The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

weak and feeble.

Better than Boris's mandate.

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

If there really is, you only have to wait a year to prove it, and then you can make that claim with no bullshit.  

There is currently no bullshit.

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

because no one has talked about the hard customs border with England, or the mega-austerity that an iScotland would need to do.

On the contrary, the Tories and libdems and you have talked about it incessantly.

23 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Then have a real poll in 15 months and be on solid no-bullshit ground.

I'm guessing that is where we are heading due to you and Johnson being democracy deniers.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Better than Boris's mandate.

no, very definitely not. His mandate for brexit was front and centre of his campaign, and 6 weeks ago.

What you're claiming as a mandate was a minor aside of based on an 'if', about something no one thought would happen.

 

1 minute ago, LJS said:

I'm guessing that is where we are heading due to you and Johnson being democracy deniers.

The rules of democracy for the UK are the ones we work to. You know, where Scotland shares the same right to an indyref as the highlands or Shetlands or Yorkshire or Cornwall.

And where an indyref isn't an on-demand any-time thing, as recognised by the SNP in the last indyref's white paper where they described the last indyref as once in a lifetime (or generation, I forget).

If you want it, you have to *really* prove the demand for it is there - by getting a *clear* mandate. 

And then as far as I'm concerned your really welcome to it, tho I hope very much that Scottish voters are smarter than the brexit deadheads. You hope they're deadheads.

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

no, very definitely not. His mandate for brexit was front and centre of his campaign, and 6 weeks ago.

What you're claiming as a mandate was a minor aside of based on an 'if', about something no one thought would happen.

 

The rules of democracy for the UK are the ones we work to. You know, where Scotland shares the same right to an indyref as the highlands or Shetlands or Yorkshire or Cornwall.

And where an indyref isn't an on-demand any-time thing, as recognised by the SNP in the last indyref's white paper where they described the last indyref as once in a lifetime (or generation, I forget).

If you want it, you have to *really* prove the demand for it is there - by getting a *clear* mandate. 

And then as far as I'm concerned your really welcome to it, tho I hope very much that Scottish voters are smarter than the brexit deadheads. You hope they're deadheads.

There is a clear mandate from last Holyrood election. I have previously destroyed your claim that it was an aside by posting numerous examples of clear public statements of this. I did this because unlike you, I try to avoid making claims which I can't support with evidence.

In addition, as you have now acknowledged (by your failure to prove otherwise) the SNP clearly campaigned in the recent GE for indyref2, and performed better in Scotland  than the Tories did UK wide.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

There is a clear mandate from last Holyrood election.

that's stretching it.

And if it's so clear, what't the problem with making it clearer still? 

Indy is for life, not just for 2020.

Quote

I have previously destroyed your claim that it was an aside by posting numerous examples of clear public statements of this.

there were lots of statements.

But 

1. it was something no one thought would happen.

2. its existence didn't change how a single person voted.

BTW, how come some mandates matter so much - even when weak - but so much else in that manifesto turned out to be politicians' piss with no complaint from you?

 

Quote

I did this because unlike you, I try to avoid making claims which I can't support with evidence.

PMSL  

Quote

In addition, as you have now acknowledged (by your failure to prove otherwise) the SNP clearly campaigned in the recent GE for indyref2,

And the Labour Party campaigned to confiscate private property.

It doesn't mean Labour voters endorse robbery, you know. 

 

Quote

and performed better in Scotland  than the Tories did UK wide.

That's because the SNP have never run a country. You know, actually made difficult decisions that people hated.   You do know there's little hatred for county councils in England, don't you, no matter which party runs the council? It's for the same reason.

But anyway, Sturgeon claimed she won the election. She's as dumb a Corbyn.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2020 by eFestivals

[mcshed]

4 hours ago, LJS said:

 

In addition, as you have now acknowledged (by your failure to prove otherwise) the SNP clearly campaigned in the recent GE for indyref2, and performed better in Scotland  than the Tories did UK wide.

Whilst I agree with you that Nicola never said that a vote for the SNP wasn't a vote for independence, it clearly wasn't the focus of their campaign there were a significant number of unionists who voted SNP so I don't thing there is an unambiguous mandate for a referendum and the Westminster is arbiter for that decision. Campaign for Holyrood with a clear we will hold a referendum campaign and win a majority (including your wee Green pals) and then it's unambiguous and if Boris is still refusing I'll be on your side. For holding the referendum not for the outcome of it. 

This is an epoch defining decision it shouldn't matter if it waits another couple of years. 

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, mcshed said:

Campaign for Holyrood with a clear we will hold a referendum campaign and win a majority (including your wee Green pals) and then it's unambiguous and if Boris is still refusing I'll be on your side. For holding the referendum not for the outcome of it. 

This^^

Tho for me, there's caveats to the "I'll be on your side" bit. If people vote in favour of a ref there should be a ref - but that still doesn't mean there should be one instantly, or necessarily to Sturgeon's timetable, or necessarily to her chosen wording.

The last ref was very clear - from all sides including the SNP - that it wasn't an open door to a never-ending referendum process at the demand of the people of Scotland.

And just as I saw asked of Sturgeon on TV in the last few days, why should the ref happen before Scotland is able to know what it would be rejecting? Shouldn't, perhaps, the outcome of the UK/EU situation be known first, as the change in that situation is being used as the justification for the new ref?

Independence is for life, not just for 2020. Why the rush?

(apart from because Sturgeon knows the support is probably temporary, and that she's trying to mug the people of Scotland into doing something she knows they might later regret ).

Edited February 1, 2020 by eFestivals

[LJS]

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

Whilst I agree with you that Nicola never said that a vote for the SNP wasn't a vote for independence, it clearly wasn't the focus of their campaign

i disagree. at the start of the campaign it was very clear that they were seeking a mandate for Indy ref 2- here is a part of Sturgeon's manifesto launch speech

Quote

 

It’s time to take Scotland’s future into Scotland’s hands.

People are increasingly sick of hearing Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson talking about “not allowing” the Scottish people to choose our own future.

The fact is it’s not up to them. Indeed, it’s not up to me either.

It is a decision for the people of Scotland and for the Scottish Parliament.

The democratically elected Scottish Parliament has agreed that people in Scotland should be given a choice over their future.

An unelected Tory Westminster government has no right to overturn that decision.

An SNP victory in this election would be a clear instruction from the people of Scotland to respect Scottish democracy.

So in this election vote SNP to send the strongest message to Westminster and to Boris Johnson: there must be no Westminster veto over the right of the people of Scotland to decide their own future.

The SNP’s message to any Westminster party seeking our support is this: if you cannot support this most fundamental of democratic principles, the SNP cannot support you.

Scotland is at a crossroads.

We are facing two futures.

In one future we will be governed by Boris Johnson and taken out of the EU against our will.

We will be at the mercy of an increasingly right-wing Tory party that will let nothing get in the way of their extreme Brexit vision.

The right-wingers who are running the show want to abandon EU standards, they want to cut Scotland’s share of UK government spending and they have shown they will trample all over devolution if it gets in the way of Brexit.

People in Scotland have the right to consider an alternative future.

One in which Scotland’s future is in Scotland’s hands – not Boris Johnson’s.

A future with Scotland as an equal partner with our closest friends in the rest of the UK and with the EU.

In an independent Scotland we will always get the governments we vote for.

 

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

there were a significant number of unionists who voted SNP so I don't thing there is an unambiguous mandate for a referendum and the Westminster is arbiter for that decision.

i am sure there were a significant no of remainers who voted Tory. No one is suggesting that means Johnson has no mandate to implement Brexit. indeed more voters voted for parties in favour of a second vote than voted Tory. Again, no one is suggestig that invalidates his mandate.

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

Campaign for Holyrood with a clear we will hold a referendum campaign and win a majority (including your wee Green pals)

the SNP have already done this. There is a myth that the demand for Indyref2 was somehow buried away in the smallprint & never mentioned dutring the campaign. I hvae previously posted links to tons of stuff that shows clearly that wsa not the case. The suspicion is that no SNP mandate will ever be good enough. 

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

and then it's unambiguous and if Boris is still refusing I'll be on your side. For holding the referendum not for the outcome of it. 

This is an epoch defining decision it shouldn't matter if it waits another couple of years. 

This is politics. The SNP woudl be mad tnotto be pushing for a referendum now. the fact is we're not getting one this year, whether Sturgeon likes it or not. If we get one after the next Holyrood election, the timing will be a matter for negotiation.

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

This^^

Tho for me, there's caveats to the "I'll be on your side" bit. If people vote in favour of a ref there should be a ref - but that still doesn't mean there should be one instantly, or necessarily to Sturgeon's timetable, or necessarily to her chosen wording.

Of course not, but naturally as part of negotiating for one she will demand all these things, on the assumption that she won't get everything she asks for. 

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

The last ref was very clear - from all sides including the SNP - that it wasn't an open door to a never-ending referendum process at the demand of the people of Scotland.

Indeed, and I don't think many folk thought that support for independence would hold up in the way it has. However, if it wasn't for Brexit, I don't think we would be talking seriously about indyref2

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

And just as I saw asked of Sturgeon on TV in the last few days, why should the ref happen before Scotland is able to know what it would be rejecting? Shouldn't, perhaps, the outcome of the UK/EU situation be known first, as the change in that situation is being used as the justification for the new ref?

of course she wants it now- politically, now is to her advantage. Getting knocked back by Johnson is to some extent to her advantage. But the reality is she's not getting it now, so its a hypothetical question.

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Independence is for life, not just for 2020. Why the rush?

(apart from because Sturgeon knows the support is probably temporary, and that she's trying to mug the people of Scotland into doing something she knows they might later regret ).

I think a fair few people regret the way they voted in 2014.

[mcshed]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

SNiP

There is a difference between having vague statements about still wanting an independent Scotland and and saying you want a referendum RIGHT NOW or even within the term of the next parliament. Campaign stating you will hold a referendum within the next parliament if you win your mandate is unambiguous. Until then do a better job of running the country.

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, LJS said:

of course she wants it now- politically, now is to her advantage.

Because indy for Scotland isn't about the people in Scotland, it's about a political win for Sturgeon because of the luck of circumstances...?

It's things like this that changes indy from the reasonable democratic "what the people want" into "how can the people be manipulated?" and the abhorent. 

 

20 hours ago, LJS said:

Getting knocked back by Johnson is to some extent to her advantage. But the reality is she's not getting it now, so its a hypothetical question.

so what you're saying is that Sturgeon is stirring up shit just because.

Who knew that the methodology is grievance mining?  

 

20 hours ago, LJS said:

I think a fair few people regret the way they voted in 2014.

Thing is - and what you miss - is this is true in both directions.

And the new support for the SNP is being built on the logical fallacy of "new borders with big markets are bad" when that's precisely what indy will cause.

[LJS]

Independent Scotland would get 'enthusiastic' welcome from EU, says Donald Tusk

An independent Scotland would receive an "enthusiastic" reception if it sought to rejoin the EU and could enjoy a bespoke re-entry process, former EU President Donald Tusk has said.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/independent-scotland-would-get-enthusiastic-welcome-from-eu-says-donald-tusk-1-5084539/amp?__twitter_impression=true

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

Independent Scotland would get 'enthusiastic' welcome from EU, says Donald Tusk

An independent Scotland would receive an "enthusiastic" reception if it sought to rejoin the EU and could enjoy a bespoke re-entry process, former EU President Donald Tusk has said.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/independent-scotland-would-get-enthusiastic-welcome-from-eu-says-donald-tusk-1-5084539/amp?__twitter_impression=true

I guess you didn't understand the article, then.

1. this is Tusk willy waving, saying to the UK "now you're on the outside things happen differently".

2. Tusk deliberately uses the word 'emotionally', and later mentions the difficult situation regarding treaties.

You want to sucker the Scots you think are thick with this, while Tusk has suckered you just like you want to sucker the Scots you think are thick.  

Edited February 3, 2020 by eFestivals

[mcshed]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

Independent Scotland would get 'enthusiastic' welcome from EU, says Donald Tusk

An independent Scotland would receive an "enthusiastic" reception if it sought to rejoin the EU and could enjoy a bespoke re-entry process, former EU President Donald Tusk has said.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/independent-scotland-would-get-enthusiastic-welcome-from-eu-says-donald-tusk-1-5084539/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Whilst I'm sure Tusk is genuine in his wish to enable Scotland to return to Europe the likes of him were never the problem, come back when Spain wants to make life easy on separating regions.

This also supposed that rejoining the EU is the best option for Scotland, is it? I would love to have stayed part of the EU and if Scotland was going to go independent then if both parts of the UK were in the EU that would also be great but given how closely interlinked we are with rUK if they are out life for an Independent Scotland is likely to be easier if we stay in some kind of customs union with them. This is an example of why being independent is shit, what works best for the country is often highly dependent on the actions of the much bigger neighbour you are closely attached to so why not stay involved and have a say in how it's run rather than having the Illusion of independence when all you're doing is losing your seat at the table.

For clarification here is my list of preference regarding memberships of unions.

In UK everyone in EU

Out UK everyone in EU

In UK everyone out EU

Out UK Scotland only in EU

Out UK rUK only in EU

 

[LJS]

I think the significance of tusk's words, is that the EU no longer feels any duty to support the UK position, now the UK has left the club.

As for whether joining the EU is the best option for an independent Scotland, one of the beauties of independence is that we can decide that for ourselves.

[eFestivals]

26 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Whilst I'm sure Tusk is genuine in his wish to enable Scotland to return to Europe the likes of him were never the problem, come back when Spain wants to make life easy on separating regions.

it's not really Spain that's going to be Scotland's difficulty. It's going to be France, and quite possibly Ireland, The Netherlands, and other places that would require a referendum to admit a new member, and it's going to be the Eastern countries who would lose some of their EU money to Scotland.

And then there's the many very big difficulties Scotland has at meeting the EU entry criteria. Who's going to tell the people of Scotland about the massive austerity that will come before membership and forever-more?

It's precisely why Tusk mentioned those treaty problems with having Scotland as a member. 

Edited February 3, 2020 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, LJS said:

I think the significance of tusk's words, is that the EU no longer feels any duty to support the UK position, now the UK has left the club.

I agree.

Which makes the words a "fuck you" at the UK and not "come and join us, we'll have you" to Scotland.

 

16 minutes ago, LJS said:

As for whether joining the EU is the best option for an independent Scotland, one of the beauties of independence is that we can decide that for ourselves.

 

But your glorious leader - and you - say it's your right to have a new indyref because you want to be in the EU.

It only proves that you know what big big guff you're speaking, and that you think the people in Scotland are thicker than the dumbest brexiters.

[mcshed]

17 minutes ago, LJS said:

As for whether joining the EU is the best option for an independent Scotland, one of the beauties of independence is that we can decide that for ourselves.

You seem to ignore my point is that it isn't as we are better off in the EU if the UK is in regardless of independence and we are better off out if the UK is out regardless of independence.

[LJS]

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

You seem to ignore my point is that it isn't as we are better off in the EU if the UK is in regardless of independence and we are better off out if the UK is out regardless of independence.

I don't really intend to get into a detailed discussion on this at this stage, partly because we don't know what the UK's trading relationship with the EU is going to look like and we don't know how (or if) the trading arrangements with the Irish republic will work in practice.  

 

However, I would suggest that, in the long term being aligned with the EU may be smarter than being aligned with a failing isolationist UK.

Once we actually have a referendum, I will happily discuss all these matters in more detail. As i'm sure you will appreciate once Neil gets his teeth into a subject you can be involved in futile circular debates which appear endless. 

  

[mcshed]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

However, I would suggest that, in the long term being aligned with the EU may be smarter than being aligned with a failing isolationist UK.

This sounds like the Brexity trade deals with the rest of the world. Both ignore the facts of geography that aren't going to change anytime soon. If you are someone's wee neighbour you will remain their wee neighbour regardless of aspirations.

If you don't want to get into it "until there is a referendum" I don't see a huge amount of point in you posting here until then.

[mcshed]

8 hours ago, LJS said:

partly because we don't know what the UK's trading relationship with the EU is going to look like and we don't know how (or if) the trading arrangements with the Irish republic will work in practice.  

Sounds like this year would have been a terrible time to have a referendum then?

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, mcshed said:

Sounds like this year would have been a terrible time to have a referendum then?

Sturgeon didn't want a ref this year and knows she's not getting one.

Which is the whole bleeding point as far as she's concerned.

Which means she's trying to scam the people of Scotland.

Does LJS know she's trying to scam Scotland? Yup.

Which means those wonderful Nats think Scots are morons.

Which is funny.  

[mcshed]

28 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Which means those wonderful Nats think Scots are morons.

You are keen to point out that half of the population have below average intelligence after a decade of SNP control the education system up here is insuring that more than half of the population will fall below the UK average.

[eFestivals]

49 minutes ago, mcshed said:

You are keen to point out that half of the population have below average intelligence after a decade of SNP control the education system up here is insuring that more than half of the population will fall below the UK average.

I'd definitely say that around half of the UK are political morons, so if that's the same with Scotland it's no surprise.

However, when the first indyref came around, there were grand claims from Nats about how the Scots were more politically informed and smarter. I'm simply highlighting another part of that Nat tosh.

But anyway, things keep on changing. It's a give away when the likes of LJS starts to free-pass the idea of Scotland as a home for tax avoidance.

[LJS]

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

This sounds like the Brexity trade deals with the rest of the world. Both ignore the facts of geography that aren't going to change anytime soon. If you are someone's wee neighbour you will remain their wee neighbour regardless of aspirations.

If you don't want to get into it "until there is a referendum" I don't see a huge amount of point in you posting here until then.

I am happy to debate the general principles. I don't see the point of getting too much into detail when we don't know if or when we will get a referendum and what the UK's relationship with the EU will look like at that time. 

I have always been clear that my first preference was Scotland independent & in the EU - with rUK also in the EU. 

I have also acknowledged that Brexit poses a challenge to Scotland's trade with rUk if we join the EU after indy. 

 

14 hours ago, mcshed said:

Sounds like this year would have been a terrible time to have a referendum then?

I believe you guys have said every year is a bad year to have a referendum. 

I don't expect that to change any time soon.

If we were to have an Indyref this year ( which ain't going to happen) I would be comfortable with an aspiration to join the EU if it can be done whilst not unduly harming cross border trade with the rest of the former UK.

 

12 hours ago, eFestivals said:

But anyway, things keep on changing. It's a give away when the likes of LJS starts to free-pass the idea of Scotland as a home for tax avoidance.

Could you point out where I have done this?

[mcshed]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

I believe you guys have said every year is a bad year to have a referendum. 

It wasn't me who raised the issue it was you. Every year since 2014 has been a bad year to have a referendum as there has been no mandate for it and it has been less than a decade since the last once in a generation one, if Brexit has caused the material change required to have one then shouldn't we as you say wait and see what the trading relationship between the UK and Europe is before making a decision? Otherwise put a commitment to holding a referendum in the ensuing parliament in your manifesto like you did in 2011 that's the precident. 

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

Could you point out where I have done this?

when you stopped claiming Scotland as morally superior* and more-left-wing and politically superior and stopped batting an eyelid at the possibility of a tax-haven** iScotland as the way to balance the books

* that claim was a regular at the start of this thread. It was the original full reason for indy.

** as you did the other day (and not for the first time) when you complained about the exclusion of Ireland for comparison with Scotland on GDP.

Note: I didn't say you actively endorse a tax haven Scotland, I said you've started to free-pass the idea. Because you have.