Scottish Independence.....

Yes, the Union is broken because a handful of politicians crossed an imaginary border.

Do you really believe this tosh, Warbler? Most of your posts on this subject have a bit of the "People's Poet" about them. You need to move out of the 80's.
 
Last edited:
I think when the leaders of the main parties of this country who profess their undying commitment to the union, and are asking us to believe how passionately they'll defend it to the last, get called out by the Deputy Leader of the Scottish Nationalists then yeah, there's an issue.

The British Prime Minister should have a sufficient command of the brief with the army of civil servants and parliamentay researchers plus privilege access to information he has to demolish Nicola Sturgeon, and when the leader of the British Labour party is too scared to face her as well then its a crumbling political class, yes I believe this is just another symptom, but then I don't think we really need them anyway. As for sending 'Lords' up to Rutherglen to campaign for a British football attack against our common enemy, the German's, for crying out loud, is this the best defence they can mount?

I should say though, that I'm detecting an increase in support now for Clive's (poorly denied position). There's been a palpable pick up in the '**** off and go then' sentiment in the last 2-3 days. I'm sure the Scots will discover in the medium term that they haven't been living in El Dorado denied, and they aren't half as wealthy (aka Switzerland) as Alex Salmond is trying to convince them they are. An oil rich emirate they aren't

FWIW I expect the Yes campaign could easily fall apart in the final few days and I wouldn't be shocked to see it nudging 40% come the count.

You've got Standard Life saying they'll move today, Lloyds saying they'll do so as well, and tomorrow it looks like RBS will announce they're leaving Edinburgh for London in the event of a yes vote
 
The London Three are on a hiding to nothing if they engage with Nick-Nack, because her tactic will be to invite them into debate, only to play the "What the fu*ck has it got to do with you anyway?" card as soon as it isn't going her way.

Swerving her is not only good for the eyes, it makes perfect political sense. They're being shrewd, not afraid.
 
The Clegg / Farage example was one that did occur to me in truth.

I do think there are other forces at play here though which the Unionists won't be able to resist over the longer term. Scotland is on its way to independence, albeit not this time round.

It's been a trend now for well over 100 years

At the start of the last century I think there were 98 sovereign countries in the world. By the end of it there were something like 250 dependent on whether you use FIFA or the UN lists

Scotland is a prime candidate (as is London) to become its own separate socio-political-economic unit

I invoked the spirit of she who can not be named earlier, only to be told by he who shouldn't be ackowledged either, that it was too simplistic. Personally I think the poll tax was the watershed moment and you can clearly see how the Scottish vote has performed since. Whatever Clive might like to think, the figures don't really support him

Year....seats..% of vote

1955....36....50.1% (remarkable that 60 years ago the Tories were Scotlands party)
1964....24....40.6% (the vote dips from a very high point, but it's still in line with the national share)
1970....23....38% (she enters parliament but the Tories hold their '60's position)
1979....22....31.4% (the share drops but as yet this hasn't translated into lost seats - vaguaries of FPTP)
1987....10....24% (Thatch has lost them 12 seats but only about 7% of the vote)
1997....0......17.5% (the poll tax was the last straw, albeit this was a highwater mark in line with the Blair landslide)

The critical thing is that unlike some parts of the country where the Tories rebounded, they haven't in Scotland

in 2001, and 2005 they mustered just a single seat, and even in Labour's 2010 wipe out, they still got the one seat on a vote that has fluctuated between 15.6% and 17.5% during this 17 year period. That's more than a direction of travel

This period has coincided however with the rest of Europe and the western world (the UK being no exception) veering ever more towards the right

Icons of 80's neo liberlisam like Thatcher and Reagan would look very different today. Thatcher would be a UKIP supporter and Reagan wouldn't get a republican nomination because of his failure to engage the religious right.

Can you honestly say you see this trend reversing? I can't, albeit common sense suggests there has to reach a point whereby we can't continue going ever further right before we fall off. Put simply Scotland is on an incompatiable trajectory having reinvented itself with a different set of morals (imaginary or real)

Centralised governments have increasingly been losing legitimacy the world over as more autonomous regions start to assert their independence based on a combination of identity and economics. Is it really so radical though? Not really. In the 15th and 16th century the idea of the city state was pretty well established and many of them prospered. Actually with supreme irony one of the original ones (Venice) laid down a marker a few months ago when holding a referendum to break away from Italy

There has been another trend to exacerbate this, and that concerns polarisation and acquisitive capital greed. The world has always been divided amongst haves and have nots, but the gap between rich and poor widens. Justifying greed has always been an intellectual challenge of the right, but sooner or later they won't even try to. They'll simply say we aren't going to support his any more and the uber rich will bring away

In Europe we see it between north and south, but also within countries. Barcelona as a city state or capital of Catalonia is an obvious candidate. Italy as I've already suggested has a tradition as well as all the other tensions running through their economic divide. Verona, Milan, Turin, and Venice were all successful. Even Naples and Rome were.

The splitting in two of Czech Republic and Slovakia has received plenty of coverage, but let's not forget that both the Dutch and Belgains sit on such a fracture line too that is gaining traction. The Bretons in France are another one. How long can the EU continue in its current form? It's lookign increasingly anacronistic

Now all of this is probably second half of the century stuff, but as major cities elect mayors and managed economic development programmes to compete for and attract talent, they'll start to pull away from the provinces ever further. How much longer is London or Paris going to be happy subsidising the rest of the UK and France? As Stephanie Flanders described it a few years ago London is "a world class enterpreneurial city, bolted onto a useless country"

The final nail in this coffin I think concerns the increasing subserviant acquiessence of national government to the role of commentators on the narrative. They aren't conviction politicians with the big ideas any longer, but administrators immersed in the straight jacket of managerialism. The institution of elected democracy is changing. Less and less people vote because they simply don't see the point. Cynicism about our bent and bankrupt political classes is at an all time high in the last 5 years, and I don't see that changing. The jeanie is out the bottle. People don't believe in them anymore. Advances in interrogative technologies give them fewer and fewer places to hide. The notion that corporations own governments used to be sneered at as the deluded mind of the conspiracy theorists. No one thinks that anymore. Our political classes are a festering ember of the age of structure but those structures are fractured. We don't need them, nor the false polemics that sustain their existance within the confines of managed dissention masquerading as choice and freedom. Accepting them is little more than the freedom to conform. They're decadent and degenerate, and although they'll have a few twists in them yet from postal voting, to under 16's and heaven knows a few more gimmicks to entice people to endorse their legitimacy, people will eventually turn to other quasi rulers who will provide for them

Scotland (or its nationalists at least) are trying to swim against an ever rising tide. Another scrap will be thrown from the table with devo max, but all that will do is encourage the snapping dog to yelp for more in the medium term. With devo max the people can return a nationalist government at will now and affect the change as when they feel emboldened to do so, or when they feel that the English rightist lerch has become so entrenched they no longer wish to be part of it
 
Last edited:
The impression I get is Alex Salmond puts Alex Salmond first and Scotland second. He evades answering crucial questions and is so hell bent on Independance he is willing to lead the Scottish people though a very dangerous maze without a map or the proper protection.

I assume should the ballots return a winning Yes vote Salmond will become the all powerful Prime Minister of Scotland and go down in history.

On the other hand you have Alastair Darling who come across as far more intelligent and someone who really fears for Scotland's future if the vote go the wrong way.
He may have been born in London but is no stranger to Scotland. He was educated in Fife then finished his education in Aberdeen University and is married to a real live Teuchter in Anna MacLean,

Alastair Darling has much less to gain personally by saying "vote No" but is fighting hard to try and explain the reasons why but Salmond simply won't go there.

Salmond bases everything on inflated oil revenue figures that have always been much less than predicted...........when the real figures prove to be a mile off those predicted what happens to all his promises then?

He blatantly lies to the public when he makes out that Scotland using the pound as currency is a matter of course....a pound controlled by the bank of England..there's more traps in that than there was in the jungle the Vietnam war, Yet Alex Salmond is willing to lead us through the jungle with no plan of escape should we need to U turn.

I'd want a lot more assurances than Salmond can give or even willing to consider before I would vote for independence.
 
Last edited:
Independence seems a frighteningly big step into the unknown.

I'm feel sure I would be voting NO if we were ever given the option in Wales.
 
Last edited:
An increasingly disturbing trend as voting day approaches is the mob-gangster tactics of the Yes campaign.

Any time a no campaigner takes to the streets, they are surrounded by highly vocal Yes people who try to shout them down and thrust their Yes placards in front of the No ones. Only last week or so Jim Murphy was assaulted while trying to make the case for No.

It's one step shy of the scenes in Mr Deeds Goes To Washington in which the gangsters' response gradually escalates to violence in their attempts to silence the majority.

It's looking like if Salmond doesn't get his way he will resort to some other tactic.
 
Last edited:
Independence seems a frighteningly big step into the unknown.

I'm feel sure I would be voting NO if we were ever given the option in Wales.

Wales hasn't got the population of an English region (north east aside) nor the economic base. Throw in other factors like its appalling education performance and the figures would ensure that Yes campaigns stronghold would be a small pub in Harlech.

If Scotland does go independent (which it won't this time round) then longer term I'd expect the next wave of pressure to come from other end of the spectrum

London & the Home Counties
Cornwall (unable to carry the rest of the South West)
The North of England (borders) to possibly join Scotland
The English Northern cities (Leeds, Manch, Sheffield - whereas Liverpool can merge with Belfast!)

This kind of thing is a long way off though

The only pressure I could see mounting is for the London/ Home Counties. I was thinking about this trend towards more devolution and a greater number of smaller countries that the world is seeing, and decided that it wasn't geographic in so far as big countries with what looks like an unmanageable land mass can be held together. It seems that population density, economic inequality, and a sense of identity were more important drivers
 
I should say though, that I'm detecting an increase in support now for Clive's (poorly denied position).
You now as well. I didnt bother responding to the somewhat tiresome trolling earlier in the thread

All I did was point out the stupidity of the "ruled from england" argument. One which can be very easily demolished

I strongly believe in the union. The nations have far more in common that they often believe. A pointless border is no good to anyone. A economically fcked Scotland is no good for England (Credit Suisse report on what Scotland will let themselves in for yesterday is alarming)

As a nation we are bloody successful.
 
Last edited:
Wales hasn't got the population of an English region (north east aside) nor the economic base. Throw in other factors like its appalling education performance and the figures would ensure that Yes campaigns stronghold would be a small pub in Harlech.

If Scotland does go independent (which it won't this time round) then longer term I'd expect the next wave of pressure to come from other end of the spectrum

London & the Home Counties
Cornwall (unable to carry the rest of the South West)
The North of England (borders) to possibly join Scotland
The English Northern cities (Leeds, Manch, Sheffield - whereas Liverpool can merge with Belfast!)

This kind of thing is a long way off though

The only pressure I could see mounting is for the London/ Home Counties. I was thinking about this trend towards more devolution and a greater number of smaller countries that the world is seeing, and decided that it wasn't geographic in so far as big countries with what looks like an unmanageable land mass can be held together. It seems that population density, economic inequality, and a sense of identity were more important drivers

If they stopped that bloody singing they would stand a chance

Frankly i do not for one minute believe that the regions want more layers of government. What for?

It could be easy to argue that London could go it alone. We would be absolutely minted (highest GDP of any city in world bar Oslo) but no one seriously wants considers that

Or more layers of overpaid fat lazy 10- 4 over-pensioned bureaucrats who contribute absolutely fck all

Despite moans, the british know in their heart of hearts this is a good place to be and it works. The british also have a healthy scepticism of more government for the sake of government
 
Last edited:
It wouldn't be another layer though would it? I don't think you're understanding the dynamics involved. Nor is it going to happen next week, next year, or during the next decade. I can see it being possible towards the end of this century.

As I've said, the trend for the last 125 years has been towards more countries, and in this case it would be a return to the concept of the trading city state, something which Kuala Lumpar and Hong Kong are perhaps the closest to being. As more cities start to recognise they would be better off dropping their regions and becoming independent trading units the trend will evolve

The only thing that the legitimises government is organising the defence of these economic engines but to do that they need to start wars. Even then though we could easily find that the mega rich corporations will buy in their own private armies to defend their wealth. It's not that far removed from the power brokers of medieval England who the king would have to turn to for support if he needed men at arms. In some cases the worlds largest corporations flirt dangerously close to having their own army in partnership with state as it is, Shell is one that comes to mind, and if you go back in history a bit the East India Company was perhaps the first example.
 
I dont believe that London feels "dragged down" by the regions. I recently posted this on my blog

http://cpcmcredit.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/britains-boom-cities/

There are black spots throughout the country of course but even beyond the bigger cities, places like Cambridge are world class centres.

Ive been doing business in Manchester recently and there is a real buzz there. Lot of talk that liverpool is also transforming

If we maintain growth levels of 3% no one will be complaining

And one last thing... a small indicator but often the street level ones are the clearest. ...

It seems like every other shop in London is advertising for staff at the moment. There is a genuine labour shortage
 
Last edited:
The idea that corporations own "governments" is too far fetched. They cannot really be bothered. In fact with the easy footloose shifting of headquarters and manufacturing bases, there is less requirement for any corporation to influence any particular administration than at any previous time. They can just move on

Frankly the economic system that businesses thrive in is not under threat at all. (Venezuela ??? ) and frankly they have better things to do
 
The London Three are on a hiding to nothing if they engage with Nick-Nack, because her tactic will be to invite them into debate, only to play the "What the fu*ck has it got to do with you anyway?" card as soon as it isn't going her way.

Swerving her is not only good for the eyes, it makes perfect political sense. They're being shrewd, not afraid.


I note with a mild smile, that Sturgeon has chickened out of a head to head with George Galloway, which probably makes him the highest life form in the whole arena then?
 
I think Sturgeon's made a mistake there. The very last thing the No campaign would want is a George Galloway association. She should take him on, and insist on prime time viewing!
 
Nick-Nack would be subjected to an intellectual and oratorial filletting by Gorgeous Georgie. She is also swerving a fight she cannot win.
 
Oh he's well read in Marxist Leninism and quite prepared to slip into dialectics she might be less comfortable with, but by the same token, many of these would drive him into her camp. I'm not sure he'd be totally comfortable arguing for the imperialist yoke

Perhaps Salmond could take it and they'd both end up mocking the no shows. If Salmond could hold his own, (which he should be able to) then the fact that Galloway came forward as the voice of the union has to be damaging to the feel good factor about BT
 
All this talk of Salmond and Sturgeon.

Makes me want to dust down some of my fish jokes.

What do you call a haddock in a tie? Sofishticated.
What did the blind man say when he passed the fish market? Good morning, ladies.
What do you call a fish with no eyes? Fsh.
How do you stop a fish from smelling? Cut off his nose.
 
Oh he's well read in Marxist Leninism and quite prepared to slip into dialectics she might be less comfortable with, but by the same token, many of these would drive him into her camp. I'm not sure he'd be totally comfortable arguing for the imperialist yoke

Perhaps Salmond could take it and they'd both end up mocking the no shows. If Salmond could hold his own, (which he should be able to) then the fact that Galloway came forward as the voice of the union has to be damaging to the feel good factor about BT

He wont share a platform with jews and she understandably wouldnt want to share a platform (or be within a mile of) a supporter of rape

Im with her on this one.
 
Last edited:
Odds have swung significantly back towards No's today

Ladbrokes going 1/4
 
Last edited:
Oh he's well read in Marxist Leninism and quite prepared to slip into dialectics she might be less comfortable with, but by the same token, many of these would drive him into her camp. I'm not sure he'd be totally comfortable arguing for the imperialist yoke

Perhaps Salmond could take it and they'd both end up mocking the no shows. If Salmond could hold his own, (which he should be able to) then the fact that Galloway came forward as the voice of the union has to be damaging to the feel good factor about BT

Gorgeous George may hold many odious positions, but he is a force-of-nature in these types of debates. As it happens, Sturgeon has decided to put in an appearance after all. Should be proper order viewing.
 
Back
Top