When will indyref2 happen?

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

9 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Which international law? 

All of them.  

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

All of them.  

So you have no idea?

[Gordon EF]

2 minutes ago, Snafu said:

So political rather than legal?

It's almost entirely political.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

8 minutes ago, strichener said:

No you are incorrect.  This is taken directly from the UN website.

So yes the UK would have a veto.

UN Process for membership

Its actually much more nuanced than that, for example Palestine is and isn't a member at the same time.  Its called an observer member, it can't take part in votes but is allowed to attend and debate etc, and has representation.  About 60% of UN members already recognise it.  UNSC cannot veto these members, or else they would have already.  

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

2 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

So you have no idea?

Well what do you mean its a stupid fucking question.  We live in a world of nation states that interact with each other according to an agreed set of rules and principles which form a body of international law.  You can't just pretend it doesn't exist cause you want to, if you want to be an independent country you need to play the game.  That's the way it is.

[Gordon EF]

1 minute ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Well what do you mean its a stupid fucking question.  We live in a world of nation states that interact with each other according to an agreed set of rules and principles which form a body of international law.  You can't just pretend it doesn't exist cause you want to, if you want to be an independent country you need to play the game.  That's the way it is.

Well it's not a stupid question when you're making specific claims. If international law dictates that nations who declare UDI are not recognised, why did the UK recognise Kosovo one day after they declared UDI?

If the answer if "well... circumstances", it suggests this idea of some kind of clear and immutable 'international law' that everyone follows in lockstep (as seems to be suggested by a few folk on here) is garbage.

Either there is no international law preventing recognition of countries who declare UDI or there is and countries just ignore it when they want to which make it largely meaningless.

I'm not advocating for UDI. I'm just challenging this idea that it automatically results in zero international recognition.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

21 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

Well it's not a stupid question when you're making specific claims. If international law dictates that nations who declare UDI are not recognised, why did the UK recognise Kosovo one day after they declared UDI?

If the answer if "well... circumstances", it suggests this idea of some kind of clear and immutable 'international law' that everyone follows in lockstep (as seems to be suggested by a few folk on here) is garbage.

Either there is no international law preventing recognition of countries who declare UDI or there is and countries just ignore it when they want to which make it largely meaningless.

I'm not advocating for UDI. I'm just challenging this idea that it automatically results in zero international recognition.

As I already alluded to the situations are not remotely comparable.  We are not emerging from a war which broke up a state, we are not under threat of persecution and, unfortunately for us, we are part of a country which geopolitically is very important, we also because of Trident and our location are disproportionately so too.

International law is clear and immutable, though, as you alluded to yourself, sometimes politics can have an influence too.  However, for us that's not an option, we are not in that position.  If it came down to simple realpolitik well we'd be fucked because of Trident and permanent seat on UNSC and Russia and location nobody would give the slightest f**k if our democratic wishes were being ignored by big bad London.

Maybe ROI and New Zealand would put out a nice supportive tweet, and countries like Venezuela and Cuba just to troll the west.  That would be it.  Nodody else would give a shit as we're small and insignificant.   

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

Talking absolute dreamland here lets say in May the SNP get over 50% of the ELECTORATE not the turnout.  Which isn't going to happen, impossible.  That's over 2.2 million votes, or about double the SNP's best ever turnout. But lets say it did.

Then they hold a consultative referendum after s30 refused by London.  And they get more than half of the ELECTORATE not the turnout to vote for independence.  Again, over 2.2 million votes.

Then you would have a legitimate case to say the will of the people is for independence.  Not by getting just over half of a turnout of 65% or whatever, which wouldn't represent the will of the people as more than half of them wouldn't have voted for it.  

If you fulfilled these conditions, which isn't going to happen, you may have a case to approach the EU and beg for recognition.  At this moment in time with the EU being very annoyed with the UK and uniquely sympathetic to Scotland as we have been EU members for forty years, maybe they say okay then.

Then you approach Biden.  Biden very pro Irish and very pissed off with breach of GFA, hates Johnson.  Maybe by then you can say to him the EU say they'll recognise us if you do, and we can show that more than half of the population (again not turnout the entire electorate) want this.  Then maybe he says alright then.

But realistically this isn't going to happen.  We'd never get enough votes and realpolitik would would dictate they would have bigger concerns with rUK that are more important to them than our democratic wishes being respected.  

So its not going to happen and will have to go to court.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

4 minutes ago, Snafu said:

A vote for SNP in a General Election doesn't automatically mean all who voted SNP had Scottish Independence in mind, that wasn't the question. Many whom voted would have been dissatisfied floaters, first time voters or those whom never voted for the SNP before and protested their usual choice such as the Scottish Labour Party or the LibDems, BREXIT was on everybody's mind at the time. When the question of Independence comes up then that is the right and relevant question to ask, that question was raised only 6 years ago with the YES vote being defeated.

If you want to use a General Election as an example that the majority of Scotland wants Independence then why not also the Local Council Elections, they should also be taken into consideration as well to gauge public opinion on Independence?

It is about asking the right question.

 

Tbf that depends on what is in the manifesto.  If its in your manifesto and you win you have a mandate to pursue it, whatever it may be.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

The only way a British government will ever agree another s30 is if there is a GE and it returns a Labour minority govt that can only govern with support from the SNP.  Then the SNP prop them up on confidence and supply basis for one parliament in return for s30.  That is the only set of circumstances in which any British government will ever agree another s30, and even then they'd try to gerrymander the f**k out of it.

[madwullie]

4 hours ago, MixuFruit said:

what an odd way to group the survey responses.

I was going for "some indeterminate time miles in the future if at all" v "relatively soon" 

I'm not a pro  

Edit: as some kind of statistical recognition of "appetite" 

Edited December 1, 2020 by madwullie

[HTG]

11 minutes ago, Snafu said:

A vote for SNP in a General Election doesn't automatically mean all who voted SNP had Scottish Independence in mind, that wasn't the question. Many whom voted would have been dissatisfied floaters, first time voters or those whom never voted for the SNP before and protested their usual choice such as the Scottish Labour Party or the LibDems, BREXIT was on everybody's mind at the time. When the question of Independence comes up then that is the right and relevant question to ask, that question was raised only 6 years ago with the YES vote being defeated.

If you want to use a General Election as an example that the majority of Scotland wants Independence then why not also the Local Council Elections, they should also be taken into consideration as well to gauge public opinion on Independence?

It is about asking the right question.

I get that but, since 2015, the entire focus of the Scottish Tories has been about sending Nicola a message. They've had absolutely f**k all else to their campaigns. They've consciously steered away from the electioneering of their counterparts in England because Get Brexit Done is a nightmare for them in Scotland. So they've focused on getting the SNP tellt - and failed on every occasion. 

The SNP were very clear in the 2019 election in terms of the platform they were standing on - indyref and stop Brexit. They cantered to victory and the "tell Nicola" lot got absolutely horsed. 

In 2021, the SNP platform is, again, very clear. 

There won't be a S30 agreement as a result of any of this. London Tories will argue against and, if they fails as it surely will, will simply refuse the request without further dialogue. 

The only way Scotland can establish the will of the people in a post-Brexit landscape is to hold the referendum. There are a couple of things in their favour. Firstly there was a commitment from the SNP that there wouldn't be a request for a further referendum except in the event of a material change in circumstances - with Brexit specifically cited. Secondly, the UK government is signed up to 7 years as a timeframe within the GFA. Given that the GFA underpins a far more fractious and volatile relationship, it's a ridiculous notion to assume that the UK govt entered into that Agreement with their eyes shut. 

There is no reason whatsoever to conclude that 7 years is anything other than reasonable in the case of Scotland when there has been such seismic change - particularly given the way Scotland voted on the matter. 

[Gordon EF]

26 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

As I already alluded to the situations are not remotely comparable.  We are not emerging from a war which broke up a state, we are not under threat of persecution and, unfortunately for us, we are part of a country which geopolitically is very important, we also because of Trident and our location are disproportionately so too.

International law is clear and immutable, though, as you alluded to yourself, sometimes politics can have an influence too.  However, for us that's not an option, we are not in that position.  If it came down to simple realpolitik well we'd be fucked because of Trident and permanent seat on UNSC and Russia and location nobody would give the slightest f**k if our democratic wishes were being ignored by big bad London.

Maybe ROI and New Zealand would put out a nice supportive tweet, and countries like Venezuela and Cuba just to troll the west.  That would be it.  Nodody else would give a shit as we're small and insignificant.   

You still seem to be trying to convince me that UDI is not the way to go when at no point have I ever said that it is.

It's easy to prove there is no coherent and universal international approach to countries declaring UDI because countries are on record as having different responses for differing reasons.

[NotThePars]

Unionists would boycott a second referendum, rendering it meaningless anyway.

It’s only meaningless if it isn’t sanctioned by Westminster or legally agreed to be valid.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Just me thats lost all faith in it ever happening? 

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

6 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Just me thats lost all faith in it ever happening? 

Me too a bit.  Its going to be years of messy constitutional wrangling and court cases, all the while the drip drip drip of propaganda from the media will have an affect.  Then post Brexit our economy will be dismantled and deregulated, weakening the economic case and making re-entry to the EU longer and more complex, and people will get used to Brexit.

I think its basically the same old same old for Scotland.  Its not polite to say it but we are basically doomed the way we have been for the last thousand years near enough because we are attached to England.  Its our curse.  

In modern times we have become the goose the laid the golden egg with oil and gas and now water and renewable energy.  A blessing and a curse at the same time.  They'll never let us go, and generations of people will continue to be told they're shit and subsidised. 

I think it really has an affect on the psyche up here too.  Its a very tragic story that Scotland has really, and independence is our only chance to change it.  I just find it hard to have much faith though, we're in a position where we're almost hostages, WM has the ultimate control and its never going to be willing to even countenance letting us go, no matter what we vote for or how loud we moan.

[madwullie]

Decent blog post by David Allen Green on this subject 

https://davidallengreen.com/https://davidallengreen.com/2020/12/how-brexit-may-lead-to-scottish-independence-and-irish-unification/

[HTG]

40 minutes ago, Snafu said:

Unionists would boycott a second referendum, rendering it meaningless anyway.

Unionists can do what they like. If the referendum has legal status then its results will stand. 

I can understand why BJ and his cohorts are shiting themselves though. They know they'll "lose" Scotland in the event of a vote. 

If the Supreme Court rules that the Scottish Parliament is acting on the will of the people in terms of holding a referendum then it'll be interesting to see the response from London. If the people continue to give a majority to independence minded parties, it's also difficult to show working where the outcome is that the people have shown a different will. We're only talking about getting to the point of holding a referendum here - not declaring UDI. 

[Gordon EF]

39 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Just me thats lost all faith in it ever happening? 

I suppose one way to look at it is, do unionists look like they're serenely unperturbed by the prospect of independence to anyone?

[Granny Danger]

52 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Just me thats lost all faith in it ever happening? 

I’m more convinced than ever that it’s on the horizon.