Split Thread Scottish Independence

[Darat]

You know why. Stop playing silly games.

This is meant to be a discussion, I am asking you to explain your stance, that is not playing games it's called trying to discuss something. If you don't want to or you are unwilling to discuss the issue in a civil and non-combative manner then fine we'll leave it there.

 

[Darat]

While I'm sure we could have a good long chat about whether the cut off should be 1,723,456 or 1,723,457 votes I'm not sure it would gain anything.

It also looks as if other UK referendums don't need 'conditions' even when they are for similar things



So why should a referendum for independence?

Well referendums are very unusual in the UK - quite alien to our parliamentary system. It's just that I think if we are going to have a referendum (one that the outcome is binding - so it's not really just a glorified opinion poll) then it should be a poll of the entire population since everyone is going to be bound by the outcome. (And before you ask yes I would like the same for parliamentary elections - I don't think voting should be optional.)

 

[Darat]

You haven't explained what's so different.

I didn't express any opinion about what should happen with a turnout of three. I didn't express an opinion of what should happen if aliens stole the ballot boxes either.

Your desire for compulsory voting is noted.

Rolfe.

And again I'm sorry that I also misunderstood your point. Are you of the mind that whatever the turn out from 1 person to 100% of the population the decision should be binding on the whole population?

 

[Darat]

I'm never very sure why the desire to be a politically independent state within the EU is regarded as laudable when it's Ireland or Denmark or Slovakia or Bosnia we're talking about, but suddenly when it's Scotland we're told it's "ugly" and "the darker side of nationalism" and so on.

...snip...

But we are already in the EU.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Well referendums are very unusual in the UK - quite alien to our parliamentary system.

I'm not sure why you think they are alien to your parliamentary system, ours is very similar and we have referendums all the time, in fact they are a requirement of the constitution.
Unfortunately we aren't very good at them and usually need two goes to get the answer right.

 

[Rolfe]

But we are already in the EU.

And?

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not sure why you think they are alien to your parliamentary system, ours is very similar and we have referendums all the time, in fact they are a requirement of the constitution.
Unfortunately we aren't very good at them and usually need two goes to get the answer right.

Is there any country which insists on a minimum turnout at a referendum, otherwise the vote is invalid? I haven't heard of one. I know voting is compulsory in Italy and some other countries, but that's not the same thing.

Rolfe.

 

[funk de fino]

Why is that a "ridiculous condition"? I think it's a good and sensible idea for referendums on any subject if they are to bind the population to a decision.

Why should a referendum have any conditions on turn out? Show me others where there has been simliar conditions that do not include the 1978 one. Its sensible to have 100% turn out or the referendum is void? Ho ho.

OK then I misunderstood your point - you are happy with any turnout and the country being bound by that. Thanks for making that clear.

Same as any other vote I have had I do not want any limits on turn out.

 

[funk de fino]

This is meant to be a discussion, I am asking you to explain your stance, that is not playing games it's called trying to discuss something. If you don't want to or you are unwilling to discuss the issue in a civil and non-combative manner then fine we'll leave it there.

Read my posts in future before you reply with a stupid qestion. What you did was not discussion.

 

[Rolfe]

Read my posts in future before you reply with a stupid qestion. What you did was not discussion.

Indeed, I made an earlier post giving some of the perfectly reasonable advantages to independence in Europe, and Darat simply quoted it back at me with "so why bother?" appended.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

Same as any other vote I have had I do not want any limits on turn out.

I agree. If we were in a country which already had a law making voting compulsory that would be a different matter. However, we aren't. To raise the suggestion with the reductio ad absurdum suggestion of a turnout of three is simply mischievous.

Even in Italy, I don't believe they can stop people spoiling their ballot papers. Maybe Darat would like to introduce a rule that a certain number of spoiled papers also invalidates any vote?

Rolfe.

 

[martu]

You know continuing with childish insults that attacks (in a derogatory way) other peoples opinions does not help your case.

An independent Scotland is not isolationist. We want to co-operate with the world.

ETA - spelling

What insults? Give me a rational reason for nationalism and I’ll take it all back until then the comment stands.

 

[martu]

Who is this "we" of which you speak?

It may have escaped your attention, but one-world government isn't on the cards any time soon. There are advantages to being a nation-state which mere regions do not enjoy, some of which I touched on in an earlier post.

Why not bend your efforts to persuading the present nation-states to surrender that status, instead of insulting and denigrating a small, peaceful country that merely aspires to that status?

Rolfe.

Your nation state is an arbitrary division created ultimately by violence. It should not be a good reason to define boundaries, the need of people should be the only good reason. Until one of you guys can tell me what you require from your government that I don’t I’ll keep pointing out how irrational you all are.

 

[D'rok]

If I may, some advice from us youngsters in the colonies who have gone through this already might be in order. Here's how our solution would transpose to your problem.

@Scotland: Go ahead and hold a referendum on separation. Make sure it's a clear question and make sure you get a clear majority. You might need a super-majority - i.e., 50 percent plus 1 might not be sufficient. Key point: a yes result is not a unilateral declaration of independence. See below.

@UK (and particularly England): You cannot set pre-conditions on a Scottish idependence referendum. A clear yes vote to a clear question in such a referendum imposes on you a duty to negotiate in good faith with Scotland on the terms of separation. The principles of democracy and self-determination do not allow you to refuse.

@Scotland: You too, must negotiate in good faith. But if the negotiations break down or are not conducted in good faith by the UK, then you likely have a right to secede unilaterally. But you must have respected the process first.

Or, you could just get on with the business of peaceful coexistence under a single roof.

 

[martu]

I'm never very sure why the desire to be a politically independent state within the EU is regarded as laudable when it's Ireland or Denmark or Slovakia or Bosnia we're talking about, but suddenly when it's Scotland we're told it's "ugly" and "the darker side of nationalism" and so on.

Scottish nationalism post-war has been non-violent, respected the democratic process, and inclusive. Nobody has been hurt that I know of, and barring a few pillar-boxes, there's been pretty much no violence. In my subjective opinion there's less racism in Scotland, and immigrants in general integrate rather better than in England.

Now I realise we've had this conversation with Martu before, and s/he believes that all expressions of nationality are a bad thing. We've been round that one before, and I for one can't be bothered going round it again. However, for many people it doesn't seem incongruous at all to damn Scottish aspirations to independence as "ugly" while at the same time issuing formal congratulations to Kosovo on achieving independence, and resisting all attempts to integrate Britain more closely into the EU.

Why is this I wonder?

Rolfe.

I'm a He.

The Kosovos (sp?) were being persecuted and lacked representation in their government. We share an island where the two most powerful offices in the land are held by Scottish men representing Scottish constituents.

I ask again what do you want from your government that is different from me or anyone else south of the border?

 

[Rolfe]

So we have to be persecuted before we can aspire to independence? Merely being economically disadvantaged doesn't cut it?

Rolfe.

 

[funk de fino]

What insults? Give me a rational reason for nationalism and I’ll take it all back until then the comment stands.

You may disagree with nationalism but your posts were insulting. I want self determination for my country. That is all. Tell me why I am wrong or ugly to want that.

 

[funk de fino]

Your nation state is an arbitrary division created ultimately by violence. It should not be a good reason to define boundaries, the need of people should be the only good reason. Until one of you guys can tell me what you require from your government that I don’t I’ll keep pointing out how irrational you all are.

Insulting again. You are adding nothing to this debate apart from childish digs.

 

[Rolfe]

I ask again what do you want from your government that is different from me or anyone else south of the border?

Personally, I require that we should be given access to and control of and benefit from our own resources, and that government decisions should be taken with the benefit of my country being the foremost consideration, not the benefit of the economy of the south-east of England.

I would also welcome the status and recognition that comes with independence, such as being able to describe myself legally as a Scottish citizen, and give my address as Scotland for international purposes.

Until such time as no country exists that has these benefits for itself, I cannot agree that it is "ugly" to aspire to them for oneself.

Rolfe.

 

[D'rok]

Personally, I require that we should be given access to and control of and benefit from our own resources, and that government decisions should be taken with the benefit of my country being the foremost consideration, not the benefit of the economy of the south-east of England.

You could get that with federalism. Full-blown independence isn't the only solution.