly balanced level of devolution that applies across the union, as per fraggle's comments. Having differences in autonomy at whichever level, is not a good thing. And that's why I'd say no to those further regional assemblies within England, if there were no plans to do so in Wales or Scotland either etc. - though it's an interesting point as to whether there would be an appetite for that in English counties, Wales north/south, maybe Scotland east/west? Ultimately if there is an appetite for that, democracy implies we should work towards it.

Either way, you can still have a UK executive - which Scotland just voted to remain part of - sitting separately to that, in which all are represented.

PS fraggle will think I'm mad for saying this (heh) but I don't actually mind hereditary peers. Reason being that I don't think our two-party election system to the commons is a particularly good example of democracy, so having a completely anti-democratic check on its remit built into the system has achieved a moderating effect. I've usually agreed with the Lords holding up of most proposed legislation for another review. Of course, legislation affecting the Lords has made the whole debate over hereditary peers slightly meaningless - and I would concede the time has come for the second executive tier to be properly reformed, and given proper powers again.

pritch said:

PS fraggle will think I'm mad for saying this (heh) but I don't actually mind hereditary peers. Reason being that I don't think our two-party election system to the commons is a particularly good example of democracy, so having a completely anti-democratic check on its remit built into the system has achieved a moderating effect.

Right, but a two party system is the inevitable outcome when you use First Past The Post. I'd much rather see the voting system reformed to use a modern system of preferential, proportional voting. We're already at the tipping point where we have a sort of proto-multipartite system anyway, making it ever more increasingly bizarre that we keep FPTP, a system that distorts the will of the electorate and clearly doesn't represent it any more.

Keeping around hereditary peers, as a way of keeping in check what you seem to be admitting is a broken system seems like wishful thinking and more than a little bizarre.

fraggle said:

Keeping around hereditary peers, as a way of keeping in check what you seem to be admitting is a broken system seems like wishful thinking and more than a little bizarre.

Oh, I agree. It's like jamming a crowbar in the gears. Antiquated system achieving a means to an end in a haphazard way.

Hence I say that whole second tier needs full reform. What it would ideally like though, I don't know. What would you do with the House of Lords?

pritch said:

What would you do with the House of Lords?

A Museum of Class Warfare

pritch said:

I like Scotland and I'm glad the independence vote failed (even if it was a case of bottling it) but what fucks me off monumentally is how it's ok for Scotland - and Wales - to have their own parliaments, but it's still ok for Scottish and Welsh MPs to come and stick their oar into how England is run.

/me shrugs. This is the nature of the whole 'marriage' between nations that was hammered out during the referendum. England is no longer going to be calling the shots solo; it's going to be all members of the precious and valued and vaunted United Kingdom voting together, as partners, on more equal terms.