Meanwhile in Scotland

[darknation]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scotland-to-publish-plans-for-second-independence-referendum-a7359071.html

Looks like we're staying in Europe boys. Pray for a harsh winter to remove Tory support.

[Tristan]

IIRC, if Scotland leaves the UK and attempts to stay in the EU, some countries (including Spain) will decide they don't like that and stop it from happening. Perhaps it would be different if Scotland separated before the UK officially leaves Europe, but all things considered, even if this referendum goes ahead, I don't expect it to yield a different result.

Less Tory support sure would be nice though...

[darknation]

Eris Falling said:

IIRC, if Scotland leaves the UK and attempts to stay in the EU, some countries (including Spain) will decide they don't like that and stop it from happening.

Nope.

And, bear in mind, this was before the UK government pissed off the European Union so completely and utterly. Politically, the EU is in a really fucked up place right now because the UK has voted out. It makes them look weak and has gotten other countries thinking it might be time to break out the lifeboats. It actually makes sense for the EU to undo some of that damage by allowing Scotland to stay, even if only for the 'see, not everyone is a roast beef eating bigot' points.

Basically, the UK pissed off the EU, but the EU would piss off the UK far, far more if they supported an independent Scotland and all our delicious oil. The UK as a whole is looking at a massive trade deficit because of brexit: remove the North Sea and the whisky trade (3.95 billion pounds per year) from the equation and you practically guarantee that England enters a fuckstorm of financial shittery that EU members can look upon and vow to never, ever make the same mistake themselves.

edit: for those interested in the massive political shitshow that Scotland is currently weathering, I made a educational post on the matter a few months ago for your viewing and personal gratification.

[dew]

Go indie Scotland! We must strive to keep those Trump golf courses within the EU! Then English snobs will need a passport to play there.

I just hope the government picks Johnson as their Remain campaigner, that would be amazing on so many levels.

[darknation]

I don't even know who the hell they could use as the face of the Remain side.

Boris? Not a hope in hell. The person has to be Scottish. Dugdale? Even Labour's own faithful cried pish when her name was mentioned at the recent leadership hustings, so she's out. Ruth Davidson? Not a hope in hell, as much as the press big her up as the saviour of the union, she's a Conservative and Conservatives are fucking poison for Scotland.

The big beast Gordon 'Financial Crash' Brown? Possible, but only if they can manage to keep him on his meds for the entire campaign. Plus, they only wheel him out of the asylum once a year, and he's still got that entire 'The Pledge' thing to answer for which would automatically sink any campaign he's associated with. Whoops here's evidence splashed all over the front page of the Daily Record, that you, sir, are a lying fucking sack of shit.

God, this is going to be hilarious.

[DooMAD]

As an Englishman, I wish Scotland the best of luck in escaping this Tory hellhole. I'd also like to point out, we're not all batshit mental. But sorry for those that are.

[fraggle]

A while back I described Scotland as the UK's saucer section, preparing for emergency separation before the inevitable warp core breach. That was before the Brexit referendum and it's even more true now. I wish independent Scotland all the best.

[TMD]

DooMAD said:

As an Englishman, I wish Scotland the best of luck in escaping this Tory hellhole. I'd also like to point out, we're not all batshit mental. But sorry for those that are.

Only a majority of you

[darknation]

Scotland to open embassy in Berlin

Top tier trolling from the Scottish Government.

[The Ultimate DooMer]

This is the thing I don't get - afaik the main reason for voting Yes in 2014 was to take back all powers from Westminster by leaving. Yet there's so much eagerness to give those powers away to Brussels afterwards. (leaving one corrupt institution for another)

[dew]

The Ultimate DooMer said:

This is the thing I don't get - afaik the main reason for voting Yes in 2014 was to take back all powers from Westminster by leaving. Yet there's so much eagerness to give those powers away to Brussels afterwards. (leaving one corrupt institution for another)

That's a very dismissive argument. The "powers" the EU "takes away" are a much smaller subset than what Scotland concedes to London, that's pretty obvious even at a glance.

[darknation]

Maybe the difference is "Independent country that is a member state of the EU", v.s "Glorified appendix to England."

Or to put it another way, just once in my lifetime, I'd like to be able to vote and have my vote mean something. Rather than being told thanks for my input, but you're getting brexit and Tories and fascist fuckwits anyway.

[Fonze]

darknation said:

Or to put it another way, just once in my lifetime, I'd like to be able to vote and have my vote mean something. Rather than being told thanks for my input, but you're getting brexit and Tories and fascist fuckwits anyway.

You do live on Earth, right? Okay, you're vote means nothing by itself and when overshadowed by a larger group of people voting the opposite way, will always be cast in vain. That's a lesson you were supposed to learn at age 18-22 after you got all excited that you can vote, voted, then realized your vote did nothing. Even the guy you wanted to get into office would have likely done the same things as the other anyway, which further makes a mockery of the system. Then between 22-26 you vote for the guy who gets in and he does nothing he said he would do; maybe he even does things he said he wouldn't do. That's even better.

This was the reason for the American Revolution and a good chunk of the reason for America's Civil War, but you see with even a system designed to provide better representation, at some point, when a govt gets too big for its flawed system to handle properly, individual votes and voters will always be failed to be represented within the govt.

We are in the age of technology where govts should move closer and closer to democracies over republics, but even then who's to say an individual's vote is going to mean much at all.

[Tristan]

It goes a bit beyond him as an individual though. Elections and referendums are typically decided by England. Granted with the EU it was too close to really call it like that, but consider last year's general election. Tory support was only significant in England, yet they won a "majority vote," despite being very out of favour in Wales and Scotland.

Of course this seems obvious as England dwarfs the rest in population and in numbers of constituencies, but I'm guessing Scotland as a single entity feel like their votes count for fuck all, so it's quite easy to see where DN is coming from.

With regard to independence, I can't for certain say I'm totally for or against either outcome. As another Englishman, I think we'll be negatively affected by Scotland leaving, which is why I hoped they would vote to stay last time. Now I think they'd probably be better off separating, and the rest of the UK is buggered anyway so uh, go for it?

[Fonze]

Eris Falling said:

It goes a bit beyond him as an individual though. Elections and referendums are typically decided by England. Granted with the EU it was too close to really call it like that, but consider last year's general election. Tory support was only significant in England, yet they won a "majority vote," despite being very out of favour in Wales and Scotland.

Of course this seems obvious as England dwarfs the rest in population and in numbers of constituencies, but I'm guessing Scotland as a single entity feel like their votes count for fuck all, so it's quite easy to see where DN is coming from.

With regard to independence, I can't for certain say I'm totally for or against either outcome. As another Englishman, I think we'll be negatively affected by Scotland leaving, which is why I hoped they would vote to stay last time. Now I think they'd probably be better off separating, and the rest of the UK is buggered anyway so uh, go for it?

This is the same scenario that has played out in history time and time again, like with the American Revolutionary and Civil Wars. I guess all we can say is thank God or the Force or the Flying Spaghetti Monster that we live in an age where voting to leave a country doesn't create a war of brothers killing brothers.

[darknation]

Yeah, thank God that the separation of Ireland from the UK was such a bloodless affair.

[Fonze]

Are England and Scotland going to war with each other? No? Okay I thought so. Try deliberately misunderstanding and cheekily mocking a comment when you have ground to stand on... dumbass.

[darknation]

Enough. You don't have a clue what you are talking about and you have no grasp on history beyond the past five years. Your opinions, such as they are, are entirely US centric and you have no idea of the outer world.

I am being polite, in the vague hope that this won't be the 207th darknation shitthread.

[dew]

Fonze said:

Are England and Scotland going to war with each other? No? Okay I thought so. Try deliberately misunderstanding and cheekily mocking a comment when you have ground to stand on... dumbass.

First of all, recalling the stupid, retarded US presidential election system is no way to argue, because it famously marginalizes huge swaths of population. Second, the very idea is for Scotland to vote for independence, so they'll be able to actually see their country run according to their vote, which is famously anti-Conservative, but given their small population, very rarely swaying the vote at the national scope.

And I just have to react to your behaviour in this thread. It's actually you who is grossly misrepresenting what this debate is about, so keep the insults to yourself before you get me going. You sound grossly ignorant about the issue at hand, so delivering patronizing generalized "truths" just agitates people who ACTUALLY care about it.

[Fonze]

My point was simply that it's nice the news headline following "Scotland decides to vote to separate from UK and rejoin EU" isn't immediately followed by a headline reading "England declares war on Scotland (or more likely 'England dispatches army to deal with rebelion'); Scottish rebels strike back." Similar in a small way with brexit not starting a war between the UK and the nations of the EU upset with the economic hit they will take (at least to my limited knowledge, granted). A hundred years ago attempting to leave a country would have resulted in war. World War 1 was started for a similar reason, with the Serbian rebels striking back at an oppressive Austrian govt that wasn't their own, yet ruling over them, by assassinating its leader. I'm sure that wasn't their first choice of action. Of course we can take a look at recent antics between Russia and Ukraine over Ukraine's separation from Russia (Putin wants it back) to say that it's not so much about the day we live in so much as how we have evolved as nations to not want to kill our brothers and sisters. But when vast quantities of land and resources come into play, it's not hard to understand how war erupts.

That said, it is impossible to predict the future, but I hope that the vote in Scotland doesn't erupt in a war or bloodshed with England. As for the slant of my own views, people complaining about govt without representation is an occurance in every govt ever, doesn't matter if you live in 'Murca or not.

There was an old thing from my classes of history, something about how amazing peaceful transitions of power are between highly principled rivals in bitter elections. This link is close enough:

https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-verizon&ei=JpMCWNK8GsyoerzOhZgO&q=peaceful+revolution+of+1800&oq=peacefu+revolution&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.1.0i7i30k1l5.8201.12690.0.13762.16.12.1.0.0.0.371.2618.0j4j5j2.11.0....0...1c.1j4.64.mobile-gws-serp..9.7.1236...0j0i67k1j0i20k1.71gzLqjGpmU

We can get into a debate about systems of govt elsewhere dewsey :)

[The Ultimate DooMer]

That's a very dismissive argument. The "powers" the EU "takes away" are a much smaller subset than what Scotland concedes to London, that's pretty obvious even at a glance.

Maybe the difference is "Independent country that is a member state of the EU", v.s "Glorified appendix to England."

For now at least...depends on how things go with ever-closer union etc.

Or to put it another way, just once in my lifetime, I'd like to be able to vote and have my vote mean something. Rather than being told thanks for my input, but you're getting brexit and Tories and fascist fuckwits anyway.

That pretty much sums up the electoral system for most of us. I live in a safe Labour seat, so my vote means nothing. I was actually hoping for another coalition of some kind (as it seemed the least harmful outcome) but now a majority is in place with some rigging of boundaries and cutting of MP's etc. planned to make it bigger, this country is screwed regardless of the EU result.

[Tristan]

Fonze said:

As for the slant of my own views, people complaining about govt without representation is an occurance in every govt ever, doesn't matter if you live in 'Murca or not.

Individual votes count for more in smaller populations, so this would be a much lesser issue for Scotland if they went independent.
That also means America with its hundreds of millions of people is one of the worst countries for this sort of thing.

[Mordeth]

From a selfish EU point of view, Scotland should not be grandfathered in the EU after gaining its independence from the UK but rather apply for membership on its own steam.

Reason for this is that Scotland's economy is very reliant on oil and the UK's support. They still need to diversify their economy, badly. Grandfathering Scotland in the EU means peeps are going to compare Scotland's economic well-being between being part of the UK plus EU versus not being part of the UK but part of the EU. Depending on oil and UK trade, that's probably not going to result in a net positive effect. However, comparing a Scotland outside both UK and EU versus a Scotland outside the UK but inside the EU is bound to be favorable. This also forces Scotland to really make work of diversifying its economy in order to be accepted as a new EU member, plus creates precedence for other would-be break-away regions.

Also, fuck winner-takes-all voting schemes.

[Fonze]

Eris Falling said:

Individual votes count for more in smaller populations, so this would be a much lesser issue for Scotland if they went independent.
That also means America with its hundreds of millions of people is one of the worst countries for this sort of thing.

Of course it would. Problem is most countries are made up of states and regions, thus at some point when a country is large enough, the problem will always erupt of region 1 receiving more power and say in the govt than region 2. With an independent Scotland, who's to say folk in rural regions won't continue to complain when disagreements with people in cities within the govt always end with the denser regions getting their way, simply due to having a majority of the vote? At what point would the madness end? How could you, if you were to found a country, ever hope to weigh equally (in the real world) a small region with a large one, or a sparsely populated region with a dense one? There will always be flaws and in the end you see this as the result: region 2 wants to split from region(s) 1-x because they are not represented fairly/properly.

As for your point number 2, that's why America's congress is set up the way it is: to give equal power to small and large states alike. Problems abound here but they are no different in their purest form to anywhere else. Perhaps the problem isn't having a govt, but living with other people, heh. But that's precisely why you don't centralize too much power in one (figurative) location.

[Arctangent]

Of course, when you either get guys from one group that hates the other group, or guys from another group that hates the other group, it's really hard to say that any states actually get any power besides sending a bunch of people in a room to yell at each other and faff about.

And, of course, if they actually agree on something, the president can just slap it away and send it back. And when they change it and send it to him again, they can just slap it away and send it back again. And again. And again. And really there's no wonder why there're so many issues with actually getting anything done in this country huh.

[Fonze]

Well aside from routes around a presidential veto, that's about accurate. But better for progress to be slow in any direction than quick in the wrong direction. Especially when that progress could affect your entire life and all that you have; your worth.

Back on topic, I do wish the absolute best to everybody who will be affected by the vote, no matter how it goes. This is something both interesting and important; worth keeping an eye on.

[dew]

Mordeth said:

From a selfish EU point of view, Scotland should not be grandfathered in the EU after gaining its independence from the UK but rather apply for membership on its own steam.

Reason for this is that Scotland's economy is very reliant on oil and the UK's support. They still need to diversify their economy, badly. Grandfathering Scotland in the EU means peeps are going to compare Scotland's economic well-being between being part of the UK plus EU versus not being part of the UK but part of the EU. Depending on oil and UK trade, that's probably not going to result in a net positive effect. However, comparing a Scotland outside both UK and EU versus a Scotland outside the UK but inside the EU is bound to be favorable. This also forces Scotland to really make work of diversifying its economy in order to be accepted as a new EU member, plus creates precedence for other would-be break-away regions.

Interesting point. I don't think full grandfathering would be possible anyway, because there's no way other countries would let Scotland keep the hyper-aggressive, system-twisting advantages and exceptions the UK has accumulated over the decades. They'd get the same deal as anyone else, most probably including the obligation to adopt the Euro eventually. Renegotiating all the deals would then take time, as Brexiteers only now realize in shock.

Furthermore Spain is committed to making Scotland undergo the candidacy process for selfish reasons. It's an inward threat to Catalonia which fosters its own desire for independence and the current Spanish PM does a really good job at agitating them further. Although there's a "slight" difference, because Catalonia is the richest region of Spain and the most compelling reasons for them to stay are, um, shared history and keeping Barcelona in the Spanish league I guess? Heh.

Still I think the candidacy process would be really short and the country would be quickly railroaded in, sort of like the EU wanted to do with Iceland when they briefly considered joining after the 2008 crash. The country does fulfill all the necessary criteria and they'd be far from the poorest EU country. One of the scare arguments in the independence counter-campaign was that with their pitiful GDP they wouldn't make it out of the door without redistributed English taxes, but that's what us Czechs used to mockingly say about the Slovaks as well and they only benefited from standing on their own feet. And look, no war erupted either, except in the hockey stadiums! Scotland would probably rake in a lot of money from the EU cohesion funds, East Europe leeches-style.

[darknation]

Adopting the Euro is, at this point, a no-brainer anyway. The British pound is going to be worth about the same as a US dollar in about 4 years time. My main concern with adopting the Euro is that we should do it as soon as possible to get the best possible conversion rate.

As for grandfathering... Well, it honestly never occurred to me that we'd get preferential treatment. All I expected was the same deal everyone else gets. The only thing I can see as being an exceptional case is if we have independence before Britain actually leaves the EU. Then the debate comes down to "Was Scotland actually a country in it's own right, and was always in the EU, or was it just a region of Britain and now technically an entirely new country?"

[Gez]

IMO Scotland should declare independence, get in the EU, and then get all the cohesion funds that previously went to Poland but that they don't deserve to keep because all they do with that money is just give it directly to Uncle Sam.

[DooMAD]

darknation said:

The British pound is going to be worth about the same as a US dollar in about 4 years time.

You're more optimistic than I am, then. Never thought I'd see that day. :D

I'm suspecting closer to, or less than, the CAD/AUD/NZD dollar.