News:

It's still under construction, so please bear with me


Scotland's future

Started by Bigfella, October 06, 2021, 09:39:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jerzy Bondov

Quote from: All Surrogate on October 07, 2021, 02:20:37 PM
You're equating England with the UK/Britain, and implying that all the 'evil' done by the British Empire etc. is the sole responsibility of english people, and that scottish people were completely innocent. That isn't the case. Scottish people were intimately involved in the building of the empire, and it's arguable that the scottish independence movement in part grew out of the decline of the British Empire and the loss of the benefits that it provided to Scotland.

It's also worth bearing in mind that a major reason that the Union occurred was because Scotland's own attempt to build an empire, the Darien Scheme, had failed. By forming the Union, Scotland got to biggy-back on the growing english colonial system; having an empire was an attraction of the Union for Scotland, not a detraction. The reason Glasgow flourished is the same reason that Liverpool did: building ships to transport slaves (and other things, of course).
Yeah fair play. I agree with you. Thanks (genuinely)

Quote from: All Surrogate on October 07, 2021, 02:20:37 PM
You're equating England with the UK/Britain, and implying that all the 'evil' done by the British Empire etc. is the sole responsibility of english people, and that scottish people were completely innocent. That isn't the case. Scottish people were intimately involved in the building of the empire, and it's arguable that the scottish independence movement in part grew out of the decline of the British Empire and the loss of the benefits that it provided to Scotland.

It's also worth bearing in mind that a major reason that the Union occurred was because Scotland's own attempt to build an empire, the Darien Scheme, had failed. By forming the Union, Scotland got to biggy-back on the growing english colonial system; having an empire was an attraction of the Union for Scotland, not a detraction. The reason Glasgow flourished is the same reason that Liverpool did: building ships to transport slaves (and other things, of course).

I wouldn't disagree with too much in your first paragraph, although not sure about the decline of the British Empire being much of a factor in the Scottish independence movement, unless you take a very broad interpretation of 'loss of empire' as part of the mix of circumstances that led to industrial decline in the 20th C.

It's fair to say that much of your second paragraph caused my eyebrows to raise just slightly, though. You make it sound as if the Scots were just delighted to be able to join the Union and get in on the
Empire action, rather than the Union having been negotiated by a gang of Scottish aristos for their own benefit, with England playing a pretty major role in manoeuvring Scotland into that position (including by deliberately undermining the Darien scheme). The Union was very unpopular in Scotland for quite a long time afterwards, and while there were benefits of Union/Empire for some, there was also military subjugation of large parts of Scotland, depopulation and mass emigration, and deliberate destruction of Scottish social structures and traditions.

Zetetic

October 07, 2021, 04:07:47 PM #92 Last Edit: October 07, 2021, 04:24:33 PM by Zetetic
Quote from: Blinder Data on October 07, 2021, 01:14:28 PM
If it helps, feel free to replace Royal Mail with any UK government service (DVLA, HMRC, MOD, etc.).
DVLA will go with Wales, all no one in England will be allowed to drive ever again (see Wales Act 2019).
Wales and Scotland have their own revenue authorities and tax offices already.
If sensible, Welsh and Scottish governments will ensure that they have developed alternative paramilitary command structures prior to independence for obvious reasons (see Slovene TO, Drakeford attempting to ensure that Welsh troops are deployed to Wales).

Zetetic


the hum

Quote from: Clatty McCutcheon on October 07, 2021, 03:53:17 PM
I wouldn't disagree with too much in your first paragraph, although not sure about the decline of the British Empire being much of a factor in the Scottish independence movement, unless you take a very broad interpretation of 'loss of empire' as part of the mix of circumstances that led to industrial decline in the 20th C.

It's fair to say that much of your second paragraph caused my eyebrows to raise just slightly, though. You make it sound as if the Scots were just delighted to be able to join the Union and get in on the
Empire action, rather than the Union having been negotiated by a gang of Scottish aristos for their own benefit, with England playing a pretty major role in manoeuvring Scotland into that position (including by deliberately undermining the Darien scheme). The Union was very unpopular in Scotland for quite a long time afterwards, and while there were benefits of Union/Empire for some, there was also military subjugation of large parts of Scotland, depopulation and mass emigration, and deliberate destruction of Scottish social structures and traditions.h

Yes, the second paragraph is light on the true history of the situation. IIRC Scotland wasn't bankrupted by Darien per se, rather a lot of influential investors in the scheme were, and personally sought an 'out' to their predicament in a union with England (Parcel o' Rogues 'n all that). The population at large were seemingly hugely opposed, so much so the Act incited rioting in the larger towns and cities. Also as Prof Tom Devine's rather excellent tome The Scottish Nation mentions, the Church of Scotland initially blocked the move, and such was its national power and influence at the time it would've seen any union buried buried before it started, but they relented after receiving assurances that they wouldn't be subsumed into the Church of England, hence why they're separate entities to this day.

I'd like to say 300 year old history isn't relevant to the situation now, but on the other hand, as Clatty illustrates, the legacy is undeniable. Why are the Highlands essentially empty? Maybe it's because it's a natural 'wilderness' and the weather's shit? Well, no.

jamiefairlie

1705: The Alien Act was a law passed by the Parliament of England in 1705, as a response to the Parliament of Scotland's Act of Security of 1704, which in turn was partially a response to the English Act of Settlement 1701.

The Alien Act provided that Scottish nationals in England were to be treated as aliens (foreign nationals), and estates held by Scots would be treated as alien property, making inheritance much less certain.

It also included an embargo on the import of Scottish products into England and English colonies – about half of Scotland's trade, covering goods such as linen, cattle and coal.

The Act contained a provision that it would be suspended if the Scots entered into negotiations regarding a proposed union of the parliaments of Scotland and England.

All Surrogate

Quote from: Clatty McCutcheon on October 07, 2021, 03:53:17 PM
... negotiated by a gang of Scottish aristos for their own benefit ...

Well, of course. But that's an argument against aristocracy, rather than for or against union. Do you think the english aristos operated in order to benefit the common english people?

Johnny Foreigner

Floors Castle, the largest still-inhabited castle in Scotland, was largely built with the riches accumulated by John Ker, who was created First Duke of Roxburghe by Queen Anne for playing a crucial part in the 1707 Acts of Union. And a very pretty castle it is, too. What's not to like?

And another thing: why does nobody ever talk about the complete travesty of justice that was the execution of Captain Thomas Green? What a petty act of resentment that was. Bah, people have such short memories. Wilful obfuscation, that's what that is. Wilful obfuscation, I say! It's all a great revisionist conspiracy. Remember Justice Godfrey.

Quote from: All Surrogate on October 07, 2021, 08:43:39 PM
Well, of course. But that's an argument against aristocracy, rather than for or against union. Do you think the english aristos operated in order to benefit the common english people?

It was only intended as an observation on one particular tangent of the back-and-forth on this thread, rather than a particular factor for or against the Union (or comment about the aristocracy in Scotland or England in any general sense). I made it in the specific context of your post, which was worded as though there was some kind of settled political will for Scotland to throw in its lot with England because people in Scotland fancied becoming part of the British Empire. While a certain section of the Scottish population undoubtedly benefited from the Union in the long run, the defining feature of the circumstances in which the Union came about was the self-interest of a few powerful men.

Zetetic

Something that's becoming more and more apparent and another reason why "England" is overbearing in the UK, is how little local government there now really is within England - the upshot being that there's not much power, authority or democratic expression that isn't centered on the broadly "English" parliament in Westminster.

Again, this contrasts sharply with Yugoslavia and even the Soviet Union.