Ultimately, the people of Scotland are the only people who should be allowed to determine their independence. Why should it be in the hands of others? — emancipate

That doesn't answer my question. Would you be OK if the English, Welsh, and Northern Irish voted to leave the United Kingdom and form their own country?

Your logic implies that the people non-uk EU countries should've also had a vote to determine brexit.

No, because the EU isn't a country. The UK is.

No, because the EU isn't a country. The UK is. — Michael

No, the UK is a political union comprised of 4 sovereign countries.

That doesn't answer my question. Would you be OK if the English, Welsh, and Northern Irish voted to leave the United Kingdom and form their own country? — Michael

This idea about some hypothetical pact between nations is irrelevant. The actual circumstances are about one nations right to its independence.

This idea about some hypothetical pact between nations is irrelevant. The actual circumstances are about one nations right to its independence. — emancipate

It's not irrelevant. If Scotland has the right to vote for its own independence then England has the right to vote for its own independence, Wales has the right to vote for its own independence, and Northern Ireland has the right to vote for its own independence. And by the same token they have the right to join with any other country which is willing to accept them. And so England and Wales together have the right to vote for a new, independent England + Wales country. And England, Wales, and Northern Ireland together have the right to vote for a new, independent England + Wales + Northern Irelands country.

Are you OK with that? Or should Scotland have a say in whether or not England, Wales, and Northern Ireland leave the United Kingdom?

No, the UK is a political union comprised of 4 sovereign countries.

The United Kingdom is a sovereign country as established by the Acts of Union 1707 and 1800:

That the two Kingdoms of Scotland and England, shall, upon the first Day of May
next ensuing the Date hereof, and for ever after, be united into one Kingdom by the Name
of Great-Britain

That Great Britain and Ireland shall upon Jan. 1, 1801, be united into one kingdom

None of the constituent countries are sovereign in their own right, but in the cases of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland devolved power was granted in 1999, 1999, and 1921 respectively.

If Scotland were a sovereign country then it would already be independent.

What is your logic here? SNP were 1 seat away from a majority. The fact that the whole SNP campaign revolved around a 2nd referendum and that the green party are also pushing for the indy ref clearly shows that the majority want it to happen. — emancipate

Referendums are won by % votes, not seats. The SNP and Greens may have a majority of seats but not votes cast. What is your answer to the fact that the % voting for them was 49% and for the Unionist parties 51% ? Surely my logic is clear... Admittedly, since people voted twice with Alba in only 1 vote the water is muddied, but given the 'once in a generation' nature of the 2014 vote surely it needs a clear majority in favour of independence to make the 2nd vote case unanswerable.

btw: I'm not against independence.

A question for those who live in the UK and are citizens there:

Does being British matter to you?

Are people OK if you weren't British anymore, but only Scottish, Welsh, English?

A referendum on independence is a curious beast. It seems to necessarily assume that the people who are entitled to vote are those who would be entitled if independence had already occurred. It mirrors a unification, in the sense that both parties must have a say if {for a random example}, the UK wanted to join the EU. Just as both parties must agree to a marriage, but either one can file for divorce.

But here's the difficulty: If independence for Scotland, why not independence for the Hebrides or for Pimlico, or any teenager's bedroom? In the case of marriage, the parties to be joined or separated are fairly well defined; not so for countries. Wars must be fought to establish borders before the scope of referendums can be established. And imagine the boot being on the other foot - England wanting independence from all those Celtic regions and granting Wales, NI, and Scotland their independence whether they like it or not!

I don't care about my national identity. It's irrelevant. I care about how much stuff costs, how much I'm getting paid, how effective public services are, etc.

If Scotland has the right to vote for its own independence then England has the right to vote for its own independence, Wales has the right to vote for its own independence, and Northern Ireland has the right to vote for its own independence. — Michael

Of course. Why would that even be an issue?

England gave Scotland the finger over Brexit. Now they’re about to have it broken off. Good for the Scots.

The Scottish have been dominated by Westminster for about a thousand years — Punshhh

The Scottish are not separate to Westminster. The Scottish are part of the Westminster Parliament, together with Northern Ireland, Wales and England.

At the moment, Scots make up about 8% of the population of the UK and have about 9% of the MPs in the UK Parliament. However, since 1900, Scottish Prime Ministers have been in power for about 20% of the total period.

The official position of the SNP is to be a full member of the EU. Of the 705 MEPs, Scotland could expect to have a similar to number to Slovakia, who have a similar population, meaning about 13 MEPs. Scots would make up about 1.2% of the population of the EU and would have about 1.8% of the MEPs

If the SNP are worried about being dominated by the Westminster Parliament, then their problem will only be magnified if they become part of the EU.

Of course. Why would that even be an issue? — Baden

I was asking what the difference is between England, Wales, and Northern Ireland all voting for their independence from the United Kingdom and England, Wales, and Northern Ireland voting for Scottish independence. Either outcome has Scotland as one country and England, Wales, and Northern Ireland as another country.

But also I disagree with the claim that one part of the United Kingdom can vote for its independence. The United Kingdom is one sovereign country and I am a citizen of that country. I'm not a citizen of England or Wales or Scotland or Northern Ireland. The United Kingdom is my country and I ought to have a vote in what happens to it.

What's the difference between me deciding to leave my house for another and my three brothers deciding for me? Either outcome has us in different houses. You're being silly.

What's the difference between me deciding to leave my house for another and my three brothers deciding for me? Either outcome has us in different houses. You're being silly. — Baden

How is it silly? What's the difference between Scotland leaving the United Kingdom and England, Wales, and Northern Ireland leaving the United Kingdom and forming a new country?

Whether I move to a different house or my brothers fuck off elsewhere, I don't care. But the bastards have neither the right to evict me nor to force me to stay. Similarities in outcome are irrelevant. The issue is choice. Sovereignty if you like.

A more accurate analogy would be that there were once four connected houses and that over time the walls between them were knocked down and a legal agreement made that there is now just one house with a joint ownership and all decisions about it made as a group, and then 300 years later the descendant of one of the original owners unilaterally deciding to restore one of the walls and take that section of the house for himself.

Good for him. Especially seeing as his section is so tiny, his control over the whole building so insignificant (he has been removed against his will, for example, from the larger housing community he wished to remain a part of), and the dominant party so insufferable to live with.

At the moment, Scots make up about 8% of the population of the UK and have about 9% of the MPs in the UK Parliament. However, since 1900, Scottish Prime Ministers have been in power for about 20% of the total period. — RussellA

Correct. It is true that historically England has dominated Scotland as it has Wales and Ireland. However, Scotland having a much smaller population and economy, it would have ended up being dominated by England anyway, in the same way Germany with Europe's largest population and strongest economy has dominated smaller Continental countries by default.

At the end of the day, foreign domination is foreign domination, and there is no guarantee that domination by Brussels, i.e. by Germany and France will be any better than domination by London. I think the danger is that the SNP is mainly interested in acquiring power for itself as most parties are and is only playing the independence card for its own agenda. But it remains to be seen whether the Scots actually vote for independence in the end.

Maybe another solution would be for Scotland to join the Scandinavian countries that are just across the sea, but whether that would help much economically is questionable and the economy does matter I should think.

How much North Sea oil can Scotland lay claim to? Aside from fish and fleece, what other products does Scotland produce? (I know jack shit about their economy.)

Maybe the United Kingdom should devolve altogether. Independent England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland. Independent Yorkshire? Independent Cornwall? Or unite Ireland? Fat chance, probably.

Maybe the British Isles should be made a UN Protectorate. Once they ran an empire; now they don't seem to be able to run a fish and chips shop. Or maybe the French should take over again. It improved things quite a bit the last time.

Once they ran an empire; now they don't seem to be able to run a fish and chips shop. Or maybe the French should take over again. It improved things quite a bit the last time. — Bitter Crank

I beg to differ. As noted in The Telegraph of 10 May in an article about the UK's 50 best fish and chip shops, there are now 10,500 fish and chip shops in the UK and they are experiencing a booming trade since the start of the lockdown, where orders have shot up by 208%.

So much so that even the French are after our fish, as noted in the BBC headline on the 7 May "Jersey officials hold talks with French fishermen over rights dispute".

I think the French have more on their plate than looking to take over another country. As the BBC News headline of 11 May noted: "French soldiers warn of civil war in new letter".

How much North Sea oil can Scotland lay claim to? — Bitter Crank

North Sea Oil cannot be called a "growth industry" even if it has been sustained, to say at least. And only part of the UK production would be Scottish (knowing the English):



The hey-days of increased oil revenue are over I'd say.

Maybe the British Isles should be made a UN Protectorate. Once they ran an empire; now they don't seem to be able to run a fish and chips shop. Or maybe the French should take over again. It improved things quite a bit the last time. — Bitter Crank

lol I doubt very much France can take over anything right now. Maybe Germany though? After all, that's where the Anglo-Saxons came from.

BTW, I remember reading somewhere that the Scots originally came from Scandinavia, thousands of years before the Celts, Anglo-Saxons and Vikings. So, maybe the genetic pull is calling?

Having said that, considering that the four nations are so close together, can they really be economically separate and at war with one another? Would conflict between them not be used by foreign powers like China or Russia to destabilize Western Europe and take over? I think the issue is a bit more complex than it seems.

Brexit was the big mistake, IMHO. The EU isn't a perfect union, of course, but it seemed like the UK was much better off IN than OUT. I certainly can understand the ethnic pride the Scots have, be they Celts or Norse. But ethnic pride isn't enough to maintain their economy.

Their international exports (not counting trade within the UK):

Brexit was the big mistake, IMHO. The EU isn't a perfect union, of course, but it seemed like the UK was much better off IN than OUT. I certainly can understand the ethnic pride the Scots have, be they Celts or Norse. But ethnic pride isn't enough to maintain their economy. — Bitter Crank

Well, when it comes to ethnic pride, the economy often takes second place. Obviously, in an ideal world all four nations should be "independent", though it's hard to tell how practicable that would be in the end.

As for Brexit, I think it's too early to tell. We need to see how Europe comes out of the pandemic crisis, how rival powers like Russia and China play it, etc. But if Johnson intends to make the UK dependent on China as a substitute for the EU, then I doubt Brexit can have a happy ending.

Referendums are won by % votes, not seats. — Tim3003

As Tim3003 pointed out, referendums are won by % votes, not seats.

In a democratic society, the will of the people is generally taken to mean a decision by simple majority, or half-plus-one wins the vote.

Nicola Sturgeon on the 8 May 2021 said a second independence referendum "is the will of the country" and the prime minister would be "picking a fight with the democratic wishes of the Scottish people" if he tries to block it.

To take a sporting analogy, in the World Championships in Berlin 2009 100 metres Men Final, Usain Bolt finished in 9.58 seconds and Tyson Gay finished in 9.71 seconds - a difference of only 0.13 seconds. If the sports commentator had said that Tyson Gay had won because he had the slower speed then that commentator would never be taken seriously again.

Similarly, it makes no sense for Nicola Sturgeon to say that a second independence referendum is the "is the will of the country", when the pro-second independence referendum parties (SNP and Greens) gained fewer votes than those parties opposed (Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats).

But not only that, as Scotland has a population of about 5,517,000 and there are about 4,281,000 registered voters, the pro-second independence referendum parties only gained 24% of the population in general and only 31% of the registered voters, making her claim that it "is the will of the country" even more spurious.

I don't know much about Scotland per se, but I do know a little about the EU. It's not easy to learn about the EU at all compared to the US or many other countries. It's just a massive undemocratic bureaucracy. Not that it's all bad mind you, but it has very serious problems.

If the EU does not integrate like the US has, I fear it will be doomed to collapse. Coronavirus response was quite illuminating so far as EU unity goes...

So if Scotland does leave, it may be quite bad. But staying in this EU is not amazing either. Pick your poison.

I understand your rationale, but remind you that this issue goes back at least 1000 years, in which there is a long history of the subjugation of Scotland by the English. We were led to believe that the act of Union which settled the matter was a voluntary Union of countries working together as one. Being voluntary, it is up to the people of member countries if they remain, or leave the Union.
Like you I wouldn’t want this to happen, I would gladly go back to how the world was before the referendum. But it was an act of constitutional upheaval which was inevitably going to have consequences. Something Cameron should have considered before calling the referendum.

Unfortunately we now have the circumstances where the break up of the Union is pretty much inevitable. Due to the clowns who have forced their way into Downing Street and are doing their Laurel and Hardy impersonation at our expense.

subjugation of Scotland — Punshhh

I can understand some Scots wanting independence, even at a financial cost of about £15 billion a year. For example, this compares to the £14 billion that the Scottish government spends on its NHS each year.

According to the 2018/2019 Government Expenditure and Revenue in Scotland (GERS) report, tax revenue north of the border amounted to around £66 billion - that figure includes North Sea oil revenues. Scotland received about £81 billion in public spending. That means the UK Government spent an additional £15 billion in Scotland as a whole, more than it collected from the country via taxes. This is under the Barnett Formula.

However, this is not what the SNP wants. The SNP wants to rejoin the EU. But independence is not compatible with EU membership. The SNP manifesto 2021 states "we are seeking the permission of the Scottish people in this election for an independence referendum to take place after the crisis (covid)" and "we firmly believe that EU membership is the best option for Scotland".

The SNP say that they want to be independent because of their feelings of "subjugation" within the UK Parliament, having only 9% of the MPs, yet propose joining the EU, where they will have possibly have only 1.8% of the total MEPs. If the SNP feel "subjugated" within the UK Parliament, their feelings of "subjugation" will only be magnified once part of the EU. Scotland can be either independent and not part of the EU or part of the EU and not independent, but they cannot be both independent and part of the EU, as the SNP misleadingly say they can.

The SNP's claim that Scotland can be both independent and a member of the EU is untrue.

After the English, I thought there were no Scots left. :grimace:

Your comparison of being ruled from Westminster being equal if not better than being ruled by the EU, in terms of freedoms of governance and autonomy, is absurd.

I am no expert on the powers Scotland has been given by Westminster, but it doesn’t give them much freedom. They still have to go cap in hand for most things. Just recently Jacob Rees Mogg said in the house that devolution is a failed project and that it is now time for its abolition. The same government has been saying in their anti EU rhetoric that we are controlled by the EU and that’s why we have to leave the EU. But in reality the EU is largely trying to regularise standards, regulations, tariffs and enjoy a customs Union between members. Allowing the establishment of the single market. Any notion of an EU superstate had receded years ago and of course we would always have had the right to veto.
Imagine if Scotland vetoed the abolition of devolution.

I’ve met some very Scottish people, more Scottish than I could have imagined, before I met them.