SNP. Why Are They Thriving?

[Anchorman]

I don't often feel moved to criticise the beliefs of others, but to support the shafting of the ordinary people of the rUK in order to grab more of the goodies for one's own isn't  a particularly Christian attitude.

I don't accept the concept of a UK, rhi.
I believe the best interests of the people of Scotland are served when the governance of Scotland is in the hands of the people of Scotland.
Only then can we be free to pursue an international agenda, free from the constraints of 'you scratch my back' aid grants.
Even with its' very limited abilities, the Scots Parliament, under an initiative started by former Labour FM Jack McConnell, started work in Malawi, with which nation Scotland had historical ties.
We have made a difference there - the fact being acknowledged by UNICEF. If we had the ability, we could make a REAL difference.
As far as domestic policies go; surely a political party must concentrate on maintaining its' principles? Any such movement which ditches principles for populism is no party worth voting for.
The SNP has never made any secret of being unashamedly left of centre, and vehemently opposed to the Labour Tory love festival which sees the pathetic Miliband pledged to continue the Tory austerity cuts.
SNP could not afford to support any such policies....they would lose members like Labour principles.

There will be no coalition....because no Westminster party would meet the terms SNP would insist on making for such a coalition to happen.
The first would be the end of weapons of mass destruction on Scottish soil.
The second would be full and complete fiscal autonomy, limited control of broadcasting rights, statuary input on defence, foriegn and European policies....and a moritorium on a referendum on EU membership.

[Rhiannon]

I don't often feel moved to criticise the beliefs of others, but to support the shafting of the ordinary people of the rUK in order to grab more of the goodies for one's own isn't  a particularly Christian attitude.

Nor is it a particularly socialist or left of centre attitude, and I thought AM was left of centre in his politics. Just goes to show how nationalism can distort priorities etc.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly, PD, because in every other way AM is the gentlest, humblest kind of Christian. I hadn't really appreciated until recently just how toxic nationalism can be to good people.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't accept the concept of a UK, rhi.
I believe the best interests of the people of Scotland are served when the governance of Scotland is in the hands of the people of Scotland.

I don't accept the concept of the EU, rhi.
I believe the best interests of the people of the UK are served when the governance of the UK is in the hands of the people of the UK.

A comment that Farage could easily have made - indeed has probably made, in perhaps slightly altered words, many times.

Petty nationalists - the same the world over.

[Anchorman]

I don't often feel moved to criticise the beliefs of others, but to support the shafting of the ordinary people of the rUK in order to grab more of the goodies for one's own isn't  a particularly Christian attitude.

Nor is it a particularly socialist or left of centre attitude, and I thought AM was left of centre in his politics. Just goes to show how nationalism can distort priorities etc.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly, PD, because in every other way AM is the gentlest, humblest kind of Christian. I hadn't really appreciated until recently just how toxic nationalism can be to good people.

I don't see any prospects of either Labour or Tory parties ending the austerity cuts - both have pledged to continue them.
That's why I would never contemplate voting for them: I know of too many disabled people north and south of the border whose lives have been made miserable, limited and, in some documented cases, terminated by these inhuman policies.
A vote for either of these two unprincipled parties would do nothing to change this situation.
I can't, therefore, do anything about the situation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I can only support a party which maintains the promise that this situation will not continue in Scotland.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't often feel moved to criticise the beliefs of others, but to support the shafting of the ordinary people of the rUK in order to grab more of the goodies for one's own isn't  a particularly Christian attitude.

Nor is it a particularly socialist or left of centre attitude, and I thought AM was left of centre in his politics. Just goes to show how nationalism can distort priorities etc.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly, PD, because in every other way AM is the gentlest, humblest kind of Christian. I hadn't really appreciated until recently just how toxic nationalism can be to good people.

I don't see any prospects of either Labour or Tory parties ending the austerity cuts - both have pledged to continue them.
That's why I would never contemplate voting for them: I know of too many disabled people north and south of the border whose lives have been made miserable, limited and, in some documented cases, terminated by these inhuman policies.
A vote for either of these two unprincipled parties would do nothing to change this situation.
I can't, therefore, do anything about the situation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I can only support a party which maintains the promise that this situation will not continue in Scotland.

our fundamental problem AM is that you equate nationalism with some particular brand of politics that you like. Nationalism is merely the view that people within some arbitrary line drawn on a map should see their country (defined by that arbitrary line) as having primacy within the hierarchical series of regions, themselves all based on arbitrary lines drawn on maps (e.g. Nithsdale, Dumfries & Galloway, Scotland, UK, EU) it in no way defines a type of politics.

If you belief in democracy within your precious independent Scotland (were that to occur) there is nothing that prevents the Scots people voting in a right wing party bent on austerity, shrinking the state etc etc. I can happen, and indeed has done in the past, where in the mid 20thC Scotland voted Tory rather than Labour.

It is my strong opinion that had Scotland voted for independence last September (fortunately they dodged the bullet) given the massive economic problems they would have had with an economy over-reliant on oil and oil prices dropping through the floor that there would be a significant shift to the right, as an independent government would have to raise the taxes rather than just spend them, as they do now.

[Rhiannon]

The Brent crude oil price isn't going to recover to three figures for years, if ever. A fiscally independent Scotland would have austerity to match or exceed that of Greece.

[Anchorman]

The Brent crude oil price isn't going to recover to three figures for years, if ever. A fiscally independent Scotland would have austerity to match or exceed that of Greece.

Eh?
Oil is a bonus, not a necessity.
Mind you, we'd have been a whole lot better off if the Westminster rabble had not squandered the income over the last three decades.
As per usual.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Brent crude oil price isn't going to recover to three figures for years, if ever. A fiscally independent Scotland would have austerity to match or exceed that of Greece.

Eh?
Oil is a bonus, not a necessity.
Mind you, we'd have been a whole lot better off if the Westminster rabble had not squandered the income over the last three decades.
As per usual.

Rubbish - oil and gas revenues account for just shy of one quarter of GPD in Scotland. A quarter of your GDP is never 'a bonus' - it is a necessity. And reliance on one, very volatile sector for such a large part of your economy is highly risky.

Remember that the SNP were claiming that oil prices would be about $110 a barrel or more. Brent crude is currently $60 a barrel and fell below $50 last month.

If oil and gas are a small proportion of your economy such fluctuations can easily be death with elsewhere, but when they account for over 20%, you've got a big problem.

[ProfessorDavey]

The Brent crude oil price isn't going to recover to three figures for years, if ever. A fiscally independent Scotland would have austerity to match or exceed that of Greece.

Not sure its problems would be of the scale of Greece but they would be very significant.

And the Scottish people have got used to spending per person way above average UK levels. Were they to have to pay for that themselves they would have to ask some very challenging questions, because the finances simply don't work. So with the huge crash in oil prices they'd need to fill the black hole somehow, either by austerity and very major cuts in public spending, or by raising taxes elsewhere in the economy, or borrowing (which as a new country with no track record would be much more costly that currently in the UK). None of those choices are ones that would be popular with the electorate.

[jakswan]

I'm a nationalist.
That means I put my nation first - before a corrupt undemocratic mess in Westminster.

The nation of the UK or just part of the UK?

[JP]

The SNP are in a very enviable position for a political party. They have the ability to claim the “good” things for themselves and blame somebody else for the “bad” things.

Oh for a yes vote. It would have been very, very interesting to see how they would keep everything “free”, funded as it is now, plus the extra they would need to promote everything they promised to reach their socialist land of milk and honey.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm a nationalist.
That means I put my nation first - before a corrupt undemocratic mess in Westminster.

The nation of the UK or just part of the UK?

A nation within a nation perhaps.

Anyone who puts a 'nation' first - i.e. an area of land or territory defined by an arbitrary line of a map, rather than putting people first is getting their priorities seriously the wrong way up.

[Anchorman]

I'm a nationalist.
That means I put my nation first - before a corrupt undemocratic mess in Westminster.

The nation of the UK or just part of the UK?

A nation within a nation perhaps.

Anyone who puts a 'nation' first - i.e. an area of land or territory defined by an arbitrary line of a map, rather than putting people first is getting their priorities seriously the wrong way up.

Since the nation comprises the community of the realm of Scotland, what's your point?
The Scottish people are the Scottish nation - not some line on the map.
Those people are Scots regardless of race, creed or ethnic origin.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm a nationalist.
That means I put my nation first - before a corrupt undemocratic mess in Westminster.

The nation of the UK or just part of the UK?

A nation within a nation perhaps.

Anyone who puts a 'nation' first - i.e. an area of land or territory defined by an arbitrary line of a map, rather than putting people first is getting their priorities seriously the wrong way up.

Since the nation comprises the community of the realm of Scotland, what's your point?
The Scottish people are the Scottish nation - not some line on the map.
Those people are Scots regardless of race, creed or ethnic origin.

Defined by a line of a map.

You can't have it both ways AM - you cannot detach yourself from the deeply nasty notion of nationality defined by ancestry, which of course really means race and ethnic origin etc. Yet also try to detach yourself from the notion of a nation defined by a line of a map.

So lets test this one out. My Dad lived in Dumfries when he died and had done for over 20 years. He was born in England and hadn't lived in Scotland prior to 1989. During that 20-odd years he contributed greatly to his local community in all sorts of ways. So much so that it was standing room only at his funeral. Is he part of your 'Scottish nation, or not'.

[Gonnagle]

Dear ProfDavey,

As a NO voter I have never thought for one minute that Scotland could not go it alone, it certainly has the resources oil being just one of them.

For me it was never a question of could we, it was and still remains should we and for the same reasons you have listed.

The SNP would have had to do some serious sums after the price of oil dropped but oil is just one of Scotland's many resources.

Gonnagle.

[Anchorman]

I'm a nationalist.
That means I put my nation first - before a corrupt undemocratic mess in Westminster.

The nation of the UK or just part of the UK?

A nation within a nation perhaps.

Anyone who puts a 'nation' first - i.e. an area of land or territory defined by an arbitrary line of a map, rather than putting people first is getting their priorities seriously the wrong way up.

Since the nation comprises the community of the realm of Scotland, what's your point?
The Scottish people are the Scottish nation - not some line on the map.
Those people are Scots regardless of race, creed or ethnic origin.

Defined by a line of a map.

You can't have it both ways AM - you cannot detach yourself from the deeply nasty notion of nationality defined by ancestry, which of course really means race and ethnic origin etc. Yet also try to detach yourself from the notion of a nation defined by a line of a map.

So lets test this one out. My Dad lived in Dumfries when he died and had done for over 20 years. He was born in England and hadn't lived in Scotland prior to 1989. During that 20-odd years he contributed greatly to his local community in all sorts of ways. So much so that it was standing room only at his funeral. Is he part of your 'Scottish nation, or not'.

-
Anyone who lives and isregistered to vote in the territory of Scotland has the right to bee Scots.
Should someon born and bred in Scotland or born of Scots parantage wish to claim Scottish nationality when we regain our status as an independent nation, they may do so, in the same way as someone seeking to become subjects of the outmoded farce of the united 'Kingdom'.

[ProfessorDavey]

Anyone who lives and isregistered to vote in the territory of Scotland has the right to bee Scots.

So my Dad was part of your 'nation' yet had he decided to retire to Carlisle just 25 miles down the road he wouldn't have been. Yet you claim that your nation isn't defined by an arbitrary line drawn on a map. You can't have it both ways - either he isn't 'Scottish' in your view (e.g. because he has no scottish heritage) or he is (which is what you seem to imply) in which case that is based on a line on the map.

And more to the point, in your world of your 'Nation first' can you explain to me why on earth is my Dad somehow more important if he lives in Dumfries than if he lives in Carlisle. How can that possibly be justified - he is the same person.

[Rhiannon]

Dear ProfDavey,

As a NO voter I have never thought for one minute that Scotland could not go it alone, it certainly has the resources oil being just one of them.

For me it was never a question of could we, it was and still remains should we and for the same reasons you have listed.

The SNP would have had to do some serious sums after the price of oil dropped but oil is just one of Scotland's many resources.

Gonnagle.

Scotland has weathered the drop in oil price because it has been cushioned from the fall by the rUK. Yes, Scotland could go it alone but at a considerable drop in quality of life and volatility in its economy - and that's assuming the problems of currency union (or not) could be wished away.

[ProfessorDavey]

Dear ProfDavey,

As a NO voter I have never thought for one minute that Scotland could not go it alone, it certainly has the resources oil being just one of them.

For me it was never a question of could we, it was and still remains should we and for the same reasons you have listed.

The SNP would have had to do some serious sums after the price of oil dropped but oil is just one of Scotland's many resources.

Gonnagle.

Scotland has weathered the drop in oil price because it has been cushioned from the fall by the rUK. Yes, Scotland could go it alone but at a considerable drop in quality of life and volatility in its economy - and that's assuming the problems of currency union (or not) could be wished away.

That's exactly right.

There is a big risk if your economy is so dependent on a single sector. The Norwegians dealt with this issue decades ago by putting aside a fund from their oil to help deal with peaks and troughs in the volatile price fluctuations. But Scotland doesn't have this and it would take years (and also require the price to be high) to build up an appropriate fund.

No doubt AM will start ranting on at Westminster saying they should have done this too decades ago. But actually because the UK was so much larger as an economy than Norway with oil a much, much smaller proportion there wasn't really the need, or the point.

[richie]

there are two ways generally to seen as a certain nationality

a) You are either born in a country

b) You are naturalised

In the case of your father Prof, he was born an Englishman by your example, but became a naturalised Scot based on 20 years residency.

Had he retired south of the border however, he would cease to be Scottish as he was Scottish by naturalisation. Had he been born in Scotland he would remain Scottish wherever he lived.

This rationale is not limited to use by 'nationalists' but as far as I can see in general use by governments around the world

[ProfessorDavey]

there are two ways generally to seen as a certain nationality

a) You are either born in a country

b) You are naturalised

In the case of your father Prof, he was born an Englishman by your example, but became a naturalised Scot based on 20 years residency.

Had he retired south of the border however, he would cease to be Scottish as he was Scottish by naturalisation. Had he been born in Scotland he would remain Scottish wherever he lived.

This rationale is not limited to use by 'nationalists' but as far as I can see in general use by governments around the world

The differences is that nationalists see this as being a matter or principle - remember AM's I put my nation first mantra. Non nationalists see it as merely a matter of practicality. That's the big difference.

[wigginhall]

I'm not sure that nationalism is always nasty.  For example, in a colonial situation, surely it's right that the subordinate nation struggles to be free.   An obvious example - Ireland.   However, Scotland is not a colony;  and obviously, the national movement does not solve economic and social problems in itself, as in fact, Ireland discovered.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not sure that nationalism is always nasty.  For example, in a colonial situation, surely it's right that the subordinate nation struggles to be free.   An obvious example - Ireland.   However, Scotland is not a colony;  and obviously, the national movement does not solve economic and social problems in itself, as in fact, Ireland discovered.

But you can struggle to be free of a dominating force (whether from outside, or just as likely a totalitarian regime internally) without resorting to nationalism.

Nationalism is all about dividing the world up - about us and them, those that fit and those that don't. That's why I cannot stand it. And there is the added problem that as soon as you create a new 'smaller nation' parts of that new nation will see themselves as not being part of it, not having their issues addressed etc, etc and so the divisions go on. Were Scotland to have become independent, how long would it be before people in Dumfries or in Shetland started grumbling about the elite in Edinburgh in exactly the same fashion as the Scots nats do now about Westminster. And of course both Dumfries and Shetland have a history that involves not being in Scotland! Indeed Shetland has spent considerably more of its history as part of the UK than it ever did as part of an independent Scotland, and not far off the same for Galloway.

[King Oberon]

Prof are you suggesting that the soviet block countries should have just stayed with Russia just so they don't upset someone, might be an extreme example but I'm sure they are in the main happier governing themselves.

Here's a list of countries and when they declared independence...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_date_of_formation

As wiggs said not all wish for independence is nasty, Quebec from Canada is another, while not all the country wanted it I don't see why it was a bad thing TO want it or why you should be tagged as some sort of crazy right winger if you do.

You have to take it on a country by country basis and I know it's a popular misconception that if you support the SNP that somehow you hate the English or the UK but the ones I meet don't they just want a chance to govern Scotland themselves for several reasons........

The UK is made up of 4 different countries but governed in one who also decide WHO the government is (due to population size), it's hard to accept for some of us i'm afraid hence the urge for independence it's been that way far too long.

Another reason is because a lot of people all over the country think that the government is corrupt, lining their own pockets and London-centric perhaps you don't agree but many do.

That's only 2 off the top of my head and that's mainly why the SNP are doing well. I've met a few people who voted no and have regrets but I haven't met anyone who voted yes who would change their vote, those no voters got what they wanted in terms of staying in the UK but seem less that pleased that the momentum for independence didn't go away 

Classic careful what you wish for.. TORY/UKIP or Lab/SNP what a choice 

[ProfessorDavey]

Another reason is because a lot of people all over the country think that the government is corrupt, lining their own pockets and London-centric perhaps you don't agree but many do.

And has it not occurred to you that were Scotland to gain independence that in no time at all a lot of people all over the (new) country would think that the government is corrupt, lining their own pockets and Edinburgh-centric (or certainly central-belt centric).

There is no magic wand which will miraculously ensure that the criticisms of the Westminster government won't simply be recreated for an independent Holyrood government.

Indeed this is already a feature of devolved government, certainly in Wales. There are plenty of people in Wales, particularly outside the South Eastern part who see the Welsh government as out of touch, detached and Cardiff-centric.