Jump to content
aberdeen-music

The General Election


delboy

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest tv tanned
Wasn't meant to be "witty"' date=' just the pretty obvious point that there is a clear sense in which 'Britain', shall we say, is by most people thought of as a nation- ie more or less the same thing as a country, a single economic system, no effective borders etc etc. Whereas there is nothing more than a relatively obscure sense in which Scotland is a distinct nation- ie one dependent on historical legal facts.

Now why, other on the basis of pedantry steeped in historical sentiment, should these facts be at all interesting or constitute a persuasive argument for Scottish independence?

It may be true that Scotland could survive and prosper economically on its own but this can hardly be a strong argument for independence- surely national borders shouldn't be dependent on economic utility. And what if Scotland's economy took a sudden downturn- would that be an argument for unification?

The moral argument doesn't convince me either- even if it's true that the English and the aristocrats 'did the Scots wrong' in 1707, I fail to see the relevance today since, to put it bluntly, everyone involved is dead. A nation is not property, and nor is there anyone to 'return it' to. Nor can I see how an arbitrary construct such as the idea of a particular nation can have any intrinsic worth, and can have anything done 'wrong' to it, or require resurrection.

And if 'we' don't like the existing governmental system, 'we' can change it, because 'we' already have a say in it- Britain is a single democratic unit (devolution aside). This 'we' is bandied about in arguments for Scottish independence, but I've never seen anything other than a rhetorical force to it. I don't see how or why I should think of myself as having any stronger relation (other than geographical) to 'fellow Scots' than to someone in London (or, for that matter, any other human being). Why must it be the case that an independent Scottish system would give me any greater say or role in the political process?

The whole idea of patriotism and belief in a nation just seems to me to be totally perverse- at best I think they are a presently necessary evil, (at the risk of going a bit allsystemsfail) and one should be overcome through integration and dissolution of borders, not entrenched by stating historical facts in a serious tone and assuming their significance on the basis of misplaced sentiment.

Anyway, that's my take on nationalism- to put the admittedly abrupt previous remark in context.[/quote']

Like masturbation, nationalism is something that some people will see as a "perversion" ... and it will always be with us.

Therefore best to decide what form of masturbation you subscribe to - the Scottish or the British variety since rejecting the Scottish variety will just place you in the British one whether you accept it or not.

Just check your passport if you don't believe me. In there you will find that the present "unionist" system subscribes to nationalism and dictates that your nationality is British. Why even accept that form of masturbation being imposed on you since you find it to be a perversion?

Of course I am sure there are people who will deny profusely that they partake in such a perversion but, just like the Labour MPs at Westminster who were caught cheering on "any team that played England", they always get caught out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like masturbation' date=' nationalism is something that some people will see as a "perversion" ... and it will always be with us.

Therefore best to decide what form of masturbation you subscribe to - the Scottish or the British variety since rejecting the Scottish variety will just place you in the British one whether you accept it or not.

Just check your passport if you don't believe me. In there you will find that the present "unionist" system subscribes to nationalism and dictates that your nationality is British. Why even accept that form of masturbation being imposed on you since you find it to be a perversion?

Of course I am sure there are people who will deny profusely that they partake in such a perversion but, just like the Labour MPs at Westminster who were caught cheering on "any team that played England", they always get caught out.[/quote']

I think that's a bit of a weak and misleading analogy... because I reject Scottish nationalism I am as an unavoidable consequence a British nationalist? I'm missing something in that argument, and I don't see the gap being filled by what is written on my passport. Because I see the idea of Scottish independence as a parochial backward step I must fully endorse and wish to sustain the present system?

I don't give two shits whether it says 'British', 'Scottish', 'European' or whatever on my passport. Why should I?

And having a nationality "imposed" upon me- yes, it would be just as imposed whether it was British or Scottish. It is, for a number of reasons, necessary that I am registered with some state and am in some relationship of entitlement and responsibility towards it. But I don't see how this is essential- I should, as a matter of principle, be able to relinquish these and be of no nationality. I do however wish to remain in civilised society, enjoy public goods and rely on institutions that are best (and only) organised by the state, so I won't be doing this any time soon. (And, I imagine, it would be pretty hard if not legally impossible to do, but that's besides the point)

You seem to think that everyone, whether they like it or not is some kind of nationalist. This is just false- no human being is essentially nation-al. Many people do, but that's no reason why I or anyone else should be bullied into thinking they have to define themselves in terms of where they're from or where they live. The land I come from is a conversation filler and no more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest tv tanned
I think that's a bit of a weak and misleading analogy... because I reject Scottish nationalism I am as an unavoidable consequence a British nationalist?

Yes

I'm missing something in that argument' date=' and I don't see the gap being filled by what is written on my passport. Because I see the idea of Scottish independence as a parochial backward step I must fully endorse and wish to sustain the present system?[/quote']

Then what are you doing to change the present system? If nothing that must mean it pleases you. Therefore you are pleased to be part of a state which projects itself as the British nation.

I also fail to see why you think that Scottish independence is a "parochial backward" step. Are you arguing that Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia, India have been parochial and backward too for rejecting the (ahem) outward looking and futuristic British imperium?

I don't give two shits whether it says 'British', 'Scottish', 'European' or whatever on my passport. Why should I?

So why do you accept it then? Why do you accept a Government imposing it on you? Why do you accept such authoritarianism? By doing so you accept a British nationality. If you don't want this why do you allow them to do it?

And having a nationality "imposed" upon me- yes, it would be just as imposed whether it was British or Scottish. It is, for a number of reasons, necessary that I am registered with some state and am in some relationship of entitlement and responsibility towards it. But I don't see how this is essential- I should, as a matter of principle, be able to relinquish these and be of no nationality. I do however wish to remain in civilised society, enjoy public goods and rely on institutions that are best (and only) organised by the state, so I won't be doing this any time soon.

So you support having a British nationality.

(And, I imagine, it would be pretty hard if not legally impossible to do, but that's besides the point)

It's entirely legally possible to be stateless. Ask a Palestinian. A recent BBC play highlighted this with a man rejecting his British nationality and creating his own state on national trust land.

You seem to think that everyone, whether they like it or not is some kind of nationalist. This is just false- no human being is essentially nation-al. Many people do, but that's no reason why I or anyone else should be bullied into thinking they have to define themselves in terms of where they're from or where they live.

So you don't believe in internationalism either?

How else could there be inter-NATIONALISM without the acceptance of nationalism?

You appear to be also suggesting that I think the nationality is the most essential thing in being a human being. I actually don't. I think it's the family first and foremost.

Nationality is but just one level or cross-section in the different levels or cross-sections of identity we have - some stronger than others. In the case of Scotland there is an unhealthy attitude to our national identity - about the land we come from - a lack of confidence.

You may eschew nationalism because you believe it is chauvinistic. There are nationalisms which are chauvinistic but I reject those. Those nationalisms are for already established states and often lead to trying to dominate other nationalities.

Like all identitiies that make up the human character I'd like to see Scotland have a healthy unconfused view of itself as a nation. In contrast with chauvinistic nationalisms the dominant nationalism in Scotland is the complete opposite - it is the we are not worthy variety. It goes too far the other way.

I'd like to see that lifted and for that to be so we should be like other normal nations and be independent unconfused by the impositions of a nationality the state ascribes to us.

The land I come from is a conversation filler and no more.

So is masturbation ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't meant to be "witty"' date=' just the pretty obvious point that there is a clear sense in which 'Britain', shall we say, is by most people thought of as a nation- ie more or less the same thing as a country, a single economic system, no effective borders etc etc. Whereas there is nothing more than a relatively obscure sense in which Scotland is a distinct nation- ie one dependent on historical legal facts.[/quote']

If you use that line of thinking, you're effectively saying that Germany and France (for instance) are just "one nation" - okay, they have different languages, but most European countries (including our own) have more than one official language. There's a single economic system (due to the Euro), there's no effective border these days (Schengen and the Customs Union ended that)..but it's pretty obvious they're seperate nations - even if there's now complete freedom to move and trade between the two countries.

As far as the "United Kingdom" being made up of seperate nations - I'd say only England and Scotland have the right to call themselves such. Northern Ireland is effectively a territory of Great Britain due to the different laws/systems in place there and not a "nation" (would you call Jersey a nation? I wouldn't..) - indeed, up until the Northern Ireland Parliament got scrapped due to Faulkner, Northern Ireland was effectively a self governing entity. Wales is a tricky one - considering the lack of any sort of structure to denote their nationality, it's hard to argue that they're actually a nation - I can't remeber the criteria used by the UN to suggest that a nation has a right to self goverment, but Scotland has a far stronger claim to it than Wales does.

To throw my stance into this - I believe that the future of Scotland lies with an independent Scotland being part of the EU, with an economy modelled on the Scandinavian/Irish example as opposed to the English/French/German example. If that isn't realistic, I'd like to see the UK divided up into a true confederation with the power lying with the respective nations (think Switzerland as opposed to the United States).

Anyway, to those who don't believe Scotland has a right to self determination - there's already been an example of a country breaking out of the United Kingdom - Ireland, anyone? The precedent is there, considering Scotland and Ireland held exactly the same status within the UK after the Act of Union between the UK and Ireland in 180..something.

One thing I've never understood is why the nationalists don't use that as an example of how independence is a good thing - okay, fair enough, when the SNP were riding very high, Ireland was still one of the poorest countries in the EU - but look at it now, massive infrastructure projects, the country is completely awash with money and is prospering beyond all imagination. Would they have enjoyed that kind of wealth if they were still part of the UK? I doubt it.

Sadly, what most people don't seem to realise is that the UK has exactly the same problems as the EU does, except on a smaller scale - the economic system is geared up to benefit the largest constituent part of the UK without consideration to the other respective parts - Look at how what kind of state Northern Ireland was in before self rule was abolished - fair enough, there was massive problems with civil rights, but the Parliament there (when they weren't engaging in gerrymandering) did what was best for the province and not what was best for the UK - then bang, when the UK goverment stepped in, the country was left to effectively rot.

Personally, I'd be happy if the Scottish Parliament gained full and complete control within a monetary, customs and immigration union with England. I don't think we need full and complete independence, but we absolutely must gain control of our own affairs as far as things like defence go. I feel though, that if the Scottish Parliament keeps passing differing laws (such as free health care, free tution fees..etc), eventually Scotland'll be in the same boat as Northern Ireland - different, but the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then what are you doing to change the present system? If nothing that must mean it pleases you. Therefore you are pleased to be part of a state which projects itself as the British nation.

Explain the logic of this.

If I do nothing about something then I agree with it??!??!

If I were to spend my time doing something about all the things that don't please me I'd never get any work done, which means no money, which certainly doesn't please me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest tv tanned
Explain the logic of this.

If I do nothing about something then I agree with it??!??!

In reference to S.A.M.' date=' Since he does something when it is a Scottish nationalist saying what could be and nothing about what the actual situation is then yes. His actions (or lack thereof) betray him

If I were to spend my time doing something about all the things that don't please me I'd never get any work done, which means no money, which certainly doesn't please me.

So opposing Scottish nationality whilst passively accepting British nationality is key to a money-orientated lifestyle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you don't believe in internationalism either?

How else could there be inter-NATIONALISM without the acceptance of nationalism?

I think that is rather missing the point, internationalism is best understood as being beyond nationalism, realising a common humanity that we share with everyone. The more benign forms of nationalism can be catalysts for positivity, but far more often it is bitter and divisive, trying to tell us that they (insert 'chosen' people here) are superior to some other bunch of jumped up apes elswhere, purely on terms of ethnicity/geographical location/because the Ur-Monkey said it was so. Mr Lydon said it best; "We're just another country"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll start voting when the lying bastards start fulfilling their manifestos.

There should be a system of fines where the party in power loses seats when it reneges on election promises or pushes them through in a form which bears little or no resemblance to their election promises.

Also politicians who answer a completely different question to the one which they are asked should be banned from all media interviews for six months. I don't mind if they refuse to answer a question but how fucking stupid do they think we are that we wont notice their misdirection. That is not democracy in my opinion' date=' they prove time and time again that they aren't answerable to the people by not answering the questions that the people want to know the answers to.

I know this would cause chaos for a while but you never know, they might get the hang of telling the truth.

.[/quote']

you should form the ian christie grumpy old men party, you'd get my vote. few policies except free jack daniels and tennents plus the entire rush back catalogue free for every home in the UK...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should form the ian christie grumpy old men party' date=' you'd get my vote. few policies except free jack daniels and tennents plus the entire rush back catalogue free for every home in the UK...[/quote']

I knew the free JD and Tennents would get your vote you old soak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to S.A.M.' date=' Since he does something when it is a Scottish nationalist saying what could be and nothing about what the actual situation is then yes. His actions (or lack thereof) betray him[/quote']

I still don't accept that passively accepting something is the same as actively encouraging it, especially when he is faced with only two choices, Scottish or British. He doesn't want to be seen as Scottish by the world therefore his only choice short of moving abroad for long enough to apply for citizenship of another country is to passively accept being British.

So opposing Scottish nationality whilst passively accepting British nationality is key to a money-orientated lifestyle?

Did I say that?

I was talking about me, NOT project S.A.M. so how do you come to that conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

drink who said the magic word.

mind you can i be a gay boy and swap the jd for morgans and a few tennent's for a starter :cheers:

I'm sure I could alter my recently imposed manifesto to accomodate most alcoholic beverages. Buckfast and 2L bottles of white cider will only be available on prescription though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest tv tanned
I still don't accept that passively accepting something is the same as actively encouraging it' date=' especially when he is faced with only two choices, Scottish or British. He doesn't want to be seen as Scottish by the world therefore his only choice short of moving abroad for long enough to apply for citizenship of another country is to passively accept being British.

Did I say that?

I was talking about me, NOT project S.A.M. so how do you come to that conclusion.[/quote']

OK, OK OK, I'll not refer to S.A.M. this time.

Explain the logic of this.

If I do nothing about something then I agree with it??!??!

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

If I were to spend my time doing something about all the things that don't please me I'd never get any work done' date=' which means no money, which certainly doesn't please me.[/quote']

I'll rephrase that:

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to care more about their bank accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK' date=' OK OK, I'll not refer to S.A.M. this time.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

I'll rephrase that:

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to care more about their bank accounts.[/quote']

It's not about inflating my bank account, it's about survival.

I don't know about you but most people have to spend the majority of their waking hours working to live. Unless you've got a very highly paid part-time job and some servants.

What's particularly evil about all this anyway. If I was to draw up a list of the top 100 evils in the world I don't think Scotland being ruled by England would make it in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest tv tanned
It's not about inflating my bank account' date=' it's about survival.

I don't know about you but most people have to spend the majority of their waking hours working to live. Unless you've got a very highly paid part-time job and some servants.

What's particularly evil about all this anyway. If I was to draw up a list of the top 100 evils in the world I don't think Scotland being ruled by England would make it in.[/quote']

it was in jest, lighten up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...