The 2021 election and a mandate for Indyref2.

[Erih Shtrep]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Okay, maybe a little extreme, but as I recall, Scotland used up around 20% of its financial reserves which were already in a poor state.

 

Must be utterly horrible to be a No voter.   

Where you genuinely hope Scotland fails at things.   It could be hospital waiting times,  school performance, covid deaths.   

 

Here’s what actually happened and why the treaty came about:

 

 

(All of this is readily available in Scottish history books. I would recommend Scotland’s Story by Tom Steel, where (pages 143 to 148) refer particularly to the Actions of William of Orange in respect of the Darien Company and demonstrate how, by his aggression against Scotland he almost succeeded in bankrupting us.)

During the period prior to 1695, all overseas colonies were designated English and trade was restricted to English Merchant Companies. Scottish Merchants were not allowed to trade with them, despite the fact that Scotland was part of the United Kingdom, (although without a United Government), and despite the fact that it was mainly Scottish explorers who opened the English colonies up for colonisation.

In 1695 the Scottish Merchants petitioned King William of Orange and were granted his Royal Assent for “The Scottish Africa and India Company”, which would be allowed to trade with the colonies. Immediately the English East India Company reduced its charges making it impossible for the new Scots Company to compete.

The Scots were forced to look for an alternative. They decided on a scheme to run mule trains between a port on the Pacific and another on the Caribbean, across the Isthmus of Panama using land that they thought, had not been colonised by any other country. (This was disputed by Spain who claimed it as theirs.) Effectively this would greatly reduce the travelling time between China, India and Scotland and save massively on shipping costs.

In 1698 the Scots changed the Company name to “The Darien Company” and opened it for investment. Many English Merchants, who were now receiving much less in bonuses from the East India Company’s reduced rates, withdrew their money from it and invested in the Scottish Company. The Scots raised £400,000.00 in only 2 weeks! That’s £40 million in today’s money! The English House of Lords complained to King William of Orange, who reneged on his Royal Consent and withdrew it. He threatened the English Merchants with being charged with treason if they didn’t withdraw their money from the Scottish Company and re-invest it in the English Company. They withdrew their money. William also prevented European investors from taking part by making it known that any investment in the Scottish company would be treated as an act of aggression and they would respond. (Spain today?)

Scotland went ahead on its own. £300,000.00 was raised by public subscription and two “Dutchmen Heavy Cargo Ships” were bought from Holland. 1200 settlers with supplies were sent to Darien Land.

William of Orange immediately sent the English Navy to blockade the Caribbean colonies thereby denying the Scots access or assistance. The Spanish Navy joined the English and between them they prevented food and medical supplies reaching the Scottish base. During a skirmish one of the two Scots boats was attacked and sunk. The Scottish settlers were forced to leave, and travelled home via New York. Of the original 1200 settlers, some 800 never made it back home.

There is no record to show how many died in Darien Land, or on the journey to New York, or on the way back across the Atlantic. Disease was a significant factor but the assertion that the failure was entirely Scotland’s fault due to a bad choice of site, and the subsequent illness, is not well founded. It’s more likely the deliberate action of the English Parliament and King William, by means of the English Naval blockade, caused its failure, and nearly bankrupted Scotland.

Although the venture cost Scotland between ¹/3 and ½ its National Assets, it wasn’t bankrupt and continued to trade successfully for the next 7 years.

[Dawson Park Boy]

Oh dear.

Methinks  you protest a little too much.

Nothing much wrong with my summarised version.

I've actually been to that area and the thought of living there in the 17th century is quite scary.

[NotThePars]

One of Scottish nationalism’s biggest successes has been aligning any class conflict with the national question. I think that’s a big part of why Labour’s position on the constitution is so fucked.

[jamamafegan]

It’s clear to see that all the top shaggers are voting SNP/Greens.

My question to those who maybe feel the SNP have gone down in their estimations and are thinking of not voting them - who would you vote instead? There isn’t anyone else worthy enough of the vote. The SNP aren’t perfect but they are definitely better than any of the alternatives on offer.

For anyone wanting independence it’s an absolute no brainer to vote SNP for the constituency vote.

If I had to vote for that utter c**t Fergus Ewing I’d grit my teeth and still do it because its the best thing whilst looking at the bigger picture. The only reason I wouldn’t vote for someone like him is if a Green or pro independence candidate was also standing and had a decent shot of winning.

[NotThePars]

A quick Google search says Fergus Ewing’s majority is 10,857 which is more votes than his nearest rival even accumulated at the last election. He’s going to be fine even if one poster says he won’t vote for him because of his views on gay marriage.

[SandyCromarty]

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

You're an utter walloper. 

For describing atrocities?

In 1747, England passed “The Act of Proscription”, which banned (for the Scots) the wearing of tartan, the playing of bagpipes, the right to own weapons, the gathering of clans, and the teaching of the Gaidhlig language. Punishment for breaking this law: Seven years slavery in an overseas English colony. Another law that same year turned all clan lands over to the English crown. In forty years, the clan culture was largely destroyed; the young people did not know their language or culture.

[SANTAN]

1 minute ago, SandyCromarty said:

For describing atrocities?

In 1747, England passed “The Act of Proscription”, which banned (for the Scots) the wearing of tartan, the playing of bagpipes, the right to own weapons, the gathering of clans, and the teaching of the Gaidhlig language. Punishment for breaking this law: Seven years slavery in an overseas English colony. Another law that same year turned all clan lands over to the English crown. In forty years, the clan culture was largely destroyed; the young people did not know their language or culture.

You're at it. 

As an aside does anyone else cringe heavily when people try and discuss subjects with their chest puffed out whilst relentlessly copying and pasting Wikipedia etc. Happens a lot on here from the Yes Da's type. They must have so many tabs open at all given times just daring someone to try and discuss something using their own words. 

[jakedee]

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
You're at it. 
As an aside does anyone else cringe heavily when people try and discuss subjects with their chest puffed out whilst relentlessly copying and pasting Wikipedia etc. Happens a lot on here from the Yes Da's type. They must have so many tabs open at all given times just daring someone to try and discuss something using their own words. 

^^^^^^ Neil Oliver

[Juanhourjoe]

Seen as Andy Wightman's coming to stand up in the Highlands. I wonder if he could be persuaded to stay of the list. Not splitting his vote with greens. And just stand in the constituency against Fergus Ewing instead.

[Highland Capital]

53 minutes ago, jamamafegan said:

It’s clear to see that all the top shaggers are voting SNP/Greens.

My question to those who maybe feel the SNP have gone down in their estimations and are thinking of not voting them - who would you vote instead? There isn’t anyone else worthy enough of the vote. The SNP aren’t perfect but they are definitely better than any of the alternatives on offer.

For anyone wanting independence it’s an absolute no brainer to vote SNP for the constituency vote.

If I had to vote for that utter c**t Fergus Ewing I’d grit my teeth and still do it because its the best thing whilst looking at the bigger picture. The only reason I wouldn’t vote for someone like him is if a Green or pro independence candidate was also standing and had a decent shot of winning.

 

26 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

A quick Google search says Fergus Ewing’s majority is 10,857 which is more votes than his nearest rival even accumulated at the last election. He’s going to be fine even if one poster says he won’t vote for him because of his views on gay marriage.

I held my nose and voted for Ewing at the last election.  If I remember rightly I voted LibDem the election before partly because I knew they wouldn't win (I was still independence undecided at that time).  If the Greens or the SSP run a candidate here this time, they'll probably be getting my vote.  Ewing will win at a canter anyway.  His mother being a big player was a bit before my time but I assume family name helps old Fergus more than policies or anything else (I asked someone in the Highland branch of the party recently why there was no challenger and they said it would be pointless as they'd have no chance).  As a local MSP he's pretty useless and allegedly has to have his staff turn his iPad on for him as he hasn't a clue how to do it himself.  

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

1 hour ago, jamamafegan said:

My question to those who maybe feel the SNP have gone down in their estimations and are thinking of not voting them - who would you vote instead? There isn’t anyone else worthy enough of the vote. The SNP aren’t perfect but they are definitely better than any of the alternatives on offer.

For anyone wanting independence it’s an absolute no brainer to vote SNP for the constituency vote.
 

To your first point that's why people are suggesting they'd spoil ballots rather than vote for someone else. It's grim that the reaction of a lot of SNP loyalists to those who are pro-independence but dissatisfied with the party is to shame them into doing so because "otherwise it feeds into the no majority for referendum argument." It's grimmer that there's no credible alternative of course

To your second there's an inability amongst some of the more fundamentalist nationalists and SNP members to recognise that some people are pro independence, but see that withholding your support for a party whose performance in government you view as not very good is more important (to them) than just viewing every election as a proxy vote for independence. 

It's moot anyway as they're the only show in town and all those who 20 years ago would tick whichever box said labour will do the same now for the SNP, as will those who value independence above all else. And fair play to them.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Genuine Hibs Fan

[jakedee]

A quick Google search says Fergus Ewing’s majority is 10,857 which is more votes than his nearest rival even accumulated at the last election. He’s going to be fine even if one poster says he won’t vote for him because of his views on gay marriage.

He will clearly win his seat.
As I've tried to explain earlier, it will not matter to the Westminster Govt. how many SNP/Green MSP's there are if the total vote cast for pro independence parties falls below 50%
There are nearly 80% of Scottish constituency Parliamentary seats in Westminster held by the SNP, how much attention do they pay to that?
Instead referring to the line that"only 45% of Scots backed the SNP, therefor 55% cannot support independence".

[Highland Capital]

18 minutes ago, Juanhourjoe said:

Seen as Andy Wightman's coming to stand up in the Highlands. I wonder if he could be persuaded to stay of the list. Not splitting his vote with greens. And just stand in the constituency against Fergus Ewing instead.

I was actually thinking recently if John Finnie could be persuaded to stand in Inverness & Nairn against Ewing.  He's one of the bigger Greens and does seem to be well regarded.  I know he's planning on retiring though.

Another name that's gone through my head is Margaret Davidson.  For those who don't know, she's the independent leader of the Highland Council and as a councillor has a very good reputation (also from the Falklands I think).  I'm pretty sure she's pro-independence and could be someone with enough name-recognition locally to be a real challenger for Ewing.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Highland Capital

[oneteaminglasgow]

18 minutes ago, jakedee said:

He will clearly win his seat.
As I've tried to explain earlier, it will not matter to the Westminster Govt. how many SNP/Green MSP's there are if the total vote cast for pro independence parties falls below 50%
There are nearly 80% of Scottish constituency Parliamentary seats in Westminster held by the SNP, how much attention do they pay to that?
Instead referring to the line that"only 45% of Scots backed the SNP, therefor 55% cannot support independence".

Voting figures won’t make any difference whatsoever to the U.K. Governments position. They should (and so should seats at Westminster), but they won’t.

[jakedee]

Voting figures won’t make any difference whatsoever to the U.K. Governments position. They should (and so should seats at Westminster), but they won’t.

Correct, but taking away any goalposts that can be moved to suit their reason of denying a 2nd referendum can only help the argument surely?

[NotThePars]

He will clearly win his seat.
As I've tried to explain earlier, it will not matter to the Westminster Govt. how many SNP/Green MSP's there are if the total vote cast for pro independence parties falls below 50%
There are nearly 80% of Scottish constituency Parliamentary seats in Westminster held by the SNP, how much attention do they pay to that?
Instead referring to the line that"only 45% of Scots backed the SNP, therefor 55% cannot support independence".

What I’m taking from this is that Westminster don’t give a single shit about what the SNP or independence supporters believe constitutes a mandate.

[jakedee]

What I’m taking from this is that Westminster don’t give a single shit about what the SNP or independence supporters believe constitutes a mandate.

Hence why everyone who supports independence should get out and vote for a pro independence party, making their stance untenable.

[SandyCromarty]

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

You're at it. 

As an aside does anyone else cringe heavily when people try and discuss subjects with their chest puffed out whilst relentlessly copying and pasting Wikipedia etc. Happens a lot on here from the Yes Da's type. They must have so many tabs open at all given times just daring someone to try and discuss something using their own words. 

Time after time over the years I've found that when I mention atrocities carried out here in the Highlands by the westminster government the unionists will hide under a plethora of denials.

Sad that they cannot deal with what the government they support committed in their country but prefer to attack the individual who dared to bring it up.

I only stated facts.

 

[WilliamBragg]

I'll be totally honest and admit I will be voting SNP Zfor the first time since about 2003 in this election. 

I am probably more what you would call a traditional Labour voter although Starmer is too middle to right for me.

At this moment in time voting SNP is the only way to keep the Tories out.

[Erih Shtrep]

1 hour ago, jakedee said:

He will clearly win his seat.
As I've tried to explain earlier, it will not matter to the Westminster Govt. how many SNP/Green MSP's there are if the total vote cast for pro independence parties falls below 50%
There are nearly 80% of Scottish constituency Parliamentary seats in Westminster held by the SNP, how much attention do they pay to that?
Instead referring to the line that"only 45% of Scots backed the SNP, therefor 55% cannot support independence".

I don't understand why people find this hard to understand.    

We MUST get the SNP vote north of 50% on the constituency vote and that will be a very hard thing to do.   In 2015 when the SNP swept the board they polled 49.7% technically not enough for a mandate.  

The SNP is currently polling between 51% and 54% and will require their best ever election result to poll in excess of 50%.    

Not voting for your MSP because you don't like them in a safe seat will only result in them being returned but no mandate for Indref2.   There's no logical reason at all to do this.