Scottish Independence and the UK State

[gnosticheresy_2]

- The remaining UK will have to become more equal, more democratic, more accountable to it's electorate and it's people. It will simply have to. It won't be able to afford not to, by the time the separation is taking place. The sheer scale of the national debt and deficit, the (ironically very expensive due to Liam Fox) denuding of the defence forces, and the "loss" of the only tangible assets that currently underpin the UK's fraudulent economy and standard of living (North Sea oil and gas, and Scotland's excess production of electricity) will lead to increased demands for electoral reform in the remaining UK, unquestionable calls for an English Parliament, and the abolition of the monarchy, House of Lords, and the aristocracy at long fucking last.

That would be nice, unlikely to happen soon though. I think of the UK like an onion, with the City of London Corporation at its heart (+ some others, but they'll serve well enough for this metaphor ). While I'd love to think that peeling off one layer will result in the scenario you outline, I think it'll take more than that to effect fundamental change.

So say Scotland votes for independence (assuming no fraud, which is a big assume considering the stakes). There is no way on gods earth the US will allow strategic radar sites or undersea monitoring to simply be taken offline, so in or out of NATO is largely irrelevant regarding this point. Can you imagine the economic and political pressure that could be brought to bear on a young nationalist government that would a have a hell of a lot else going on (which means multiple weak points to lever)?

Trident and the nuclear issue - I'm not sure about this. The Establishment south of the border will fight tooth and claw to hang on to this, as you rightly point out, loss of a nuclear "deterrent" would mean a final end to any pretensions of Empire. But I can easily forsee a scenario along the lines of "Sorry Mr Salmond, it's going to take at least 15 years to move the nukes + decommission and decontaminate the facilities (you wouldn't want bonny Scottish babies getting cancer now would you?). What's that? You want them gone sooner? And how exactly do you propose to force us to do that?"

However, Scotland going will be the start of change in England, but as I said, I'm expecting a few more things are now going to have to happen:

-resurgent Welsh nationalism/ English regionalism. Peeling back the onion, the more layers fall away the harder it is to conceal what sits at the centre. This will also probably work the other way as London/SE gets increasingly resentful of the "subsidy" it provides those workshy northern monkeys those noble savages of the northern wasteland (and Wales).

-as an addendum to this, Northern Island moves towards full autonomy with a Catholic majority population making the prospect of a united Ireland something to be taken seriously (I expect this to happen btw, sooner or later, and I expect for the first time in 1000 years no one in England will really care).

-economic collapse - well it might not be catastophic economic collapse, I suspect it will be a more drawn out affair, but it will be collapse nonetheless. However, the slow unwinding of neo-liberalism in one of it's heartland states isn't going to be unopposed, and it's here that we'll see the real power structures becoming exposed as they desperately try and keep the wheels turning. What will happen at this point? I don't know, I would expect a doubling down on (English) nationalism, attacks on immigrants, the poor, even more restricted movement and speech - all the usual suspects in other words. Fun times

Gentlemen, I'm drunk. But I believe. And here's hoping!

I'm not drunk, though I am hungover with a craving for bacon. mmm bacon

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Is dóigh liom go minic mar a bheadh ​​fhaighin mór ollmhór.

Aye.... yur right enough.

I often feel like a big massive fanny

Well, Ahab, when I finally succumb to my people's desperate pleas ("Will ye no' come back again?"), I shall adopt that as the motto on my new coat-of-arms.

I look forward to seeing those words embossed on your shield, Mac, at The Gathering.

(Translated into Latin, of course. Or, even better, Gaelic, so I can be absolutely sure nobody understands it.)

FFS, behave yourself, I can't even talk English under the current dictates of the state education system. Latin and Gaelic might be best left till later.

Anyways, we already know what the people are saying when they gairm for you, Mac...

Welcome back tae Glasgow, our own dear John Maclean!


.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

I'm not drunk, though I am hungover with a craving for bacon. mmm bacon

Gnostic, all the points you made in that post are very good points, and I shall adress them when I am sober myself. I promise.

So say Scotland votes for independence (assuming no fraud, which is a big assume considering the stakes). There is no way on gods earth the US will allow strategic radar sites or undersea monitoring to simply be taken offline, so in or out of NATO is largely irrelevant regarding this point. Can you imagine the economic and political pressure that could be brought to bear on a young nationalist government that would a have a hell of a lot else going on (which means multiple weak points to lever)?

The main point you are making is that there is a threat being advanced by the UK state and it's allies here - a potential catastrophe - which will be meted out against us if we dare to vote against the UK government's will. This (I hope most people realise) is the main reason to vote FOR independence.

You do not and cannot and must not allow yourself to be ruled by a (more or less obviously) antagonistic power just because they are larger and more powerful, and demonstrably so. If you give democratic assent to that kind of treatment then you can't really complain about anything that happens to you afterwards (and we love complaining about stuff, us Jocks, as I'm sure you've been told by the press).

Can you imagine the economic and political pressure that could be brought to bear on a young nationalist government that would a have a hell of a lot else going on (which means multiple weak points to lever)?

Aye, you're right enough, we joost shouldnae bother tryin'....

I know that's not what you're saying there. But.... is everyone everywhere just supposed to always vote No to any kind of independence forever more because otherwise the UK and it's international allies will kick the shit out of them? Is that what the Union boils down to?

That realisation will be a wake-up call for people in Scotland. Many of them (Unionists, mainly) have hitherto thought that they lived in a democratic Union, a Union of Equals (haha), and they have thought (for reasons unknown) that they were protected by a benevolent British state which would respect their views and the votes of the country overall. We'll see, I suppose.

.

[MacCruiskeen]

What will Independence actually mean, though, in the 21st century? If it's just going to mean new and craftier ways of getting haggard Chinese and Indonesian children to make the gadgets we (don't) need, then it's hardly sustainable™, to say nothing of ethical. Plus, the Chinese and Indonesians might raise objections, eventually. It's barely even practicable, unless you have a gigantic military budget, which Scotland won't have, unless its Independence is merely nominal and pro forma. Independence without socialism is nothing, especially if there's no socialism anywhere else. Unless it's Independence plus Capitalism, which is what it will be, i.e., "independent" Scotland will need a big strong country to defend it, e.g, England or the USA. Or, say, NATO. So in what sense will it be independent?

Admittedly, global warming is likely to make Scotland the new Spain while Spain shrivels up and dies, and surely we can all unite and rejoice about that, whatever our petty political differences. But which army is going to keep out the hordes of Iberians clamouring for potable water? The Scottish army? Far be it from me to say ho ho don't be ridiculous. Moreover*, any nation of waiters and chambermaids (however ecstatically happy) is going to be dependent on cheap flights, which are in turn dependent on plentiful cheap oil. Which army is going to secure that increasingly-rare oil for the waiters and chambermaids of tiny little Independent Scotland? The Scottish army? Is it going to beat the armies of China, India, Indonesia and Brazil? All on its own?

Questions, questions.

(So call me a miserable fucker, you fuckers. Water off a duck's back.)

*Nobody ever uses that word in real life, and no wonder.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Nobody uses "potable" in real life either. For obvious reasons.

The Scottish Government is doing a fair few deals with the Chinese on renewable energy technology (mainly wind-farm stuff) at the moment, but as far as I know the exploitation of underage Chinese labour is being kept to a minimum by Chairman Alex Salmond himself, who barely even visited the factory where the Chinese children who craft the turbine wings of our unproductive windmill follies out of papier-mache were busily dying en masse.*

*The Scotsman, 17 May, 2012.

[MacCruiskeen]

^^
Ahab, please ignore that shite (i.e., my own last post). I was just passing the time while waiting for an email to turn up. Sorry. I am in favour of Scottish independence. I also believe that there can be socialism in one country, though probably not for very long, or at least not while the world is still full of very big bad bastards, especially in the age of Peak Everything.

The United Kingdom has never been a happy alliance, much less a "natural" one. Three-quarters of Ireland fought its way free nearly a century ago, so Scotland can surely manage it peacefully today. Still, Ireland remains totally fucked, now more than ever. And it still amazes me that Iceland -- a country with a bigger land area than Portugal and a population smaller than that of Edinburgh -- can be incapacitated by the movement of money. What price "independence"?

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Hehe, I thought it was a pretty good satirical take on some of the (hundreds of) paper thin Unionist arguments. 'Course it could also be seen as a pretty good satirical take on some of the (hundreds of) paper thin Nationalist arguments too. Looked alright to me anyway. Nothing to object to.

I realise we are all fucked anyways.

But in my view you just can't give explicit consent or encouragement through a referendum to a government that you know has fucked you over in the past, is still doing so in the present, and has every intention of doing so again in the future.

It is illogical Captain.

A No vote in the referendum will be counted as consent by the UK government. Wholehearted consent. Whatever punishment we might think we would we get after breaking the Union, it will be as nothing compared to the kind of punishment we will get for having dared to question the whole foundation and utility of the United Kingdom, and then daring to fucking stay in it for another thirty years till all the oil runs out.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Still, Ireland remains totally fucked, now more than ever.

Yeah, but, as always since the eghties, Ireland is in far better economic shape than the United Kingdom, despite the collapse. Check dat GDP per capita! Pretty much everywhere is doing better than the UK, and it's always been that way. Even Post-collapse. Aye. Don't believe the financial apoco-hype.

The UK gets away with pretending that it has a decent standard of living only by convincing the majority of it's citizens that Scandinavia does not exist.

And it still amazes me that Iceland -- a country with a bigger land area than Portugal and a population smaller than that of Edinburgh -- can be incapacitated by the movement of money. What price "independence"?

Ach, they'll get by.

[MacCruiskeen]

I find your persistent use of statistics somewhat vulgar and decidedly unsporting.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Gnostic, all the points you made in that post are very good points, and I shall adress them when I am sober myself.

Well, uh... that took a bit longer than I had anticipated, but here we go!

I think of the UK like an onion

Me too, that's why I cry when I see them cutting it to bits. (I mean unnecessary spending cuts, obviously, not regions or constituent countries being allowed to govern themselves separately or even federally, which I'm all in favour of as you might have gathered).

with the City of London Corporation at its heart

It's more like a diseased appendix, but I see what you're saying.

While I'd love to think that peeling off one layer will result in the scenario you outline, I think it'll take more than that to effect fundamental change.

It'll be a start, though. A start that will never otherwise be allowed to happen if the UK retains it's current form forever.

So say Scotland votes for independence (assuming no fraud, which is a big assume considering the stakes).

This is why the SNP (and me as well) don't really want the UK Electoral Commision involved. I don't consider it a trustworthy body due to it's failure to investigate postal voting fraud in numerous UK elections, and it's refusal to investigate Peter Cruddas and Sarah Southern over their clear breaches of party funding laws, as revealed by the Sunday Times in it's sting. There's no excuse for their decision not to investigate proven breaches of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, which fall within their remit. They just don't want to.

I would like to see the referendum administered by either the Electoral Management Board in Scotland, or by an international body, maybe the UN's Election Observation people. Hell, even the EU's electoral watchdog would be preferable. I can imagine the huff the UK government would go in if we asked for that, though, so a compromise has been reached - both the Electoral Commision and the Electoral Management Board will take part.

The part to be played by MI5 (and GCHQ) has not yet been finalised. They'll have to be careful though, more careful than they have been in a long time, and more competent too. What if deliberate planned fraud by agents of the UK state was exposed in advance of the referendum? The Yes vote would skyrocket.

I wish we never introduced electronic vote counting up here. It was a disaster in the 2007 Parliamentary elections. In the recent council elections the machines in Glasgow went offline for 15 minutes, and had to be rebooted. How anyone is supposed to be confident of a fair result where computers are involved is beyond me. They are wide open to abuses.

There is no way on gods earth the US will allow strategic radar sites or undersea monitoring to simply be taken offline, so in or out of NATO is largely irrelevant regarding this point.

True. Of course, I am worried about that side of things, but it is hardly likely to make anyone vote No on the day. "We cannae dae it, Washington says Naw!"

Whatever they might get up to undercover, or behind closed doors with the UK government, is impossible to predict, so I can't let it affect my actions or beliefs in any way.

But I can easily forsee a scenario along the lines of "Sorry Mr Salmond, it's going to take at least 15 years to move the nukes + decommission and decontaminate the facilities (you wouldn't want bonny Scottish babies getting cancer now would you?). What's that? You want them gone sooner? And how exactly do you propose to force us to do that?"

It might well take fifteen years, but at the moment it's never going to happen at all, so it would still be a clear improvement on the status quo.

resurgent Welsh nationalism/ English regionalism. Peeling back the onion, the more layers fall away the harder it is to conceal what sits at the centre. This will also probably work the other way as London/SE gets increasingly resentful of the "subsidy" it provides those workshy northern monkeys those noble savages of the northern wasteland (and Wales).

I feel sorry for (and Wales) most of all. It seems like (and Wales) is swiftly becoming it's official title.

"Where you from?"

"And Wales. Boyo."

I'm going to say something controversial now - English nationalism isn't necessarily a bad thing (nor is Welsh). Whenever I see a British fascist (and they are all very much British, aren't they?) there is usually a Union flag somewhere nearby, not the flag of any of the UK's constituent nations. It's only recently that English fascists have adopted the Cross of St. George as their banner, and it's only been since they started pretending to be civic groups and mainstream non-violent political parties (EDL, BNP, British Freedom Party, um, UKIP to an extent - it's full of old NF guys - etc). Before that, in the NF days, it was always the Union flag they adored, with the ocassional Red Hand of Ulster thrown in. From Belfast to Bangor to Barnsley to Bonnybridge, our neo-Nazis all seem to worship the Union and the Empire.

It's why they have traditionally had such a loathing of lefty nationalist groups from the "Celtic Fringe" like Plaid Cymru and the SNP, and of course Sinn Fein. The far right seems to believe in the UK concept (and shout about it) more than anybody else. What is it about it that appeals to them so much?

Could it be that "English" nationalism only became so toxic and frightening because all the healthier and more democratic expressions of it (such as demands for an English Parliament, etc.) were deliberately suppressed by the UK state in the interests of promoting Britishness? Why are there so few neo-Nazis in Scotland, Ireland and Wales proportionally to England, and near zero support for their aims or values?

Let me illustrate the point. Here's an EDL demo in Brighton, a generally progressive and peaceful town:



Here's a Scottish Defence League demo in Glasgow, which doesn't have much of a reputation for peacefulness or progressiveness. The police were there to protect them from the public.



I know they bus their trogs around from all over the country, but why did the SDL just never take off here? At all? I'm not saying "the English" are any more prone to fascism than us (they're not), I'm just saying many folk in England might feel they are not allowed to express their own English national identity in England, and they might want to, so they end up frustrated, and then coralled into these overtly and oppressively "British" groups. Not that they'd all be out morris dancing otherwise, but it does make me wonder.

Anyway, that wasn't even related to what you said, so i'll shut up.

-as an addendum to this, Northern Island moves towards full autonomy with a Catholic majority population making the prospect of a united Ireland something to be taken seriously (I expect this to happen btw, sooner or later, and I expect for the first time in 1000 years no one in England will really care).

Yeah, even Mad Dog Adair has admitted this will happen. Even the DUP have said they will soon have to court the "Catholic vote" if they want to hold onto power. Unfortunately, I think the UK government will still want to stay in nominal control of Ulster, though, because it strengthens their claim on Rockall. It's still all about the oil, sadly.

However, the slow unwinding of neo-liberalism in one of it's heartland states isn't going to be unopposed, and it's here that we'll see the real power structures becoming exposed as they desperately try and keep the wheels turning. What will happen at this point? I don't know, I would expect a doubling down on (English) nationalism, attacks on immigrants, the poor, even more restricted movement and speech - all the usual suspects in other words. Fun times

But all of this is already happening, and I don't see the Union doing much to prevent it, just as I've never seen Scottish Labour MPs doing much to improve England's fortunes, either financially or socially (or Scotland's, for that matter). Their removal from the UK Parliament won't be any great loss to anybody (except Labour).

What I mean is, I don't think England will move right after Scottish independence. I think it will move left.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

I find your persistent use of statistics somewhat vulgar and decidedly unsporting.

Who is that guy? He has a funny face.

I'm addicted to statistics now, on this subject above all, but I don't want to post too many 'cos the facts taken altogether really do amount to a merciless slagging of the UK and it's governance. I mean, the overall picture is terrible, and I find nothing to be happy about in that.

I hate the UK press talking about Ireland and Iceland as if they were basket-cases, though, when they are so clearly and measurably doing better than the UK, and have at no point in recent history done any worse than it, at least as far as the income of the "man in the street" is concerned.



This image admittedly does show that percentage-wise Iceland lost more of it's national GDP during the collapse years than the UK did, and it was in terrible shape for a while, but it still has a far higher income per person and standard of living than the UK. And it's "in growth" again - as is Ireland - for what that's worth, whereas the UK is still in recession and unlikely to leave it any time soon. Iceland has less people to provide for, I suppose, but it's remarkable what they have been able to achieve since the collapse, and the good things that are happening there now are the very reason that the press has stopped reporting about them.

Of course, they had the eminent good sense to tell their financial oligarchs and the sitting government to GTFO after the collapse, and showed signs of being willing to drive them out by force if necessary... something that would be a lot more problematic here. Iceland has no army.

EDIT: Well, okay Mac, since you absolutely insist, I will post one wee bit of data for ye (it's taken from wikipedia, but only because the full report has absolutely massive images). It's an eye-opener. The UN's Human Development Index for 2011:

The HDI is a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education, and standards of living of a country. It is a standard means of measuring well-being, especially child welfare. It is also used to distinguish whether the country is a developed, a developing or an under-developed country, and also to measure the impact of economic policies on quality of life.

What does it tell us?



Norway's at number 1, as always, because it is a country with a population of around 4 million and is also a major oil and gas producer. It's very similar to Scotland in that way, except it has a decent standard of living and a £500 billion oil fund for the future (built up over only 17 years, since 1995), and doesn't have the poorest public health record or the greatest concentrations of urban poverty in Western Europe, as Scotland does within the UK. Norway also owns 1% of the entire world's stocks and shares.

Scotland (and the UK generally) currently have an oil fund worth £0. The UK is the only oil producing country in the world that did not bother to set up a Sovereign Wealth Fund for the future of it's people - instead it pissed the revenue away as soon as it came in, on endless wars of choice and (not coincidentally) the world's fourth highest defence spending.

EDIT: Oddly, Norway has never felt the need to spend anywhere near as much on defence as the UK does, despite being one of the world's wealthiest countries, and having a land border with Russia.

It is probably also not coincidental that the UK has the 4th highest level of wealth inequality in the developed world.

The disparity between Scotland and Norway's wealth is really weird, given their similar population size and level of natural resources, especially when you take into account that Scotland has always produced more barrels per day than Norway. If only we had found the awesome kind of oil they must have instead of the shitty stuff we produce. Of course, it's the exact same oil.

There are two countries in the world that have discovered oil and become poorer - Nigeria, and Scotland.

Anyway, Ireland is ranked at 7, as you can see, Iceland at 14, and the UK at number 28, just under the Czech Republic.
The Czech Republic and Slovakia have been shooting up the charts since they held a referendum and decided to separate in the nineties, in what was called the "Velvet Divorce". They still get on okay.

Back to GDP per person...

Ireland's average GDP per person (measured in international dollars by Global Finance Magazine, using Purchasing Power Parity - I hate the lingo, but it's how they measure stuff) is $39,312

Iceland's is $37,504

The UK - $35,646

Sources:
http://www.gfmag.com/gdp-data-country-r ... eport.html
http://www.gfmag.com/gdp-data-country-r ... eport.html
http://www.gfmag.com/gdp-data-country-r ... eport.html

Christ, I'm boring. Beware - Scottish Independence causes Aspergers Syndrome.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Well, the official launch of the Yes campaign just happened, not long ago (hours, days - I'm not exactly sure). I have now reviewed and processed the event. I'll be brutally honest about it - it was shite. Salmond mashed a surprising number of his words together in his opening speech, as he has increasingly done in recent times, and appeared to be in genuine physical pain at some points, which helped to propel his arguments (such as they were) into increasing high-points of incoherency. The speech was fucking awful, to be frank. "This is the start of the beginning... we will decide in 24.. 24000... 2014... "

For fuck's sake.

He did not look well, though, I must say. Or sound it. This is not, usually, a guy who stumbles over his words under pressure, or mixes them up, but he did this time, when it really mattered. If he is ill then of course no blame attaches - but if he just couldn't be arsed writing or delivering a decent speech at the launch of the campaign which is designed to deliver his own lifelong dream, then there are real problems ahead.

The event was somewhat embarassing, if I'm honest (and I say that as someone who has in recent times posted a song by The Proclaimers in support of my cause... ).

Patrick Harvie of the Greens produced the only noises that were worth listening to, tbh. It was Salmond who all of a sudden seemed to lack a vision, or a means of articulating it, as well as looking unwell.



PS: The theme song for the Yes campaign has been recognisably repurposed from an old Tennents Lager commercial that was extant in the nineties, ffs, in the name of Christ, and it's also shit.

Are they taking the piss? It's a reasonably catchy tune, I suppose, but they are intoducing minimum alcohol pricing per unit - so it might not be a good idea to use a known Tennents Lager track as the campaign song at this moment.

C'mon. FFS. This is supposed to be serious business.
.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Nobody uses "potable" in real life either.

We use it frequently when describing and comparing water sources actually.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

Nobody uses "potable" in real life either.

We use it frequently when describing and comparing water sources actually.

Don't get smart.












Fair point, though.

Did I ever mention that Scotland has a vast, renewable, and nearly inexhaustible supply of fresh water, btw, while the rest of the UK requires constant and ongoing transfers of H2o to keep itself going?

I maybeshould have mentioned that earlier.

[semper occultus]

Salmond mashed a surprising number of his words together in his opening speech, as he has increasingly done in recent times, and appeared to be in genuine physical pain at some points, which helped to propel his arguments (such as they were) into increasing high-points of incoherency. The speech was fucking awful, to be frank. "This is the start of the beginning... we will decide in 24.. 24000... 2014... "

For fuck's sake.

He did not look well, though, I must say. Or sound it. This is not, usually, a guy who stumbles over his words under pressure, or mixes them up, but he did this time, when it really mattered.

are you implying he was got at...?



http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=31671

are we to assume he is shortly be outed as a cross-dresser....?



...mind you that may not cut much ice up there ofcourse...given the scottish climate you've got to be a real man to wear a skirt.....

The UK is the only oil producing country in the world that did not bother to set up a Sovereign Wealth Fund for the future of it's people - instead it pissed the revenue away as soon as it came in, on endless wars of choice and (not coincidentally) the world's fourth highest defence spending.

cobblers.....there's Ecuador and...........Iraq....!

www.businessdayonline.com