Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, calls for fresh independence referendum

[Deleted]

No, the government rejected regional assemblies of this type because they want to centralize power in London, particularly its economic draw. The centre of gravity in London pulls in finance from every other part of the United Kingdom, just to feed "the city" which, in loose terms, means the financial institutions that thrive there, and whose reckless gambling was the fuel for the crash in 2008.

Wrong. We voted on English regions. The first vote was in the area that most strongly supported regional assemblies, and the voters resoundingly rejected it.

I also point out that when adjusted for size, Scotland's financial services sector is actually larger than the UK's. Edinburgh is actually a bigger financial centre relative to Scotland's economic size than London is compared to the Uk economy. I also point out that Alex Salmond in 2007 wrote in the Times

"We would adopt a light-touch regulation scheme suitable for the Scottish financial sector and banks, famous for their probity. We would reject the gold-plated regulatory approach of Westminster"

That's not really what's happening. Scottish nationalism is the civic form, where immigration is welcomed and we dislike the idea of being removed from Europe when we overwhelmingly voted to stay. English nationalism has, unfortunately, become ethnic; this is a different thing, altogether.

This is complete tosh and I suspect you know it is. Every nationalist will claim that their version of nationalism is pure and benign and nicer than the nationalists next door.

There are without doubt English natipnalist racists. There are also without doubt Scottish nationalists who are racists and simply hate England via centuries old grudges. English natinalism has concerns about immigration. That doesn;t make you a racist. England has a much higher population density than Scotland, it also has much higher levels of immigration even when you allow for England's greater size. England has born the heaviest of the cuts. It is no wonder that concern about immigration has become an issue.

London is one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the world.

Moreover, the most recent Social Attitude Survey just released, showed a sharp rise in euro-scepticism in Scotland: 67% of respondents either wanted Scotland to leave the EU or to have Eu powers "substanially reduced".

And remember, this is Scotland where the euro and schengen have no happened. Had scotland been in the euro and been subject to Herr Schauble's fiscal regime, or had scotland bene subjected to Angela Merkel's armtwisting everyone into accepting mandatory migrant quotas, what then?

Yes, a majority of those who voted in Scotland voted tostay in the EU. But the turnout was actually lower than the overall UK. How many Scots voted to remain in the EU encouraged by the SNP saying "if we vote remain and leave wins we willgo for independence again"? Are you saying there was no tactical voting?

Alex Salmond stated on his radio show that after independence Scotland might not even apply to join the EU? He has read the reports too and also knows Scotland owuld fail the admission requirements. Or if it did join it would have to accept the euro (at least in principle and would likely face alot of pressure to join in actuality), and Schengen. But the voters are hostile to both.

This is just a suggestion, but you should perhaps look at how the anti-independence campaign is messaging. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, flat-out called the SNP and their supporters "racists", and so many others have simply followed suit. Calling a pro-immigration party racist, when your own towed the line because of UKIP-driven xenophobia, is ridiculous; but we don't live in sensible times.

Luckily, the spanking of Geert Wilders here in the Netherlands seems to imply that ethnic nationalism isn't "on the rise".

It's on the rise in two, very particular, countries.

Sadiq Kan said nothing of the sort. What he actually said was

" nationalism can be as divisive as bigotry and racism"

He did not say Scottish natinalists were bigots or racists - although undoubtedly some of them are (and indeed, some unionists in scotland are as well). He just said nationalism can be as divisive as racism or bigotry. They might not be the same, but they can both cause the same problem.

Natually nationalism is divisive.It seeks to separate "us" from "them". Scottish Nationalism is no different to any other nationalism.

It paints itself as holding the moral high ground.
It compares neighbours unfavourably with itself.
It fuels a sense of injustice, of being taken advantage of, being bullied
It seeks to blame every problem on "the other". The SNP blaming Westminster for everything is no different to Trump blaming Mexicans and Chinese.
It paints utopian fantasies where every problem is solved once "free of the other".

Can you be pro-immigration and racist? Of course you can. It's absurd to say otherwise. If you looked hard enough you'd find Scottish Nationalists who would welcome French or German immigrants into Scotland but who hate the English.

It's the same everywhere.

[Rend Blackhand]

For as long as I've been alive, I have never heard an argument for Scottish independence that extends beyond the 'those English bastards' mentality.

The SNP might show a cuddly left wing face but at grassroots level, independence is a racist movement that blames the English for Scotland's problems.

[The Glitch]

For as long as I've been alive, I have never heard an argument for Scottish independence that extends beyond the 'those English bastards' mentality.

The SNP might show a cuddly left wing face but at grassroots level, independence is a racist movement that blames the English for Scotland's problems.

Well you haven't been listening hard enough or to the right people. Because , yes while there will always be some that think like this, I can tell you , being Scottish, and living in Scotland, Most everyone I know that wants Independence, does not think like that, they have no bad feelings towards English people, only Westminster.
We want to govern ourselves, as we feel Westminster does not have the best interest for our country at heart, we do have differing views as to how to run our country, and whats best, compared to how Westminster runs things currently. It has nothing to do with hating the English.

So I suggest before making such blanket statements you make damn sure you are correct, as you are just as bad as tabloid newspapers spouting their fear mongering garbage.

[Rend Blackhand]

Well you haven't been listening hard enough or to the right people. Because , yes while there will always be some that think like this, I can tell you , being Scottish, and living in Scotland, Most everyone I know that wants Independence, does not think like that, they have no bad feelings towards English people, only Westminster.
We want to govern ourselves, as we feel Westminster does not have the best interest for our country at heart, we do have differing views as to how to run our country, and whats best, compared to how Westminster runs things currently. It has nothing to do with hating the English.

So I suggest before making such blanket statements you make damn sure you are correct, as you are just as bad as tabloid newspapers spouting their fear mongering garbage.

I lived in Scotland for years and went to school with an English accent. Don't bullshit me, the country is riddled with racism.

[Pua]

I also point out that when adjusted for size, Scotland's financial services sector is actually larger than the UK's. Edinburgh is actually a bigger financial centre relative to Scotland's economic size than London is compared to the Uk economy. I also point out that Alex Salmond in 2007 wrote in the Times

"We would adopt a light-touch regulation scheme suitable for the Scottish financial sector and banks, famous for their probity. We would reject the gold-plated regulatory approach of Westminster"

As I pointed out earlier, it doesn't matter what Alex Salmond said. This is a completely different debate and, even if it weren't, Scots would decide whether or not they'd vote for right-wing policies such as these (or the lowering of corporation tax Salmond also supported), or reject them. At the moment, we get what the Conservatives say we get; the failed austerity project writ large, nuclear weapons, an aggressive foreign policy, and the disproportionate hammering of the low paid, sick and disabled.

This is complete tosh and I suspect you know it is.

No, it's not. The Scottish National Party wants to remain part of the European Union, and the freedom of movement that entails. This, put simply, can NOT be considered ethnic nationalism in any way, shape or form. UKIP and the nutter-fringe of the Conservative party that spawned UKIP want to move away from Europe and the entire leave argument centred around immigration; despite immigration not being an economic problem, according to MigrationWatch.

English natinalism has concerns about immigration. That doesn;t make you a racist. England has a much higher population density than Scotland, it also has much higher levels of immigration even when you allow for England's greater size. England has born the heaviest of the cuts. It is no wonder that concern about immigration has become an issue.

First of all, I didn't say 'English nationalism made you racist'. We know people like Farage and his ilk are, but that's somewhat beside the point.

Here is the problem with immigration:

It's an easy bogeyman to deploy.

The lower-middle to working classes care about relatively simple things. They want jobs they can live on, schools for their kids, doctors to see them when they're sick... And they probably want their bins emptied. 'Immigration' is an easy argument to frighten these demographics with, because it impacts on all of them - that's why right-wing, propagandist media keeps harping on about it.

Moreover, the most recent Social Attitude Survey just released, showed a sharp rise in euro-scepticism in Scotland: 67% of respondents either wanted Scotland to leave the EU or to have Eu powers "substanially reduced".

Which is it? Out of 67 people in 100, how many wanted powers "substantially reduced" and how many wanted to leave?

And what powers did they think needed reduced? Did the poll ask? Or was it another case of the Brexit voter on LBC that couldn't tell James O'Brien a single EU law that he wanted to see revoked?

But the turnout was actually lower than the overall UK. How many Scots voted to remain in the EU encouraged by the SNP saying "if we vote remain and leave wins we willgo for independence again"? Are you saying there was no tactical voting?

I've no doubt there was tactical voting involved, but we're getting hugely into the realms of speculation here. There could be any number of reasons why the turnout in Scotland was lower, and just about all of the arguments hold equal weight.

Alex Salmond stated on his radio show that after independence Scotland might not even apply to join the EU? He has read the reports too and also knows Scotland owuld fail the admission requirements. Or if it did join it would have to accept the euro (at least in principle and would likely face alot of pressure to join in actuality), and Schengen. But the voters are hostile to both.

1. It's not up to Alex Salmond. My personal view is that the comments he (and other SNP members) is making are to shore up the Yes/Leave vote.
2. Scotland would NOT have to accept the Euro. I've already explained multiple times why this is, so there's no excuse for you not knowing it.

Sadiq Kan said nothing of the sort. What he actually said was

" nationalism can be as divisive as bigotry and racism"

He did not say Scottish natinalists were bigots or racists - although undoubtedly some of them are (and indeed, some unionists in scotland are as well). He just said nationalism can be as divisive as racism or bigotry. They might not be the same, but they can both cause the same problem.

That was his doctored speech, after his original was leaked and caused a shitstorm. Helpfully, his original Tweet is still available and it says:

"There's no difference between those who try to divide us on the basis of whether we're English or Scottish, and those who try to divide us on the basis of our background, race or religion".

It's pretty unambiguous.

But, actually!

We do know something about who is more likely to be racist amongst Scottish nationalists and Scottish unionists. We know something about it, because it was recently polled (by Panelbase).



People who voted No and Leave are far more anti-immigration than those who voted Yes and Remain by a stark 18 and 45 points respectively.

So...

Scottish Nationalism is no different to any other nationalism.

Obviously, it is.

It paints itself as holding the moral high ground.
It compares neighbours unfavourably with itself.
It fuels a sense of injustice, of being taken advantage of, being bullied
It seeks to blame every problem on "the other". The SNP blaming Westminster for everything is no different to Trump blaming Mexicans and Chinese.
It paints utopian fantasies where every problem is solved once "free of the other".

All of which was common to the Leave campaign, and the opposite of the Yes campaign.

And equating Scottish issues with Westminster to what's going on with Donald Trump is so utterly asinine, I can only assume you were drunk when you wrote it.

[The Glitch]

I lived in Scotland for years and went to school with an English accent. Don't bullshit me, the country is riddled with racism.

Yes there is racism, like anywhere in the world you will find pockets of racist scum. But that is not who the people of Scotland are as a whole. And while I am not taking away from the fact that you may have been bullied at school for being English, lets just say kids will bully anyone that they perceive as different, that doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't prove that everyone that wants an Independent Scotland hates English people.

[Tommi]

Well you haven't been listening hard enough or to the right people. Because , yes while there will always be some that think like this, I can tell you , being Scottish, and living in Scotland, Most everyone I know that wants Independence, does not think like that, they have no bad feelings towards English people, only Westminster.
We want to govern ourselves, as we feel Westminster does not have the best interest for our country at heart, we do have differing views as to how to run our country, and whats best, compared to how Westminster runs things currently. It has nothing to do with hating the English.

So I suggest before making such blanket statements you make damn sure you are correct, as you are just as bad as tabloid newspapers spouting their fear mongering garbage.

And yet, everyone I know is the opposite. Maybe we should prove we can govern ourselves? As it stands right now, the SNP isn't showing how well it can run Scotland. To the average person, all the SNP seems to do is debate " MAH FREEDOM!" and "MAH EU!". The country is in a shit state.
NHS is so fucking strained that I'm being told my life saving medical treatments may be stopped and I'll have to go back on chemo tablets and steroids.
The education system is squeezing more kids into a single classroom, and special schools are kinda fucked as well. There are autistic kids that will not be able to cope in a mainstream school, and mainstream teacher will not be able to handle a full scale meltdown. Fuck, even I still don't know how to handle my nephew when he had a meltdown.
And that's just two things that we never hear about from Wee Jimmy Krankies mouth. All her brain seems to be able to think is " MAH INDEPENDENCE".

I honestly hope there is IndyRef 2. And I hope it's still a NO. Maybe then she'll respect democracy, as she doesn't seem to just now.

[Rennadrel]

England already rejected regional assemblies. For one thing the English do not see why their country should be split up into faceless "regions" with drab names like "The Assembly for the South West" which no one identifies with, simply to appease inferiority complexes in Scotland and Wales

The English should not have to suppress their national indentity in the face of ther Scots and Welsh expressing theirs, let alone do it because of the argument "The Scots can be nationalist but the English can't because England is bigger and scarier"

There is no real reason for the English to not have their own Parliament. Most certainly "because it worries the Scots" should not even come into it.

For far too long English nationalism has been held down whilst that in the other nations has run rampant. Any English National Party would no doubt immediately be cast as racist and compared to the National Front, no such comparisons would even be permitted for the SNP and Plaid.


Apparently the English are expected to simply sit back and passively get used as a verbal punching bag by everyone else.

Well, the SNP have most certainly awoken English nationalism, as was their intent. They won;t like it, not with England being ten times bigger and stronger.

Tony Blair started it all off with his ridiculous asymentic devolution: The Scots can have their Parliament, but the English can't.

Having regional governments like provinces works just fine. We have provinces in Canada and have had fairly appropriate representation in our federal government across all provinces as well as having governments within the provinces. That said, provincial governments are a big problem in that they can easily screw over the people living within the province, as has been done to Ontario over the last 14 years of liberal rule in the province. Equal representation can happen by MPs getting elected for their regions to represent them at the federal level and the provincial legislatures do most of the day to day operations of the region or province. It's not a bad idea, governments are just too inept to get the systems created. Hell, the Canadian government promised to change our electoral system to equal representation rather than first past the post, but that fell over on its ass pretty fast.

[Kallisto]

It isn't mine. No more illegal foreign wars, please.

The guy that dragged Britain into those wars was Scottish. Blair is Edinburgh born and raised. (Cameron is half Scottish) So it's never been England dragging others into the wars.

- - - Updated - - -

Wrong. We voted on English regions. The first vote was in the area that most strongly supported regional assemblies, and the voters resoundingly rejected it.

Wrong it was one small region in the north west given a vote on an assembly that had absolutely no power. It can not be compared to the Welsh assembly of Scottish Parliament. That's why it was voted down. Not because "Let's keep English nationalism." but more "Why you giving something that costs money and gives no power."

[Tommi]

Yeah the result of not being able to run your own economy, and shelling out for England has disasterous affects on daily life. Especially after periods downturn that we havent recovered from yet.

Oh, I don't disagree, not saying life in the Uk is perfect. But I see no proper plan from any party in Scotland that would allow us to be independant and thrive. As much as I'd love to see Scotland on it's own, I don't see a viable way that I, a disabled person, can have the same quality of life. Until there is absolutes my life won't be affected, I cannot support independence.
Edit: Found this old medical record. I was pretty fucked from a young age :P : http://i.imgur.com/KMiQx1e.jpg

Tommi we've said it a hundred times and its not even refutable honestly, she is just doing her job as an independence party, they got voted in, if you wanna be pissed at anyone be pissed at Scotland as a whole.

No mate, I'm pissed at the SNP for diving Scotland. The SNP's greatest legacy is splitting Scotland in two.

If you're interested btw these guys do great work with kids with communication issues, they have these touchbases that really help people and give them back choices in their life. http://www.sensescotland.org.uk/

My sister works with autistic kids, she's one of those support workers in schools. My nephew is her son. He is full blown autistic though, has to have a set routine or he goes into meltdown.
Funny story though. Before she finished her college training and shit, my nephews first support worker was my one when she was just out of training. We didn't have separate schools for shit back then. Although they thought I had learning problems, turns out I had asynchronous development. Which bring me to the point that our school system failed someone like me because it's still stuck in an industrial age where we as a society have moved far past that, yet the education system hasn't.
This is what I said about it: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...9#post35322789

Whilst I'd love to see Scotland stand on it's own, I personally don't believe we are at that stage. Start working towards it by getting more powers devolved to us first. If Nicola Sturgeon was more like "Let's have more powers given to us to run Scotland the way Scotland wishes to. We wanted to stay in the EU, so allow us more power as a compromise", I think Westminster would be far more accommodating that all out hostile, which I don't blame them for given the way the SNP acts in parliament just now.

[Pua]

The guy that dragged Britain into those wars was Scottish. Blair is Edinburgh born and raised. (Cameron is half Scottish) So it's never been England dragging others into the wars.

I know. Which is why I know that it's not England or the English that's my problem; it's the crooked, anti-democratic parliament that just happens to reside in its biggest city.

Personally, I don't split people up like this. Your mileage may vary.

Oh, I don't disagree, not saying life in the Uk is perfect. But I see no proper plan from any party in Scotland that would allow us to be independant and thrive. As much as I'd love to see Scotland on it's own, I don't see a viable way that I, a disabled person, can have the same quality of life. Until there is absolutes my life won't be affected, I cannot support independence.

Honestly, this just seems like you haven't been paying attention. There are literally dozens of policies that could be employed once Scotland becomes independence, many of them would have an impact on your life; for the better.

As things stand, this is what happens in England due to Conservative governance.

If you think your life hasn't changed much over the last decade or so, it's because the Scottish government are protecting you (as they do with, for example, the DHP that stops the most vulnerable from being hit with the bedroom tax).

Here's the key: policies don't matter.

What matters is that Scotland, at the moment, has no say in what policies are enacted. It makes no matter who you vote for, you're getting right-wing neoliberal governance and that's it. Only once independent, can Scotland choose a different route and if you honestly think Theresa May will take better care of you than Nicola Sturgeon will, then I'd take a closer look at the evidence.

Whilst I'd love to see Scotland stand on it's own, I personally don't believe we are at that stage. Start working towards it by getting more powers devolved to us first. If Nicola Sturgeon was more like "Let's have more powers given to us to run Scotland the way Scotland wishes to. We wanted to stay in the EU, so allow us more power as a compromise", I think Westminster would be far more accommodating that all out hostile, which I don't blame them for given the way the SNP acts in parliament just now.

That's exactly what the "Scotland's Place in Europe" document was designed to do.

It got thrown out of the departure bill, which was the first bill not to face a single amendment since World War 2.

Think about that.

[Tommi]

@Tommo and @Aviemore

Whilst I can't disagree with what you have said, I do ask this. Why do the SNP not PROMOTE these things more? What good is this information if it isn't made more public to the common man and woman and child? Shove that down our throats instead of "MAH FREEDOM". If shit like that was publicised more by Nicola Sturgeon, then the SNP might actually win more people over. Right now, hearing her drone on about IndyRef2 is just grating as fuck.

[Mayhem]

No its you that is incapable. My request was straightforward, show me where in that post that Boris Johnson says we are staying in the single market

The whole quote is saying it. You want these words "we are staying in the single market", i get it, your position is that bad that you ask for these specific words not a message that says the very same thing, no, it must be those exact words, in that exact order.

That is pre-school level arguing.

[Rockyreg]

The whole quote is saying it. You want these words "we are staying in the single market", i get it, your position is that bad that you ask for these specific words not a message that says the very same thing, no, it must be those exact words, in that exact order.

That is pre-school level arguing.

It must be those exact words because he is not saying we are staying in the single market! He is arguing, whether rightly or wrongly that we can be outside the single market yet still do these things.

[Mayhem]

It must be those exact words because he is not saying we are staying in the single market! He is arguing, whether rightly or wrongly that we can be outside the single market yet still do these things.

Yes, by saying "British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down ... there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.". None of that says at some point in time, it doesn´t even imply at some point in time, however it implies quite obviously that the UK stays in the single market by using the words "still be" and "continue to be".

[Rockyreg]

Yes, by saying "British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down ... there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.". None of that says at some point in time, it doesn´t even imply at some point in time, however it implies quite obviously that the UK stays in the single market by using the words "still be" and "continue to be".

It does no such thing. You highlight these two points as evidence yet you ignore the rest where he says:

''is that the UK will extricate itself from the EU’s extraordinary and opaque system of legislation: the vast and growing corpus of law enacted by a European Court of Justice from which there can be no appeal''

Now you know as well as I do that you cannot be a member of the single market without accepting supremacy of the ECJ. So with that statement is he saying we will be staying in the single market?

The whole article is Here

In my opinion he obviously being very cagey about what he is saying, but reading between the lines I think he is expecting maybe a transitional deal in the interim leading to further negotiation on a future trade agreement, but that is my personal opinion.

[Deleted]

As I pointed out earlier, it doesn't matter what Alex Salmond said. This is a completely different debate and, even if it weren't, Scots would decide whether or not they'd vote for right-wing policies such as these (or the lowering of corporation tax Salmond also supported), or reject them. At the moment, we get what the Conservatives say we get; the failed austerity project writ large, nuclear weapons, an aggressive foreign policy, and the disproportionate hammering of the low paid, sick and disabled.

Ah, I see. So when the banks cause trouble it's all Westminster's fault for not regulating them enough and it is Westminster protecting City interests. But before allthat it really doesn;t matter that Alex Salmond was complaining long and loud that Westminster was regulating the banks too much and pushing for independence so that he could de-regaulate them even more.

It is very obvious that as a Nationalist you believe that Westminster is always wrong and that the SNP are always right.

Let me ask, exactly how have the SNP in Holyrood used their new powers to increase welfare spending and to raise tax to pay for it to mitigate the "hammering of the sick and disabled"

I put it to you that the SNP are hypocrites: they call for more welfare but only when Westminster pays for it, and then they'd complain that Westminster taxes too much.

Exactly what wealth re-distribution has the SNP done with their powers? Almost none, because they know that the moment taxes started to rise the Scottish taste for "social justice" would disappear. It is easy to have "social justice" when someone else has to find the cash to pay for it. And after independence there wouldn't be any. There would be no utopia. Only cuts and tax rises that would make the Tories look like Mary Poppins.

No, it's not. The Scottish National Party wants to remain part of the European Union, and the freedom of movement that entails. This, put simply, can NOT be considered ethnic nationalism in any way, shape or form. UKIP and the nutter-fringe of the Conservative party that spawned UKIP want to move away from Europe and the entire leave argument centred around immigration; despite immigration not being an economic problem, according to MigrationWatch.

But do they? Alex Salmond dropped a heavy hint that the SNP might not even apply for Eu membership after independence. As I said, they are caught between their rhetoric about the scots being passionate pro-Europeans, and the reality, which is that the Scots dislike the EU slightly less than the English and Welsh. In 2014 they had to promise that they'd keep Scotland out of the euro and Schengen, because both were deeply unpopular (particularly the euro)

Why do you keep harping about "ethnic nationalism"? It doesn't make nationalism any less divisive. At it's heart nationalism is always about feeling superior to someone else and pinning the blame for your problems on them.

First of all, I didn't say 'English nationalism made you racist'. We know people like Farage and his ilk are, but that's somewhat beside the point.

Here is the problem with immigration:

It's an easy bogeyman to deploy.

The lower-middle to working classes care about relatively simple things. They want jobs they can live on, schools for their kids, doctors to see them when they're sick... And they probably want their bins emptied. 'Immigration' is an easy argument to frighten these demographics with, because it impacts on all of them - that's why right-wing, propagandist media keeps harping on about it.

And the SNP do exactly the same, only their bogeyman is "Westminster".


Where was the Yes vote the highest? Those areas of Scotland which are predominantly poor, where people are heavily dependent on benefits, and where educational attainments are lowest and unemployment the highest.Where was the No vote highest? Where people are doing well and are well-educated.

Nationalism is always the same. It takes advantage of people feeling unhappy with their lives, then it presents them with simplistic yet appealing explanations:

Your problems are caused by "them". Your problems will go away once you free yourselves of "them".

The "them" doesn't matter. It can be any scapegoat you like. People are not only willing they are eager to be told there is a quick and painless solution to their difficulties.

Look at UKIP. They too said they were not racist, they were not opposed to immigration just uncontrolled and unlimited immigration. Their big bogey-man was Brussels, and guess what?

They said exactly the same thing about Brussels that the SNP say about Wesmtinster.

Which is it? Out of 67 people in 100, how many wanted powers "substantially reduced" and how many wanted to leave?

And what powers did they think needed reduced? Did the poll ask? Or was it another case of the Brexit voter on LBC that couldn't tell James O'Brien a single EU law that he wanted to see revoked?

What does that matter? The point is that the SNP are painting the Scots as passionate embracers of the Eu, but they aren't. A majority of them either want to leave the Eu or at least see it's powers reduced, and that is when you consider that the Scots are not even part of the euro or Schengen for which every poll shows little to no enthusiasm for. The report indicates that only 33% are happy for Scotland to embrace the EU in it's current form.

It is quite obvious that the EU is simply a convenient pretext. I repeat the SNP have dropped increasing hints that after calling for their referendum which is all about the "outrage" over Eu membership, they might not even apply to join. No doubt because they have read that report too, and they know that there is no way of evading the thorny issues of schengen and the euro either.

A million Scots voted Leave and 300,000 of them were Yes supporters. It is quite obvious that the SNP's "outrage" is synthetic, and the Eu is just a pretext to pick a fight with Westminster, painting the Scots as plucky underdogs aching to fully embrace Brussels and being denied their rights by the nasty English xenphobes next door.

1. It's not up to Alex Salmond. My personal view is that the comments he (and other SNP members) is making are to shore up the Yes/Leave vote.
2. Scotland would NOT have to accept the Euro. I've already explained multiple times why this is, so there's no excuse for you not knowing it.

Riight.Alex Salmond does not in any way drive SNP policy. Good lord, his influence is so obvious watching Nicola Sturgeon is like seeing an episode of Thunderbirds because the strings are so obvious.

Scotland would have to commit to the euro. It might be able to fudge it's way along and avoid it; but the SNP can hardly begin Scotland's relationship with the EU with an independence campaign telling the voters "Don't worry, we technically commit to the euro but we've no intention of joining it". It would undoubtedly come under pressure to join.

Moreover, what is not voluntary at all are the criteria for applicant members, which are meeting the requirements on debt and deficit and setting up your own currency and central bank....

because these are all necessary steps in preparing to join the monetary union and all applicants are required to commit to doing so
/Thereis no treaty clause that says an applicant state can break these requirements just because.

That was his doctored speech, after his original was leaked and caused a shitstorm. Helpfully, his original Tweet is still available and it says:

"There's no difference between those who try to divide us on the basis of whether we're English or Scottish, and those who try to divide us on the basis of our background, race or religion".

It's pretty unambiguous.

Yes and at no point did he "out and out call scottish nationalists racist"

He is actually quite right. There really isn;t a difference.

But, actually!

We do know something about who is more likely to be racist amongst Scottish nationalists and Scottish unionists. We know something about it, because it was recently polled (by Panelbase).



People who voted No and Leave are far more anti-immigration than those who voted Yes and Remain by a stark 18 and 45 points respectively.

So...



Obviously, it is.

Good old Wingsy! Like they would never present biased information or cherry pick bits of a poll. And what is interesting is that almost half of the respondents thought immigration was too high and that 40% of the people who voted SNP felt the same way.


And all we know is that they are anti-immigration to some degree. Being opposed to immigration in some way doesn;t make you racist. It is perfectly possible to have legitimate concerns about immigration whilst not being in the slightest racist.

And equating Scottish issues with Westminster to what's going on with Donald Trump is so utterly asinine, I can only assume you were drunk when you wrote it.

Nice. All I said was that the SNP and Trump are using exactly the same tactic of "blaming the other"

With the SNP it is Wesmtinster.
With UKIP it was Brussels.
With Trump it is Mexico and China.
With Gert Wilders it is Muslims


The underlying message and method are the same.

Donald Trump is exploiting the fact that American factories have closed and created the rust-belt. The actual reason is that things like cars can be made cheaper and often better outside the US because people in other countries work harder, for less and the simple fact is that America got out-competed.

But of course Americans do not want to hear that. What they do want to hear is that China rigged the market, deceived the Obama administration and exploited the trusting Americans who only ever act out of goodwill and kindness and never exploited or bullied anyone else ever. They want to hear that Trump will make everything right and will miraculously open all those factories again because by golly he will stick it to those perfidious Chinese and Mexicans.

Nationalists are all the same.

They all require their own "Great Satan", a figure to blame every problem on and to fit with their narrative of "vote for me and I will free you from them and it will all be wonderful"

[Mayhem]

It does no such thing. You highlight these two points as evidence yet you ignore the rest where he says:

''is that the UK will extricate itself from the EU’s extraordinary and opaque system of legislation: the vast and growing corpus of law enacted by a European Court of Justice from which there can be no appeal''

Now you know as well as I do that you cannot be a member of the single market without accepting supremacy of the ECJ. So with that statement is he saying we will be staying in the single market?

The whole article is Here

In my opinion he obviously being very cagey about what he is saying, but reading between the lines I think he is expecting maybe a transitional deal in the interim leading to further negotiation on a future trade agreement, but that is my personal opinion.

So your argument against his lie that the UK will continue to have free trade and access to the single market is that he is lying?

If the average brexit voter would know what the EU, the ECJ and so on actually do there would be no brexit. I mean you´re arguing here that boris chose his words because he thought people would understand that it is bullshit he is claiming. That makes no sense whatsoever. It was propaganda, that was meant to say "we don´t lose access and the good stuff and we will get rid of the bad stuff". That this doesn´t work, doesn´t change what his message was, namely the UK will continue to have free trade and access to the single market. And i don´t know how you understand continue to have, but i think it means without interruption, like a transition phase or negotiations.

[Frozenbeef]

Nicola needs to chill out and stop being a racist twit, the people of scotland knew what they were voting for just like the entire knew what brexit involved. it's time to live with it and overcome our troubles rather than whining.

[Rockyreg]

So your argument against his lie that the UK will continue to have free trade and access to the single market is that he is lying?

If the average brexit voter would know what the EU, the ECJ and so on actually do there would be no brexit. I mean you´re arguing here that boris chose his words because he thought people would understand that it is bullshit he is claiming. That makes no sense whatsoever. It was propaganda, that was meant to say "we don´t lose access and the good stuff and we will get rid of the bad stuff". That this doesn´t work, doesn´t change what his message was, namely the UK will continue to have free trade and access to the single market. And i don´t know how you understand continue to have, but i think it means without interruption, like a transition phase or negotiations.

No I don't think its a lie. And the bolded bit is exactly what I said in my post. Ultimately after the transition/negotiations he believes we will leave the single market but have a trade agreement and as you say "we don´t lose access and the good stuff and we will get rid of the bad stuff"