SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Scottish nationals have two supra-national citizenships. One is UK citizenship, the second is EU citizenship. In democratic referenda over the past two years, Scots have voted clearly to retain both citizenships.
Unfortunately it is not possible to respect both democratic decisions of the Scottish people, due to a vote by other nationalities. So where you have democratic decisions which cannot both be implemented, which does democracy demand should take precedence?
It is not a simple question. The vote to retain EU citizenship was more recent and carried a much larger majority than the earlier vote. In addition it was made crystal clear during the campaign that it may require the overturning of the earlier vote. So on these grounds I believe the most recent vote must, as an exercise in democracy, have precedence.
In these circumstances the announcement by the First Minister that she is initiating the procedure on a new referendum for Scottish independence from the UK, in order to retain Scottish membership of the EU, is a sensible step.
Source: Craig Murray
Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Dunbal on Saturday June 25 2016, @02:24PM
The relationship with Wales and Northern Ireland is one of conquest. Wales was pretty much subjugated and broken by William the Conqueror and his line in the 11th century. While the Welsh retain their national prestige and culture, they do not have an independent government (rather a "National Assembly") and conducted guerilla warfare against the English for many years. Likewise with Ireland - it was repeatedly invaded and conquered by many English kings but the Irish proved to be quite stubborn resulting in revolt the minute the English Army left to fight elsewhere (or simply ran out of funding). Henry VIII was finally declared King of Ireland, but you have to remember this historical period was a time of massive intrigue between Spain, France and England. The Irish have always resented English rule and were quite open to foreign aid to encourage revolt. Over time you end up with England hanging on to a tiny chunk of land called Northern Ireland with the rest of the island reverting back to independence and local rule. The Scottish are the only ones who quite willingly joined with England in 1707 after years and years of bloodshed (the Scots being the ones doing most of the bleeding in later years because of superior English numbers, technology and firepower resulting in repeated massacres). They gave up their autonomy in foreign affairs to the United Kingdom while retaining a local government structure and limited local autonomy. Scotland itself has traditionally been divided between the "Lowland Scots" and the "Highland Scots". The latter view the former as ancient traitors who often take the side of the English at the drop of a hat. North of Edinburgh many Scots still retain their Gaelic speech, although all speak English usually with a heavy accent.
Today the issue is pretty much one of political manipulation, like the French Canadian separatists in Canada. Threatening separation creates political division, which can be exploited for political power. This has been copied all over the world more recently in Catalunia, Spain, and Scotland. The Irish have always resented English control of Northern Ireland. What the politicians often base their campaigns to create this division on is the fact that these geographical areas are usually resource rich and exploited by the other governments. This gives them the idea that they could exist as independent entities. French Canadians, for example, feel that the rest of Canada would collapse without Quebec. Likewise with the Scots who feel that England basically rapes their country for profits while handing Scotland a mere pittance in infrastructure investments. Of course these are only political statements made for political gain. Reality is far more complex. Nothing stops Scots from fully participating in English affairs and profit - for example several recent British Prime Ministers have been Scots - for example Tony Blair was born in Edinburgh. This is the bit they forget - Scots also have full participation in any and all UK affairs. However the politicians focus on local issues to divide the country and create a power-base.
Oh, and I am both French Canadian (born in Montreal) AND Scottish (my mother was born in Aberdeen) and I am a British dual citizen. That is one hell of an explosive mix - bagpipes and maple syrup :) But I feel qualified to talk about this. At least to an American :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2016, @02:41PM
in the last paragraph, replace Scotland by UK and UK by EU and you have almost the same description... just add also the emigration, but that is due London being rich and a magnet to attract poor people trying to change their life. Leaving the EU will not truly fix that, no matter what nationalists say, unless London stop being rich... but i suspect that this may be a undesired goal
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Saturday June 25 2016, @02:44PM
No it's not the same, because an Englishman cannot become President of Bulgaria.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2016, @03:22PM
But I feel qualified to talk about this. At least to an American :P
Ach, you'll be needing pictures then... :)
Scotland itself has traditionally been divided between the "Lowland Scots" and the "Highland Scots". The latter view the former as ancient traitors who often take the side of the English at the drop of a hat. North of Edinburgh many Scots still retain their Gaelic speech, although all speak English usually with a heavy accent.
Not quite correct, it's a lot more nuanced than that, for example, to a "Highland Scot" (native Gaelic speaker, Gael, aka Teuchter) I'm a "Lowland Scot" (no Gaelic).
However, my family are of highland extraction, moved to the central belt several generations ago, and lost the Gaelic, so, to me, a Lowlander is from a bit further south than my location, but not so far south that it makes them from the Borders..them's a mad, bad, cursed [hiskingdomprophecy.com] lot.
To the direct North of Edinburgh, you have the Fifers, for your amusement, see this [thecourier.co.uk] regarding Gaelic in Fife, so, not really Gaels.. they're more to be found in the West-North West.
Let's not forget the general East Coast-West Coast divide, the North East-South East divide, the Fife-Rest of the universe divide, the Broughty Ferry (centre of, and all of the known Universe) or the Anglo-Saxon enclaves of the south east, the Norse nature of some of the Western Isles, Orkney and the Shetlands, though they're not as Norse as they'd like to think, an an example re the Orkneys, see here [bbc.co.uk]..and again, have a look at this [scotsman.com], the whole thing is quite an interesting mess, depending on how 'granular' you want to be, I could be here all night...
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Saturday June 25 2016, @04:04PM
Oh, and Glasgow, which is all alone :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2016, @05:54PM
Oh, and Glasgow, which is all alone :)
Ah, we do not talk about the 'G' place...like the 'E' place on the other coast we ignore them in the hope that one day they Oozlum..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25 2016, @06:36PM
There's a reason it was called auld reekie...