Categories
Given the proximity of the Scottish Parliament elections Johnson’s devolution comments might not be
Given the proximity of the Scottish Parliament elections Johnson’s devolution comments might not be wise – politicalbetting.com
Boris Johnson working hard to boost Scottish Tories in next May's Holyrood election – NOThttps://t.co/1Ic50l1bo2
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Scottish Independence is highly analogous to Brexit. It would be, in the short term, an economic and political catastrophe.
Sure, in the longer term Scotland would survive and thrive, just as Ireland has. The question is whether it is “worth” the 30-50 year wait.
I can see the appeal, especially since Brexit and the rise of a parochialism, corruption, and incompetence at Westminster.
But frankly, I’ve had enough of those who think splitting off is the answer to every ill. We need more coming together and less division.
But sometimes it is the right answer. The trick is to distinguish one from the other, and to argue persuasively to that middle third for whom the answer is not obvious, one way or the other.
*Yes, I know. It's not a shock. Just a lamentable habit of underwhelming incompetence.
But here we are with utter chaos ensuing and a lot more imminent. With a UK government largely telling Scotland to stick it. It has single-handedly made independence not just an idea that needs to be revisted but should be actively pursued by many people who voted No last time.
And you are a free, independent libertarian minded thinker. You don’t have to be a wrong headed Tory troll on this too.
Watch the Tories in the commons, every other sentence regardless of topic is “the differential here is we are the only party of the union who will protect the union”.
But they are the same people, proudly singing British patriotic songs in the commons who have taught us the first rule of brexit. Nations need to keep their identity, their culture, their democracy, their sovereignty, and where these are smothered by any union with other nations, with so much surrender of your democracy and sovereignty into the pool, so some far away government, with partisan policy agenda spoken in a language other than your own, now rules over you, you vote and everything stays the same, building up your desire to take back control - something has to change.
Ignore the last indyref vote, except it’s dress rehearsal Scotnats learnt from, brexit has changed everything. To say brexit changed nothing in this regard is in denial.
Hes wrong 4
Depends 1
He is ****ing idiot' 1
He is right Philip
We don't need to "come together", we need people to look after themselves first and foremost. Splitting off into smaller but more adaptable units is better for that.
Division leads to competition and is a strength not a weakness.
If Ireland can exist okay out the U.K. in EU, what is the argument an independent Scotland can’t as well?
History books will show Scots got independence because of the people who not just voted for brexit, but those who didn’t yet still enabled brexit to happen without accepting they were destroying UK.
Firstly, going ahead with a brexit built on the grounds of identification with community, the perception of the local distinction, centralisation versus freedom and independence, is in fact handing the explosives and detonators to the SNP for the same repatriation of this out of Britain into Scotland. They can’t make the same reasoned argument in one place, where it suits them, and deny it in another, where it doesn’t. If there is a reasoned argument, and brexit principle’s have to stick to them.
Brexit principles point to just one honest outcome, the torys freely admit this union was always dominated by the English, their greater numbers and economic power, their distinct culture. An unequal marriage.
Because secondly, just like the question where is the democracy and subsidiarity in the EU, effectively dominated by larger nations/cultures - in the EU the North in charge, the south do what they are told – is it not the same in Britain? where Britishness has always been just a term to disguise English nationalist cultural, economic and political domination over the union?
We don't need to "come together", we need people to look after themselves first and foremost. Splitting off into smaller but more adaptable units is better for that.
Division leads to competition and is a strength not a weakness.
War is ‘competition’. That is the logical conclusion of the principle of the survival of the fittest. Those who want to live in a world riddled with conflict and division might like to reflect on Ghandi’s observation that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
No bet or tip from me yet. But now the US is done I'm starting to focus on it.
Assuming the SNP win a mandate next year it strikes me we will have a situation not dissimilar to when Johnson first started calling for a Brexit GE in 2019. The opposition and "remainer" forces then had a choice. Do they grant the election and risk losing it? Meaning game over. Or do they frustrate it? With the latter course, the hope would be that over time the impetus behind Johnson declines such that a later election is less winnable for him. The corresponding risk is that the very act of denying the election whips the public behind him all the more and the election, when it finally does come, is a slam dunk for him. Of course they ended up doing neither. Or rather a bit of both. Denied it for a few weeks. Then granted it. Then got buried.
So here we just switch the cast. Johnson calling for a snap GE = Sturgeon calling for Sindy2. Remainers fighting Johnson and Brexit = Johnson and Westminster fighting Sindy and Sturgeon.
I wonder what lessons each of them will draw?
Johnson could be right about it all being Blair's fault. If it was Blair who had called and lost the Brexit referendum. If it had been Blair who posutered until the eleventh hour to reach a post Brexit trade deal. If it had been Blair who had mismanaged Covid-19 post Lockdown 1. Yes it would all have been Blair's fault.
The UKEnglandMy avatar was assigned to me by the site, I've never given it any thought up to now and indeed had to scroll down to see what it looks like!
Shame that you always seem to defend him .
Especially , as I think you have said you believe Scotland should have another referendum on Independence.
I think Brexit makes another referendum inevitable as the last one was on the basis the UK remained in the EU.
One one hand, individuals and families are nimble and competition of ideas can strengthen everyone.
On the other, individuals and families are vulnerable to slings and arrows of life, and we're stronger together than apart.
The important questions are to do with that tradeoff, and the balance point might land in different places for different things that need to be done. In normal times, I don't want my groceries delivered as a state-standard parcel (though it was a damn good idea for vulnerable people back in the worst of The Emergency). Equally, I don't want to be personally responsible for protecting my family from the Russian Threat. Different-sized horses for different courses.
That's an argument for multiple layers of co-operation, multiple layers of government, doing things appropriate to their scale. And for boring discussion about what appropriate scales are.
But that's less fun than going on about freedom, isn't it?
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence/ian-murray-union-flag-jacket-photo-result-few-ciders-glastonbury-1375948
https://wingsoverscotland.com/we-need-to-talk-about-ian/
The Scots need to start pricing stuff in Euros now and taking both currencies so they can ditch the Pound. They will still be tied to England because they are on the same island but they would be going in the right direction of travel. Our future lies with Europe, not with Boris and Bluekip.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/17/jeremy-corbyn-labour-antisemitism-concerns-were-not-exaggerated
That's pretty well a full retraction. For once Corbyn's done the right thing.
I don't know whether it still requires a disciplinary hearing to lift his suspension, or whether David Evans can unilaterally, given that he suspended Corbyn in the first place.
Just remember this: there's a saying a man only has enough blood in his body to run his brain or his penis, but not both at the same time. The PM is unusual in that one of those organs is never off, and the other is never on.
Edited extra bit: corrected an error.
Sturgeon could open a conversation with Barnier now. To put the shits up the Johnson government...
The analysis on the other hand - perhaps those claiming he's wrong could point to superior outcomes in Scotland for Health, Education or Ferry building, for example?
All of them devolved.
All of them "closer to the people".
All of them better outcomes?
Pointing out the problems with leaving or why devolution is not optimal are not really making the substantive positive arguments. It’s the same issue as bedevilled the pro-Remain side in the Brexit debate.
It has just given a platform for grievance and worse, widened the gap in the methods of governance between different parts of the UK.
Unfortunately for Boris, it is a one way ratchet, and impossible to reverse, so criticising it gets you nowhere. The only solution is to come up with a plan for the whole UK.
The other variable to condier when betting is legal. That side hasn't been worked through yet, despite claims. Scots Law is not the same as English. We've seen that over the rorogation of Parliament. The shock in some elements in PB and the Tory Party was palpable at the very idea that the two systems (and NIrish law) had the same status. And Mr J is being reported as wanting to shut down the Supreme Court. Where does that leave the arbitration except by acts of the Westminster Pmt - which is the entire point at issue?
https://twitter.com/Damian_Barr/status/1328643561273892864?s=20
And crap with it which is worse.
The big similarity imo is in the top level political dynamic. You have somebody calling for an early public vote on something they think they will win. And you have those fearing and opposing that outcome with the choice of going for it and joining battle, or denying the vote and hoping the impetus falls way but taking the risk that the opposite happens - that a denial of Sindy only fuels the desire for it.
It's not where I would want to go but it seems inevitable at this point in time. It's independence in all but name with Westminster holding defence, trade and foreign policy in reserve.
A telling typo.
The big problem for Tories is that the nationalists are playing from the very same divisive playbook that Brexiteers did. Brexiteers and nationalists are rotten peas in the same nasty pod.
And if the Scots and English electorates have differing views on foreign policy and trade then what purpose does it serve to keep these united in Westminster?
Anas Sarwar, the party’s constitutional affairs spokesperson:
"Boris Johnson has been a disaster, not devolution.
The truth is he and his party are now the biggest threat to the United Kingdom.
The Scottish parliament is one of Labour’s greatest achievements. In the face of attacks on devolution from the Tories and the SNP, Labour will always be devolution’s greatest defender."
Quite something that the Tories are seen as less Unionist than the SNP ...
See also Brexit, Tories.
Then a federal system could have worked.
However brexit and tory dominance creating the UK to leave the EU, has now made Scottish Independence inevitable.
It seems to me many English conservatives would be happy to see the end of the union , so that they can rule England forever.
The desire for Scottish independence, however, rose significantly after (and due to) devolution.
The reason for this is that it'll be a cross-party platform, and I think Murray's record of solid SNP-proof re-elections in leafy Morningside will make him acceptable to the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, and the fact that he's Labour will put him onside with most of Labour. The Corbynite wing will have a problem, but I don't see them as being the most keen on fighting hard against independence, so even they might shrug their shoulders rather than fight it.
The danger for the unionist side is if they can't agree on a single campaign/approach. That is a very, very real possibility given how this government is acting. The sense of "spending Tory pounds to win Labour votes" is in the bin, so there'll be some nerves on the Labour side about jumping into bed with Conservatives again.
The Lib Dems will go along with anything, I feel. Their Scottish contingent are powerfully weird. And the last lot to think about would be the Brexit/Ukip fringe in Scotland, who would probably, by mutual agreement, just do their own thing. I hope they don't get any MAGA pretensions and organise far-right tiki-torch marches, but it could happen.
Lastly, someone to keep an eye on in all this is the Shadow Chancellor. She could be a secret weapon in all this. She won't front it, being a resident of England these days, but if anyone is going to get on a train and go north and make a positive impact on the unionist side, it'll be her.