Referendum on Scottish Independence

[Antilogic]

There are no surviving Stuarts by that name, but the heir to the Jacobite succession is currently Franz von Bayern, the Duke of Bavaria. Franz has refused to comment on the issue previously, which technically means he hasn't said no...

So it's sort of like a presidential campaign?

 

[bhsup]

Hey, I got a win-win for both America and Scotland. Gets her out of here and... well I don't really know how it's a win for Scotland, but I'll think of something soon.

Her Royal Majesty Hillary the First, by the Grace of God Queen of Scotland, The Hebrides - both Inner AND Outer, The North Sea Oil Fields, Head of the SPFL, Defender of the Faith.

 

[Pangur Bán]

No, it is the small minority of NastyNats that I was referring to. Every country has its share of Nasties – we have the EDL, BNP etc; you have the NastyNats.

The best thing would be that it should put a stop for at least a generation or so to the divisive, nasty Nats – divisive for Scotland even more than for the UK IMO.


Scotland (and the UK) will become even more divided as we listen to Herr Salmond and his jackboot cybernats for several more years until another referendum takes place. That will be truly awful.

Stop trying to smear and insult supporters of Scottish independence.

 

[really]

I think the EU would force you guys to apply for membership and go through all the regular hoops that new countries have to go through, if they want to join. Spain will for sure want something like that to be in place, as well as several other countries.

Although it would make far less sense to make a country that's already using the Euro to apply to use it again. But I suppose it makes a bit of sense, as the financial situation is going to dramatically change after independence. (right?)

I don't see the steps being a problem for an independent Scotland - they presumably have adopted the complete body of EU law already via UK law. An accelerated entry could be negotiated for seamless transition.

Scotland presumably would have to give up some of the opt outs negotiated over the years and commit to join the Euro.

The rest of the UK would have to renegotiate its own membership simultaneously - I can't think of any members who have lost a chunk of their land and population? (Denmark with Greenland maybe?)

 

[Borachio]

Well, there was French Algeria - formerly an official part of French territory (unless I'm mistaken). I don't recall France having to renegotiate its membership of the EEC when Algeria achieved independence.

Nor did Germany have renegotiate on unification. As far as I remember.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I don't envisage EU 'entry' being that problematic. However one issue that is very clear but is not made clear by the media is that rUK and Scotland are NOT going to be two continuing states, Scottish independence will not lead to the legal fragmentation of the UK. The London rUK state will be the UK, and Scotland will be a breakaway unit. There is no chance of rUK ever agreeing to anything else, and there's no power in the world that could or would make them ... agreeing to do so would create anarchy and threaten a bunch of hard won international privileges and thousands of treaties and millions of other contracts.

 

[Borachio]

I don't understand. What do you mean by "are NOT going to be two continuing states". You apparently contradict (though I guess I'm misunderstanding you) yourself by saying that the "London rUK" (quaint way of putting it, but never mind) "will will (sic) be the UK". What does that mean but that the UK will be a continuing state? Or are you saying that there will only be ONE continuing state?

Seems a bit of an obscure point. If in fact you have a point at all.

edit: And Scotland seems quite obviously, by declaring itself to be independent, to be indeed a breakaway unit. But, again, what does this mean beyond stating the obvious?

I'm surely missing something.

 

[Pangur Bán]

You apparently contradict (though I guess I'm misunderstanding you) yourself by saying that the "London rUK" (quaint way of putting it, but never mind)

What's quaint about this? Maybe you're using this word in a way I don't understand.

You apparently contradict (though I guess I'm misunderstanding you) yourself by saying that the "London rUK" (quaint way of putting it, but never mind)

Seems a bit of an obscure point. If in fact you have a point at all.

I'm surely missing something.

Yeah, it comes across as less rude if you say something like 'next time you can try 'can you clarify what you meant by ...'.

I don't understand. What do you mean by "are NOT going to be two continuing states". You apparently contradict (though I guess I'm misunderstanding you) yourself by saying that the "London rUK" (quaint way of putting it, but never mind) "will will (sic) be the UK". What does that mean but that the UK will be a continuing state? Or are you saying that there will only be ONE continuing state?

Seems a bit of an obscure point. If in fact you have a point at all.

edit: And Scotland seems quite obviously, by declaring itself to be independent, to be indeed a breakaway unit. But, again, what does this mean beyond stating the obvious?

I'm surely missing something.

So you realise that a state has a legal name, an international political identity through which it signs treaties, enters contracts, gains membership of international associations, and so forth?

OK, now you do.

You realise that the UK is presented, rhetorically at least, as being a 'Union' between at least two (usually more) countries, of which Scotland is one?

OK, now you do.

Do you realize that such a union being dissolved can raise the question of that state's continued existence? I.e. UK ending through exit of Scotland, and hence calling into question the state named in all those contracts, memberships, treaties etc?

The apparently obscure /potentially non-existent point is that the UK will not be ending. The UK will be completely unaffected. Scotland will just exit. This is not obvious rhetorically or 'legally', but is absolutely certain as a political fact.

 

[Borachio]

I see. You think the UK will be completely unaffected?

You don't think they might need to amend the Union flag, for instance?

(As for coming across "as less rude", I'm clueless what you might mean.)

 

[Antilogic]

Hey, I got a win-win for both America and Scotland. Gets her out of here and... well I don't really know how it's a win for Scotland, but I'll think of something soon.

Her Royal Majesty Hillary the First, by the Grace of God Queen of Scotland, The Hebrides - both Inner AND Outer, The North Sea Oil Fields, Head of the SPFL, Defender of the Faith.

That's just hillarious.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I see. You think the UK will be completely unaffected?

You don't think they might need to amend the Union flag, for instance?

They can if they want, there's no reason they have to though (and they probably won't).

 

[Benefactor]

You're equating the SNP to the BNP? Really?

That barely even deserves this scoffing dismissal.

I'm pretty sure he's comparing your insane nationalists (only good sassenach is a dead sassenach, etc.) with our insane nationalists (rah rah rah death to Islams.)

A pretty fair comparison to make, I like to think neither the majority of Scots or English are like that but we both know they sure are a loud bunch.

 

[Borachio]

They can if they want, there's no reason they have to though (and they probably won't).

Is this so? Surely the cross of Saint Andrew was only incorporated into the Union flag after the 1707 Act of Union? Won't Scotland insist on taking it out?

Oh, look they're Pantone 280 (Scottish) and Pantone 300 (Union). Not the same colours at all!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Scotland

 

[Pangur Bán]

The closest UK parallel to the SNP are the Liberal Dems; both have left-of-centre social and centre-right economic policies, both want their countries to be independent in the EU. Scotland has BNP types too, but they're associated with British nationalism. The anti-Englishness in Scotland that the UK press go on about is largely their own invention.

Is this so? Surely the cross of Saint Andrew was only incorporated into the Union flag after the 1707 Act of Union?

This is the etymological fallacy. Like I already said, it's up to them if they keep that flag or not. But they probably will.

 

[Traitorfish]

I can't see them changing either the name or the flag if Scotland leaves. If Northern Ireland leaves as well, which is a possible long-term result of Scottish independence, that may be a different matter, because retaining a flag and a name that no longer describe anything might turn out to be a bit too ridiculous even for conservative Britons.

I'm pretty sure he's comparing your insane nationalists (only good sassenach is a dead sassenach, etc.) with our insane nationalists (rah rah rah death to Islams.)

A pretty fair comparison to make, I like to think neither the majority of Scots or English are like that but we both know they sure are a loud bunch.

Your insane nationalists sit in the European parliament. Ours haven't risen above the status of an allegation. It seems unreasonable to conflate the two.

 

[Benefactor]

Your insane nationalists sit in the European parliament. Ours haven't risen above the status of an allegation. It seems unreasonable to conflate the two.

No BNP in the European Parliament anymore.

 

[innonimatu]

If Northern Ireland leaves as well, which is a possible long-term result of Scottish independence

I don't see Northern Ireland becoming an independent state by itself.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I'm more interested in the referendum on London's independence. What do the polls say?

 

[Kyriakos]

London's people are out of it. They elect Boris-Chickenfeed- Johnson, so clearly they don't care or don't communicate anymore

Aka Grandmeister Pycell.

 

[bhsup]

SATW reason why UK flag should not be altered.

Spoiler :