Zern
-
Posts
598 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Zern
-
-
14 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:
Now that's a charitable statement.
Well i did say.
So are we agreed that the SNP/Green coalition promise of a referendum is realistic? They tried to get another Edinburgh Agreement last parliament and that ended with UK refusal. So they worked on legislation that set out the framework for advisory referendums in Scotland and passed that. It is under that framework we hold the referendum in 2023.
1 -
17 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:
Seen as you're clearly struggling with my position and you're unhappy with my casual wording I'll be charitable and use your own words.
This is why I think it's disingenuous when they tell their supporters they will deliver independence if elected.
And that would be a misunderstanding, on your part, of what they've promised.
Or how their supporters view them and their government.
They are promising legislation for a referendum in 2023.
They have been equally clear that they are bound by Westminster in more ways than one.
1 -
2 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:
No you're not.
It's very obvious what my position is no matter how much you or others do this weird misframing tactic.
I'm happy to have a referendum that's legally binding on the issue of Independence.
Referendums, under UK law are advisory. ie not legally binding.
1 -
37 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:
I'm not arguing against people choosing to vote for the SNP. If you followed the conversation I was responding to why i dont think we should have referendums to take us out of the UK after every Scottish election.
I don't care if the SNP want to have advisory referendums to poll opinions every year. Can't imagine it being of much use to anyone and I'd imagine the turnout would be very low.
What were you being charitable about?
I'm trying to be charitable towards your position. It appears incoherent. If advisory referendums are of so little concern to you, why do you object to a border poll by the SNP/Greens? That is what is being proposed. You can advocate for the UK whilst supporting a vote. Especially since SNP/Greens have represent the majority of electorate. To that end what they promise appears achievable. Or to put it another way; within their power.
1 -
1 hour ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:
Things that they don't have the power to do in the first place. This is of course contested and we may have to go to court to find out but I don't believe Holyrood has the power to call a referendum on it's own back as that would directly impact the other nations in the union.
The SNP have previously campaigned on the premise of stopping Brexit which is something they never had the power to do but they got elected off the back of that campaign, I don't think that suddenly meant the SNP should have been able to halt the Westminster Brexit process as they never had the power to do what they were offering the people in the first place. Generally speaking manifestos don't mean much, just paper with false promises from every party.
I think winners of elections should of course be able to carry out everything they promise within their power but that doesn't even happen as it is so it's fanciful to imagine them carrying out things outwith their power.
This is the fault of the SNP being sleekit and campaigning on something they know they can't deliver which then leads to conversations like this and some people being aggrieved as they think it's unfair and undemocratic whereas the SNP know this before they start campaigning. I believe that's what strengthened the breakaway factions and Alba types as they're frustrated as they know Sturgeon is leading them up the garden path every year. They know she isn't able to deliver it like she says she can year after year but at the same time they don't really have any alternative to backing the SNP and hoping Westminster changes it's mind.
It is also possible to think that Westminster could do with reform and that Holyrood should have the power to hold referendums unilaterally but that's where I would disagree. It also must be acknowledged if you believe this that Sturgeon and the SNP themselves already know and believe this so are at least in some way being misleading about what they offer Scottish voters.
I'm trying to be charitable here. If your objection to the SNP is that they promise something "outwith their power" it seems that you have very few options when it comes to political parties in Scotland. Almost by definition the local chairmen of the branches of Con/Lab/Lib Dem have no power to deliver on anything they promise, only the power to lobby within theior own party on behalf of Scotland. The SNP and Greens at least have control over their ambitions.
They certainly are, at present, unable to deliver another Edinburgh Agreement. That arrangement requires co-operation from the UK government.
However. It is far from clear that Scotland lacks the power to hold a referendum. The case for is pretty good, relying on existing UK legislation. Referendums are not a reserved matter. Voting is something wholly devolved to Holyrood. With the referendum act in 2020 they have already established that this is their preferred route. Holding an advisory referendum to poll opinion on independence.
The legislation will be clear that there is no legal obligation incurred by such a border poll. The intent is to clarify support or lack thereof.
1 -
54 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:
He appears to be claiming that an Act of the Great British parliament has "nothing to do with Britain".
I'm looking forward to his next reply.
Perhaps he has no knowledge of British history or the tangled weave of Anglo-Irish conflict.
Seems impossible to me. However i am aware that The Daily Express does indeed have a subscriber base, so there is a chance that one of their 'readers' has managed to figure out how to get on the internet for something other than porn.
0 -
13 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:
It was a daft question and had nothing to do with Britain. But that's to be expected.
Um, pretty sure the British were intimately involved in the conflict of Irish Independence. A key player if you will.
1 -
I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make there @The_Kincardine
All laws are made in perpetuity, it doesn't prevent them from being amended, annulled or repealed.
0 -
17 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:
Oh me too. I think the point is we are being forced to choose.
Gazing briefly over the water to The Norn, the beauty of the GFA is that it found an amicable solution to the competing identities at play. You could be Unionist, Republican, Irish or British live either side of the border and self identify as either and functionally it would make f**k all difference. A couple of decades of genuine neglect, arrogance and utterly self obsessed English nationalism, not restricted to but certainly typified by Brexit has forced people to make those choices and for it to matter again.With obviously very different circumstances and pressures some of that applies here. We are being forced to choose, we are being forced to seek a national identity that isn't a total embarrassment, to seek or achieve a system of governance that is in some way representative or functional and isn't basically an after school creche and money/influence and ego farm for the worst c***s English public school vomits up.
Devolution in some way bridged some of that gap but both in reality and in the way it is treated by successive UK governments, it is just a cage. That can be rattled, squeezed and basically fucked about with at the whims of an English plurality. And that's just not enough for me.Scottish, Irish reunification or the somewhat lagging behind Welsh independence movements would be what they are now if the UK wasn't a disgusting shambles. But it is a disgusting shambles and the blame for that lies squarely with the supposed protectors of the union and their horrid little acolytes and craven arse lickers in the devolved nations. It's why they won't engage seriously about constitutional reform or ideas of national identity and self worth. They know it is they who have and are fucking it and to engage is to have to accept some culpability.
This is precisely why you always hear shite about grievance and hostility and angry cybernats in response to reasonable objections to the fact we're governed by utterly venal b*****d clowns, we haven't voted for since 1955 ripping up what passes for our constitution unilaterally, making us an international laughing stock and making a complete c**t of running things.
We're at a point where they have no real arguments in favour of continuing as part of the UK. Because Brexit is that bad. Alarmism and insults are all that is left.
The damage that the UK Government are attempting to do to the GFA and NIP is indicative of an attitude towards Ireland that has ugly roots. Under the EU membership we saw an increase in democratic representation across the UK with the setup of assemblies and devolution. The free movement across the Irish border was facilitated with the EU working towards the benefit of everyone.
It appears that the Torys have an idea of the UK that is exceptional. Not in a good way. They view Westminster, and their place within it as having ultimate authority even to the extent that they have tried to break international law. An attitude that is embodied in the way the Prime Minister, and his willing cohorts, has behaved. The counter to independence would be in good governance from Westminster, catering to the the pro-EU sentiment within Scotland, just as they did for Gibraltar. But the Torys lack any ability to work with the Scottish Government, and that mismanagement only adds to dissatisfaction with the union.
The thing is. Had the UK stayed within the EU, the EU itself would be protecting the UK as a unified whole. They were always clear that they were unwilling to interfere in another member's internal politics. It is by leaving in the hard manner that the Torys demanded that the UK finds itself outside, and under pressure from a rise in independence movements. And the EU is free to use its influence to encourage those movements and prevent them being stymied.
I can't see the Torys doing anything to reverse this trend.
3 -
3 minutes ago, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:
If “United Kingdoms” were in perpetuity then Rangers would never have been pumped out of Europe by some mob from Luxembourg.
If Britain were actually a thing then why is no British Football League?
Checkmate unionists.
0 -
9 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:
I find the discussion on the nature of British Nationalism, Unionism or more properly English Nationalism in a Geri Halliwell dress fascinating. I heard the former Moscow correspondent John Sweeney speak about this on a podcast recently. He said that while he was a republican in his youth and was against the idea of the monarchy he has grown to appreciate the role of HM Lizzie. His point was that the Queen not only acted as a head of state but also embodied what is was to be British, provided a focal point for patriotism and essentially a political and functional dead end for the worst bits of the far right and classic English Nationalism. Basically every notion of pride or national identity had to be viewed through the lense of "what would the Queen think of this" and "am I being a good enough loyal subject" when I do a nazi salute, or wreck a pavement cafe during the world cup in Nice or whatever.
I think there is something to that view tbh. It is a useful shield, or flimsy cover to throw over the fact that this is a collection of islands deeply uneasy about its identity and certainly i find expressions of English national identity, pride, patriotism or whatever to be deeply confused and indistinct from that of British National identity. A sort of revolving door of national consciousness.I also find the idea, in this day and age especially, of needing to hide your insecurities and frankly embarrassingly diminished and quite grubby self of national self worth behind a 95 year old woman in a hat, laughable, contemptible and kind of indicative of what a fucking lunatic shambles the UK is.
The idea of what qualifies as British has changed throughout the years. I think i have this correct when i say that it was coined as a term by John Dee, back when it was just England and Wales. As the UK developed the term changed, and changed again when the Empire grew. What were once "british" subjects are now Canadians, Jamaicans and Australians as that influence waned and withdrew. Throughout the majority of my life the term has explicitly excluded people who were Irish.
Exclusion appears to be its defining feature at present. Not helped with British Nationalism being nazi-adjacent. The do love to throw those nazi salutes. They can't help it apparently.
I don't think of myself as British. I'm Scottish and European.
0 -
5 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:
I have indulged you with a few replies. Sorry I did that given that statement.
I'm sorry that your feelings are so hurt by the mere mention of a future event.
Gonna be hard to deny when it happens tho.
0 -
4 minutes ago, Antlion said:
To be fair, the UK did manage to partition the island of Ireland, thereby becoming a partitionist state. Every time Kincardine badmouths partition, he’s shitting on the UK (just as every time he condemns “tartan gonks”, he’s digging up the people’s Princess and taking a dump on her bones). So much for his being a stalwart supporter of all things bally well Bri’ish.
There is never any coherent sense presented. He hates. But has nothing other than that.
We are the despised.
We are also winning.
0 -
1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said:
Yet you reply to me. If only you daft wee Natters were capable of joined-up thinking. But then you'd be normal people...
Anyway, that Britain is a unitary nation - in perpetuity since 1707 - is beyond contention.
On the contrary, this will be up for contention in 2023.
0 -
6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:
Silly boy. Again.
'British Unionism' is a construct of the febrile mind of the daft wee tartan gonk since we've been one nation in perpetuity since 1707.
No. British Unionism an artificial and ever changing term with regards to the UK.
It used to involve claiming the entirety of the island of Ireland. Then they kicked you lot out.
A large part of the 20th century involved the UK being ejected from lands claimed. That hasn't stopped as we entered the 21st.
Nothing lasts forever. And the union between Scotland and the rest of the UK is due for change.
0 -
Just now, The_Kincardine said:
Yes. Pro-EU, happy with the EU, anti-EU. Left wing government or mildly right wing government. It doesn't matter to the ScotchNats.
Whatever the situation is the answer is always partition. So don't try and kid on that it has anything to do Brexit or TOOOOAAAARRRRIIIIEEESSSSSS.
You clearly have no idea. Westminster and its economic ideology of Brexit and Austerity have combined to make our standards of living in the UK worse. That isn't an opinion. It is something measurable. A demonstrable fact.
It is also valid for the Scottish Government to highlight those areas that they cannot control, instead of taking the blame for when those issues impact society. They have limited powers. That is also a fact.
Right now, we have the choice of further Austerity, further Brexit, or to do something that works against the worst effects of those policies. Independence and joining EU.
We know we would be better off economically within the EU and that comes with rights and recognition. These are facts.
Brexit is deeply connected to the ideal of British unioninsm. That is why i think it will ultimately fail.
1 -
9 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:
Silly boy - especially as I was an ardent remainer in 2016.
Having cut my teeth in politics in the EEC referendum - wherein Billy Wolfe, Big Margo and Lovely Winnie told us that 'remaining' was evil and would be to the vast demerit of Scotland - I take any Nat position on the EU are nothing more than ignorant opportunism.
Did have to wait 50 years to before seeing evidence that they were wrong?
Parties change. Labour used to be a left-wing party, the Conservatives used to be relatively sane.
The Lib Dems were once relevant.
0 -
Just now, The_Kincardine said:
Since a majority of decent Britons eschewed partition in 2014 we've seen two things:
1. A regional administration in Embra becoming less competent yet more mendacious and 2. A dwindling thicket of thwarted grievance junkies becoming more partisan and more abusive.
With that backdrop I am - by any measure - a reasonable - and mild - contributor to the discussion.
Two things:
1. Domination of Scottish politics by pro-independence parties for over a decade
2. Brexit
You keep asserting that our governance has somehow degraded, that is not bourne out of any evidence with the further complication being; what are you comparing present governance with?
If you compare it with previous Scottish administrations, we see that the SNP led coalitions have delivered impressive changes to our society with reform of the electoral landscape. The Lab/Lib coalition was little more than a rubber stamp for Westminster legislation.
Compared to Westminster? f**k off. That place is now openly corrupt.
0 -
5 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:
At this point I refuse to believe Kincardine is anything other that someone running excerpts from a ‘monkeys typing Shakespeare’ experiment that’s actually being secretly run. Nothing else makes sense.
The funniest part is that he appears to think he is winning.
0 -
0
-
21 hours ago, Highland Capital said:
They seem to be a rebranding/takeover of the Scottish Christians or at least taken their policies but dropping the outright religious stuff to be more universally appealing. They only seem to be really operating properly in the Highlands like the Christians did before them and the sudden appearance of this party and the sudden disappearance of the Christians seem to be too much of a coincidence.
Probably found that their opposition to "the gayz" had rather tarnished their reputation. Rebrand and hope everyone forgets.
See Scotch Labour for how that works.
0 -
Brexit and the NI Protocol to become focus for Tory's going forward; so stupid.
-
Quote
- Whitehall insiders told the daily that Mr Johnson's administration was developing the plans partly in anticipation of a new constitutional crisis if Unionist parties, which reject the Protocol, refuse to re-enter the region’s power-sharing executive after the May 5 elections.
- Under the proposed legislation, ministers would have unilateral powers to switch off key parts of the protocol in UK law.
- This would include border checks on goods travelling to the region from Great Britain.
0 -
-
I'd like to congratulate Nicola on making the Russian no-fly list.
A list of of top UK politicians no longer allowed entry into Putin's Russia. It's not the recognition i want. But it is recognition.
0 -
12 minutes ago, Salt n Vinegar said:
I think I'll get upset about maskgate when Sturgeon says that she wasn't there, then if she was there all rules were followed, then denies it was against the rules a dozen-ish times in Parliament.
Until then, not so much.
5-secondgate
She didn't even have a drink in her hand. I find it hard to be outraged by Nicola Sturgeon going into a building, smiling and... PUTTTING HER MASK ON!!!!
The horror.
2
Let's All Laugh at the Royalist Nats and Greens
in The Politics Forum
Posted
Will you be voting in 2023 then?