Main Edition
US
FR
Scottish nationalism is not the fluffy progressive creature London's media likes to imagine (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)
Leading SNP politicians have been formulating a plan to renew their push for Scottish independence after next May’s elections. It is hardly surprising that Scottish nationalists are pushing for Scottish independence — that’s sort of the trade description — and especially so as the coronavirus is putting strain on the UK, as it is on other federations like the United States and Belgium.
Yet it cannot be right that the Scottish National Party should subject the good people of these Isles to yet another nationalist, divisive, separatist “little Scotlander” referendum, kicking off a new round of an entirely unsolvable political bun-fight that will tear our country apart even further. We’ve had the “once in a generation” referendum and the nationalists lost. Should the SNP succeed next May, Westminster — Parliament for all the United Kingdom — should simply refuse to authorise it.
The SNP is by any measurement Left-wing, a social democratic party that prides itself on being as unlike the Tory and Brexit-voting hordes of the south as is possible. They are Left-of-centre on economic and social issues, fiercely pro-EU and in the European Parliament would align with progressive and green groups from across the continent. Yet this is not the whole story, as anyone who has upset their supporters can testify to.
Despite being a Remain-voting liberal, my views on a second referendum have attracted the sort of racism — from Scottish nationalists — that you would usually expect to receive from the far-right. In many exchanges with SNP supporters, I have learned that that Left-wing racism against people of colour is apparently acceptable, if we veer off an approved script.
But, then, as surprising as English liberals may find it, Scotland is not the progressive paradise they like to believe — and my anecdotal experience is borne out by wider concerns. Last year more than 80 public and professional figures signed an open letter warning that the struggle against racism in Scotland is “rolling backwards”, creating a climate of “resentment towards frank discussion of race and racism” that is threatening to undo progress on race equality.
It is significant that the signatories also highlighted a trend to “silence the voices of people in Scotland who face colour-based racism”. This letter came less than two months after Scotland’s national poet laureate Jackie Kay warned openly that Scotland had to “grow up” as it was “decades behind” in its treatment of black and ethnic minority people.
Too often, when minority voices such as mine — children of the colonies, born in Britain — oppose the break-up of what we now consider our country, Scottish nationalists too readily seek to silence our voices by accusing us, instead, of being English “colonists”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeMaajid Nawaz’ article is absolutely spot on about the SNP’s trolls coming down viciously on anyone who dares to criticise the Queen of Scotland, even mildly. I do not have the knowledge to comment on the racism towards Scots from ethnic backgrounds but, when I saw the title of the article, I expected it to be about the “racism” (not sure of the correct term) of the SNP against English people – as that has been something I have increasingly observed. As a spectator, I have been amazed at the overt hostility shown by many SNP supporters against “the English”. Sometimes, the obvious prejudice is covered up by using “the Tories” or “Westminster” as substitute wording, when being at their most rude. I know many English people living in Scotland feel unwelcome now and I am deeply ashamed of such fellow Scots. Keep shining a light on these attitudes.
I don’t know about Scots from ethnic backgrounds either, but I do know that in 60 odd well travelled years, I have only been racially abused in Glasgow!
Were you campaigning for a Scottish seat?
I was just trying to campaign for a pint!
You probably encountered a Rangers supporting unionist David…l’d like to apologise on behalf of all Glaswegians…As the great majority of Glaswegians are really friendly and welcoming to all visitors to Glasgow…
Oh indeed, to be fair he was very drunk!
Where are all those ‘racists’ in Scotland?. Ask the refugees who have settled here in places like Bute. They don’t seem to have encountered any problem and a number of them have set-up highly successful businesses now.
Evidence of that please? As someone with an English background and SNP membership, that really is utter tosh… ask @EnglishScotsforYes what they think?
Thanks for the article Majid. You are absolutely right about the SNP getting an easy ride from metropolitan liberals in the media. I have been amazed at the lack of hard questioning of the SNP in England and Scotland. Half of them are seemingly in awe of them and the others are intimidated.
When you consider the treatment of Sarah Smith and other examples of intimidation e.g. the mob several thousand strong that marched on the BBC HQ in Glasgow during the first referendum, it’s easy to see where the fear is coming from.
Nonetheless it is vital that the media not only stand up to intimidation, but also that attempts at intimidation are given the full glare of publicity in the media as well and that the SNP are asked whether they condemn it or not. From that standpoint the appeasement of the mob by a leading BBC journalist was both shameful and deeply troubling.
I also agree with your point that there is no need to have a second referendum whatever the result in next years Scottish elections. As you say, we had a clear result in 2014 in the “once in a generation” referendum and it seems to me that the only reason that there is talk of a second one is that the Nationalist’s and their supporters didn’t like the result of the first one.
Thanks again for shining a light on the dark underbelly of Scottish Nationalism Majid. You are standing up for millions of us living in Scotland who despair at the way the country seems to be heading sometimes.
Finally, please watch out for the SNP bill coming down the line which some have described as the biggest attack on free speech and freedom of conscience since the enlightenment.
And for a further insight of the Scottish media’s
uncritical attitude please try to look up the “Thank you Nicola” children’s video posted on the STV website yesterday then quickly taken down. It is seriously jaw dropping and wouldn’t be out of place in North Korea.
Sarah Smith constantly trys to put down the SNP, it is well documented. BBC are a propoganda arm of Westminster with the likes of Kay Adams constantly trying to bad mouth them. The good news is the people of Scotland are waking up and support for independence is rising, now close to 56%. Why do you think Westminster is petrified to allow another indi reg, they know they will lose. 😂♥ï¸ðŸ´ó §ó ¢ó ³ó £ó ´ó ¿
No their not. You don’t speak for Scots or Scotland. You lost the last referendum by a decisive margin because you had no coherent economic or currency policy.
What the Nationalist side is trying to do is intimidate the media into not criticising the Supreme leader, a bit like China just now.
Luckily even liberal commentators in the rest of the country, like Majid, are starting to get wise to these tactics and tell it as it is.
Innes, mind your spelling, as well as your facts. Scotland is not like China: that is absurd. The fact that at the referendum in 2014, 45% of a constituent part of the so-called United Kingdom voted to break apart politically was/is a terrible indictment of this country and the way it has been run over the years. The 45% was not that far from victory and was achieved despite overwhelming bias in the media who bad-mouthed what other countries have strode for, and gained, all over the world.
Ah James…going for the grammar is always the sign of a strong argument!! Not!!
Picking holes in someones argument isn’t bias.
Fact checking isn’t bias.
Presenting alternative opinions (as well as yours) isn’t bias.
Just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t mean its biased.
The BBC/STV/Al Jazeera journalists etc…would be completely remiss if they overlooked glaring anomalies in a campaigns policy ( like say no currency plan, spending that doesn’t add up at all). To say nothing would be biased!
Oh and interestingly – I would be of the opinion that BBC were far too easy on the Yes campaign and he SNP in general – for fear of being seen as biased.
I think the SNP campaign of intimidation is actually effective (and wrong obviously)
Hope my spelling was to your satisfaction – its all about the details after all (which is exactly where the SNP policymakers fall down. Maybe you could get a job with them?)
Excellent reply, Jason. It is the case that there are some so blind (James) that cannot see a logical argument such as the one you posted. Well done!
Sorry mate, you lost. Deal with it.
It wasn’t a decisive margin though, was it. If less than 200k people had switched to Yes from No, the result would have differed.
I.e. if the international citizens of Scotland hadn’t been lied to by the No campaign about their citizenship being in jeopardy with a yes vote, if they had know Brexit was actually the No party’s direction… things would have been very different.
“Arm of Westminster”? The UK government is constantly whingeing that the BBC is biased against it. Meanwhile, a large part of the Left complains that the BBC is too rightwing. On the EU issue, both the Leave and Remain movements constantly complained that coverage favoured the other side. I wish that the BBC could get its act together and decide who it’s biased against, because everyone else seems to think it’s them.
The BBC were shamelessly biased in the referendum .
The clue is in the name.
The SNP are myopically focused on one policy and fly in the face of the democratic majority of the people of Scotland.
The clue is definitely in the name.
They have been in power for 13 years? Surely that’s democratic?
Absolutely it is when it comes to Scottish elections – they are the biggest single party. I don’t personally like that they are but I fully accept that they have the right to form a government on that basis.
And thats how it works.
Votes are cast and we stand by the result (whether or not we like it).
I’m sure you will agree that where this starts to get tricky is when a party or grouping begins to over-reach and claim mandates on issues that weren’t part of the vote. Or worse still ignore results.
To claim that the people of Scotland demand another vote on the question of independence based on securing 46.5% of the vote with a 55.6% turnout or 45% of 67% in 2019 is disingenuous.
People vote for a variety of reasons – personality, specific policies, local issues etc…etc…Manifestos are awash with reasons why people might chose to vote for or against a party at a particular moment in time….. which I’m sure you’d agree?
So the best (most democratic) way to find out if they agree with that one single huge policy is to ask it in isolation – a binary yes /no.
There can be no crossover, nothing lost in translation – a straight shoot out! Correct?
So when that result comes back as a ‘No’, its undemocratic to dismiss it as ‘wrong’ and demand another shot over and over again and repeatedly use the result of votes on other topics and other elections where the big issue isn’t the primary question as a justification.
I’m sure If you’re completely honest with yourself James, you’ll agree. that If the boot was on the other foot you’d be arguing my point – its just that the result didn’t go the way you wanted so you’ll play fast and loose with the term ‘democracy’ to engineer your own end.
Doesn’t work like that and to try and twist it so is desperately wrong.
That’s not how mandates work Jason as l suspect you know already…the party that wins the election gets to introduce the manifesto promises as their right…So the manifesto promised a new referendum if the situation changed sufficiently or we were taken out of the EU against our wishes. That’s happening at the end of December so a new referendum is legitimate and will occur with Westminsters blessing or not…It is ridulous that an equal partner in a political union can attempt to block the other equal partner from taking a decision that effects the future of the people of Scotland…We won’t let that happen…
It wasn’t/isn’t theirs to promise…that’s the issue.
The SNP (as the party of government) has the right to introduce and implement their policies that fall within the scope of Devolved Powers (Scotland Act 1999)
Demanding or setting conditions about a referendum does not fall into this scope. The SNP knew this at time of writing their manifesto and it was included for grandstanding/ideological/and opportunistic reasons in breech of their promise to park the issue post 2014 defeat.
The main point being it’s in their manifesto but has no place being there as a promise or set of conditions.
The SNP and supporters now claim that every election (national/general or referendum Brexit) is actually a defacto referendum on Independence or referendums on a referendum on Independence.
But…lets park the lack of remit and all the other reasons and policies that people may choose to vote for the SNP and accept for one moment that this logic is correct.
Lets say that each election and each vote is actually principally about the referendum/independence issue and as the First Minister likes to suggest, the will of the majority of Scottish people on this topic is being oppressively stymied by Westminster
…..wait….did we say ‘majority’ and ‘will of the people of Scotland’?
Less than 26% of voters (46.5% of 55.6% turnout in Scottish Election) actually gave you the thumbs up on the topic.
The other main parties all included manifesto pledges to prevent/not have another referendum.
So if we apply the same rationale their voters expressly gave the issue the thumbs down.
A further 44% weren’t even bothered to express an opinion.
So how, either without the express will or known opinion off 74% of voters in Scotland the SNP claim a mandate on an issue/policy promise that isn’t within their legal right to implement, demand or promise?
Doesn’t feel like the will of a nation – it feels more like the will of a minority who happen to be in power.
I suspect you are right – the people of Scotland won’t let it happen. But then again they’ve already told you that in 2014…you just are struggling to accept it!
An ipsos mori poll for the BBC published on 28th May stated that 63% of Scots now favoured a 2nd referendum which dwarfs the majority that you quoted from the 2014 referendum…looks like the tide has turned…
Well there we go….
Although its 34% that want now/within 2 years.
19% around 2-5 years
10% beyond 5 years
So interestingly the poll says your support is probably about the same as voting patterns suggest (may be a bit higher) – at this moment.
But wouldn’t be like the SNP/Supporters to grab the best possible twist out of the facts?!!
How about the SNP run the country well, sort out teaching crisis, balance the books, god forbid they could even try and run a surplus (appreciate Covid makes that tough) and show the populous that they can do a good job!?
Wouldn’t that just be awesome?
Guarantee you that way they’ll get real and genuine support rather than trying to run roughshod over the population and get in through the backdoor.
Unlucky Craig, opinion polls don’t override referendum results. When it came to the only poll that counts you lost by a decisive margin. Too bad.
Presumably Craig your are ‘in denial ‘ about that £67billion, and North Sea Oil Revenue?
If you cannot answer such a simple question you should not be pontificating on Scottish affairs, of which you obviously know little.
This a constant problem with ‘nationalists’, strong on emotion and weak on facts. Thus most of your arguments are immediately dismissed as nonsense.
Sarah Smith was pulled up short for gross lack of professionalism in making a broadcast for the supposedly impartial state broadcaster which was not impartial.
Provide evidence please. Because I have lived in Scotland and supported Scottish independence my whole life and your comments are complete and utter lies. There are nearly 800k english,Welsh , NI people living perfectly happily in Scotland. If you want I can provide plenty of evidence of English hostility against Scots and not just the casual racism we see on English TV. I will wait ðŸ‘♥ï¸ðŸ´ó §ó ¢ó ³ó £ó ´ó ¿
Yet in the 1997 Scottish Devolution Referendum, sometimes colloquially called the ‘Yes, Yes, Referendum only 44.69% voted Yes, and we call that Democracy?
Held on exactly the same terms as British elections and the Brexit referendum.
Agreed, but is that really the best ‘we’ can do? To call it Democracy is a travesty. We should try the Swiss system.
Fine, let’s abolish Brexit.
Touché! A rather obvious ‘wind up’.
However our ‘Parliamentary Democracy’ does require a major overhaul before we blunder into yet another crisis!
Only 45%
That my friend, is a lot of opposition.
Especially at the first time of asking.
Remember that devolution took two goes.
Well said. I supinely decided not to mention that as it will only serve to further enrage some of the ‘participants’ in this animated discussion!
If 45% is a lot of opposition then surely 55% is a much bigger support of the union.
Clutching at straws there I’m afraid.
Fewer voted No.
Have you tried being an EU migrant in England since summer 2016 like my wife and I have been? The level of hypocrisy on the part of white English people when it come to complaining about prejudice shown to them by others relative to that which they show is truly unbelievable.
I’m a born and bred Brit, I love my country and I am somewhat of a (in my interpretation of the ‘good bits’) nationalist. I am a Tory through and through and shall be to the end of my days. I am a total 100% believer in Brexit; as are most of my friends and family. I do not consider myself a racist, though TBH I’m not terribly keen on those whom come here and expect us to change or be damned; so dependant on your interoperation maybe I am a racist. However on behalf of any of my fellow Brits who have shown their prejudiced faces to you I apologise profusely. Unfortunately you get these people the world over but it is unfair to paint us all with the same brush. Myself and all my friends are ashamed utterly by these people whom have offended you. May I wish you both a very long, a very healthy and a very happy life here on this (damp cold) island that we all call home. Ignore the idiots, they aren’t worth the energy.
What a wonderful comment you make, Andy. I believe that you could be speaking for the majority of Brits.
You’ll actually have proof of that won’t you. I’m at a bit of a disadvantage to you as I actually have an English wife with a very strong East Midlands accent who has been living up here since 1973 and has never (Note that word, ‘never’. ) experienced the racism against English people. Likewise we have numerous English friends who’ve lived up here for long periods with the same experience. I’m sure some English people have had bad experiences. After all headcases are international.
What my wife does notice is the increasing xenophobia apparent in England and the growing unpleasant attitudes towards Scots. After all, her half English son now lives down there and he has a strong Edinburgh accent.
As usual you are talking nonsense!
I happen to know a large number of retired Scottish Army Officers, who both served in, and commanded some of Scotland’s finest regiments, yet they suffer racial/class discrimination and abuse. Why?
For the simple fact they speak with an English accent. The fact they can trace their ancestry in Scotland back to the Middle Ages, have commanded some of Scotland’s finest in action, counts for nothing with your kind.
It is all an embarrassing charade of pseudo Gallic tosh, almost completely devoid of historical content, logic or even reason. Please wake up! Stop embarrassing both yourself and your cause.
.
What about the thousands of English people who have settled in Scotland and joined the SNP? I know many people like that. It is an inclusive party with many members from all sorts of backgrounds and cultures. On the other hand I also know many Scots and people from various ethnic backgrounds who, after the Brexit vote especially, have felt decidedly uneasy at the change in attitudes by many (though not all) towards those from different backgrounds. Two wrongs do not make a right, though.
I support independence because I choose to take a stand against the corruption, warmongering and elitist pocket lining in Westminster.
I believe the union is unfair for England too, why are they the only country in the union without a parliament? Why do we get to vote on all English matters and they only vote on reserved elsewhere?
I have nothing against the English, I think they also deserve to take their own path. I actually adore the queen!
I make a daily effort to be anti-racist, because I now recognise many things that people of colour have highlighted that I’ve overlooked my whole life. Even the small details like skin coloured crayons for kids, make up, tights… the assumption that white is default is something ingrained from a young age, and it’s wrong.
Yet I vote SNP. I want independence because we have different demographics, financial needs, infrastructure, objectives and evidently political views. A one size fits all approach does.not.work.
In an independent Scotland I probably won’t vote SNP. We will return to a blended of parties which will result in a fairly balanced government. I want my children’s political voice to hold weight, I a government with fewer layers and smoke screens. It’s all more transparent when on a smaller scale: a gov that genuinely wants to reinvest in the country it governs is what I want for the future of my children.
I’m Welsh and live in Wales and can testify that Welsh nationalism is also inherently racist. It’s not openly antagonistic to non-whites, it’s just that the nats’ dream is of a tribal homeland more or less exclusively for the tribe. When I have asked nationalist friends whether they would like Welsh towns and cities to become as culturally diverse as their English equivalents I am met with a very uncomfortable silence, which is usually followed by a protest that Wales has been an ‘occupied’ territory since the Middle Ages and that the nationalistic struggle is about the right to self-determination. This deflection disguises the fact that what is really being said is that ‘we want to enjoy our tribal homeland free of outside influences for a good long while before we entertain any idea of how it it might alter in future’.
The ‘build the wall’ mentality has only been exacerbated by the differing lockdown rules.
We now have a have border between England and Wales (police road checks, no automatic right of entry!) enacted by the Welsh Assembly, who are entirely unapologetic about it.
I cannot describe the bizareness of the situation …
I would let the Welsh decide Welsh issues Mat .
I notice you do not consider the politics of the way people are voting in Wales, but prefer to talk about tribes, as if anyone thinks in these terms these days.
I would like someone to challenge those police in a court of law. I feel sure they are acting illegally by enforcing a ‘no right of entry’ from England to Wales.
Its called Devolution. Live with it.
What are you waiting for? If you feel that sure why wait for someone else to challenge the legality of entry.
“Come home to a real fire! Buy a cottage in Wales!”
Also it’s no longer the Welsh Assembly but the Welsh Parliament! (from 6th May last).
The conduct of the Welsh over the Lockdown is truly pathetic!
I trust Dominic Cummings will take note, when deciding if it’s worth subsidising the Welsh any longer. A more ungrateful bunch of scroungers would be hard to imagine, although I can think of one or perhaps even two candidates.
Typical of the arrogance found in some, increasing numbers of English people. The Welsh are scared that incomers might bring in the virus; the same feelings are being voiced in Devon and Cornwall; Northumberland; North part of East Anglia and in the Highlands. It is perfectly understandable in this crisis.
No it isn’t a “perfectly understandable in this crisis”.
This an outbreak of national panic on an unprecedented scale. I never thought I should live to see such a day.
My only consolation, if you can call it that, is it has also afflicted most, but not all of the Western World.
Here in the UK, ‘we’ are all equally guilty!
Do you not agree?
You completely ignore the fact that the virus has been virulent in some, mainly urban, areas while being almost non-existent in others (mainly rural ones). Who could blame folks in fairly remote villages not wanting visitors coming in for 3 months until the crisis passed. That is understandable.
This is not a crisis unless you are one of the ‘Darwinian’ categories preselect for death eg: Old, knackered, and Black. Cruel but irrefutably fact based.
‘Folks’ as you so quaintly call them, should not have been panicked into the selfish hysteria you describe.
A ‘whiff of flu’ and what we used to call civilisation collapses into an internecine brawl. Wonderful!
Vae victis!
I’m also Welsh, lived in Scotland since 1977 and a member of the SNP. Big difference between the Welsh and Scottish Gov is that the Scottish Government can smell what the English Gov is shovelling.
Yep, I remember Nigel Farage being attacked in Scotland In 2013 by Scottish nationalists and being called ‘N.z* Scum’ for daring to believe in exit from the EU and a cap on immigration, in contrast to a large group of proud, independence-supporting Scots who cannot tolerate the English, seem to support unlimited inward immigration, and appear to want to be ruled by continental Europe – three positions that if not held, in their eyes automatically equate you with members of the 1930s/1940’s German National Socialist movement, and something, it is worth mentioning, they have in common with lots of English liberals, greens and hard left socialists (not to mention several Conservatives).
Paul do you also remember the exact same abuse he took in england. Nigel farge is an English conscept forced upon Scotland due to Scots being force fed English TV. We are not anti english, but anti Westminster. Have you heard of English Scots for independence. Do you not understand that the vast majority of Scots are happy being in the EU and that we need immigrants to help our economy. As for the article I would suggest the journalist look to the loyalist yoonionists for racists. Because any debate I have with them always ends up with me being told to fkk of back to where I came from. As for immigrants the yoons all appear to follow in Nigel garages footsteps.
Yep, hi Brendan. I was careful not to say “all” Scots Nats in my critique, and I agree with some of the points you are making. I also regret you being told to fkk off back to where you come from. You sound like a great and humorous bloke. Also I do accept the majority Scots view of EU membership while remaining baffled why they seek independence from England but voted to be ruled over by Brussels. I agree also with your basic view on immigration while wanting it throttled, limited and controlled. I’m guessing we’ll part company on our thoughts on Nigel Farage (for me a hugely important figure whose policies I am mainly in support of), but that’s life I guess.
There shouldn’t be anything baffling about wanting to be out of the UK and within the EU. There are 27 other nations in the EU that are not under Westminster rule but choose to be part of the EU. I highly doubt any of them will be holding a referendum to come under UK rule as they could do if they chose to – but they don’t.
What is baffling is the fact that people cannot see why the people of a Country such as Scotland would want to choose what Union to be part of, rather than have that choice made for them.
The EU cannot stop the will of their member Nations to stay or go- Westminster are doing exactly that for Scotland as far as the UK are concerned and are puling them out of the EU against their will without a say in the process.
This is not an equal Union and no amount of flag waving and Vera Lynn can make it so- it is a basic question of democracy or rather a huge democratic deficit. Scottish Sovereignty is 80% controlled by Westminster, with UK Sovereignty just 16% controlled by the EU.
Perhaps if Westminster was to return Sovereignty to its UK Member States to same levels EU member states have control over their own Sovereignty, then there would be no need for referendums.
All Scottish Independence will achieve is the right to have say in the running of these Islands on an equal basis.
Hi Rob. Scotland is not independent and is part of the UK and Nationalists lost the last ‘once in a generation’ independence referendum. Yes you are being pulled out of the EU against the will of the majority of those Scots who voted in the EU referendum but you weren’t voting as an independent state we’re you? Just a region of the UK.
I do sympathise in a way, but you have to gain independence before you can start to demand being treated as an independent entity.
Also I still don’t get why you think you’ll have any say in the running of Scotland as a tiny country ruled by France and Germany. Good luck with that if it ever happens.
You don’t really understand modern politics; do you?
I’m not an expert in politics John no, but I think I understand what independence means and what not having it entitles you to do.
Well, perhaps you should try and understand the difference between a loose Federal or Confederal Union with national voting rights and provisions for blocking vetos and an incorporating Union which is what the UK is.
I understand those differences. Do you understand that Scotland is not an independent country?
That’s what the whole argument is about.
The standards of living in France/Germany/Netherlands/Denmark and other northern European countries is much higher that in the UK. They are fair, respectful societies generally-speaking and why wouldn’t we want to remain a part of something that is working. The problem with the EU is the much poorer and more incompetently-run southern economies.
If Scotland were to gain independence and were permitted to join the EU you might have to add it to your last paragraph. My problem would be the blame that would be heaped upon England by EU-run Scots independendistas for any penury that independence and EU membership would bring them and the country. Somehow I feel it would end up being our fault. Having said that I would not underestimate the backlash against Scotland from England should you ever get independence. Personally I would wish you good luck but only with the caveat that it costs no Englishman or woman a penny. Then or in the future.
I constantly wonder why a certain kind of English person takes on a saviour complex that somehow Scots could not do what people all over Northern and Western Europe without the nice English to guide us.
How do you feel about James Heppey MP for Wells telling a Scottish schoolgirl to “f*ck off back to Scotland.” when he found out that the Millfield schoolgirl’s family supported the SNP? Heppey was and is a Tory MP. The party took no action. My son being threatened with “a doing” for politely asking if he could see the Scottish football results in a Bedford pub. Me being physically attacked in London and Manchester for the sin of having a Scottish accent. That was about 50 years ago so it isn’t just recent. I could post a lot more and so could numerous other Scots.
I am disgusted by it John. Full stop.
Then perhaps you should complain about incidents like those rather than non-existent attacks on Farage.
Mmm. Not quite the gracious response to my unqualified response to your post that I was expecting.
The attack on Farage in Scotland was a disgrace and I’m pretty sure led to many of your fellow Scots rejecting independence for fear that those responsible, supported clearly by you and Alex Salmond, would take power and act to silence any opposition in the same way.
If you feel that the attack on Nigel Farage was justified I would suggest you take a long hard look at yourself. For me that bunch of thugs attacked fundamental democratic concepts of free speech and public debate.
You have no idea what the bulk of Scots feel about Farage. Farage wasn’t attacked. He was heckled and questioned by a group of students actually led by an English chap and an American chap. The drama queen was never in any danger.
Well, John, after over 30 years in the British Army much spent with English soldiers the worst that I recall was being called a “haggis-basher” and that was light hearted banter.
That is all such nonsense Paul.
Farage was attacked for his far right philosophy, the EU thing wasn’t on the agenda back then.
I am always amazed by people like yourself, with obviously not the slightest knowledge of history and much else besides, likening Scottish nationalism, which encompasses about half the electorate of Scotland btw, to the third Reich.
It is all so utterly pathetic .
Dave. I’m not likening Scottish Nationalism to the third Reich (where did I say that?). I’m just repeating what Scot Nats we’re saying to Nigel (who by the way I don’t believe cleaves to any far right philosophy – a calumny on your part I think). I’ll offer you the chance to re-read what I wrote and perhaps moderate your response – especially the bit where you accuse me of knowing nothing without actually knowing me.
I think I like you Dave but you are making it tough.
My problem with the author is not his skin colour but rather his arrogance at trying to deny the majority of his fellow citizens their right to a democratically mandated referendum…he’s just in the door so to speak yet he thinks he knows better than people who have lived here all their lives…and had to suffer at the hands of tories for most of their lives…the description 5th columnist fits him like a glove why else would he advise Westminster to ignore the democratically elected government of Scotland?
Another calumny. If I were Farage I’d start suing people calling him that and linking him to 1930s/40s Berlin as others have done. Where is your evidence for it Craig? Being in favour of immigration control does not a racist make.
it does when you blame imigrants for eveything wrong in this country
He doesn’t.
Where he better informed Craig, then he would know that the SNP has my far the most active Asian participation of all Scottish parties.
He doesn’t seem to have done much research at all Dave just an outsider having a pop at the SNP because he clearly doesn’t like them despite the fact they are the most progressive political party on these islands…
His hero is Thatcher, doesn’t that say it all?
You said,,,,proud, independence-supporting Scots who cannot tolerate the English
And then ….. automatically equate you with members of the 1930s/1940’s German National Socialist movement,
Few Scots dislike the English per se, it is English Tories that are disliked, so don’t post a lot of childish nonsense
And keep the 3rd Reich our your posts, it just makes you appear an hysterical, ill informed bigot.
Dave. You mentioned the 3rd Reich, not me. I said a large group of Scots Nats (OK Scots lefties plus Scots Nats) called Nigel Farage ‘N*z* scum’, which is a fact.
As I said I truly believe that it cost you your independence referendum, just as I believe your inaccurate, ad hominem posts are doing you no favours.
P.S. at the risk of riling you further I count Mrs Thatcher among my favourite historical figures too.
Hear hear, Paul.
Thank you John.
“far right philosophy”? If you believe wanting to control immigration is ‘far right’ then there is no hope for you. It is also England that bears the brunt of immigration partly because of the support for it from the likes of the SNP etc.
The SNP did not take us into the EU without a vote , or keep us there all these decades, don’t overestimate Scotland’s influence in the UK.
I don’t consider opposition to mass immigration right wing, only common sense, please don’t stereotype me.
‘…likening Scottish nationalism, which encompasses about half the electorate of Scotland btw…’
I think you’ll find that it’s less than half and thats the issue!! When asked the direct question on independence less than half the population wanted it. You may try and conflate other elections as being some kind of transferable barometer of ‘real’ feelings…BUT when asked cold and straight the majority simply didn’t agree with you.
No mandate…so all thats left is to shout down the opponents, spin, fudge the facts that don’t fit and try to trade on passion and sentiment instead. Poor show!
Your memory is playing tricks, dear.
It was the Edinburgh Uni socialist group.
None of whom are Scots Nats Paulo? Sure about that?
They were mainly labour with English and American students in the van.
Absolutely sure. It was a far left group who lazy journalists labelled as Scot Nats.
What about the guy who told Farage to shove his Union Jack up his a***?
One of them told Farage to shove his Union Jack up his fundament. Perhaps he was confused.
l think it had more to do with him being a blatant racist than an actual Nazi…but it’s rather ironic given the premise of Mr Nawaz’s blog
The 2 leaders of that group were English and American. I believe they were Labour supporters and Farage; self dramatising fruitcake that he is, was not attacked. He was heckled and had questions asked which he dodged by diving into a pub.
Had questions asked? The crowd were screaming “fascist scum off our streets” at a pitch designed to silence any debate – a tactic used many times by the left to no platform speakers they disagree with. One told Mr Farage to “shove your Union Jack up your a***”. Welcome to Scotland.
Salmond of the SNP’s response to Farage’s legitimate complaints was not to condemn those guilty of having assaulted freedom of speech and public debate but rather to accuse Farage of not being able to handle challenges to his policies.
Not acceptable, and I think part of the reason why independence was rejected the year after. Scottish people who value debate, manners and democratic freedoms would have voted in their droves not to hand all that over to the care of people like that.
Salmond was right. As a young teenager then man I was brought up on politicians being heckled and cat called in public meetings. I remember Wilson, Douglas-Home and Heath handling such incidents with wit and authority. Its something which Salmond and other SNP pols have had to deal with for decades.
The SNP party and their followers actions, rhetoric and behaviour mirror the ‘Trans’ movement.
Both are driven principally by feelings and emotion. Their assertions and policies don’t stand up to any kind of scrutiny. Facts are viewed through the prism of the ‘desired result’ and either warped or ignored to fit. They believe (and constantly fuel the myth) they have the moral high ground and the end justifies the means, however unsavoury, undemocratic or reckless they may be. The flaws in their arguments are so apparent and their proposition so flimsy that monumental efforts are made to shut down discussion, debate or control contrary views.
Appealing to and whipping up the fervour of their followers is essential. A ‘crisis’ or “injustice’ is the breeding ground for support and provides the ammunition needed to ensure that your opponents heads don’t peak above the trenches for fear of retribution.
Where one movement denies biology, the other denies economic reason. Where one is happy to trample on the rights of 50% of the population, the other believes that less than 50% of the vote is a mandate.
Both bully, cry foul, troll, aggravate and appeal to guttural instincts that manifest in a mob mentality blind to the fact that there are other opinions, positions and realities that should be considered and discussed.
It’s a pity that the majority aren’t as organised, focused and loud…yet.
We will see at the ballot box how it pans out , but I am sure the British Media and political might of the Union of Bullying , crying foul , mob mentality will be used ….they tried in 2014 and just managed to get over line by using the above . It will not be so easy the next time .
How dare those that don’t agree with the SNP use facts and demand specifics!! No one should be subjected to the offensive nature of asking for details and having to engage in debate.
And you’re right I remember hoardes of non-SNP supporters descending on the television station offices and demanding resignations of journalists that didn’t share their views and crowds screaming at Yes voters that they should go home or aren’t ‘Real’ Scots….oh wait!!
Project Fear of Someone Finding Out That We Don’t Really Have a Proper Plan was all I saw – and the resulting resort to shouting loudly to cover that up!
You really should have read the pro-union news outlets which were relentlessly based on fear and negativity. And the vast majority of news outlets hate the SNP and the independence movement.
By hate….you mean don’t agree with, question and pick flaws in their position? Repeatedly? And present alternative positions?
And you think that shouldn’t be allowed?
Why?
I don’t agree with Wings Over Scotland but I wouldn’t try to shut it down. I wouldn’t criticise the right to express views. I would criticise the views put forward.
Just cause you don’t like it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t occur or that it isn’t right.
Funnily enough…there is a direct correlation between weak and flawed policies and the amount of criticism that gets levelled at them. Its not negative or fear mongering to point out having a currency plans a good idea, Venezuela isn’t a great role model, Oil revenue is too volatile to trust and EU membership wasn’t a given (if even advisable etc…..)
Just because you want something doesn’t mean you have a right to it or that all other factors will miraculously fall into place.
Again…run the country well, show a proper economic plan, make the case properly, stop relying on emotion and more people will listen…and possible support it.
Jason, why is the case for Scottish independence, so absurd? It is resource-rich and is approaching the point where it will be self-sufficient in renewable energy. Any excess will be sold-off at a profit and the companies involved will, of course, also make a healthy profit. It has world class, successful industries like tourism and whisky and has, over the years and thanks to the Scottish Government, an improving infrastructure. I fail to understand why people like you and others like Majjid Nawaz, who I agree with on many other issues, argue the case for Scotland the exceptional, yet don’t blink an eyelid when other less fortunate countries like Slovakia aspire for, and get, their independence whilst remaining in the EU, and benefit in the process.
As far as I’m aware Slovakia became independent in the early 90’s and joined the EU and Nato in the early/mid 2000’s but sure…the SNP won’t worry about details like that.
The SNP fought for decades for the referendum and pitched in with a one-pager on the economy, no plan on currency and a laughable determination use oil revenue as the answer to every question as to where future funding would come from for defence, more schools, free prescriptions, creating a central bank and generating a rainy day fund!
Salmond happily stood front and centre projecting a rise in oil prices that no one else dared suggest just because they needed it to say what they wanted to get over the line!!
Scotlands deficit is the worst in Europe at 7% (Slovakia is 0.5% if your interested) pre-covid – but lets go with the renewable energy sector as the new panecea. International exports totalled a heady £350k in 2019 so in SNPland that should be more than enough!!!
Make the economic case properly, get the house in order and govern effectively and you won’t have to rely on emotion and fabrication to get votes – you’d have mine too!
Jason, you make a very basic mistake: Scotland at the time of writing this is not a national country but a notional one. It cannot be compared with actual existing countries because it is still part of the UK. You know that country with a national debt, up till now, of over £2 trillion! There are also the vast reserves of gas, not oil (which is more polluting) which have been found off the north west coast. Surely we will benefit from that in the future?
Well aware that Scotland is not currently a Sovereign State!! Hence the discussion?!!!
But you’ll agree that we are able to determine Scotland’s GDP, tax take, spending, population size, welfare budgets etc etc and even the subsidies it receives!
The accuracy of these points are not a matter of debate – not even for the SNP. The deficit is a matter of fact.
So, much like a company filing its year end accounts we know what the books look like. Yeah?
But I’m going to concede a point to you – you’re right….because we’re not a ‘national country’ making the assumption that we’d run the same level of deficit just isn’t fair.
We haven’t factored in all the other costs (of transition, lost markets, impact of austerity measures to make up for Barnett etc…) BUT theres a Gas field somewhere you say? When prices are at a 10 year low!!
You’re right though lets put all our chips on a finite fossil fuel that “Surely we’ll benefit from in the future!’
That sounds like a plan the grandkids will thank you for!
This whole “racism is right-wing” really, really annoys me.
Hitler. National Socialist. Racist. Left-wing.
Mosely : Fascist. Racist. Left-wing.
Le Pen. Socialist. Nationalist. (no longer racist?) Left-wing.
SNP. National Socialist. Racist. Left-wing.
The proper left-wing, with the exception of Globalists, ARE the racists. And the SNP are National Socialists, so they are NAZIs.
Please stop believing the propaganda, none of the above are right-wing in any way, they are all left-wing to the very core. And looking at a parties stance on race does NOT determine whether they are left or right, it is their economic outlook that decides that.
Very true. I always think the political spectrum is a circle with the “far right” and the “far left” occupying the same space. The best example is antisemitism. The media and the left define it is “far right” yet the extreme left of the Labour party hold antisemitic views as an integral party of their identity.
You may be confused about Antisemitism and the actions of the Israeli governments.
Nope. The far left often think the later justifies actions which are clearly anti Semitic and perpetuate prejudice about Jews in general eg that mural!
I don’t think many think like Hitler these days.
Hitler wasn’t right wing????????
You are ignorant of history .
Check what he did to the trade unions.
He hated Bolshevism as much as the Jews
True fascism presented itself as neither right nor left. Hitler certainly was not left wing and he quickly dispatched the original socialist elements in the Nazi party eg the Stresser brothers as well as the trade unions .Mussolini gave up any pretence of being on the left and claimed to create a corporate state that was neither right or left .Mosely was in favour of something similar.In practice ,when in power , so called fascist governments leaned towards big business for support and for war production . I think you need to look at a little real history rather than just focusing on party names.
Can you give us all some evidence the SNP are racists?…your opportunity to show off
Otherwise…..
“That which can be asserted without evidence can be ignored without justification”
It is hidden in plain view all the time.
So, it should be easy to find it. Let’s have some proof then.
Look to your royal family if your looking for Nazis. Especially Phil. ðŸ‘♥ï¸ðŸ´ó §ó ¢ó ³ó £ó ´ó ¿
Yes, it is VERY annoying, and deliberate.
If the scotch want independence, best way to guarantee it, is to give the English a vote in the next referendum. They have really really, annoyed most of the English tax-payers who support them.
Two things Jean…Scotch is the whisky not the people (it really winds us up when ignorant English or any other nationality for that matter make this glaring error) The second error you make is supposing that England supply the funds for the Barnett Formula…last year we sent £67billion to the UK treasury from our income tax revenue…we received £37billion back as our Barnett Formula pocket money to run our country…the other £30billion is retained by Westminster to be spent on our behalf…however very little of it ever makes it’s way back over the border…so the truth is it is Scottish tax payers that support England..l can’t imagine how annoyed you’d be if the situation was really reversed…ps sorry our quest for self determination annoys you but it is a basic human right…
Scotch is an alcoholic drink, Jean.
Lawrence, read your post again. Can you provide any examples of racism in the SNP? No, neither can I and I have been in it for almost 40 years.
SNP..”Nationalist” ? Surely some mistake. If so they must officially be the world’s crappest national party. Nippy Sweetie herself says she’s embarrassed by the term and wishes it had been called something else. (SCOSOC maybe?)
“Little Scotlander” is in fact a term of scorn used within Sturgeon’s Notionalist Party to describe anyone who actually believes in independence. The SNP are Little Europers who believe in a power transferal from Westminster to Brussels. Centralised power, freedom of movement( for mainly white Europeans) and a parochial narrow minded Fortress Europe mentality prevail. As evidenced by their rather shameful and pathetic singing of the European national anthem in the UK parliament. The term Independence is merely a tool to deceive the electorate. Oh, and of course journalists who take their word for it.
But I agree on the Scottish moral exceptionalism that pervades most SNP attitudes.
We can easily equate Sturgeon’s failure to rein in the unacceptable views and behaviours of members and supporters of her party to e.g. Corbyn’s failure to deal with anti-semitism in the Labour Party. The only conclusion one can reasonably draw, given that she has not come close to rooting them out, is that she sees them as core to her overall political strategy.
What a fanatical position you take there Paul.
Thanks Dave, but how can it be viewed as fanatical? There are many people within Sturgeon’s movement who hold extreme positions on England and the English.
They do exist Paul but they are a tiny minority…but it isn’t a baseless view if you know the history of Scotland’s treatment from their big next door neighbours…some hold grudges for generations…l personally have let it go to concentrate on freeing Scotland to run it’s own affairs…l do however have an extreme position regarding Westminster which is a steaming cesspit with no regard for Scotland or her people
Perhaps you can prove that.
Of course he can’t.
It is just a thinly veiled piece of English arrogance, hinting that only a few mad Scots don’t want ruled by the English.
You are quite wrong. You seem to have bought into a unionist/Tory myth, a piece of cheap propaganda.
It is the union with England that is disliked, it delivers Tory governments that we don’t like. There is nothing extreme about seeking govern your own country .
Please don’t conflate Tories with the English.
You really don’t don’t know what you are talking about Paul. Scots are friendly people, though you’ll always find a few idiots in any country, there’s absolutely no need to imagine more than there really are.
I know precisely what I’m talking about Dave. I have met, worked and served with many Scots – friends and brothers in arms – and I agree that there is nothing wrong with wanting to govern your own country, just as I believe in the United Kingdom. What vexes me is the denial that there is an anti English problem used as a political weapon by the SNP – especially given that most of us are conservatives, with a small ‘c’. Are you saying you’d accept the United Kingdom if the Greens were running it?
Maybe you’ll get another chance at independence via a second ‘once in a generation’ referendum, but Sturgeon will need to rein in and denounce nationalist and leftist Scottish thugs as those friendly Scots you and I know will not want power to pass from London ‘Tories’ to them.
Once again, proof please.
Paul l remind you of Nicola Sturgeon’s call at her party conference for “Anyone in England to come and join us” If and when we do gain our independence l suspect there will be quite a few who will take her up on the invitation…The biggest difference between the Scottish and UK governments is that the SG govern for the benefit of the people of Scotland whilst the UK government govern for big business and rich people…
It is my fervent hope that everyone on the woke liberal left of politics in England take her up on that generous offer
The benefit of the people of Scotland? That’s a giggle.
It’s no different. It exists to leech off the taxpayer and fill politicians pockets.
Government is a cancer. Dressing it up in tartan doesn’t cure it.
There are many people in Dordogne, Tuscany, the Costa del Sol and the west of Ireland who hold the same views. Can you explain that?
Can you explain what Sturgeon is doing to root them out James? Perhaps she needs a Baroness Chakrabarti to come and write a report into it. That seemed to work for Corbyn until the Equality and Human Rights Commission got involved.
Pretty simple actually. Anyone who is an SNP member found making anti-English statements will be disciplined and probably expelled from the party. Unlike Tories found making anti-Scottish statements.
Who? Can you name names?
The equation of both your examples is that neither of them are true…There is no anti-semitism in the Labour party this was a fabrication with no evidence by Jewish Tories to discredit Corbyn…Just as Mr Nawaz tries to discredit the SNP because he clearly doesn’t like them…
You have gone way down in my estimations Craig.
Keir Starmer (he’s the leader of the Labour Party by the way) confirmed the antisemitism problem in the Labour Party and called it a stain on the party that he vowed to expunge AND APOLOGISED TO THE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOR IT.
A fabrication you say?
No just Starmer trying to take the high ground…the stain was deposited by Jewish Tories…where’s all the evidence of it? if it’s so well known there must be evidence???
Come on Craig. You seem like a top bloke but surely you can’t believe that. Will you accept the report of the unprecedented investigation into Labour antisemitism by The Equality and Human Rights Commission?
I will indeed…looking forward to it…l have to point out that Israel are masters at turning criticism of their policy and treatment of Palestinians into acts of anti-semitism…
They most certainly are.
There is nothing as strong as playing the race card these days.
What about the terrible things done by Palestinians to their fellow Palestinians ie Hamas? It isn’t fair to single out Israel when there are far worse groups and governments in the Middle East.
Really James? Worse than Israel? I think not…they treat their neighbours abysmally and steal their land at every opportunity…l must be anti-semetic for pointing that out though l guess?
Very small minority, Paul. I personally don’t know any and I am a member.
No problem then.
No. Not as far as I can see. There is less racism in Scotland and I have seen that in the schools I have taught in. It just isn’t an issue. Sorry to disappoint you.
Not disappointed.
Possibly as there are less immigrants in Scotland? Or do you maintain Scottish people are just inherently less racist? That would seem…well…racist?
Must have been a big problem. It seems to have been a powerful
laxative down in Westminster!
One thing you need to be careful of is the SNP traditionally are anti EU and Anti Nato and they have previously campaigned to leave both. The current leadership and a majority of the party are pro EU but approximately one third of SNP supporters voted to leave the EU.
So you have described the current policy but leadership and policy can change. A successful BRexit and an economic crises in the Eurozone will see the SNP change it’s views.
Which would be sensible
Dream on. It won’t happen.
You mean the SNP will not change policy if they think the change gives them the best chance of independence? I think it’s you who is dreaming. They have done it before and they will do it again. That is what a one issue part like the SNP do. They view everything through the prism of that one issue and set policy to further that issue.
A great case study is why the SNP changed policy on the EEC in the late 80’s. At the time the tag “Separatist” hung heavy around their neck and cost them votes. They took a pragmatic decision that they had to change policy to say an independent Scotland would stay in the EEC. The ideological backing was to promote independence the support of EU membership is a pragmatic necessity!
Certainly their leadership are EU fanatics, but joining the EU would be for the Scottish people to decide.
As for Moral exceptionalism, you must have seen more of that than me, or perhaps you just believe England has some god given right to rule Scotland?
By the 1707 Act of Union Scotland, was ‘bought and sold for English gold’.
Do you really deny this?
Only because Scotland had effectively bankrupted herself with the Darien scheme. There were also plenty in England who opposed the Union on the grounds that it was the bailout of a profligate neighbour.
You neglected to mention that it was our lovely neighbours who sabotaged the Darien scheme at every opportunity…
I am glad you picked on the Darien fiasco. So what is your opinion?
Were many Englishman correct in regarding the Union as the “bailout of a profligate neighbour “?
Is so, what wonderful modern parallel don’t you think?
A bailout was so welcome that the English government threatened mass deportation of Scots living in England, imposed a naval blockade and readied a couple of armies for a full scale invasion unless the Scots agreed to Union.
I thinks that is a bit of an exaggeration.
Firstly the English armies were far too busy winning the Battle of Ramillies in Flanders whilst the other one was preparing to be thrashed at Almanza in Spain.
Most of the pressure was applied financially via the London and Hamburg Stock Exchanges, at the insistence of the East India Company.
However you are correct that the Union was unpopular with the poor and middling sort.
The rich and elite were, off course, overjoyed. It was a massive bribe. Their Darien debts were in effect, cancelled and life as supplicants of England could resume.
In retrospect it was the best decision every made, and ensured a brilliant partnership as we both set out to conquer the greatest Empire the world had seen, since the days of Ancient Rome.
What a pity it has descended into the internecine squabble we have today.
Sic Gloria Transit Mundi.
English troops did move up to the Scottish border. English ships did move into blockading positions off the Scottish coast. English interests did attempt to sabotage Scottish trade. Threats were made to deport Scots who had lived in England for years.
Members of the Scottish aristocracy were bribed by the English state but that money was recouped by the English state within a relatively few years of the Union as Scotland had to take a share of debt service of England’s state debt and also to help pay for England’s constant foreign wars. The tax burden on the average Scot rapidly increased post 1707.
We have no idea how Scotland would have fared had the Union not taken place. That is counterfactual. It may have delayed the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions by a few decades. It may, however, have kept us out of war after war from 1707 on. What we can say is that in 1707 the Scottish population was about 20%-25% of England’s. Now it is about 8%-9%. Even at the height of the richest Empire the world has known people were pouring out of Scotland. This went on right up to the present day. In 1945 my mother’s family comprised 13 people. By the early 50s it was 2. The other 11 were in the USA and Canada. There’s hardly a family in Scotland which hasn’t had something similar happen.
I shall reply to your statements in reverse order. Scotland has been depopulated for a myriad of reasons, as you well know. It has always been a poor land agriculturally, “you can’t put in what God left out” as they say.
The enormous advantages offered by the Union encouraged enterprising Scotsmen to flee to the Colonies, such as, for example, Hong Kong, where they established a flourishing trade in Opium.
What would have happened had the Union not been made? Scotland would have been conquered and firmly garrisoned, just as it had been nearly sixty years earlier, by Oliver Cromwell.
You are correct the Scottish ‘aristocracy’ sold the country out for English gold. As Robert Burns so poignantly put it “such a parcel of rogues in a nation”.
Essentially this was a classic case of ‘subverting elites’ as we now call it. You should read Tacitus on the subject.
In fact it is still alive and well, with the Scottish elite still sending their sons south to English Public Schools, Oxbridge, and very fashionable English Regiments.This off course means, horror of horrors, they speak with very English accents!
What evidence is there of ‘English troops moving up to the Scottish border’? There is nothing in Fortescue about it. Nor can I find any record of the Navy deploying any force northwards. This sounds like mythology to me. As mentioned previously English troops were fully committed to the Continent, as was the Navy.
However the inference of your remarks is that the Scots were intimidated by the mere presence of the English military and rolled over supinely without a fight.Is that not so?
So basically, accept the Union or we will invade and devastate your country. That being the case the quicker the Union ends the better. There was no standing Scottish Army in the late 17th/early 18th centuries.
Oh dear.
Did you not understand a word I wrote? ‘You’ were sold out by your own ruling class. Can’t you get that?
There was no military threat, that is pure mythology.
Finally ‘you’ did have a Standing Army and for that matter Navy.
Both were obviously small. Look it up, and start with the Royal Scots. (First of Foot).
Parroting mantras doesn’t enhance your cause I’m afraid.
I almost forgot John, where is the “proof” of no standing Scottish Army? or for that matter, Navy?
Were the Royal Scots (Pontius Pilate’s Bodyguard ) a figment of English imagination?
They were essentially mercenaries who, in one guise or another, fought for the Swedes, French, Dutch and English but never for Scotland as a state.
No they weren’t. They were on the Scottish Establishment, as was the pathetic little
Navy. Look up the history of the KOSB for example.
For one who is always bleating on about ” proof” you are singularly lacking in any yourself.
I, and I think many other Englishmen, are astonished that someone like you, who is so delightfully cavalier about the facts, could ever have been employed as history teacher.
My opinion of the Scottish Educational Establishment in the 1980’s has suffered accordingly.
Your last sentence is a bit rich my friend… History has it that most battles fought in WWI and WWII were that Celtic regiments went in first and came out last. One thing the English hated was the Black Watch Regiment hence it was decommissioned by the English. In my book the English have always claimed to be “Jacks” of all trades “Master’s of none”
Brian, you might try reading some proper sources to save yourself from the embarrassment of making preposterous remarks.
What you say about so called Celtic (incidentally not a term that was ever used) regiments is pure mythology.
As for the Black Watch (BW) what utter rubbish! No Englishmen I have met ‘hated’ the BW.
Incidentally you know the BW was formed of companies of Highlanders only too anxious to take English gold to police their fellow Highlanders?
Even more embarrassing at the Battle of Magersfontein, during the Second Boer War, the entire Highland Brigade, including the BW fled the field in one of worse displays of panic in modern Military History.
An English Guards Officer who witnessed this humiliating event remarked “The problem with the Scots is they charge like hell, in both directions!”
Finally the BW was not “decommissioned by the English”. It has become the Third Battalion of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, as you should very well know!
Well Brian have you read up on your Scottish Military History? You have had plenty of time to do so.
I suppose that rather like your comrades on this post, Craig Macfarlane and John Munro, you are in ‘total denial’?
If you wish to be taken seriously it is axiomatic that you get your facts right. Fantasy and mythology just will not do.You only humiliate yourself and negate your argument.
Frankly I’m astonished at how little SNP members seem to really know about their own history. I presume your leader NS, is just as bad?
By contrast, when discussing such matters with Irishmen, I have found them to be particularly well informed.
And here you see the paucity of nationalist arguments. Inventing history to justify nursing their wrath.
If you want to quote history quote sources
You are quite correct. In fact it is both astonishing and depressing that so few of the correspondents on this topic know anything, but mythology about Scottish History.
How on earth can this have come about?
By contrast, refreshingly, I have always found the Irish both particularly well informed, and in most cases not consumed by irrational hatred and rage.
I have heard it said, that SNP really stands for Small Nation Paranoia. I’m beginning to believe it.
Come on John, you’ve had three days now and you are always bleating about ‘proof’. Let’s hear something (proof) about English troops ‘moving’ up to the Border. Which English troops precisely?
Also, the Navy blockading the Scottish coast, which ships under whose command?
I have already outlined why I think this is preposterous nonsense. Perhaps, your thirty years in teaching will refute me?
On a more positive note, at least you understand that your ruling class sold you out over Darien. You should try to inform your comrades of this regrettable fact.
John, let’s face it you are a fantasist!
Despite your thirty years in teaching (presumably not History) your claims about English military deployments and that Scotland had no Standing Army, are patently ridiculously! You must have made it up!
I understand how difficult it must be to accept that Scotland just ‘rolled over’ without a fight, but those are the indisputable facts. It was almost certainly the most humiliating surrender in modern European History bar none, but, paradoxically brought much prosperity to an otherwise much impoverished Scotland. So perhaps you should consider forgiving your ruling class for selling you out for English gold.
Fervent nationalists such yourself must know their facts before pontificating. By not doing so, you not only humiliate yourself but negate your argument.Is that not so?
Scotland was not bankrupt. It had no national debt: did not as a state issue bonds or borrow in other ways. By 1707 the Scottish economy which had gone through a bad patch in the late 17th century, along with many other parts of Europe, due largely to poor weather, was on a bit of an upward rebound.
Thanks to the Act of Union. Well said!
No, prior to the Act of Union.
Gun boats were used by the English to blockade ports and our gentry were promised lands in England if the signed
The old adage is correct… Never trust an Englishman! Especially if your Celt!
You make a basic error when you say ‘Scotland’. The decision to indulge in that was entirely made by the Scottish aristocracy. They ignored geography to their peril.
That Brussels gold is much more moral.
Not for much longer.
I fail to see the connection
“From Little Europers Large Europers grow”
My point exactly. Choke them now.
I have never heard “little Scotlander” used to describe anyone.
Amazing what you don’t hear with your headphones in listening to The Proclaimers.
I first saw it used by Andrew Wilson in a column he did for SOS in the 90s. I doubt he coined it, but he is a smart lad so maybe. I have heard it often since then. Regardless of the nomenclature,Independence in it’s true sense is a filthy word in the SNP. Ask Jim Fairlie, or Jim Sillars.
Yet again the false equivalence of ‘nationalism’ as usually ‘right-wing’. In fact the UK, as favoured by the right in general, was the first modern anti-nationalist creation. It abolished the separate countries of England, Scotland and Wales (NI being a special case).. It left the legal system of NI (in many respects) and Scotland alone, and English law applied in Wales. Unsually for any multi-nation society there were no internal borders within the one political and constitutionally merged realm. The UK is in fact what the EU ought to have been (i.e. a single centrally governed political unit with separate local legal systems and no land borders). Instead it wanted to be an Empire (that’s where the real ‘Empire-nostalgia’ is, and always was).
When the United Kingdom was formed there was no right or left in anything like the modern sense .
Just the haves and the have nots.
Hey, hang on!
There IS no modern sense of those words. They have become meaningless and useless. Even Saint T Bliar agrees with me on this.
The countries weren’t abolished. Brush up on your history. Really. Creation of a political unitary state did NOT abolish England.
you can make an argument it abolished Wales, ‘Principality’ and that Northern Ireland is an occupied province of Ireland rather than a country, but England and Scotlands existence as countries is unarguable
Perhaps, but Scotland was reduced to a very subservient position, as shown by her aptitude for Rebellion in 1715,1719 and most disastrously 1745.
Your will recall this is commemorated in the verses of the National Anthem ” And like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush”
That verse was never official, and the rebellions were not because Scotland was subservient, per se, but because it was ruled by a German Protestant, rather than a Scots-descended Catholic. The Jacobites were fighting to re-establish Catholicism, through the Stewart line, and plenty of clans fought on the Hanoverian side.
Is there an ‘Official’ National Anthem? Or is it just the accepted version?
However are you correct in that the fourth verse, or shall we say General Wade verse, was a short lived piece of rampant triumphalism.
Perhaps more to point, the whole Anthem is mediocre at best, and should be replaced, perhaps with ‘Land of Hope and Glory’ don’t you think?
1745 and the Jacobite rebellion was a religious war, nOT a struggle between nations and peoples.
Did I say it was a religious war? No.
The ’45 was a feeble attempt by a primitive, poverty stricken, pastoral people, now I gather referred to as “Westies” to overthrow the status quo.
Religion no doubt played a small poisonous part in it (it always does), but essentially this was misplaced, nostalgic adventure, that went horribly wrong when it met the Brown Bess Musket at Culloden.
‘Primitive’? Obviously you never read what Winston Churchill said of the Scots. He said that apart from the ancient Greeks, there has never been a people who have contributed so much to humanity. Why don’t you Google Scottish Inventors, Mark? Hardly primitive, I would say.
Churchill was a very generous man, particularly when in ‘his cups’.He also for example, described the Jewish people as “The aristocracy of the human race”.
This is not to detract from Scotland’s contribution to humanity, however large parts of the county, namely the hilly bits can only be described as primitive by contemporary standards.
Surely that makes its contribution all the more remarkable, don’t you think?
I personally think the ‘secret’ was the high rate of literacy in 17th and 18th century Scotland, particularly in comparison to contemporary England.
Thus from an English point of view we got a very good bargain at a reasonable cost.
Religious war? I never heard that Charles Stuart went to war over Papal Infallibility, or the efficacy of the sacraments.
There was me thinking it was a power struggle between the House of Hanover and the House of Stuart.
Which is why it is booed when its played up here and generally hasn’t been played for 30 odd years or more.
Hardly surprising when one considers the thousands of young minds you must have poisoned with your nationalist bigotry over your so called thirty year teaching career.
Your capacity for self humiliation astounds even me.
This matter was apparently concluded in a “once in a generation referendum” which settled the question. Apparently not. I know ideology can/does replace logic, but key questions will have to be asked at some point.
Why would you want independence from the UK, a group of 4 countries, when you are desperate to join a club with 27 members? How is this independence? How will you pass the economic tests set by the EU? What currency will you use? Why would the EU allow Scotland membership when they would open the floodgates to the Basques, from Catalonia and others? My post can certainly be ignored, but the questions will be asked by people who cannot be ignored.
Ask the senior members and politicians of the EU who are very sympathetic to the idea of Scotland becoming a member and enjoying all the benefits, like Ireland.
Sturgeon is a hate preacher – she continually uses inflammatory language to reach the darkest part of the Scottish psyche.
She continuously refers to “The people of Scotland” as if they are one homogenous lump, and contrasts them to the oppressor – usually “Westminster” or “The Tories”. She is careful not to say “England” or “The English”, but her simplistic bigotry channels the old hatred of England, and quite deliberately too.
As the author rightly points out, the fact that this hate preaching is tolerated says enormous amounts about the hypocrisy of the left in current politics.
English nationalism is never tolerated by the left, seen as “racist”, “bigoted” and so on. Personally, I enjoy seeing pride in the home nations, and celebrations of differences as well as similarities, but Scotland is becoming a hateful place for non SNP supporters. Perhaps the rest of the UK should vote to expel it from the union!
So, the SNP are Socialist Nationalists who hate another race. Where have I heard that before.
I had a run-in once with a Scottish woman living in Cambridge. The hate she spewed on Facebook about Leave voeers was shockng, vile and truly zenophobic. I assume she felt justified to say what she did after the earlier Scottish referendum which she was clearly upset about. So I think you are right that Sturgeon is managing to tap into the darker side of the Scottish.
Scots aren’t English, or Tories, like you Mike.
Don’t judge us all by one person, you may, or may not have met.
Who are you to say what a Scot is or isn’t? You don’t speak for Scots or Scotland
There are people of all political persuasion in Scotland, including plenty of Tories.
About 20% according to latest polling.
Nah, they are much less plentiful in Scotland Innes.
Scotland isn’t England you know.
A Scot is someone who lives in Scotland , or more simply and generally anyone who considers himself so.
Study the voting patterns in Scotland.
Are you aware that the Tories lost more than half their seats in Johnson’s landslide?