Sunday, September 14, 2014

Britian has been forgotten

Based on what I've been hearing over the last two years there is one subject that has just been missing from the Scottish Residents Only Yes-No referendum, and that's Britain itself.

The Yes side make a Scottish exceptional ism / Brave heart type argument - combined with a spin operation designed to say the 180degr opposite of what anyone pointing out the problems says.

The No side sows fear and argues about how much Scots can get out of the UK and what Scotland might stand to lose.

None argue or consider what this means to the Welsh, Irish and English .

Scots who claim their deep passion for social justice drives their desire for divorce, also by definition are arguing that the sort of people they care about outside Scotland don't count. ( Now I don't by into their government solutions argument - but I'm looking at things int heir own terms ).

The No side argue about how much more can be gained for Scotland by using the rest of the UK to underwrite Scotland's risks.

A marriage argued about in these terms is one that's in deep trouble.

A few weeks ago, for the first time anyone can remember, the Scotland 7 aside team was booed in England. People in the UK outside Scotland have noticed the greed and selfishness of those in Scotland.

Its unlikely to be forgotten quickly.


Edward Spalton said...

The poison of deliberately 'asymmetric" ( I.e. Unfair) devolution has done its work in setting people in different parts of the country against each other.

John Prescott intended that his programme of regionalisation in England would balkanise us into Scotland-sized chunks for easier EU digestion. His head henchman Sir Peter Housden is now Scotland's senior civil servant.

The dream of every would-be continental power since 1707 - the dissolution of the UK - is close to achievement by treachery within.

In 1971 the Foreign Office recommended devolution as a distraction for people who would become disaffected from government because of "the remote and unmanageable workings of the Community" . It also said that there would be a duty on HMG and all political parties never to blame the EEC for unpopular measures.

I think the Conservatives gave up on Scotland when they removed the words " and Unionist" from their membership cards ( around 1985 I think). Like all the main parties, they became at heart a "No Nation" party, quite happy to be office holders in an EU subject province - and it does not much matter to those manipulating affairs whether this province is subdivided.

Petrina said...

I entirely agree with the author of the article.Everyone is talking money/pensions/student fees etc no one is talking about Britain or what it is to be British.
I suppose that the politicans have decided ,probably correctly, that the Scots are basically so materialist that only money and greed will prevail in the polling booth.
As to devolution itself,it was and is ,just a precursor to disintegration which as Edward Spalton has eloquently pointed out it is the name of the game

Edward Spalton said...

Cameron's latest proffered bribe to Scotland certainly shows that he thinks the matter is simply one of calculation of advantages. If I were a Scottish unionist I would be inclined to think to myself "if that's all he thinks of us, then be damned to him".

I think what it shows is that Cameron and the other leaders of the nominally unionist parties do not actually believe in the nation as such, at all. There is no appeal to the heart at all. With their policies of massive immigration and perpetual subjection to the EU, they could hardly make such an appeal with a straight face or any credibility. They have squandered their inheritance and ours. In terms of allegiance -whether to the Crown or to the interests of their fellow countrymen- they are not really British at all.

Salmond, of course, is even more poisonously PC but is riding the wave of disaffection which the Foreign Office foresaw clearly in 1971.