Jump to content

Recommended Posts

But to answer the question, my answer is NO to independence. And most Scot's feel the same. The SNP have yet to have more than about a 35% of the population as a "Yes" in past public opinion polls. The best thing Cameron did was to force the SNP's hand with an earlier referendum than the SNP had planned. They have a long way to go to convince >50% of the population. Basically, it wont happen and this is a political side show that's wasting a load of time and money that could be spent by everyone on stuff that is likely to happen in the real world.

Add in Paxman and his "armoured train" loaded with 8% of the BofE gold reserve heading north etc. (actually add in the regular cliff faces of self-regard clashing as 'ec crosses swords with Paxo)


What's been, er, annoying about these "entertainments" is the exploitation of the cultural cringe factor, the playing on the sense that of course the poor old Scots couldn't handle the responsibilities of independence. Paxman and his eyebrows would make me want to vote yes (if I had a vote) just to stick it up that patrician disregard.


But overall, appeals to nationalism...too ugly, too late. Appeals to democratic accountability...yes of course. It all depends what you define as the relevant unit of population/nationhood, which I think is eventually a gut/heart decision.


Another thing. Say Labour does lose its block of Scottish MPs from Westminster, even as part of some sort of Devo Max arrangement. It looks like you then get a permanent English Tory majority, but given that possibility maybe we would see some re-balancing of party politics within England? Pipedream for a Friday lunchtime, obviously.

I thought Gordon sold of all the gold reserve :)


Ted Max Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Add in Paxman and his "armoured train" loaded with

> 8% of the BofE gold reserve heading north etc.

> (actually add in the regular cliff faces of

> self-regard clashing as 'ec crosses swords with

> Paxo)

>

> What's been, er, annoying about these

> "entertainments" is the exploitation of the

> cultural cringe factor, the playing on the sense

> that of course the poor old Scots couldn't handle

> the responsibilities of independence. Paxman and

> his eyebrows would make me want to vote yes (if I

> had a vote) just to stick it up that patrician

> disregard.

>

> But overall, appeals to nationalism...too ugly,

> too late. Appeals to democratic

> accountability...yes of course. It all depends

> what you define as the relevant unit of

> population/nationhood, which I think is eventually

> a gut/heart decision.

>

> Another thing. Say Labour does lose its block of

> Scottish MPs from Westminster, even as part of

> some sort of Devo Max arrangement. It looks like

> you then get a permanent English Tory majority,

> but given that possibility maybe we would see some

> re-balancing of party politics within England?

> Pipedream for a Friday lunchtime, obviously.

yeah the attractions of SNP, nationalism and the rest of it sit uneasy with me, but so do the counter-arguments amounting to "Scotland wouldn't cope"


I'm sure same was said about Ireland in all the years before independance (and it's current economic woes hardly make it unique)

If the scots take the debts of the RBS (run almost exclusively by a Scottish banker mafia) and the Bank of Scotland debts of HBOS (and the Bank of Scotland was largely responsible for HBOS toxic corporate loan book that nearly sunk Lloyyds) then I'm all in favour; altenatively if the SNP and large numbers of other Scottish people could stop blaming London and 'The City' for all their woes and TAKE SOOME FOOKING RESPONSIBILITY they can stay.


Numbers, Mr Ben, Snorky and The BarryBarry boys can all stay on licence as I'm very fond of them all.

I don't understand this.


???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>if the SNP and

> large numbers of other Scottish people could stop

> blaming London and 'The City' for all their woes

> and TAKE SOOME FOOKING RESPONSIBILITY they can

> stay.

>

>

That bit where the chap seemed to think that scotch types get spat on as they come off the train at padington/kings cross was a bit jarring wasn't it.

He might actually want to find out about English attitudes to the Scots before voting yay or nay on a ludicrous supposition of large scale racism.


That aside, of Galloway he is occasionally right even when his reasons for being right are wrong, stopped clock and all that. It is awful these days though, except when Will Self (who's often wrong even when his reasons for being wrong are right) or Ian Hislop are on.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Or increase tax.  The freezing of personal allowances is one way, not what I would choose.  On principle I don't care if the rich immigrate.  The main parties could have been more honest before the election.  Reform is deluded.
    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...