Scotish independence

[Peter Lemkin]

I don't even know what to say to nonsense like this, except its irrelevant what it is to you, it only matters what it actually is, and what it actually is is certainly not tribal, or parochial, another word you throw in deliberately to denigrate and insult. Scotland is a country. You live in a country that has no democratic deficit at all, I don't, we're not happy about that, I don't know what could possibly be considered unreasonable, parochial or tribal about that.

How about a reality check and how about stopping with the written attacks? There is a certain lack of logic in your stating that 'it doesn't matter what others (such as David) think'...and then going on and telling us what you think...as it would be equally wanting in being 'something that mattered' by your own say-so. I don't see how what David said should or would have set off the attack it seems to have. I'm an American who can't live in my own country for political reasons - in the interest of clarity. While I'm sure you are passionate about Scottish Independence and you're most welcome to be. (I'd personally be happy with it...but don't think the UK will allow...nor will their masters [as David pointed out]...the US and those in the shadows behind all the major powers, IMO).

Please feel free to engage here, but without resorting to rancor - and less so when I don't see that you were subjected to any 'attack'. We are posting and hopefully debating ideas here...., not the person for holding a position. You have your views and David has his. I have mine and others have theirs......."what it actually is" is highly subjective when it comes to history and political analysis, etc. Saying that England has no political deficit, to me, is highly questionable [and I'm being polite in use of that term]. I don't see much democracy [real democracy!] anywhere - it varies slightly place-to-place, but almost everywhere I see top-down oligarchy, and in some places a corporatocracy. Democracy and 'voting' (where allowed) is often used as a narcotic to make the sheeple think they have a say in their governance...but what say they have is 1] highly illusory and 2] when at all, only on small local issues. Big money, big wars, big spying, big swindling, big evesdropping on citizens, etc. are not decided democratically, but by those few who undemocratically run the World (IMO).

[Malcolm John]

Thats not the case with David and this one issue though is it, he is affronted as he is English, so can't seperate that from his attitude to my posts. Would you describe the American Revolution as a 'tribal' and 'parochial' event? When Americans celebrate the 4th of July are the being 'tribal' and 'parochial'? If not, why is a Scottish Nationalist tribal and parochial? Explain the difference. He is just affronted as it is his country I am talking about, so he feels the need, even subconsciously, to inuslt and denigrate, and I have had that all my life from the London press and won't put up with it anymore, we are as entitled as any other country in the world to want what all other countries in the world have, and there's nothing 'tribal' or 'parochial' about that.

[Malcolm John]

And you don't think its accurate to say there is no or negligible democratic deficit in England? England, as an entity, almost always gets the government it votes for, and has never in history had a government it overwhelmingly voted against. Wales usually doesn't get the government it voted for, Scotland usually doesn't, Northern Ireland never does, and all three regularly get governments they overwhelmingly rejected at the ballot box. I don't think people outside the UK actually understand what the UK is and how politics works, thats why you get attitudes like yours whenever this issue is raised. The UK is not one country, it is four countries or three and a territory joined together in political union, one of those countries has democracy, the other three do not.

[David Guyatt]

Thats not the case with David and this one issue though is it, he is affronted as he is English.

That Malcolm is your projection on the English, and you need to deal with that to be taken seriously here.

I have made plain that I don't really care either way about who rules Scotland - be they Scottish born or other - you'll get fleeced just the same. The real game is far bigger than this tribal tediousness you keep resurrecting.

Having now pointed out your error in your prejudiced perception, this definitely is my last word on this subject.

[Malcolm John]

Frankly, I have no further interest in discussing what has become a circular argument with outburst of hysterical nationalism.

Ah, the defence of all English/British nationalists when shown to be holding an indefensibe position.

[Peter Lemkin]

Thats not the case with David and this one issue though is it, he is affronted as he is English, so can't seperate that from his attitude to my posts. Would you describe the American Revolution as a 'tribal' and 'parochial' event? When Americans celebrate the 4th of July are the being 'tribal' and 'parochial'? If not, why is a Scottish Nationalist tribal and parochial? Explain the difference. He is just affronted as it is his country I am talking about, so he feels the need, even subconsciously, to inuslt and denigrate, and I have had that all my life from the London press and won't put up with it anymore, we are as entitled as any other country in the world to want what all other countries in the world have, and there's nothing 'tribal' or 'parochial' about that.

I would categorize the above sentiments and viewpoints as politically naive - more so from a Deep Political perspective [and this is the Deep Politics Forum, if you hadn't noticed]. I would not use the words, but the terms tribal and parochial would fit about the American Revolution - which was not a populist rebellion [except in propaganda and mythology and/or fueled by propaganda and mythology] - but that of the American wealthy to not be taxed and harassed by the British wealthy - but then they turned around and did to the average American People what had mostly been done to them by the British. Personally, I think humans should go back to more of their tribal wisdom and roots and cut off the 'feet' of the Oligarchy wherever they live. I feel that where you are coming from leaves me with little interest to engage in further debate.

[Malcolm John]

I have a masters degree in politics, I wouldn't describe myself as politically naive, I think your response was very naive and showed a simple lack of understanding.

I agree democracy is not really democracy in todays world, but within that countries do elect their own governments that are answerable to the electorate and that they can vote out of office, in Scotland we don't have that, we get governments we didn't elect and can't vote them out of office if we don't like what they do.

Its a very simple and obvious democratic deficit. Your refusal to accept that means if you don't want to contribute to this thread further that suits me fine.

[Peter Lemkin]

And you don't think its accurate to say there is no or negligible democratic deficit in England? England, as an entity, almost always gets the government it votes for, and has never in history had a government it overwhelmingly voted against. Wales usually doesn't get the government it voted for, Scotland usually doesn't, Northern Ireland never does, and all three regularly get governments they overwhelmingly rejected at the ballot box. I don't think people outside the UK actually understand what the UK is and how politics works, thats why you get attitudes like yours whenever this issue is raised. The UK is not one country, it is four countries or three and a territory joined together in political union, one of those countries has democracy, the other three do not.

Again, IMO, an oversimplistic and naive political view - and nothing of Deep Political nor historical reality woven in. As I said before, I don't think the UK as a whole, nor its constituent parts - any of them - have nor will have much democracy. You seem to think the system 'works' as the propaganda states. I'm not interested in debating such a completely alien idea. You may have fallen for their lies and propaganda - or have not fully analyzed history and political events. The elites in England [and elsewhere] call the shots [sometimes literally] and the populace's voting get them a sham democracy, a very partial faux democracy at best - really an Oligarchic system with voting to fool the people. I'd suggest you look at the archived posts on this forum on topics of interest....

[Malcolm John]

And you also clearly just know nothing whatsoever about the Scottish Referendum, cause what you are talking about cutting off the feet of the oligarchy and restoring real democracy etc, thats what it was actually about, thats what we were trying to do, thats why those forces so vehemently opposed it, only for people to call us 'tribal' and 'parochial'. So since you clearly know nothing about any of this it probably is best you don't contribute.

[Malcolm John]

And you don't think its accurate to say there is no or negligible democratic deficit in England? England, as an entity, almost always gets the government it votes for, and has never in history had a government it overwhelmingly voted against. Wales usually doesn't get the government it voted for, Scotland usually doesn't, Northern Ireland never does, and all three regularly get governments they overwhelmingly rejected at the ballot box. I don't think people outside the UK actually understand what the UK is and how politics works, thats why you get attitudes like yours whenever this issue is raised. The UK is not one country, it is four countries or three and a territory joined together in political union, one of those countries has democracy, the other three do not.

Again, IMO, an oversimplistic and naive political view - and nothing of Deep Political nor historical reality woven in. As I said before, I don't think the UK as a whole, nor its constituent parts - any of them - have nor will have much democracy. You seem to think the system 'works' as the propaganda states. I'm not interested in debating such a completely alien idea. You may have fallen for their lies and propaganda - or have not fully analyzed history and political events. The elites in England [and elsewhere] call the shots [sometimes literally] and the populace's voting get them a sham democracy, a very partial faux democracy at best - really an Oligarchic system with voting to fool the people. I'd suggest you look at the archived posts on this forum on topics of interest....

I don't agree at all thats its overly simplistic, I agree there are powerful forces at work etc, and they effect everything, but nations and countries are empowered to determine within certain parameters their own foreign, social and economic policy, that is true, that is what we want in Scotland and that is what we don't currently have and never could as part of the UK.

I think you need to give up your obsession with deep politics and elites as far as this issue is concerned cause its totally unrelated, and if you believe in that stuff it should be the most obvious thing in the world to support Scottish independence as that was a movement opposed to these forces it was a working class, left-leaning, liberal revolution that was quashed by the elites, I simply think its a case of people outside the UK having no understanding of it at all, thats why you get people saying things like have been said to me on this thread, you just don't get it and aren't in an informed enough position to comment.