The Scottish Government

Ask any self-respecting individual, whether Irish,American,Norwegien,Dutch,Indian,vietnamese etc.

'Do you prefer to be master in your own house?'

The answer will surley be an emphatic 'Yes'.

The Irish kicked out the English.
The Norwegians showed Sweden the door.
The Dutch chased the Spaniards back to where they came from.
The Americans defeated the English forces at Yorktown.
Not to forget the indians who humbled the British Empire in 1947.
likewise the vietnamese who humiliated the most powerful country in the world, The USA.

Yet we scots, who built the English Empire and got little credit for doing so. Had an not insignificant role in the events leading up to the American war of independance, dither and procastinate.

439. Kev - Edinburgh
Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:29

First I lacked maturity, now I'm a racist!

Thanks for raising the intellectual tone of this debate Kev!

If you read my posts you will see I've already said I personally have no problem with Scots in the UK govt. but that’s because I'm a Unionist.

I refer to them purely as a way of suggesting that maybe the view that everything bad in Scotland is to do with not being your own masters is a little one sided.

Just to be clear for you Kev, by that I mean if Scotland provides the UK’s Prime Minister then you must have some power in the UK.

On thing (finally) you are correct on is in saying it doesn’t matter what I think as the people of Scotland will decide but surely that’s not a reason for me not to be heard?

Or maybe you think this forum should only allow posts of the same view as you?

Whether you like it or not Kev, what you & others propose for Scotland will destroy my country, Great Britain.

Name calling isn’t going to stop me arguing against that!

437. Mike King
I appreciate first that your posting wasn't racist, and was (I presume) meant more in the sense that "if Scots can't manage Britain, how can they manage Scotland!". It's a good question, though there are many would say Gordon Brown was a good chancellor for Britain, and could be a good PM for Britain also. It depends on viewpoint. It's the same question that could be posed about the Bank of England's control and recent handling of interest rates - it may be good for fighting inflation, but is it good for the economy - it may be good for some (presumably those who have), but is it good for those who have not? For me inflation is good, as it reduces the real value of debts. And interest hikes are bad as my debt, errr, sorry, borrowing, costs more to maintain!

Can Scots manage Scotland? Why not? At least the management will be relevant to Scotland in particular, rather than Britain in general.

The feeling of Britishness is an issue that will not be solved in an independent Scotland until a couple of generations have come - and passed away. Though I want independence for Scotland, I still have some pride and feeling for Britain.

Having read well over a thousand books about WWII in my more leisurely years - and a fair few about WWI particularly naval engagements - and Biggles of course, I am also of the generation that had a father and uncles that fought in the second world war, and to whose efforts I owe my freedom - freedom that I can use to want and work for further "freedom". And I would want whatever government we have for an independent Scotland to work hard for a few years to minimise the damage to Britain that withdrawal of Scotland could make.

What I would say though is that in my experience the younger generation directly down from mine has little knowledge of WWII, and less feeling in itself of being British. That wrench of independence will be less for them, though that does not neccessarily mean they would vote for it.

And with the "constitution" of the EU being sneaked through without us having a chance to say "yea" or "nay" in a referendum, increasingly I guess Westminster - and Holyrood - will become irrelevant. We will all be Europeans!?

For Mike King
In your post 426 you said nobody could explain the independence in Europe policy. Here goes, in case you hadn't noticed we are already in the EU but at the minute we have to go through London to talk/negotiate with Brussels. With independence we could cut out the middle man, clear enough for you? Oh and another thing i would prefer an EU passport that said nationality SCOTTISH, where as just now my passport says british which is something completely foreign to me.

independence will come.
devolution ;the first step
more people now in the nation are waking from the unionist lies
trying to make people doubt only proves the unionist own doubt.
when a tunnel twixt England and Europe there be
the land they call Alba
will shortly be free.

No Problem Mike(443), so what if the PM is Scottish, no mention on Iraq, nuclear weapons, Act of Settlement, 27% higher wages in England, Mike, but cause union jack Brown is Scottish that make's it alright! next point caller.

Btw britain is not yours or anyone else's country its a union of country's and at the moment your country is taking more from mine than it puts back, so I suppose your understandable happy to keep this unfair undemocratic union going, not sure what Criag Cook (441) agenda is in keeping the union perhaps he "follow" "follows" another party?

444. Dave Eastabrook - Largs, Ayrshire

Re: And with the "constitution" of the EU being sneaked through without us having a chance to say "yea" or "nay" in a referendum, increasingly I guess Westminster - and Holyrood - will become irrelevant. We will all be Europeans!?

Couldn't agree more with you Dave but I'm not ready to concede sovereignty
to the Europeans yet!

Another reason - surely ? - why we shouldn't abandon our Britishness just yet.

Ladies and Gents. Lets think back shall we? Why was it in the first place that Scotland/England ditched independence in favour of Union in the first place?

Before the Nationalists rush in saying "oh its different now, it dosen't apply" yadda yadda, think about the reasons properly.

What security is there now in place, what guarentees are there that the future will turn out hunky dorey for independence to thrive culturally, to turn these independent nations into there supposed cutural powerhouses (which indeed is ironic because becoming independent throws away an aspect of that culture). Solving our problems together whatever they are is the soundest course of action.

Answer to Ellis Sims 449
You asked why did Scotland/England ditch independence and go for union.
The answer is that the Scottish people did not want it, only the landed gentry in Scotland made the decision (many of them bribed ). Do you honestly believe that such an undemocratic arrangement is something to be proud of?

Ellis Sims - the main reasons why the union went through in Scotland was because of vast amounts of money shipped north to sway the vote in the (undemocratic) noble-dominated parliament of the time, the economic incentives offered in the short-term to sure up the Scottish economy following the failure of the Darien colony (partly due to the English crown deciding not to intervene to protect settlers from the Spanish, as had been promised) and the vast armies sitting in Newcastle and on the Antrim Coast in case the parliament said no.
In England’s case there were better reasons for union, a permanently secured northern border allowed expansion previously undreamed of. However, the main reasons for Scotland joining in union with England were coercion and threats – that is why the populace rioted throughout the country and many dozens of petitions were sent to the Scots parliament in an attempt to stop it.
In what way has Ireland thrown away its cultural heritage since leaving the union? It seems to me it is near on the definition of a "cultural powerhouse" with global reach!
Incidentally I find it interesting that so many of the vocal contributors in favour of continuing union make their case from south of the border – where are all the Scottish unionists?