The Great Scottish FREEEEEEEEEDOOOMMMMM!!!!1!!! vote

[Dauphin]

Scotland is not subsidising the rest of the UK with its oil either. At present Scotland spends more than the rest of the UK and raises more in taxes (if oil taxes are ascribed to Scotland). The future could be one where Scotland provides more to the Union, or one were it provides less. The idea of the Union is that it shouldn't matter.

[kentonio]

very true, but that is not the point that those perpetuating this myth are making.

Perhaps someone could also be honest about the huge deficit Scotland runs, including with the oil considered. The SNP lost the vote because they lied, lied more, and then threw a few extra lies in for good measure. The whole campaign was an exercise in the very strident nationalism you claim to hate, yet which can apparently be conveniently ignored when it supports your wider political preferences.

[C0ckney]

who claimed scotland didn't run a deficit; in common with, well, just about every western country? it's a bit like asking why no one was honest about 'scotland' starting with an 's'.

i'm not sure if you've understood my posts, because i have condemned a number of things, but not to my knowledge 'nationalism'. the reason i have not done so is because 'nationalism' can be used to describe everything from the nazis (or neo-nazis in a modern context) to africans struggling to throw off colonial rule. in other words, it is not a thing which can supported or condemned, and is essentially meaningless without reference to the wider context.

[kentonio]

who claimed scotland didn't run a deficit; in common with, well, just about every western country? it's a bit like asking why no one was honest about 'scotland' starting with an 's'.

The independence narrative was that Scotland was extremely wealthy, subsidized the UK, and would be able to fund huge new social programs without any cuts. That was complete nonsense, and every time it was pointed out as such the reply was 'Scaremongering!!'. The reason the deficit thing was relevant was because of their currency options the only one that was a) possible and b) realistic was Sterlingization which would have required them to run a large surplus to be able to support the currency. A surplus that was simply impossible without huge cuts.

i'm not sure if you've understood my posts, because i have condemned a number of things, but not to my knowledge 'nationalism'. the reason i have not done so is because 'nationalism' can be used to describe everything from the nazis (or neo-nazis in a modern context) to africans struggling to throw off colonial rule. in other words, it is not a thing which can supported or condemned, and is essentially meaningless without reference to the wider context.

Erm..

of course we shouldn't underestimate the efforts that our politicians will make to delay, dissemble, wrap themselves in the flag and give people the usual hoary patriotic nonsense (which sadly, a large number seem to fall for time and again), so as to convince people that they don't really want a chance to run their own affairs locally; however, perhaps, just perhaps, we may some real changes as a result of panic at the top, and some hasty promises made to shore up the crumbling edifice.

So it's 'hoary patriotic nonsense' and wrapping themselves in the flag when it's the Union, but when it's 'shake off the oppression of the evil English' that's ok? I am completely sympathetic to the argument you're making, but that has to work both ways. It's also more than a little patronizing to assume that the vote was lost because of people being too stupid to understand the deeper issues (which is something that many pro-independence people are already pushing) and were somehow just conned into a No vote.

As I said to you before the vote, never forget that all politics is local. The No voters were largely voting because their very real concerns about economic issues were basically waved off with 'we'll worry about the details later'.

[C0ckney]

being wealthy and the country running a deficit are not mutually exclusive. almost every country in the western world runs a deficit, yet is at the same time wealthy; in fact i think we can go further and say that the two things are almost entirely unrelated. i really have no idea what you mean with the currency issue.

there's nothing contradictory in the two posts of mine you quoted, and i've never described scottish independence as 'shak[ing] off the oppression of the evil english', i haven't said that the 'yes' lost because people were too stupid, nor in fact made any comment at all as to why i think it lost.

[regexcellent]

But Scotland isn't wealthy. It's poor as ****. It's poorer than every American state. It's poorer than ****ing Puerto Rico for christ's sake.

[kentonio]

being wealthy and the country running a deficit are not mutually exclusive. almost every country in the western world runs a deficit, yet is at the same time wealthy; in fact i think we can go further and say that the two things are almost entirely unrelated. i really have no idea what you mean with the currency issue.

When the SNP were selling Scoland as a hugely wealthy country, the implication was quite clearly that it could afford the many expandions to social programs being promised. Given that basically their only option on currency would have required large cuts to all those programs, it's extremely related.

there's nothing contradictory in the two posts of mine you quoted, and i've never described scottish independence as 'shak[ing] off the oppression of the evil english', i haven't said that the 'yes' lost because people were too stupid, nor in fact made any comment at all as to why i think it lost.

The 'evil English opppresion' thing was on the part of many of the campaigners, not from you. I just only saw you critisize outdated nationalism when it was on the Union side, which seemed somewhat bias.

Apologies if I misread your take on the 'stupid' thing, that appeared to be what you were saying.

[Hauldren Collider]

The UK as a whole is poorer than Mississippi. If the SNP had won, their socialism would have made it one of the poorest countries in Western Europe. That, and really for no other reason, is why Scottish independence was such a terrible idea.

[C0ckney]

ken: but scotland is a wealthy country, and as we discussed at some length in the last thread, there wasn't anything hugely ambitious in what the SNP were proposing. what i don't understand is why would scotland have to run a surplus to keep the pound (or rather i think i do and don't agree, but i'd prefer that you explain your position first in your own words).

I just only saw you critisize outdated nationalism when it was on the Union side, which seemed somewhat bias.

ok, i know what you're referring to here, and it probably deserves a proper response, so here goes. the yes campaign, at its core, was what one might call civil nationalism: the idea that the people living in a certain area are best placed to run their own affairs. it was remarkably free from the kind of romanticism and ethnic nationalism that characterised the formation of the many european states; the only 'braveheart' references came from 'no' supporters seeking to ridicule the 'yes' campaign. in other words it was really about self-determination and positive participation.

now of course you might say in response, well that's great as far as it goes, but what do the people, for example, in the western isles have in common with those in glasgow? and i'd answer very little, and that ultimately every community should run its own affairs, co-operating as necessary, and free from the oppression of the state, the capitalist system it protects, and any authority at all. however, we have to start from where we are now, and breaking up one unrepresentative and unresponsive entity, to replace it with one slightly more able to be shaped by the popular will, is probably a step in the right direction.

[regexcellent]

Where on earth is gdp/capita of $27-28k/year wealthy? Jesus. Scotland isn't just poorer than MS, it's nearly 25% poorer.

[C0ckney]

also, i think it's important to make a distinction between 'nationalism' and 'patriotism'. the first is a catch-all term which as i've said, can be used (if done so without qualification) to describe everything from the nazis to just about every independence, liberation and anti-colonial movement in history. patriotism on the other hand is an essentially right wing and authoritarian sentiment because its inherent purpose, is to connect individuals to a system - a set of myths and hierarchies and institutions. it's the commitment to a set of myths of belonging a la patrie, to the motherland, the fatherland etc. in exchange for inclusion in its hierarchies; it's what both the far right and traditional right are selling.

[C0ckney]

Where on earth is gdp/capita of $27-28k/year wealthy?

on most of it.

[Dauphin]

But Scotland isn't wealthy. It's poor as ****. It's poorer than every American state. It's poorer than ****ing Puerto Rico for christ's sake.

What source are you using for those numbers? Sounds off.

[Bereta_Eder]

41.5% of puerto rico's population is allegendly below the poverty line

[regexcellent]

The poverty line is a meaningless number, especially in PR where stuff is pretty inexpensive.

I got Scotland's GDP by googling "Scotland GDP per capita" and Puerto Rico's in the same manner.

Looks like my number for scotland is from 2005 though so it's probably slightly wealthier than Puerto Rico but still pretty poor.