Scottish Independence

Do you support Scotland's independence?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 45.7%
  • No

    Votes: 10 28.6%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 5 14.3%
  • Don't care

    Votes: 4 11.4%

  • Total voters
    35
Totally honest question. What do you think the EU is and what limits do you think it places on a nations independence?

I don't think it is needed, It's a bit complex to me because I don't mind people having an alliance right? I'm so old school I guess you could say so. What should I do, quote my fathers again? Why not I guess, they spoke better than I ever can.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
 
No EU Membership would guarantee a repeat of the previous Referendum in my opinion.
 
I don't think it is needed, It's a bit complex to me because I don't mind people having an alliance right? I'm so old school I guess you could say so. What should I do, quote my fathers again? Why not I guess, they spoke better than I ever can.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
But why do you think its not needed?

Do you hold that the UK should be broken up (you seem to from your post above)? What about the USA, should the states split up?
 
But why do you think its not needed?

Do you hold that the UK should be broken up (you seem to from your post above)? What about the USA, should the states split up?

TBH I like the idea of the EU, I think at this moment it has corruption beyond what I would like to see. As for the U.S. states, our republic is strong and I'm very much against any sort of secession. I would like to see more power to the state however but I'm sure I've made that clear already.

I've never really thought of the UK the way you describe maybe, United Kingdom sure and I like that. I didn't mean to say any old breaking off is just ok, but you know......

We did didn't we? Oh, I mean I did didn't I? ;)
 
TBH I like the idea of the EU, I think at this moment it has corruption beyond what I would like to see. As for the U.S. states, our republic is strong and I'm very much against any sort of secession. I would like to see more power to the state however but I'm sure I've made that clear already.

I've never really thought of the UK the way you describe maybe, United Kingdom sure and I like that. I didn't mean to say any old breaking off is just ok, but you know......

We did didn't we? Oh, I mean I did didn't I? ;)
Well you seemed in favour of Scotland being independent, which would break up the UK.

Now its a topic for another thread, buts its arguable the the states that make up the US have less freedom and independence than the nation states of the EU.
 
Well you seemed in favour of Scotland being independent, which would break up the UK.

Now its a topic for another thread, buts its arguable the the states that make up the US have less freedom and independence than the nation states of the EU.

You know something? Freedom is what I'm talking about, if they are free in the current form I have no worry. You are right about the U.S. at the moment and it bothers me a great deal, it really does.

I have always said how angry I am that states have had their rights removed, let's not go back to the civil war because that creates a mess but it is where it started.

Trump claims he wants to return, it could be he is sincere.

Ok Hijack over, you helped me think of Scotland in a new light.
 
If Scotland wants to leave then let them. It's not gonna have much of a detrimental effect to the rest of the UK if they do (whereas if England seceded you'd be left with something along the lines of the United Celtic States of the British Isles or whatever, with a minuscule economy), but it'll mean their own economy will go down the crapper, especially if they don't stay in the EU and end up with some kind of lousy trade deal. Fishing, tourism and what little oil reserves they have are probably not gonna be enough to sustain them, but that'll be their problem then.
 
Now its a topic for another thread, buts its arguable the the states that make up the US have less freedom and independence than the nation states of the EU.

I wasn't even aware there was an argument, considering all the "lack of freedom" the EU has given us seems to be made up by people who don't like the EU because it takes away our freedom in some poorly defined way... I've never really understood why people are anti EU myself, cheaper trading, easier movement, and all we (the member states) have to do is allow a few people we didn't elect* to have their say on trade restrictions. Oh, and it pretty much guarantees no war in Europe, so what's not to like?

*Amusingly one of the primary catalysts for the leave vote. That went well. :rolleyes:

I have always said how angry I am that states have had their rights removed, let's not go back to the civil war because that creates a mess but it is where it started.

Yeah, let's not, as that was about the states' rights to take away the rights of others. :lol:
 
Are they not leaving?

If they have another independence referendum and once again vote to remain the UK then they almost certainly will leave the EU.

As @Touring Mars has said, the main incentive for the Scottish Independence movement is to remain in the EU and not have to bend over backwards to whatever England wants. However, if that invariably means entering the Eurozone as well, then they've reached an impasse.

Either way they'll go bankrupt and/or be very unhappy.
 
No EU Membership would guarantee a repeat of the previous Referendum in my opinion.
No EU membership should guarantee no second referendum, since losing EU membership is the very reason the SNP are giving for seeking one.
 
Last edited:
If Scotland wants independence then they should have it but I think it would cost a lot of money and be bad for the economy.
 
I personally think she has called for it at the wrong time. Surly if she gets what she wants and its granted and the vote goes her way then wouldn't Scotland have to apply to be a member of the EU?

If that is the case then wouldn't a more prudent approach be follow the UK out of the EU and see what the outcome is. Once the dust has settled then make her choice (if she is the First Minister then).

I'd personally not like to see the split between Scotland and the rest of the UK as it don't see any benefit for either side. However if the vote goes in favor then it wouldn't it be in the UK's interest to let them go without too little fuss?
 
If Scotland wants independence then they should have it but I think it would cost a lot of money and be bad for the economy.
Will it be worse for the economy if they leave the EU and stay with the UK or gaining independence and staying with the EU?
 
I personally think she has called for it at the wrong time. Surly if she gets what she wants and its granted and the vote goes her way then wouldn't Scotland have to apply to be a member of the EU?

If that is the case then wouldn't a more prudent approach be follow the UK out of the EU and see what the outcome is. Once the dust has settled then make her choice (if she is the First Minister then).

I'd personally not like to see the split between Scotland and the rest of the UK as it don't see any benefit for either side. However if the vote goes in favor then it wouldn't it be in the UK's interest to let them go without too little fuss?
I think Sturgeon has blundered for this reason - the SNP would have a much stronger case once the Brexit deal is done and the UK's future trading arrangements with the EU are known - but she is gambling the house that the UK will not be able to negotiate a favourable trade deal with the EU without full membership...

... but even if that does happen, what makes her think that the EU will sign a similar deal with an independent Scotland? The elephant in the room is that the SNP are making this all about access to the single market and not about EU membership - EU membership makes little to no sense for a newly independent Scotland - wresting control from Westminster just to hand it straight over to Brussels is not what die-hard SNP supports want. If you look at the SNP's own website, it is clear that EU membership is not what they really want (though concede that they will have to have it), but 'access to the single market' is the main aim. But that is what the UK wants as well - full access to the single market but without the downsides that EU membership entails. So what makes the SNP think they'll get it if the UK doesn't? And if the UK does get it, then why does Scotland need to leave the UK??
 
Last edited:
I think Sturgeon has blundered for this reason - the SNP would have a much stronger case once the Brexit deal is done and the UK's future trading arrangements with the EU are known - but she is gambling the house that the UK will not be able to negotiate a favourable trade deal with the EU without full membership...

I think the reason for seeking permission now is in case a referendum is needed - it takes a pretty long time to organise, even with Sturgeon shouting down the phone at you.

By that time we'll know more (maybe) about leaving the EU. We'll also have a better idea of how the border is meant to work, certainly at least one part of the UK is going to have a pretty hard border already. At the moment the crossing into Scotland is only evident through the increased number of traffic police on bridges, obviously :)
 
Wales has enough country killers to turn us into the next Cornwall as it is.

C60MQFnWoAIjKG6.jpg
 
I think Sturgeon has blundered for this reason - the SNP would have a much stronger case once the Brexit deal is done and the UK's future trading arrangements with the EU are known - but she is gambling the house that the UK will not be able to negotiate a favourable trade deal with the EU without full membership...

... but even if that does happen, what makes her think that the EU will sign a similar deal with an independent Scotland? The elephant in the room is that the SNP are making this all about access to the single market and not about EU membership - EU membership makes little to no sense for a newly independent Scotland - wresting control from Westminster just to hand it straight over to Brussels is not what die-hard SNP supports want. If you look at the SNP's own website, it is clear that EU membership is not what they really want (though concede that they will have to have it), but 'access to the single market' is the main aim. But that is what the UK wants as well - full access to the single market but without the downsides that EU membership entails. So what makes the SNP think they'll get it if the UK doesn't? And if the UK does get it, then why does Scotland need to leave the UK??

I don't follow your pessimism. Don't you understand this referendum will be a once in a generation opportunity? :D
 
The elephant in the room is that the SNP are making this all about access to the single market and not about EU membership - EU membership makes little to no sense for a newly independent Scotland - wresting control from Westminster just to hand it straight over to Brussels is not what die-hard SNP supports want.

Surely the Scottish Parliament will be in full control of the country while voting via their MEPs in the European Parliament, while continuing to have access to the single market?

If a Remain vote had prevailed the Scottish Parliament wouldn't be in full control of anything other than their comparatively meager devolved powers, they'd have fewer strings to the MEPs and would negotiate through Westminster into the single market.

If Scotland doesn't become independent the Scottish parliament isn't in full control and all non-devolved legislation is in the control of The Other Place anyway.
 
Surely the Scottish Parliament will be in full control of the country while voting via their MEPs in the European Parliament, while continuing to have access to the single market?
Perhaps if an independent Scotland were to create (and maintain) its own currency, or (if hell freezes over) keep Sterling... but both of those things would set Scotland on a collision course with the EU mantra/doctrine of greater economic integration, and (more importantly) the Maastricht Treaty that compels all EU members to (eventually) adopt the Euro. Scotland may be the first applicant nation to explicitly state that it will not adopt the Euro, as a) the Scottish people would overwhelmingly reject it in a referendum on the matter and b) it is totally inconsistent with the goals of the SNP insomuch as it hands the key levers of monetary/financial policy over to Brussels. Scottish Nationalists already complain that Scottish MPs don't have enough say at Westminster with 9% representation - how much influence do they think 0.8% representation (6 seats of 751) will get them in the European parliament?

Also, if Scotland were to leave the UK and join the EU, Scotland would argue to Westminster (just as the UK will do to the EU) that a favourable trade deal would be mutually beneficial, which it would be - it would also be totally essential to an independent Scotland's economy. But as a member of the EU, Scotland will not be permitted to sign any trade deal with the UK, and any trade deal with the UK would have to be agreed by all EU member states. Given that the rationale behind wanting to leave the UK is because the SNP believe the EU will not give the UK a favourable trade deal, then where does that leave UK-Scottish trade?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps if an independent Scotland were to create (and maintain) its own currency, or (if hell freezes over) keep Sterling... but both of those things would set Scotland on a collision course with the EU mantra/doctrine of greater economic integration, and (more importantly) the Maastricht Treaty that compels all EU members to (eventually) adopt the Euro. Scotland may be the first applicant nation to explicitly state that it will not adopt the Euro, as a) the Scottish people would overwhelmingly reject it in a referendum on the matter and b) it is totally inconsistent with the goals of the SNP insomuch as it hands the key levers of monetary/financial policy over to Brussels. Scottish Nationalists already complain that Scottish MPs don't have enough say at Westminster with 9% representation - how much influence do they think 0.8% representation (6 seats of 751) will get them in the European parliament?

I agree insofar as I'm not sure a Scottish Pound would survive the comparative fiscal and legislative strength of the Euro. I still think that Scotland's 6 MEPS (possibly a couple more as the percentages shift when England, Wales and NI withdraw theirs) in the European parliament should be considered alongside the Scottish parliament otherwise having full control in their country.

As it stands with Brexit they lose their say in Europe, lose their MEPs (naturally), are bound to whatever deals the rest of the UK makes (which aren't looking like much right now) and don't have territorial control over their country - that balance remains strongly in the English (or UK) parliament.

Also, if Scotland were to leave the UK and join the EU, Scotland would argue to Westminster (just as the UK will do to the EU) that a favourable trade deal would be mutually beneficial, which it would be - it would also be totally essential to an independent Scotland's economy. But as a member of the EU, Scotland will not be permitted to sign any trade deal with the UK, and any trade deal with the UK would have to be agreed by all EU member states. Given that the rationale behind wanting to leave the UK is because the SNP believe the EU will not give the UK a favourable trade deal, then where does that leave UK-Scottish trade?

That's a very interesting point that I'd completely ignored. I guess we'll have to say what (if any) EU-UK trade deals are in place by referendum time. It could be that whatever deal exists doesn't provide am obvious barrier to trade between countries like England and Scotland. By then maybe Cornwall will be a country... and hopefully Yorkshire :D
 
Please correct anything I've got wrong, but as I see it (without looking into a whole lot of detail);

Scotland are in a worse place economically since last referendum due to a drop in oil revenues, the SNP haven't explained how they would fund Scotland's nearly 10% deficit (which is higher than Greece's?), and they now have to explain how they intend to get back into the EU (with Spain at least most likely opposed), what they're going to use as a currency and why, and how they're going to get the good deal with the UK that they would need.
 
Scotland are in a worse place economically since last referendum due to a drop in oil revenues, the SNP haven't explained how they would fund Scotland's nearly 10% deficit (which is higher than Greece's?), and they now have to explain how they intend to get back into the EU (with Spain at least most likely opposed), what they're going to use as a currency and why, and how they're going to get the good deal with the UK that they would need.
Careful, you might just be labeled a fearmonger with comments like that.
 
According to what I once learned about the full name of the UK, that name will still make sense unless NI leaves. but I'm just a bloody foreigner so I'm probably wrong. :P
 

Latest Posts

Back