UK Devolution

[Mozza]

I agree that no one alive sees Reghed or Briganttia as nations, but the cultural identity of Mercia certainly still exists, and to a lesser extent so does that of Cornwall and Kent.

The simple fact is that an overwhelming majority in both Wales and Scotland want to remain British.

If self rule is forced on the Scots, I don't want to be the one that has to tell the Black Watch they aren't British any more.

 

[Disenfrancised]

In England all the descendants of those Wessexers, Mercians, East Anglians, Rhegeders, Cornwallers, and Kentians have forgotten enough not to make these viable collective identities anymore. Browbeating someone for not remebering these once-upon a time polities is a bit redundant, as a prerequsite for the modern English sense of collective identity is fo no one to remember these.

Kentishman!

Wales and Scotland are only different in that there is still an active historical memory making up a local collective identity. But it makes all the difference. Disregarding it equates telling people they should forget who they are. It's neither feasible nor popular, it tends to amount to saying "You people are history, so you don't matter", which is factually incorrect as they are still around in the here and now.
Do it, and someone like Figaro will recall things like the "Welsh Not" campaign in Welsh schools in the early 20th c. actively designed to kill the Welsh language.

Now, do the English agree with the historical policies designed to kill off Welsh (in which case they should kick themselves for leaving the job half-finished)? The 19th c. liberal Renan would probably have urged the English to make sure to snuff out Welsh and Scottish identities asap, as it would be a necessary requirment for making "Britishness" a working proposition.

Or do the English today disagree with these policies, in which case it would seem unavoidable to admit that a great wrong was done to the Welsh, and that the present disadvantage of Welshspeakers in relation to Englishspeakers in Wales is in considerable part due to historical repression?

Funny you should mention that, considering thats exactly whats been done by the Francophones in Brittany over the 20th century, where Breton is still not an offical language. Unlike the french, the British don't want to exterminate the smaller indentities, but we also do not want them to become politically seperate nations either. For the acts of historical repression they should seek redress with the unitied political structure.

If the Irish can cast off on their own, why not Wales or Scotland?

i)Ireland was conquered, and more recently (this is a reason Scotland can shut up about oppression considerign they proposed the union).
ii)Ireland was much much worse treated than either the welsh or the scots
iii)There was little cultural and ethnic intermixing between Ireland and Britain, and you'll note that we kept hold of the bit that did experience that intermixing.

Actually, the recent success of Ireland might even give heart to those Welsh and Scots who would like such a development.

It took 70 years of independence before ireland was a success, and we've already been over in this thread why the recent irish success might not apply to Scotland or Wales. Namely a) The EU development capital is now deployed elsewhere and Scotland and Wales wouldn't get much of it (and probably less than England sends scotlands way) and b) the Growth of Ireland is based on a number of social circumstances and pro-corporate and industry policies than neither of the moderately centre left SNP and Plaid Cymru seem likely to impliment.

Would it be easier for Wales to become a "New Ireland" within the EU as a part of the UK or as an independant nation?

What do you mean by this?

 

[GinandTonic]

It always me astonishes me that most Northern Irish want to be British (c 55%), most Scots want to be British (c 65%), most Welsh want to be British (c 75%) but international polls always say most non Brits think they should all leave the UK.

It does raise the question of why the citizens of these other democratic nations think the democratic writ stops at the white cliffs. I mean all the US citizens who claim to love democracy but funded the IRA's terror campaign, or the French sing the praises of their revoloution but tell me that they want NI and Scotland to separate from the UK - do they reallise how hypocritical they are?

 

[Figaro]

So were left-handed people. Much more recently than the Welsh. Do you support the new Democratic Republic of Left-Handers, too?

So the Welsh were certainly oppressed for being Welsh. That's all I was stating. You were the one who said Indian independence was justified by their being oppressed by the British.

But there you show your utter ignorance. England is made up of several former countries, Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, Rheged, Cornwallum, Kent etc etc, each of which are just as valid former nations as Wales, or indeed any of the constituant countries that make up Wales.

Hey, careful about terms like "utter ignorance". I am actually reasonably well-aware of the history of the UK (at least, compared with most people). I studied the literature of Rheged as part of my Welsh A-level. And although arguably what you say has elements of truth, surely you accept that Gwynedd/Y Ddeheubarth/Rheged/Gododdin had more in common with one another than they did with Mercia/Wessex/Kent, by virtue of language, religion (before the saxons converted to christianity) and so forth. But it's not relevant, really, because we're not talking about independence in 600 AD, but in the 21st Century. In the 21st Century, Rheged no longer exists either as a political entity nor as a cultural one. But Wales does. So does Cornwall by the way.

the cultural identity of Mercia certainly still exists,

Really? So there are average Joes in the street who consider themselves "Mercian" rather than English? There's a "Mercian" language? "Mercian" artists?

i)Ireland was conquered, and more recently
ii)Ireland was much much worse treated than either the welsh or the scots
iii)There was little cultural and ethnic intermixing between Ireland and Britain, and you'll note that we kept hold of the bit that did experience that intermixing.

Actually, Ireland was the first of the three to be dominated by England. And Wales was conquered, so I don't really see your point. And there was little ethnic intermixing between Wales/Scotland and England either, at least up until relatively recently. At the beginning of the 20th Century, there were areas of Wales where 95%+ of the population spoke Welsh - and that number went down more because parents stopped teaching Welsh to their children (because of Welsh being constantly portrayed as a backward language) than because of immigration.

 

[Figaro]

In actual practice there are massive amounts of things making people in the UK conform in attitudes and behavior. You can't get Welsh people to watch subtitled TV for instance, which is daft as small languages like Welsh stand to gain immensely that way. It's just that the dominant attitude to TV is for it to be monolingual, with voiceovers whenever someone not speaking the dominant language gets on the tube. It becomes really strange in Welsh TV-news, when everyone on it gets a Welsh voice-over, rather than a Welsh subtitle. Welsh language TV mirrors English language TV in a situation where it would do better to mirror say Norwegian TV.

I don't follow. Welsh TV is not voiced-over, it's in Welsh. They don't show English programs, voiced-over or subtitled. Do you mean, when foreigners speak on the news? They're usually voice-overed, yes, but this is done on English TV and (as far as I know) most TV stations. Generally people don't like subtitles unless they need them.

 

[Disenfrancised]

Actually, Ireland was the first of the three to be dominated by England.

First to be invaded, but last to be completely dominated and annexed by a considerable margin. Plus, much worse treated.

And Wales was conquered,

Didn't dispute that at all.

And there was little ethnic intermixing between Wales/Scotland and England either, at least up until relatively recently.

a) There was considerable intermixing for the last handful of centuries, why do you think Jones is the most common surname in the UK? Genetic studies [which I will go and cite directly if you want once I get into work] show no discernable difference between the english and the scots and statistically disputable difference between the welsh and the english+scots when compared with anyone else.
b) Even if it only happened recently, it would still count as intermixed population

At the beginning of the 20th Century, there were areas of Wales where 95%+ of the population spoke Welsh - and that number went down more because parents stopped teaching Welsh to their children (because of Welsh being constantly portrayed as a backward language) than because of immigration.

Culture is more than just language, no one is disputing that Welsh as a language should be preserved, and be thankful you're not in France.