Scottish Nationalism

[Adeste Fideles]

Lianachan,
You want a Unionist argument devoid of all emotional content:
A list:

a) Standard Life. on the whole, its the English/Welsh pensioners that pay the Scottish Standard Life assurance/insurance workers their wages - and its the Scottish finance worker who gives the English/Welsh really good investment advice.
b) Scottish Widows. Ditto
c) Aviva - Perth. Ditto
d) AEGON (Scottish Equitable) - Edinbugh. Ditto.
A seperate state needs either a seperate currency or the EURO. Both will mean getting a pension from a Scottish based pensions company will be too risky (its the reason people, on the whole don't have French or German pensions - the curreny fluctuation risk is too great).

Suppose you're a Scottish person in a post seperate Scotland which no longer had the British pound and you wanted to buy some shares in an Oil Company. A Scot investing in oil! The LSE FTSE 100 etc is all based on British pounds. You as a Scottish small investor would have the extra risk of currency fluctuations that the English/Welsh person does not have. you will be at a disadvantage.

Now since the majority of jobs in and around Edinbugh are in financial services its potentially possible that all these jobs could be lost in any seperatist split because they are linked to the finance industry in London. Yes Scotland could try to be a new Switzerland but is there room for two?

Now lets move on to west coast.The SNP has already said it does not want Trident. Thus the thousands employed in the Greenock area servicing the subs will be lost. On top of this, Rolls Royce employees about 2000 in Renfrewshire and on the coast. One suspects without the Royal Navy in Scotland there might be less reason for Rolls to continue to stay in Scotland - it would have lost its main local customer. I guess this also goes for the remaining naval ship yards.

Then lets switch back to the currency. Its possible the British pound could collapse without the "oil" link and the Scottish pound go into orbit. Not sure of the consequences of this but sounds like it could be dire for Scottish manufacturing and for English pensioners.

Then there is the Northern Ireland Scots - the extra instability caused by the seperation might actually help spark more troubles - its part of the equation that looks, on paper, to be messy.

Scottish nationalists often point to the Nordic countries (I lived in Finland for a year so I do know a wee bit about it). There actually is a Nordic "council" - Even in Helsinki street signs are in Swedish and Finnish. The Danes have built that fantastic bridge to Sweden. There is a great deal of economic and political Union between the nordic nations. They are not as political seperate as say the UK is to Ireland. And for the young person who started this link I am aware of the Benelux 'Parliament' too (Belgium, Holland and Luxenburg).

Both Benelux and Nordic Council nations do appear to appreciate the political and economic benefits of political unions as well as keeping their seperate identities.

so it would be nice to have an "Council for the Islands" - Scotland, Wales, England, Ireland and Iceland..... But will it happen? I doubt it.

I reiterate, I have nothing against Scottish (or Welsh, or English, or Cornish, or Brittany, or Wessex) nationalism provided it does not hurt the common good. People used to say if Wessex became independent it would be the richest nation on earth - but the price would be their soul (sorry emotional argument).

England as a whole, like non-Wessex, gets the advanages of the union by being able to share the oil wealth. It has kept us proped up since about 1980. thats the economic argument stripped of emotion. But being married into a Scottish family I think the emotional unionist argument also is important and should not be down played - its just as emotional for unionists as it is for braveheart fans..

Here is a link to a big Nordic wish to create a country like the UK:
(link broken up so as not to offend this sites rules)
"http:"//"euobserver.com/886/31188

[Saorsa1]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Adeste Fideles

Saorsa1,
your counter arguments go no where in explaining why your nationalism is "nice".

you think the the dying man story a bit weird. Well yes, I agree, but obviously it affected me for years. Its behind my philosophy that everyone should attempt to be nice to one another and the decisions we make in life should be based on this "niceness".

It's nice to be nice but 'nice' is nothing to do with a political system as anyone will tell you.

You do know that all the pension companies in Scotland exist and employ so many scottish people because the Union allowed them access to the English/Welsh market and English/Welsh pensioners could put their money there knowing it was safe from currency fluctuatons. You do know that Scottish shipbuilding got so big up to the 1950s because English/Welsh shipowners (eg PO) bought them (now its all South Korea of course, but PO is no longer English either). The same is true of banks. the only significant real money RBS was making was out of Nat West "ordinary" customers.

Banking, assurance and insurance companies are/were/always will be international. The fact that for a while the English/Welsh chose Scottish pension companies is simply down to the individual self interest of the pensioners at that time. They weren't doing anyone any favours.

You talk about history, but I guess the most important history is ORDINARY people. Scotland, for the most part speaks English, not because it was forced to speak English, but simply because of the weight of so many anglo-saxons living there. Ancient towns like "Paisley" - ley is anglo-saxon for a "clearing in a wood". Edinburgh itself was part of the same kingdom as Newcastle in ancient times - they were still depating what was Northumbria by 1237. Since the joint monarchy started in 1603 significant parts of Scotland theorectically have been in a union for longer than they have been Scottish. Sassenach actually means "saxon" and it was first applied to the lowland living people from Glasgow to Edinbrugh - They were called Sassenach's because, lets face it, basically they were (lingustically, ethnically and culturally). the Sami, on the other hand, in the north of Norway/Sweden/Finland are a distinct "people". I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being proud of a Scottish heritage, or being nationalistic to some extent, but rather, my point is taking that nationalism "too far" but damaging the "common good".

English is spoken in : Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, Africa, the US and countless little islands; none of these peoples consider themselves British (whatever that concept means to anybody anyaway).

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about whole island nationalists and "leaving eu".... Actually there are strands of Scottish Nationalist thinking that (a) wants to leave the EU and have a oil currency as per Norway and (b) leave the EU to stop immigration. So I think you're being a tad disingenuous saying this unpleasent philosophy only occurs amongst whole island nationalists. On my very first day in Scotland (late 1989) I went in to a pub and sat down next to an old man who looked like he wanted a chat. I told him I was English. His reply was "We don't mind you coming up here but we don't want any more .......". This was in a small ordinary pub in the Edinburgh area.

There are always individuals and small groups in all political parties with a swathe of opinions but it is only in England does one hear constant Euro-phobia (since the day Westminster joined to get into the European markets).

You knock the food means culture argument, but I think you are wrong to do that. Nearly every other northern european culture is based on Pork. Russia, Finland, Poland, Germany, Denmark and Sweden. In the UK from the Outer Hebrides to the Scilly Isles its nearly always sheep - it was fundamental to our culture. In the UK parliament we have the Wool Sack - its there because in ancient times the island became "Well to do" as a result of the lamb/wool industry. My wife is currently running a market stall selling hand made cushions using Harris Tweed (only three mills left) and typically English Cath Kidson fabrics - one item even joins the two "cultures" together - the paisley pattern made-up from tiny cotton roses.

British food (with the exception of the noble haggis) is not a subject worthy of discussion. Nobody says, 'I'm going out to eat British' because lamb and mint sauce has a limited appeal. I look to the future of a nation and you look to nice tea rooms with a high tea of fish and chips as far as I can tell.

I don't think your seperatist arugments stands up. I can give an explanation why the union helps us all (you do not have to accept it). Your seperation argument does not start to explain why it helps the average person living here. I'm listening, how will it help me?

I wish to see an independent Scotland entirely broken away from Westminster politically. A proud and happy separatist indeed. Scotland cannot flourish as a nation (in so many ways) without independence

[Adeste Fideles]

Saorsa1,
you still have not given any positive arguements.
You clearly are not an economist. Do you care to tell me the number of people in the UK with a foreign currency pension or mortgage - the answer is very small. The reason the investment industry arose and thrives in Edinburgh is because of English/Welsh investors and our common currency. Sorry, but it is the truth of the matter.

Yes they do speak English in these countries you mention due to RECENT immigration. The difference is the Saxons went to the Lowlands about 1500 years ago. The distance was not like going to the other side of the world. One can see some logic for the Hawaiian sovereignty movement - extreme distances and very different cultures - neither is the case for Scotland.

you talk about English/Welsh Euro-phobia but actually the socialist left in Scotland is normally anti-EU. In England/Wales its the right - UKIP - I'd say SSP and UKIP both get about the same share of the vote and in fact, for a time the SSP had more MEPs then UKIP.

Come on Saorsa1 come up with some general reasons why its a good idea to have Scottish seperation - not some vague idealistic notions but some concrete examples as to why Scotland and England/Wales will be happier and richer due to seperation. I can't see how I will be happier or richer. I'm pretty sure I'd be very sad and probably more worried about my familys well being.

[Saorsa1]

[quote=Adeste Fideles;418335]Lianachan,
You want a Unionist argument devoid of all emotional content:
A list:

a) Standard Life. on the whole, its the English/Welsh pensioners that pay the Scottish Standard Life assurance/insurance workers their wages - and its the Scottish finance worker who gives the English/Welsh really good investment advice.
b) Scottish Widows. Ditto
c) Aviva - Perth. Ditto
d) AEGON (Scottish Equitable) - Edinbugh. Ditto.
A seperate state needs either a seperate currency or the EURO. Both will mean getting a pension from a Scottish based pensions company will be too risky (its the reason people, on the whole don't have French or German pensions - the curreny fluctuation risk is too great).

Exactly echoing what I said.

Suppose you're a Scottish person in a post seperate Scotland which no longer had the British pound and you wanted to buy some shares in an Oil Company. A Scot investing in oil! The LSE FTSE 100 etc is all based on British pounds. You as a Scottish small investor would have the extra risk of currency fluctuations that the English/Welsh person does not have. you will be at a disadvantage.

A tiny argument which the Euro does away with anyway.

Now since the majority of jobs in and around Edinbugh are in financial services its potentially possible that all these jobs could be lost in any seperatist split because they are linked to the finance industry in London. Yes Scotland could try to be a new Switzerland but is there room for two?

Nonsense, if companies are making money they stay where the profit is. You seem to think financial institutions are doing Scotland a favour or something. Newsflash, they're i it for the profit. The Edinburgh financial sector is an enormous profit engine. It's potentially true that a Scottish government may reduce business tax and thus encourage business to set up its head offices in Edinburgh and we'd gain even more than before (much more).

Now lets move on to west coast.The SNP has already said it does not want Trident. Thus the thousands employed in the Greenock area servicing the subs will be lost. On top of this, Rolls Royce employees about 2000 in Renfrewshire and on the coast. One suspects without the Royal Navy in Scotland there might be less reason for Rolls to continue to stay in Scotland - it would have lost its main local customer. I guess this also goes for the remaining naval ship yards.

Well, if you'd been reading the news, you'd have discovered that not long after Blair got into power the defence budget has been reduced to a great deal so that whether it be from a population head count or the fact that Scotland is about half the size of the British isles we've been getting screwed badly. We're many millions down because of this and the Scottish parliament is discussing it. Shame we can't just trust Westminster to do the right thing but nobody can.

Then lets switch back to the currency. Its possible the British pound could collapse without the "oil" link and the Scottish pound go into orbit. Not sure of the consequences of this but sounds like it could be dire for Scottish manufacturing and for English pensioners.

What Scottish manufacturing? we need to create some first. The Scots could just join the Euro. In any case this kind of discussion is worthy of Thatcher and her 80s muggers who said any old tosh to try and scare the Scots.

Then there is the Northern Ireland Scots - the extra instability caused by the seperation might actually help spark more troubles - its part of the equation that looks, on paper, to be messy.

A situation created by the English to which Irish republicans have a gripe with Westminster and not at all with the Scots who don't get involved, so it seems an odd thing to discuss here.

Scottish nationalists often point to the Nordic countries (I lived in Finland for a year so I do know a wee bit about it). There actually is a Nordic "council" - Even in Helsinki street signs are in Swedish and Finnish. The Danes have built that fantastic bridge to Sweden. There is a great deal of economic and political Union between the nordic nations. They are not as political seperate as say the UK is to Ireland. And for the young person who started this link I am aware of the Benelux 'Parliament' too (Belgium, Holland and Luxenburg).

Apples and oranges.

Both Benelux and Nordic Council nations do appear to appreciate the political and economic benefits of political unions as well as keeping their seperate identities.

They are actually separate countries, I don't know if you've quite twigged that.

so it would be nice to have an "Council for the Islands" - Scotland, Wales, England, Ireland and Iceland..... But will it happen? I doubt it.

Not while such a thing as political, social and economic interest exists. It does exist, so no.

I reiterate, I have nothing against Scottish (or Welsh, or English, or Cornish, or Brittany, or Wessex) nationalism provided it does not hurt the common good. People used to say if Wessex became independent it would be the richest nation on earth - but the price would be their soul (sorry emotional argument).

The point you make about Wessex simply underlines the fact that Scotland is/was/always will be a nation. Scotland had the institutions left over after the treaty of union and those things are probably the actual reason Scotland kept a national identity. Wessex was never more than a loyal lordship to the English crown and as such was never a country with separate laws, religion and education systems. Nor has Wessex or any other state in England shown the slightest desire to become independent or even devolved fom England.

England as a whole, like non-Wessex, gets the advanages of the union by being able to share the oil wealth. It has kept us proped up since about 1980. thats the economic argument stripped of emotion. But being married into a Scottish family I think the emotional unionist argument also is important and should not be down played - its just as emotional for unionists as it is for braveheart fans..

Your Brit nat emotional argument is based upon the Brits wandering around the world invading, taking over and eventually getting their unwanted assës unceremoniously kicked out of countries everywhere. Then there's the 'we fought two world wars against the hun' argument. It's arguable that the Brits contributed to starting the first world war and left conditions ready for the second world war in place at the end of WWI. Nothing to boast about, albeit the evil of Hitler had to be gotten rid of. The English kings treated their people like rubbish and executed thousands who asked for a fair deal (KH8). Not to mention the psycho king Edward the first who caused so much vile destruction of Scotland.

Your 'nice' argument that we should all sip tea together and pick up knife carrying people bleeding in public aside, the non emotional argument is weak, flawed and unconvincing.

[Lianachan]

Apart from pointing out the typing mistake (you put "Blair" instead of "Bliar"), I'd agree with all of that.

[Adeste Fideles]

Can't you HONESTLY see that I am trying to get YOU or anyone else to give me HONEST TO GOODNESS REASONS - POSITIVE REASONS - why seperation is going to be good.

You talk about English in USA, Canada etc, but miss the point entirely. As wiki says of the development of English in Scotland:


Northumbrian Old English had been established in south-eastern Scotland as far as the River Forth in the 7th century and largely remained there until the 13th century, which is why in the late 12th century Adam of Dryburgh described his locality as "in the land of the English in the Kingdom of the Scots" and why the early 13th century author of de Situ Albanie wrote that the Firth of Forth "divides the kingdoms of the Scots and of the English".

Political developments in the 12th century facilitated the spread of the English language. Institutions such as the burghs first established by David I, mostly in the south and east of Scotland, brought new communities into the areas in which they were established. Incoming burghers were mainly English (especially from Northumbria, and the Earldom of Huntingdon),


We have a common past and a common island. In order to vote for seperation you have to have POSITIVE reasons not a load of waffle and english bashing. Come on mate give me your positive argument.....

[Lianachan]

Originally Posted by Lianachan

Apart from pointing out the typing mistake (you put "Blair" instead of "Bliar"), I'd agree with all of that.

Except - I have heard talk of a wish for Cornish independence, and I know the Cornish flag and of it's language.