Jim sillars left the Labour Party and set up the Scottish Labour Party which failed to get anyone elected. This was 1979. In a post independence Scotland voters would be faced with Scottish Labour, Scottish Nationalists , Scottish Socialists and Jim's party Scottish Socialist Labour Party? Amongst others. Judean People's Front etc.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
White Paper (THE #indyref thread)
(2915 posts)- Started 11 years ago by Morningsider
- Latest reply from chdot
- This topic is
closed
-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
"In a post independence Scotland"
You think it's gonna happen??
"etc."
Plenty choice.
That's the 'new democracy'...
Posted 10 years ago # -
Would they all stop calling themselves "Scottish"?
Posted 10 years ago # -
No I don't think it is going to happen I think the combination of labour, Tory, liberal voters in a Westminster trend vote exceeds any nationalist or other yes side party. I think it will be Westminster trend. I think this has always been the case and it has never changed despite media trying to make the story a competition.
I was just being hypothetical like the other posters. I can do this. It seems some on the no side are not able to consider a yes vote?
In this hypothetical scenario they will stop calling themselves Scottish. You will instead get the paisley socialist weavers party, the kilbarchan independent socialist weavers party, the chlochoderick's stone independent Scottish socialist fairy party etc etc
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
In this hypothetical scenario they will stop calling themselves Scottish. You will instead get the paisley socialist weavers party, the kilbarchan independent socialist weavers party, the chlochoderick's stone independent Scottish socialist fairy party etc etc
"Sounds like a win to me! lol
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
“I know this is anecdotal but it has certainly worked for me as a politician: you apply the Tesco test.
“I was in Tesco quite recently and I heard these two ladies, one of them saying: ‘I’m very worried about what currency we are going to have’.
"
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
THE media’s obsession with currency union is diverting attention from key devolved issues, says Lesley Riddoch
"
http://www.scotsman.com/news/lesley-riddoch-let-s-concentrate-on-real-debate-1-3505057
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
The London mayor stated his opposition to devolving greater tax responsibilities to Scotland as a poll showed he had opened up a big lead over his rivals as the politician the public would like to see replace Tory Party leader David Cameron."
Posted 10 years ago # -
Scottish voters 'more engaged than ever'
DURATION: 07:52
James Naughtie speaks to Patrick Harvie, co-convenor of the Scottish Greens, a member of the advisory board of Yes Scotland and Robin McAlpine, director of the Jimmy Reid Foundation.Posted 10 years ago # -
Were it not for the internut, we wouldn't even be contemplating the prospect of possibility of a Yes vote. Alecsammin would have taken too many blows for Scotland to contemplate running its own affairs. One of the most powerful weapons has been Wings Over Scotland;
http://wingsoverscotland.com/about/
It's not to everyone's taste, mixing analysis with polemic, but both the Telegraph and the Record hate it, which makes it interesting.
The guy who runs it has issued his pdf booklet summarising the website's pro-Indy argument. No punches are pulled;
http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/WeeBlueBookDesktopEdition.pdf
Posted 10 years ago # -
After a wee break to attend a wedding in "the nationalists" heartland of north east Scotland, browsing this thread I'm tickled to see gembo's portrayal of a "climate of fear" silencing timid No voters and stopping them from "coming out" with their views. I suppose there may be some fearties or debate avoiders out there right enough, but methinketh gembo doth protest too much.
Here's an alternate view also published while I was away, which in many ways is a bit of a rant (though I don't think it mentions Bannockburn). I don't agree with some of it, so this is not an endorsement but it does give a different perspective on the "climate of fear":
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/08/10/the-sad-and-ugly-end-of-british-socialism/
Posted 10 years ago # -
Interesting range of views -
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Insto "What the SNP want seems to be a form of devo max dressed up as independence. Their formulation of Devo Max was for Scotland to be responsible for everything, with Westminster only handling foreign policy, financial regulation, monetary policy and the currency."
From inside the SNP, that's really very much mistaken.
Any settlement that leaves us unable to evict nuclear weapons, puts Scottish soldiers into wars picked by Westminster, and could see us dragged in and out of international arrangement, the EU standing chief among them, would never be remotely acceptable to the SNP membership. Don't be fooled that, because they are keen on international engagement and co-operation, that lessens their desire for ultimate independence.
There's a fundamental difference between even Devo Very Max and independence - no matter how much devo we get, Westminster can always ultimately take back anything they choose. They would retain sovereignty, and they wouldn't hesitate to use it.
And besides, no UK government will give us powers over benefits and most taxes, so devo max is a pipe-dream.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Iain T Cunningham's letter made me chortle. OK, so they've got practicaly no poverty, a much higher median and minimum wage than us, much more satisfying employment, they live much longer and are in much better health generally, they have more holidays and work fewer hours, they're nuclear free and one of the world's strongest voices for peace, and to top it all they have a sovereign wealth fund equal to £100,000 per person, that owns 1% of all the shares in all the listed companies in the world.
But they've got road tolls and you pay for a GP appointment, so sod that for a game of soldiers.
Posted 10 years ago # -
This must be a new low in Scottish journalism;
There is no need to invent things or lie to make a decent case for the Union. I am saddened and mystified by the sight of someone who is probably decent at heart just making things up and journalists putting them on line without the most cursory check or challenge. The 'speech' that is reported was given in private to prevent any challenge at the time and no links to sources are given. What is an interested citizen supposed to make of it?
The contrast between the fully referenced on-line pro-Yes community with its open meetings and come one, come all ethos are in stark contrast to this grim mechanised gibberish. Surely we can do better than this?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Surprise As Young Activists Defect From Better Together To Yes Campaign (Paisley):
Posted 10 years ago # -
@calmac
"From inside the SNP, that's really very much mistaken."Fair enough. I thought I was on fairly safe ground basing it on the Peatworrier.
@IWRATS
It looks like it's based on the NIESR estimate:"The researchers estimate that an independent Scotland would face additional interest rate costs of between 0.72% to 1.65% above the UK borrowing costs for 10 year debt."
She (or more likely whoever wrote it) has rounded the estimates up. So, made up in the sense that the NIESR estimate is modelled but not in the 'plucking figures out the air' sense, although it's a economist's model so the two may not differ substantially.
Posted 10 years ago # -
So, made up in the sense that the NIESR estimate is modelled but not in the 'plucking figures out the air' sense, although it's a economist's model so the two may not differ substantially.
That made me laugh out loud. Comment of the day!
Posted 10 years ago # -
@crow lots of fearties out there. My better half was sorting some babysitting jobs out for my eldest and person with first booking put a p.s. Saying thank Gembo for his work in the constituency, I have done some leafleting but I am too feart to chap the doors. Also when we were down the centre in wester hailes I was sent up to the east entrance as big stu of the yes side was being too rough for the no leaflet person. Big stu is not a pussycat, indeed he is a fearless and brave warrior of many a demo that I have also been on. There is a brand of rampant nationalism and also a leftist rhetoric that an awful lot of fearties do not like.
When I report from the front line (you know this is irony yes?) that people are actually relieved to discover the No word on my badge means I am on the No side, I am not spinning. That is the vibe. Personally I have also had some great banter with people on the yes side but also personally aware of rabid individual and reported other mouth foamers on the yes side to match the guy who said he was phoning polis on IWRATS.
So there is a wide range of humanity out there. I am happy to chat with most of them, even the wings over Scotland chap.
I am also trying to make you laugh as the total lack of sense of humour in this interminable process is wearing.
Don't underestimate the fearties though
Posted 10 years ago # -
"There is a brand of rampant nationalism and also a leftist rhetoric that an awful lot of fearties do not like."
As there was before this 'campaign'.
Are you saying the wild lefties are all on the Yes side now?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Well I know one mildly wild leftist on the no side.
The SWP switched from No to Yes a while back when they moved from being international socialists to err, national socialists. Joking. But the previous line was revised by 180 degrees. Hey, good that they can change their minds, maybe they will change back?
Posted 10 years ago # -
I'm surprised the SWP was ever on the No side, officially. Not surprised if there was a vigorous debate since that was the best thing about the SWP - you never had to look far for an argument.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"I'm surprised the SWP was ever on the No side"
I think this has been a problem for some people who consider themselves to be 'left of centre' (wherever that is these days).
The idea that it's nationalism v internationalism, whereas this clearly needn't be the case.
Some imagine that (Scottish) independence is about isolationism and/or anti-English racism.
There is also a feeling that 'we shouldn't abandon our rUK brothers/sisters'.
IF Scotland votes for independence in September (however independent it seems after pound/queen/defence/etc. negotiations) I think it may well concentrate the minds of many rUKers and make them realise that a Westminster system (first past the post Commons and unelected Lords) may not be in their best interests. Some might even turn to Scotland for advice/help - which I am sure would be gladly given.
Maybe the SWP understands this.
Posted 10 years ago # -
No, it's got nothing to do with any of those things. The article I linked to a while back, from 2007, seemed to set out the position pretty clearly - socialists should support independence because it hastens the dismantling of the British state and for no other reason. There doesn't seem to be any illusion that an independent Scotland would be in any way progressive.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@IWRATS
That Wings thing. I jumped straight to the currency section, since it's topical, and he seems to be approvingly quoting the Adam Smith Institute and the Institute of Economic Affairs - both notorious right-wingbampotsthink tanks and Thatcher fanboys - who support the idea of Scotland using Sterling without a currency union.While I wouldn't entirely discount the idea that right-wing zealots might be right, I can't help feeling they approach the issue from a different perspective than the Yes campaign.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Instography
Yes, like you I'm sure that Ms Lamont was referring to the NIESR numbers. What she made up, or what may have been grossly misreported, is the direct connection between the rate at which the iScottish state could borrow on the open market and the cost of a retail mortgage. She appears to be throwing into this mix the notion of iScotland 'defaulting' on debt that it will never hold. The cost of a retail mortgage in iScotland might well not be exactly the same for equivalent properties and customers in the rUK and iScotland, but calculating the difference....let's just say I'm not sure that the leader of the 'Scottish Labour Party' would know where to start.
Using Sterling outside of a currency union isn't ideal. That's why it's not being proposed by the Scottish Government I suppose. Removing the implicit state guarantee to large banks (or at least charging the full price of it) is a very good idea. I suspect that iScotland would use its share of the BoE reserves to back retail Sterling denominated bank accounts in iScotland.
In other news, we may be being teed up for our next war;
Nice badge on the aid, eh?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Certainly it's probably not as simple as that. Nothing seems to be but is it truly totally unreasonable to think that if base rates in Scotland have a premium over rUK rates that that would at least be reflected in mortgage payments? My own mortgage tracks base rates so rises and falls automatically. Mind, it's probably time I reviewed my mortgage but that's a different issue.
More generally, it seems certainly true that the language is being totally debased to obscure issues for the public. My two pet hates of the whole campaign have been this notion of 'default' as an over-simplified stand-in for not taking a reasonable and negotiated share of the UK debt, and 'using/keeping the pound' to obscure the distinction between being in a currency union and using sterling outside a currency union.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Instography
I can only agree that the use of language has been quite hopeless. If bankers, politicians and economists lost any shred of respect in 2008, it is hard to see how journalists can come out of this anything other than stark naked. Problem is, who will point this out?
I'm also not terribly impressed by the analytical thinking toolkit that the Scottish education system has provided to the citizens. Manifestly absurd propositions (e.g. iScotland expelled from the EU but simultaneously compelled to follow European law) have not been universally ridiculed as they should have been.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Meanwhile in Kirkcaldy -
(From Twitter)
Posted 10 years ago # -
IWRATS - if an independent Scotland wasn't a member of the EU (can't see that happening myself, not really in anybody's interest) and it wanted access to the single market, then it would be required to comply with most EU law, and where appropriate transpose that into Scots law. This is a requirement for the three EFTA members that are signatories to the EEA agreement (Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein). Switzerland has a separate bilateral agreement with the EU, which requires pretty much the same thing.
Posted 10 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
posts
