It's hilarious watching countries who have achieved independence from Britain backing the union. No sense of irony there at all. Obviously his stance is totally based on Quebec but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Printable View
It's hilarious watching countries who have achieved independence from Britain backing the union. No sense of irony there at all. Obviously his stance is totally based on Quebec but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
As someone who's lived in both Australia and Canada I could never quite get the fawning. It's bizarre.
Harper is a goon though.
That's quite something. I really hadn't expected that. YouGov polls tend to be generous to the 'no' vote as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
Wonder if an unlikely Scottish win tonight would boost the "Yes" campaign? Or if a tanking could do the opposite?
I understand completely what you are saying but that kind of mindset by those "groups/communities/identities" is illusionary. Lets say we take a person from the Ulster Scots and take one person from the Irish and they never told about the history of either groups, what then those one call itself? The notion of these groups gives the people a feeling that they are different, superior, patriotic etc. and gives a meaning to their lives that otherwise would be boring and pointless. Some may think that these groups have positive elements to them, and they may well be right but in saying that you have to look at the other side, it causes division amongst people which on larger scales causes wars. So for me, the fact that these groups cause division/wars is something that this world can do without.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
So the latest poll from TNS has the yes and no camps tied at 41% each if you exclude don't knows.
It's been a remarkable few days.
Interestingly the Devo-max timetable should be announced today.
Offers of Home Rule in 2014...interesting.
My latest on this thoroughly compelling campaign:
http://www.krank.ie/category/opinion...ce-referendum/
If that's the case, what human feeling, sentiment, emotion, identity, culture or ideology wouldn't be an "illusion" or a manufactured/notional means of escaping this boredom and futility you mention? You appear to be distinguishing the ideology of nationalism from other ideologies, or singling it out as being particularly or uniquely flawed. That would imply that you feel there may be other ideologies that aren't illusory and flawed; if so, what ideologies are they? The ones to which you conveniently just happen to subscribe, surely not? I submit that any distinction you invoke will be no more than arbitrary. By your logic, all ideologies and feelings of connection could be said to be figments of our imagination.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBoss
Just because something is a means of escape or a means for creating meaning, value or essence in one's life, it doesn't necessarily mean it is flawed and illusory; rather, the tool or mechanism of escape is perhaps itself the very fabric of real, meaningful life and human experience. Of course your test cases wouldn't know who they were if they were stripped of their histories and experiences - the things that define their essence - for they'd be blank and unblemished canvases. But no human is like that. Essence is an integral by-product of existence. By our very existence, life's environment moulds us and gives us essence; that's not something that can be denied or erased. It's those very histories and experiences that have made these people who they are. Their communal histories and experiences are very real for them and integral to their identities.
I suspect national identities are more an effect rather than a cause of division. People will always be divided by interests and will always construct (wittingly or organically/unwittingly) and exploit conflicting ideologies or dogmas to morally justify and reinforce those respective interests.Quote:
Some may think that these groups have positive elements to them, and they may well be right but in saying that you have to look at the other side, it causes division amongst people which on larger scales causes wars. So for me, the fact that these groups cause division/wars is something that this world can do without.
My daily missive on the referendum:
http://www.krank.ie/category/n_ca/wo...ce-referendum/Quote:
Six Points of Separation: The Scottish Independence Referendum
So up from London they came; David, Ed and Nick, determined to show the Scots that they really really wanted them to stay part of the United Kingdom. On top of that, Lord (John) Prescott, former Deputy Prime Minister under Tony Blair, made an appearance. The big guns are out for Better Together. On the other side of the debate, Yes Scotland continued the grassroots contact that has served them so well so far. No change there.
Meanwhile in England, there was a bit of a kerfuffle made over the differentiation of the Scottish and English editions of national newspapers, most notably The Daily Mail, having different headlines and policies towards published articles and “feelings” towards the referendum in Scotland compared that that in England. This is exactly the same as what happened to the Daily Express back in April when, in England, it stated that their would be a “Pension Shock For Millions” whereas in Scotland the headline state that “Pensions [were] Safer In [the] UK”. Hardly what could be called unbiased coverage one would think.
The big news on the trail today was, of course, the Survation poll for the Daily Record which showed a 6-point gap in favour of No when the undecideds were omitted. Whilst this may appear to be a huge jump from the last two days, the interesting thing to note is that the Survation poll has consistently undervalued the Yes side and has shown only a 1-point change in the “don’t knows” since last month. It also shows a huge 6-point swing (Yes +3%; No -3%) since the last poll.
The smart money is on a race that is still too close to call and the perceived wisdom that the flight of Ed, David and Nick to England’s Attic was as a result of some private polling which shows a flight of undecided voters to the Yes camp over the last two weeks.
All-in-all, the effect of their arrival seems to chime with the panic that is being felt across the Better Together camp that they could indeed find themselves on the losing side. With only seven days left until polling day, this campaign will get nastier and nastier as the tension mounts.
The campaign is truly on a knife edge and that knife has killed the UK as we know it.
Scotland’s presence in the UK is still very much up-for-grabs.
Bold Davie Cameron:
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/510099132334481409
Yes in the lead according to ICM poll:
http://postimg.org/image/a2trwatst/
All my points refer solely to nationalism (due to this thread) and reasons I feel why it is outdated caveman style of living our lives, I never implied that the other ideologies are better or worse cause I never made any claim to that. I do however agree that all ideologies are illusionary, it fails to make an individual think for themselves. We should all have political viewpoints independent of groups/ideologies etc., cause we have to as an intelligent species be able to live our lives to the best we can, unfortunately nowadays most people who live on this planet are just happy to sit back and allow this fake nationalism to control their lives. I think I've made my point. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Ha, yes, I think you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBoss
The referendum is as much about enhancing democracy as it is about the coming of age of a nation though. As an aside, I've found it interesting that Scottish nationalism and unionism aren't really aligned to ethnicity or religion in the same way that Irish nationalism and unionism broadly are. George Galloway, of Irish Catholic descent, for example, has often made a case for 32-county Irish republicanism, yet he's a staunch Union-supporting socialist in terms of Scotland's place in the UK. Obviously, the two nation's respective histories and interactions/conflicts with England/Britain have influenced that, but interesting nonetheless.
Dan Snow of the 'No'/'Better Together' campaign was arguing yesterday that it didn't make sense to divide an island into two separate political jurisdictions. The irony of the situation was completely lost on him as he made the claim whilst donning a pro-Union t-shirt featuring a partitioned Ireland. He made no case for the re-unification of Ireland, meanwhile. :p
Just glancing at the odds today, PP pretty set on the likelihood of a "No", given as 77% chance. Just don't see it happening.
It'll be interesting to see how fast Cameron actually does try and implement "Devo Max", or if it was a just a fake carrot on a stick, left unimplemented by the time the next GE comes around.
Yeah i also had a quick gander at the PP odds, bit surprising, but they have got it wrong before with elections (Obama/LMF)
He should have a look at this list of divided islands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_divided_islands There are a lot of them and the one divided between Germany and Poland caught my eye. Never knew that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I suspect Celtic supporters will be voting to stay in the UK for if Scotland exits, that's their last chance of playing in the EPL.
Not necessarily. Why would union, or the lack thereof, make a difference there? FIFA/UEFA already consider Scotland and England as distinct footballing territories anyway. Furthermore, there are numerous examples in world football of clubs from one jurisdiction playing in the league of another state/jurisdiction; Derry City, for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
Interestingly, a lot of Celtic fans are wary of the SNP and Scottish nationalism, or at least were a few months ago anyway: http://www.irishpost.co.uk/sport/ind...sh-nationalism
I have a feeling many would be traditional Scottish Labour supporters - Glasgow being an old industrial/shipyard city - and, obviously, Labour are pro-Union. It's an economic thing rather than an ethno-cultural thing for them. Independence has seen support rise steadily in the last few weeks, mind, presumably from all sections of Scottish society. I don't think it'll happen myself though, but it will be a very tight call.
Betfair are recording a much higher volume of "Yes" bets, but more money being placed on "No" gambles. It's a bit confusing, the site is apparently paying out on some "No" bets already: https://betting.betfair.com/politics...98967&mpch=ads
Gorgeous's allegiances are a bit inconsistent. Celtic one week, Dundee United the next. Ditto proud Socialist and MP for an ethnicity-based party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Invincible
Dan Snow is a professional historian albeit not specialising in Ireland. He's oversimplifying/ bull****ting for his English audience.
I doubt thatQuote:
Originally Posted by "Owls Fan
a) Celtic-supporting voters tend to have that support as a major factor in their choice
b) any political change tomorrow will make any difference to their presently negligible chance of joining the EPL
Clearly a fake carrot. The SNP wanted "Devo Max" on the ballot as an option, and Westminster refused. Why would they implement it when they have no mandate for it?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
Some really patronising ****e from plenty of Irish people on my social media feeds tonight, mansplaining-esque in their reasons to vote Yes. Almost as bad as the English celebs in the Vote No camp.
And Irish celebs in the Vote No camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
Oh yes, lets not forget Sir Bob.
Anything I've seen or heard from the Tories so far (pretty limited due to work) about Devo Max, has not so much been about what powers Scotland will have, but limiting the power of Scottish MP's in Westminster. Better (for the Tories) Together indeed...
Pretty decisive win for the 'Better Together' campaign in the end. Will the chances of and conditions for an independence vote ever be as ripe again? Much of the discontent has been seen as a reaction against "effing" Tory rule - Labour are favourites to win the next general UK election - and, of course, the separatist minority will be appeased now with those extra powers (assuming the unionist Westminster trio do deliver on their promises). That will surely de-radicalise its potential sting. Hardeep Singh Kohli of the 'Yes' campaign condemned the result as a victory for "Project Fear" and as representing a mandate for a continuation of the status quo. It would be very bad faith on the part of the Westminster trio to fail to deliver now.
They can hardly complain if Devo Max isn't delivered - they voted on a vague, non-binding commitment and if it's not delivered they don't have anyone to blame but themselves. Nevertheless, I hope it works out for them.
Support for separation is now significantly higher in Scotland than NI! I'd hardly call that a decisive win for BTQuote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Quite likely, yes. Six months of polls after the next GE, showing YES well above 50%, say?Quote:
Will the chances of and conditions for an independence vote ever be as ripe again?
Labour share much of the coalition's 'austerity' programme. But it's a big assumption that they'd deliver if they win the next election. If, for example, the payback for more devo to Scotland is their Scottish MPs being excluded from English votes.Quote:
Much of the discontent has been seen as a reaction against "effing" Tory rule - Labour are favourites to win the next general UK election - and, of course, the separatist minority will be appeased now with those extra powers (assuming the unionist Westminster trio do deliver on their promises). That will surely de-radicalise its potential sting
Certainly, and more fool them if so. In spite of the promise, presumably, any devo-max proposal will have to be approved by a majority in Westminster first? Is majority support even likely? Possibly not. It was a (vague, as you say) promise desperately bundled together at the last minute. And mightn't the other regions expect similar then, perhaps even regions within England? What might happen if the unionist parties fail to deliver? Interesting times...Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Hmm, maybe so. I guess what I meant was that the result was nowhere near as close as the recent inconclusive "49-51" opinion polls were predicting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
It remains to be seen. If the Conservatives are voted out and greater powers are granted to Holyrood, I can't see support for full independence increasing. It'll be what Samond originally wanted as one of the options on the ballot papers anyway. There's a sense that the question has now been out to bed for at least a decade or two now and Salmond did express acceptance of the democratic decision and urged unity within Scotland in his speech this morning. That would indicate he doesn't really see another referendum happening for the foreseeable future.Quote:
Quite likely, yes. Six months of polls after the next GE, showing YES well above 50%, say?
Fair point.Quote:
Labour share much of the coalition's 'austerity' programme. But it's a big assumption that they'd deliver if they win the next election. If, for example, the payback for more devo to Scotland is their Scottish MPs being excluded from English votes.
What inspired your change of position, by the way? Weren't you originally of the feeling that everyone in the present UK was better together? If you are supportive of Scotland's place outside of the UK, what about NI's? Could you ever come to accept NI leaving the UK?
I wonder was it. They wouldn't put it on the ballot in the first place, which SNP wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
So now they get to present it at the 11th hour, offer vague promises instead of something made binding by referendum, destabilise the Yes campaign, and not allow the SNP to claim victory at the polls as they would have if devo max had been on the ballot and been the number one choice.
I think Salmond has been out-politicked, and he probably knew that's why devo max was off the ballot too.
That's a good point. You may well be correct. Maybe it was the "break in case of emergency" option all along. The proposal only entered into the general debate when one of the YouGov opinion polls put "yes" ever-so-slightly ahead in an opinion poll last week.
Interesting one, this, and, no doubt, coloured by a petty sense of diplomatic retaliation for western criticisms of Russian elections; Russia cries foul over this morning's counting procedures: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ish-referendum
Meanwhile, a video of counting footage from Dundee doing the rounds is claiming the count was rigged:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guardian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUR-H...ature=youtu.be
Dundee's 'Yes' campaign did clarify that there was nothing to worry about, however:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx2p32OCYAEucgK.jpg:large
Saw a lot of kneejerk RT's of similar stuff last night. People not realising all votes are counted up before being being sorted into results. That and claims that some people tried to vote twice in Glasgow. All a little desperate imo.
Haven't they heard of voting early and voting often?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
a) health the key issue for me. I don't fully trust the SNP but the obsessive Tory privatisers frighten me sh*tlessQuote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
b) yes, usually/ previously housing's been the most important issue. Beyond football matches and karaoke/ open mike I'm not too bothered about flags and anthems etc.
c) I don't have any direct emotional/ financial interest in Scotland (never lived there, no family etc.). So it's up to the locals really
d) obviously there isn't a direct parallel, as Nationalists in NI don't want independence, and even if Unionists did the inherent instability means it's a non-starter
e) yes, as I've said here I accept the possibility however small of a UI. If, for example there's some combination of 'Orange Flight' to a small geographical area of suburban Belfast while at the same time Westminster imposes ever stricter financial cuts.
Devo Max would give the Scottish government the power over most reserved matters except Defence and Foreign Affairs. That was never offered, so it won't be delivered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I think when the days and weeks pass and the disappointment for the Yes campaign begins to settle they can reflect on a remarkable achievement. 10 or 15 years ago who would've thought that Scotland would even have a referendum on independence, let alone that 45% of the population would vote for it. The result is no endorsement of the Union. Indeed the most interesting thing to take from the result is that the Yes vote would've won had it not been for the over 60s. The support for No amongst OAPs almost trebled that for Yes, so the demographic edge is with independence.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
In other words, the genie is out of the bottle and it ain't going back. In my view the only thing that can halt the further destabilisation and possible ending of the Union is a move to the full federalisation of the British state.
Ha, you've already answered my follow-up-in-waiting; "If you can see a place for NI outside of the UK, could you envisage a place for it in a new all-island Irish state?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
What is the meaning of "'Orange Flight' to a small geographical area of suburban Belfast"? I'm afraid that reference has gone over my head. :o Does it refer to a possible situation where the unionist population has become a minority in such a way so as to lack the influence to prevent such a development?
Sorry, didn't explain it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I mean, basically, the Unionist population in Ulster country falling significantly as older people die while the younger move to suburban Belfast, or England and beyond.
If there are basically no Prods in Fermanagh, Tyrone and Derry beyond Coleraine, NI looks lopsided even if Nats can't manage 50%.