|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Vote on Scottish Independence
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Of course, this won't wash with the right-on, leftie Scots Nats shipmates who like to discuss the finer points of the Schengen Agreement, but then we're not exactly typical voters, are we?
I think you underestimate massively the depth of feeling around this issue north of the border.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
I guess we'll find out in just under a fortnight!
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I guess we'll find out in just under a fortnight!
Suggesting that only some mythical species of 'leftie right-on scottish nat' is actually engaged in the intricacies of what independence means is fairly deluded.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
If it was a referendum on a Scottish Republic then maybe a breaking positive royal story would make a difference.
Though maybe Better Together might find it helpful if they made sure that Kate has her titles properly used. If we only hear about the "Duchess of Cambridge" then we subconsciously hear something about an elite English university town. Make "Countess of Strathearn" a bit more obvious in reporting, especially north of the border, and the people of Scotland will hear something that's more of "one of us". A single line at the bottom of a BBC article doesn't really cut it.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Spending the remainder of the campaign cooing over how delightful the Countess of Strathearn looks would I think, on balance, be beneficial to the Better Together campaign.
I'm fairly sure that opportunities to buy Hello magazine will not be affected by a Yes vote.
Also, republicanism hasn't been a feature of this referendum.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
The Westminster politicians seem to be falling over themselves, offering 'new powers' to a Scottish government - but then why was devo-max ruled out on the ballot paper?
I see that J. K. Rowling is asking Labour to clarify if devo-max is now being offered, so maybe some wavering voters may be tempted by this. On the other hand, some people have already voted, so it is looking rather underhand.
Cynics are of course arguing that Cameron rejected devo-max, in order to crush Salmond with a large no vote - hmm.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
They're not offering new powers; they're offering a clear timetable to give powers they've already been vaguely offering.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
NEQ: quote:
I'm fairly sure that opportunities to buy Hello magazine will not be affected by a Yes vote.
Indeed. And the Royals are very popular in the USA, despite the fact that the Americans fought a war to assert their independence from the British monarchy...
Interest in the latest chapter in the Windsor family saga will not necessarily translate into a surge of support for the 'No' campaign.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The Westminster politicians seem to be falling over themselves, offering 'new powers' to a Scottish government - but then why was devo-max ruled out on the ballot paper?
Because it would have won outright. Now that full independence might win, it's ruled back in.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Except that they can't re-introduce Devo Max at this stage, because people have already started sending in postal votes.
What they're doing it gathering together existing vague promises, polishing them up, and offering a clear timetable towards implementation. But there's nothing genuinely new on the table.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Of course, this won't wash with the right-on, leftie Scots Nats shipmates who like to discuss the finer points of the Schengen Agreement, but then we're not exactly typical voters, are we?
The irony is that 'right-on lefties' south of the border won't be so keen on a 'Yes' vote, since it will largely entrench a Conservative majority in Westminster.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Except that they can't re-introduce Devo Max at this stage, because people have already started sending in postal votes.
They can't change the question on the ballot; they can try and put forward the idea that voting No results in some form of Devo-Max. A variant of 'vote no and get more'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Oh, just let the Scots go off and do their thing.
Yes, many of us suspect it will end in tears - while many (most?) Scots seem not to have learned about Darien some of the rest of us did.
But if they go off and do their own thing we need to ensure that we don't bail them out again - the economic value of bailing them out of the Darien fiasco would be £7.1 trillion today.
Too much then, definitely too much now.
And especially too much bearing in mind it was a Scots Chancellor (Brown) who laid the foundations for the failures of Scottish banks (RBS/BoS) under the regulatory framework of another Scots Chancellor (Darling).
But then I live in the South East where government spending per head is (at £7,638) 13% lower than the UK national average and an eye-wateriing £2,514 less than spending per head in Scotland for the same period (2012-13).
So I pay for prescriptions, eye tests, etc, and my children are racking up heavy debts thanks to university fees - brought in by a Labour PM (Blair), approved by a Scots Chancellor (Brown).
And if Salmond gets his YES vote partly thanks to the gerrymandering of allowing impressionable 16 and 17 year olds to vote - fine. Just don't expect the rest of us to pay for your antics and your hubris.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Except that they can't re-introduce Devo Max at this stage, because people have already started sending in postal votes.
They can't change the question on the ballot; they can try and put forward the idea that voting No results in some form of Devo-Max. A variant of 'vote no and get more'.
They've been doing that for quite some time; in fact Doublethink remarked on it on this thread on 9 Aug.
quote:
Theres a weird dynamic in the no campaign though, which is to respond to the independence campaign with the promise of more autonomy.
What they're doing now is putting more emphasis on this and trying to make it seem "new." The only thing which is new is the promise of a clear timeline.
These offers will only seem "new" to people who haven't been paying much attention up to now, and to journalists working for the Daily Fail.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I am really surprised by the number of English who are taking this line. I hope that there is a silent majority who would deeply regret the Scots leaving. Do we really dislike each other that much?
Personally I am worried by the effect a Yes vote would have on Northern Ireland. I think it could well start a new round of arguments there, perhaps with an added "Independent Ulster" movement (I don't think I'd like the look of that one).
[edit: reply to L'organist]
[ 08. September 2014, 14:40: Message edited by: TurquoiseTastic ]
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
They've been doing that for quite some time; in fact Doublethink remarked on it on this thread on 9 Aug.
Up to a point - I think the tone and emphasis has changed in recent days in the direction of inducements - you are welcome to disagree.
quote:
These offers will only seem "new" to people who haven't been paying much attention up to now
In the context of the history of scottish referendums, details are something new - because vague promises were previously tried.
Note to L'organist; all those decisions were supported by the neo-liberals on both sides of the house - regardless of accident of birth.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I don't think it's about 'disliking' each other. There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
As an English supporter of Scottish independence, it seems to me that the Scots see the possibility of their nation being free from the pernicious neo-liberalism which has driven their values, and the values of successive (Tory and New Labour) English dominated UK governments, further apart.
I am hoping for a Yes vote so that we can shortly see, at very close quarters, that a nation can flourish which is based on basically democratic socialist values.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Up to a point - I think the tone and emphasis has changed in recent days in the direction of inducements - you are welcome to disagree.
I agree about the tone and emphasis having changed. However, I think they're just polishing up previous inducements.
Incidentally, a quote by Eddie Bone “If and when the Scots ‘bottle it’ on 18 September and vote no, they will see a stronger English voice because the people of England have had enough of Scottish self-indulgence" is circulating widely here.
I'd never heard of Eddie Bone. Is he a serious figure? The idea that Scots might be "punished" for voting No isn't much of an inducement to do so!
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
As an English supporter of Scottish independence, it seems to me that the Scots see the possibility of their nation being free from the pernicious neo-liberalism which has driven their values, and the values of successive (Tory and New Labour) English dominated UK governments, further apart.
Am I the only one who remembers that the Conservatives failed to win a majority in the last election, and that the Lib Dems made a surge because of Clegg's promises on tuition fees etc.? The fact that he broke those promises is not indicative of some English-led conspiracy but one of weak leadership on his part.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
How would you describe the behaviour of, for example, 'CyberNats'?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I don't think it's about 'disliking' each other. There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
As an English supporter of Scottish independence, it seems to me that the Scots see the possibility of their nation being free from the pernicious neo-liberalism which has driven their values, and the values of successive (Tory and New Labour) English dominated UK governments, further apart.
I am hoping for a Yes vote so that we can shortly see, at very close quarters, that a nation can flourish which is based on basically democratic socialist values.
I'm not sure that Alex Salmond and the Tartan Tories are terribly different, in terms of economic policy, from that nice Mr Blair. For example, the Scottish Parliament has never used it's tax raising powers since devolution. Mr Salmond is currently offering Scots rUK levels of taxation with Nordic Social Democracy, despite the attendant loss of English subsidy that will follow from independence. (Not to mention the financial uncertainty which will follow from the loss of the currency.)
At the end of the day, I hope the Scots stay. But if they do vote to go because they think it will lead to greater Social Democracy then I predict the greatest outbreak of buyers remorse since, oh, the student body of the UK voted for that nice Mr Clegg on the grounds that he had sound views on tuition fees.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
How would you describe the behaviour of, for example, 'CyberNats'?
Can you give examples of anti-English cybernatting? I thought their main target had been fellow Scots who support the "No" campaign?
By contrast, a lot of the cyberbrits are extremely anti-Scottish, depicting the Scots as a nation of ginger-haired benefit scroungers etc etc.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
There are elements of this that remind me of the pre-dissolution Austria-Hungary, which were 2 kingdoms united by the Hapsburg monarchy after approx 1870 to 1918. The difference being the Scotland has a small population base.
The other thing I wonder is whether this is really about the ongoing dissolution of the UK, which started with the departure of Ireland approx 1922.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I am hoping for a Yes vote so that we can shortly see, at very close quarters, that a nation can flourish which is based on basically democratic socialist values.
Ha, I think we'll see the failure of that vision as we are witnessing in France. In the event of a yes vote there'll be bills to pay and tax rises. After the inevitable period of austerity, Scotland will probably reinvent Scottish conservatism in a different guise.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
I'd never heard of Eddie Bone. Is he a serious figure? The idea that Scots might be "punished" for voting No isn't much of an inducement to do so!
He appears to be the Chair of the Campaign for an English Parliament, which appears to be a kind of UKIP without the easy multiculturalism.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack the Lass
Ship's airhead
# 3415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Incidentally, a quote by Eddie Bone “If and when the Scots ‘bottle it’ on 18 September and vote no, they will see a stronger English voice because the people of England have had enough of Scottish self-indulgence" is circulating widely here.
I'd never heard of Eddie Bone. Is he a serious figure? The idea that Scots might be "punished" for voting No isn't much of an inducement to do so!
I had heard that same quote last week credited to Paul Nuttall, who is apparently the UKIP MEP for North West England.
--------------------
"My body is a temple - it's big and doesn't move." (Jo Brand)
wiblog blipfoto blog
Posts: 5767 | From: the land of the deep-fried Mars Bar | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
The Scotsman are attributing it to Eddie Bone, but I've seen it attributed to other people on Facebook.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Oh, just let the Scots go off and do their thing.
Yes, many of us suspect it will end in tears - while many (most?) Scots seem not to have learned about Darien some of the rest of us did.
But if they go off and do their own thing we need to ensure that we don't bail them out again - the economic value of bailing them out of the Darien fiasco would be £7.1 trillion today.
Too much then, definitely too much now.
Just in case anyone is wondering:
The main proponent of the Darien scheme was William Paterson, a trader and banker born in Tinwald, Dumfries and Galloway. He drummed up support for the scheme and did the leg-work for it. Amongst other things he was one of the founders of the Bank of England.
These Scots get everywhere; England mostly.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uriel
Shipmate
# 2248
|
Posted
I'm English, live in England, and wish Scotland the best in making up it's mind for its future.
Personally I would want Scotland to remain part of the UK, in part because the country I grew up in and identify with has had Scotland as part of it, and I believe we are stronger and richer (economically and culturally) together. I also worry for family currently living in Scotland who are very dependent on state welfare, as my reading of the economics is that an independent Scotland will struggle far more that Salmond and Sturgeon are letting on.
That said, should Scotland decide to go independent then there might be a purely selfish silver lining for me. My children will probably end up in university in the future, and if Scotland is both independent and part of the EU then (as far as I understand it) they can study at Scottish universities without having to pay fees, as is currently the case for other EU nationals.
Presently Scottish universities can charge fees to rUK students because England, Wales and Northern Ireland are not sovereign states in the EU, and neither is Scotland. But, post independence, Scotland will not be able to prevent rUK students from attending their universities on an equal basis with their own youngsters. I have looked at several articles and new reports online, and it appears that this is very probably how it would turn out for the Scottish HE sector, with some Scottish academics warning of an influx of rUK students wanting to avoid fees in their own country, and Scottish students finding it harder to gain access to Scottish universities. If that is the case I would encourage my children to look at the excellent universities north of the border, saving them £27k at the expense of the Scottish taxpayer.
I know that there are folk on the Ship involved in university admin, and working in Scottish universities, so will probably understand this much better than me. Is it the likely scenario that an independent Scotland (assuming it joins the EU) will have to offer free higher education to rUK students? Or is there some cunning get out clause that evades EU law? My children's future debts may depend on it, and I'd rather Scottish taxpayers footed the bill than me ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 687 | From: Somerset, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Fees for non-UK EU students may be paid by the Student Awards Agency for Scotland. A non UK EU student would need to apply to SAAS for support in paying tuition fees. There are complex eligibility rules, and successful application just on the grounds of being an EU national is not certain. I can't see the qualifying criteria laid out clearly in a quick skim through the SAAS website.
Post independence the system would presumably be the same. So, students from the rest of the UK could apply to SAAS for support in paying fees, but they would also need to meet the additional qualifying criteria.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
deano
princess
# 12063
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I don't think it's about 'disliking' each other. There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
Beyond the normal anti-English sentiment that is prevalent in Scotland you mean? I mean if you have normalised it...
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I am hoping for a Yes vote so that we can shortly see, at very close quarters, that a nation can flourish which is based on basically democratic socialist values.
So to you the most important decision made by the Scottish people is nothing more that a prelude to an experiment you would like to run? Even given that mostly that experiment has failed given enough time?
--------------------
"The moral high ground is slowly being bombed to oblivion. " - Supermatelot
Posts: 2118 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
A non UK EU student would need to apply to SAAS for support in paying tuition fees. There are complex eligibility rules, and successful application just on the grounds of being an EU national is not certain.
As far as I can tell (from here), the rules are the same as those applied to Scottish students, except the requirement of three years ordinary residence is "in the non-UK EU" rather than "in Scotland".
Foreigners don't seem to get loans or bursaries - just their fees paid.
There's a big pile of language for "what if I'm an asylum seeker / self-employed migrant worker / I've started my degree elsewhere and want to finish in Scotland", but the normal case seems fairly straightforward.
If you are a normal undergraduate from a non-UK EU country, you get your fees paid but no loans or grants. An independent EU-member Scotland would be obliged to offer the same deal to students from the UK.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I don't think it's about 'disliking' each other. There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
As an English supporter of Scottish independence, it seems to me that the Scots see the possibility of their nation being free from the pernicious neo-liberalism which has driven their values, and the values of successive (Tory and New Labour) English dominated UK governments, further apart.
I am hoping for a Yes vote so that we can shortly see, at very close quarters, that a nation can flourish which is based on basically democratic socialist values.
Hmm....don't get your hope up. You're dealing with two smaller countries don't forget and the tax base will be less. The same will be true of the reminder of the UK of course.....and Alex Salmond wants to reduce Corporation Tax
There's also the question of the oil. I'm not thinking of now but further down the line. There is only a finite amount of oil in the North Sea. What happens when you reach peak oil isn't that you suddenly run out of oil but that it becomes more and more difficult to extract or at least it makes less sense from an economic point of view. I'm not sure we're not close to that situation now otherwise why is the government looking at fracking?
You could see a retrenchment in the field of public spending which will be rather more than it is now.
I don't think I'd want to risk it myself.......
--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen
'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10
Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
There has been little anti-English sentiment around in the Yes camp.
How would you describe the behaviour of, for example, 'CyberNats'?
Can you give examples of anti-English cybernatting? I thought their main target had been fellow Scots who support the "No" campaign?
For example I thought the use of 'Quisling' had an anti-English vibe to it.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I am really surprised by the number of English who are taking this line. I hope that there is a silent majority who would deeply regret the Scots leaving. Do we really dislike each other that much?
Personally I am worried by the effect a Yes vote would have on Northern Ireland. I think it could well start a new round of arguments there, perhaps with an added "Independent Ulster" movement (I don't think I'd like the look of that one).
[edit: reply to L'organist]
It would be interesting to see how the dissolution of the present Union would affect Ulster, right enough.
Quite apart from the political aspects of the collegiality between Scottish and Ulster Loyalism, there exists a huge overlap of cultural and genealogical identity, thanks to the Scots-Irish plantations covering some centuries. It is, arguably, understandable that the Scots might wish to thumb the nose at the Auld Enemy, but to make foreigners of their close kith and kin across the water might be less easy to adjust to. The 'yes' or 'no' vote isn't just about splitting with England. It's about splitting with Ulster (and Wales).
Politically, I imagine an already isolated and threatened Ulster Loyalism would feel perhaps quite dangerously insecure, should their Scottish brethren lose their own UK identity. But clearly this is no reason for Scots to vote 'no' if they are sure that independence will give them greater success for their future, and the future of their children, than remaining in a United Kingdom with the Welsh, the Northern Irish and the English.
Personally, I think it's a hell of a risk to take. Bannockburn was a long time ago, after all. And small islands divided against themselves make for uneasy neighbours as anyone living on the island of Ireland can testify - even leaving aside the unique exacerbating circumstances peculiar to Ireland.
But on the other hand, if there's a 'yes'. It's also all rather exciting, too! A new nation! A brand new creation! The anticipation of something completely innovative. It could come as almost an anti-climax should there be a 'no' after all!
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
The word 'Cybernat' was coined by Labour's George Foulkes when nationalists began to challenge the monolithic pro-Union nature of the Scots newspapers by becoming early users of social media. It was way of attempting to delegitimise social media campaigning, which by its very nature is not done exclusively by trained journalists but mostly by ordinary people posting their thoughts online, much as you get here.
If you have posting with no intensive moderation, then as well as the sensible people, you get all the trolls, socks, crusaders etc. The Labour narrative was to pretend the worst posters were all nationalists and to ignore their own quotient of trolls from their thinner ranks - because more nationalists were active online, they pretended it was a nationalist problem not an online problem.
Anyone who peeks at the 'all' part of the indyref hashtag on twitter knows that there are some vile misogynist, racist and sectarian trolls from the No side.
To give an example there was the woman who Better Together accidentally put in their first telly advert (not the famous one) who was retweeting Nick Griffin and anti-Catholic material such as a joke about how Irish Catholics would look better hanging from trees. Or for another example, there was the very prolific pro-union troll who posted a drawing so obscene, of Alex Salmond defecating into Nicola Sturgeon's mouth who was defecating into somebody else's mouth, that I won't link it.
These people are rarely mentioned in the papers but anyone who follows the hashtag knows they are there and that some of them are very prolific and if they get banned just come back with a sock account. You won't see the Daily Mail running a breathless article any time soon about the peril of 'Cyberbrits' though - because it doesn't suit their narrative. Every on-line political cause has its bampots and trolls - just as every religion has people who make their co-religionists cringe.
If you want to attempt to turn the few numpties who throw about words like 'quisling' into an argument for Yes anti-Englishness then you'd have to brand your own side as dangerous anti-Irish racists and sectarians to account for your own unmoderated online numpty quota.
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
A non UK EU student would need to apply to SAAS for support in paying tuition fees. There are complex eligibility rules, and successful application just on the grounds of being an EU national is not certain.
As far as I can tell (from here), the rules are the same as those applied to Scottish students, except the requirement of three years ordinary residence is "in the non-UK EU" rather than "in Scotland".
Foreigners don't seem to get loans or bursaries - just their fees paid.
The main difference between non-Scottish UK students and other EU students is that the UK (well, England as Scotland, Wales and NI all have their own schemes) charges relatively high tuition fees - most of the rest of Europe have either no tuition fees or very much lower fees. The way the system currently works in Scotland is that EU students pay fees according to the standard of their home nation. If you're English and attend an English university you would pay a substantial tuition fee, therefore if you attend a Scottish university you pay a similar fee. If you're Austrian and attend an Austrian university you do not pay a tuition fee, therefore if you attend a Scottish university you do not pay a tuition fee. Independence will not, ISTM, change that.
It is, however, the case that an English student could go to an Austrian university and not pay fees. But, the number of British students choosing to study in other parts of Europe is very small (at least full time), so it isn't a substantial burden on universities or government budgets. If a large number of British students start to take advantage of low fees elsewhere in Europe it would not surprise me if other European countries start allowing universities to charge fees rather than fund the education of British people.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The way the system currently works in Scotland is that EU students pay fees according to the standard of their home nation.
That is neither my understanding of the rules as expressed on the SAAS website nor my understanding of EU law. Clearly you work for a Scottish University and I don't, so none of my opinions here are first hand, but still:
My understanding was that EU law requires you to treat citizens of other EU countries on a par with (the most favourable category of) your own, so if Scots students don't pay fees, EU students don't pay either.
My understanding was that the only reason rUK students can be made to pay the high England + Wales fees is that these EU laws do not interfere in country-internal matters.
quote:
It is, however, the case that an English student could go to an Austrian university and not pay fees. But, the number of British students choosing to study in other parts of Europe is very small (at least full time), so it isn't a substantial burden on universities or government budgets.
The difference with Scotland, of course, is that English students all speak the language, more or less, and the current situation is that many / most students choose between the "big name" universities throughout the UK with little concern for which country the university happens to be in.
So it's easy to imagine that an independent Scotland compelled to treat English students on a par with Scots would face a significant number of education tourists.
[ 09. September 2014, 02:03: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Yes, many of us suspect it will end in tears - while many (most?) Scots seem not to have learned about Darien some of the rest of us did.
I genuinely find it hard to understand what's supposed to have been "learnt" from Darien, beyond 'best not to sink too much money into a speculative colony in Panama'.
What else is supposed to have been learned that is relevant to the 21st century? I mean, look what happens to countries now that get into financial trouble. They have IMF plans and what have you, but they don't get taken over by a larger neighbour. No-one suggested that Greece or Cyprus ought to become a part of Germany.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
And all is this stuff about Scotland's small size... it's got a larger population than a dozen other European countries, not counting the microstates. Did anyone say that the Baltics couldn't go it alone outside the Soviet Union? Scotland's population is almost as much as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia put together.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Sorry to multi-post, but this is a different topic.
All this talk about border controls and Schengen doesn't seem to have addressed the existence of the Common Travel Area, which involves territories that aren't part of the European Union. There's doesn't seem any reason why an independent Scotland couldn't be part of the same arrangement.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
There's doesn't seem any reason why an independent Scotland couldn't be part of the same arrangement.
The UK and Ireland aren't in Schengen. The CTA isn't compatible with Schengen, except in the trivial case of all CTA members joining Schengen (as CTA members agree to maintain & cooperate on their outward border checks, and Schengen forbids border checks between members.)
New entrants to the EU are obliged to join Schengen. If Scotland were treated as a new EU member, it would have to join Schengen, and so couldn't join the CTA.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
With Gordon Brown offering what is effectively Home Rule to Scotland, supported by both David Cameron and Ed Miliband some reflection on the implications is in order. While I wish Ireland had gone down the Home Rule route, as proposed in the Government of Ireland Act 1914, instead of the militant republican road it took during WW1, I feel sure that, as the 20th century wore on, Home Rule would have morphed into a republic by itself, but hopefully without the awful bloodshed which ensued. While Scotland is a very different case, in that it's purely a democratic issue, without violence, once you concede the idea of devo max, it would only be a matter of a few years until that matures into independence anyway. Alex Salmond said, in 1998 when the Scottish parliament opened, that he saw it as a stepping stone to independence, and devo max is just a further step along that road.
As an Englishman of part Scottish(and Irish) descent, I am a passionate supporter of the union. I've always believed that the UK is bigger than the sum of its parts. Both in our history, and in our present influence in the world. I see our nation being perhaps fatally weakened by breaking our small island into different countries, because everything could start to unravel. Northern Ireland has a much closer ethnic and political link to Scotland than it has to England, and what about Wales. Certainly Scotland is in a much better position, with its oil and population size, to be a nation, than either Wales or Northern Ireland, who probably both need financed by their larger neighbours, but once the principal of the UK is broken, it could fragment entirely. Opponents of devolution such as Margaret Thatcher always took the view that if the UK is a nation, Scotland's complaints that it never elected a Tory government are no more relevent than saying London, with twice the population of Scotland, didn't either, or that rural Cambridgeshire never elected a Labour government. That's democracy.
Unfortunately a link was broken long ago. When I was born in the mid 1950's, half of Scotland's parliamentary seats were conservative. With it's industrial heartlands solidly Labour, there was little difference between politics North or South of the border. With the total collapse of the Tory vote and the rise of the SNP, especially during the long Tory rule of the 80's and 90's, politics in Scotland and England are now so radically different that separation may have become inevitable. I don't buy George Osborne's sabre rattling that Scotland can't keep the pound, nor Ed Miliband's vision of border guards. Many things will stay the same, and a Londoner will still be able to visit his granny in Glasgow. But where it will lead all the micro nations of the British Isles in terms of world trade and future prosperity for any of us is anyone's guess and it fills me with fear!
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Scotland's complaints that it never elected a Tory government are no more relevent than saying London, with twice the population of Scotland, didn't either, or that rural Cambridgeshire never elected a Labour government. That's democracy.
Well, democracy just sucks. As it's been famously said, the worst possible form of government - except for all the others (paraphrase).
A democratically elected government is only ever going to represent a minority of the people, and then imperfectly. It is unusual for any one to find someone standing for election with whom they agree 100%, so we end up voting for the least bad of all the people who don't really stand for the things we believe in.
I do, however, think that with a smaller electorate there is an increased chance of a candidate being a reasonably close match to the views of a larger proportion of the people. And, by extension, that a government formed from elected representatives will be more representative of the local population. Democracy on a smaller scale is therefore, IMO, a better system than democracy on a larger scale. From which follows a belief that democratic government should be for the smallest possible population group.
In the UK, and practically everywhere else, we have things upside down. The national government is seen as the most important and holding all the reins of power. I believe it should be the other way around; local government is the most important, because it's at local government level that the will of the people is most clearly expressed. Ideally I don't want devolution, even devo-max, which is an acceptance of the power of central government to grant powers. I want local government, with power given up to larger scale political structures reluctantly and only as necessary.
But, I'm an idealist living on a fantasy island.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
You could just adopt preferential voting. That'd help.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
Many things will stay the same, and a Londoner will still be able to visit his granny in Glasgow. But where it will lead all the micro nations of the British Isles in terms of world trade and future prosperity for any of us is anyone's guess and it fills me with fear!
Fear? Fear of what? I don't understand this. What, like you're going to run out of food or something because you can't afford it because there's no UK anymore?
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The way the system currently works in Scotland is that EU students pay fees according to the standard of their home nation.
Alan, you need to come back to this point. I don't think it's true but given you're in the University system you may be able to defend it. You may be right about high fees in English Universities compared to the rest of Europe but that's irrelevant. If you have rules about equal access across the EU you can't discriminate.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
New entrants to the EU are obliged to join Schengen. If Scotland were treated as a new EU member, it would have to join Schengen, and so couldn't join the CTA.
EU membership is ultimately a matter of negotiation. It's not like the EU is just going to look at the terms Scotland asks for and say "computer says no". There will be some horse trading, a little media manipulation and probably a series of face-saving gestures which involve Scotland committing to all the "obligations" in the fullness of time just... not yet. The EU is not served be excluding Scotland and even the likes of Spain aren't going to want to embarrass themselves with too much of a flounce over the issue; knowing that if it ever comes to Catalan independence they can just veto anyway.
It's not certain, nothing is when you're talking about future events, but I'm not unduly worried about reaching an amicable arrangement with the EU. Our farmers (particularly the crofters) should do very well out of getting their fair share of the CAP as doesn't happen at the moment.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
I've read on here theories that Scotland will do badly, and the remaining U.K. will be poorer for being smaller, or that Scotland will do poorly and the rUK will be fine.
After reading L'Organist post, I'm wondering if the result might be that both sides do better after a split. This happens on the stock market when a struggling conglomerate is broken into pieces and the sum of the individual valuations increases.
Is this even a remote possibility?
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Yes voters are assuming that Scotland will do better after a split; you'd hardly expect people to vote Yes on the assumption they'd do badly.
If Scotland was independent, government policies would focus on Scottish needs. Immigration, for example, is one area where Westminster restrictions on immigration are unhelpful to many Scottish industries.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
