Brexit: Now What? Part III

[Craig B]

And yet so many people - including in Scotland - are lining up trying to bribe/flatter/terrify Scots into rejecting the escape hatch out of this that we have. It's really worrying.

The latest is that wanting to be independent from England (and stay in the EU) is racist.

That racism stuff didn't work. It was too preposterous. So there's an even more recent charge: not mere racism, but worse - parochialism! See here

The charge to which the SNP has offered no coherent answer is that of parochialism; that by choosing nationalism we forgo what used to be called international solidarity but might now be termed cosmopolitanism. At root, the Nationalist contention is that a bus driver in Shettleston has more in common with Sir Brian Souter than with a bus driver in Salford. The connection, though, is not genetic but geographic; it matters to the SNP which side of the Tweed the bus is being driven on.​

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I agree with you.

I was not saying having a second vote was a real option but more in the abstract I could see the argument for a second vote as part of the process of constitutional change.

I think the 1979 referendum was a bad example since the legislation was passed so what people was getting was clear, this should have been a simple majority. In situations such as the EU where one is voting on a principle (I think the phrase is a pig in a poke?) but not knowing what exactly that means a case for a second referendum could be made.

Some legal opinions are article 50 being a notice to withdraw is not irrevocable.
http://verfassungsblog.de/is-article-50-reversible-on-politics-beyond-legal-doctrine/
This I suspect may be a court case to ECJ if an agreement on exit is not achieved at the 2 year point. One could argue if there is not an agreement on exit then the UK remains in the EU. (Just as one remains married until the divorce is agreed at least by the court if not by one's spouse.)

I thought it was pretty clear that if no agreement is reached 2 years after triggering Art 50 then the UK leaves the EU unless an extension is unanimously agreed?

Whether Art 50 can be revoked seems to be more uncertain but I have seen nothing to suggest that there is anything to say it can be. Even if it technically may be so it would seem an untenable longterm position to want to leave but remain until a suitable deal can be agreed.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

That racism stuff didn't work. It was too preposterous. So there's an even more recent charge: not mere racism, but worse - parochialism! See here

The charge to which the SNP has offered no coherent answer is that of parochialism; that by choosing nationalism we forgo what used to be called international solidarity but might now be termed cosmopolitanism. At root, the Nationalist contention is that a bus driver in Shettleston has more in common with Sir Brian Souter than with a bus driver in Salford. The connection, though, is not genetic but geographic; it matters to the SNP which side of the Tweed the bus is being driven on.​

Slightly incoherent when the argument seems to be that we should hitch ourself to an increasingly isolated and xenophobic Union rather than show international solidarity with the rest of Europe.

Rehashing arguments from the past won't work when the present is fundamentally different.

ETA: That article is from 2015 I just noticed. So the criticism above is invalid.

 

[ceptimus]

People wanting Scotland to leave the UK = brave patriotic Scots.

People wanting the UK to leave the EU = racist moronic little Englanders.

If Scotland wanted to go it alone like Iceland, I could understand - but why would Scots want to wrestle control from London only to hand it over to Brussels and Berlin? And why are they so concerned about preserving their vital access to the EU market but don't mind throwing away their (at least four times larger) single market with the UK?

It makes no sense whatsoever and the only rational explanation comes down to hatred of the English, or as Archie would say, hatred of little Johnny Foreigner.

 

[Craig B]

Slightly incoherent when the argument seems to be that we should hitch ourself to an increasingly isolated and xenophobic Union rather than show international solidarity with the rest of Europe.

Rehashing arguments from the past won't work when the present is fundamentally different.

ETA: That article is from 2015 I just noticed. So the criticism above is invalid.

So it is. Sorry, I mistook the date. The parochialism charge has been around for a long time then.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

People wanting Scotland to leave the UK = brave patriotic Scots.

People wanting the UK to leave the EU = racist moronic little Englanders.

If Scotland wanted to go it alone like Iceland, I could understand - but why would Scots want to wrestle control from London only to hand it over to Brussels and Berlin? And why are they so concerned about preserving their vital access to the EU market but don't mind throwing away their (at least four times larger) single market with the UK?

It makes no sense whatsoever and the only rational explanation comes down to hatred of the English, or as Archie would say, hatred of little Johnny Foreigner.

You are very confused and, I suspect, wilfully ignorant.

People wanting to leave the EU - SO THAT THEY CAN KEEP FOREIGNERS OUT - vs people wanting to leave the UK - while keeping the door open to others.

ETA: This nonsense argument is just too close to the babble from Christians about forcing them not to discriminate against people being Anti-Christian.

Racist? Moronic? Little Englanders? You said it, not me.

 

[Craig B]

People wanting Scotland to leave the UK = brave patriotic Scots.

People wanting the UK to leave the EU = racist moronic little Englanders.

If Scotland wanted to go it alone like Iceland, I could understand - but why would Scots want to wrestle control from London only to hand it over to Brussels and Berlin? And why are they so concerned about preserving their vital access to the EU market but don't mind throwing away their (at least four times larger) single market with the UK?

It makes no sense whatsoever and the only rational explanation comes down to hatred of the English, or as Archie would say, hatred of little Johnny Foreigner.

That argument, when reduced to the essentials of your message, reads very oddly indeed.

... why would Scots want to wrestle control from London only to hand it over to Brussels and Berlin? ... the only rational explanation comes down to ... hatred of little Johnny Foreigner.

You're telling us that little Johnnie Foreigner lives in London, not Brussels and Berlin?

 

[ceptimus]

That argument, when reduced to the essentials of your message, reads very oddly indeed. You're telling us that little Johnnie Foreigner lives in London, not Brussels and Berlin?

Yes - that's the way the SNP view things. Their hated foreigners are the English.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Yes - that's the way the SNP view things. Their hated foreigners are the English.

Can you name one policy of the SNP that is anti-English? Can you name any credible voice that is trying to deny English people rights in Scotland?

Clueless.

 

[McHrozni]

but why would Scots want to wrestle control from London only to hand it over to Brussels and Berlin?

Because they trust Brussels and Berlin far more than they do London?

Given the events of the past year, I wouldn't blame them for it.

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

Now I don't believe that Scotland will be allowed to join the EU in the foreseeable future. It doesn't meet the EU's criteria for joining and Spain, possibly other countries, would veto its membership even if it did meet the criteria. In any case I don't think there will be another indyref and if there is one I expect it to be lost from the SNP's perspective.

But in the imaginary parallel universe where Scotland gains independence from the UK and joins the EU, I would expect the SNP to be campaigning to leave after a few years. They're a nationalist party - that's their main reason for existence. Once they were freed from their perceived London Yoke then they would naturally begin to bristle against unwanted interference from Brussels and would begin campaigning for another independence (from the EU) referendum.

Otherwise they would suffer the same fate that UKIP is now experiencing - having achieved their sole policy objective what further use would they be?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Now I don't believe that Scotland will be allowed to join the EU in the foreseeable future. It doesn't meet the EU's criteria for joining and Spain, possibly other countries, would veto its membership even if it did meet the criteria. In any case I don't think there will be another indyref and if there is one I expect it to be lost from the SNP's perspective.

But in the imaginary parallel universe where Scotland gains independence from the UK and joins the EU, I would expect the SNP to be campaigning to leave after a few years. They're a nationalist party - that's their main reason for existence. Once they were freed from their perceived London Yoke then they would naturally begin to bristle against unwanted interference from Brussels and would begin campaigning for another independence (from the EU) referendum.

Otherwise they would suffer the same fate that UKIP is now experiencing - having achieved their sole policy objective what further use would they be?

Did someone say clueless?

It seems, if it's possible, that you know even less about the SNP and Scotland than you do about the EU.

 

[ceptimus]

Can you name one policy of the SNP that is anti-English? Can you name any credible voice that is trying to deny English people rights in Scotland?

Do you think any members of the SNP have a credible voice? Every one of them is trying to deny the English and Welsh what they have democratically voted for - Brexit. Of course it's a transparent excuse to get what they really want - another 'once in a generation' indyref. If they ever get the independence they seek that will deny the rUK some of their rights in Scotland - if it doesn't then what's the point?

Clueless indeed.

 

[McHrozni]

More experts that to be safely ignored.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/02/news/economy/child-poverty-brexit-uk/index.html

(...) growth over the next five years is expected to be 2.4% lower than it would have been had Britain remained a member of the EU.

(among other things)

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

More experts that can be safely ignored.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39154218

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Do you think any members of the SNP have a credible voice? Every one of them is trying to deny the English and Welsh what they have democratically voted for - Brexit.

No they aren't. That's yet another Brexit lie. The Scottish Government is trying to achieve for the Scottish people what they voted for. The SNP and the Scottish Government are perfectly happy with England and Wales leaving the EU if that is what they want. What they object to is Scotland being dragged out against its will alongside them.

Of course it's a transparent excuse to get what they really want - another 'once in a generation' indyref. If they ever get the independence they seek that will deny the rUK some of their rights in Scotland - if it doesn't then what's the point?

What rights specifically are you referring to? I know that you can't see the point in anything that isn't denying rights to foreigners but there are other ways to look at the world.

Clueless indeed.

Admitting you have a problem is the first step. Don't worry though there is plenty you can read if you want to come across as less ignorant.

 

[baron]

You are very confused and, I suspect, wilfully ignorant.

People wanting to leave the EU - SO THAT THEY CAN KEEP FOREIGNERS OUT - vs people wanting to leave the UK - while keeping the door open to others.

An open door to what?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/msps-demand-action-is-taken-after-1485805

FEARS were raised by official crime figures yesterday that anti-English racism is on the increase in Scotland.

Racist incidents rose in the last year for the first time in five years.

And the number of cases where the victims were described as “white British” soared to 1295 – up 24 per cent on the year before and 57 per cent since 2004-5.

or

In a 2003 survey of 500 English people living in Scotland, one quarter said that they had been harassed or discriminated against by Scottish people.

and

Scottish identity comes close to rivalling low levels of education as an influence towards Anglophobia.

- an observation entirely relevant to the SNP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglophobia

'Islamophobic' (not my word) crimes are also at an all time high in Scotland

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...a_in_Scotland_now_worse_than_in_wake_of_9_11/

So let's put to bed this idea that the Scottish are saints and oh-so welcoming to non-Scots, because it's simply a bag of baloney.

 

[ceptimus]

If you want a specific policy, the SNP are attempting to deny the rUK their right to have a nuclear submarine base near Glasgow.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

An open door to what?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/msps-demand-action-is-taken-after-1485805



or



and



- an observation entirely relevant to the SNP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglophobia

'Islamophobic' (not my word) crimes are also at an all time high in Scotland

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...a_in_Scotland_now_worse_than_in_wake_of_9_11/

So let's put to bed this idea that the Scottish are saints and oh-so welcoming to non-Scots, because it's simply a bag of baloney.

Lets make up strawmen time then?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

If you want a specific policy, the SNP are attempting to deny the rUK their right to have a nuclear submarine base near Glasgow.

There is no such right. Try again.

If you aren't tired of looking silly that is.

Do let the record show however that when asked to support your claim of anti-English racism in SNP policy the BEST you could come up with is their opposition to nuclear weapons. This is the logic we are dealing with here.