Jump to content

shull

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

The initiation of the Union and it bailing Scotland out of bankruptcy was in answer to your earlier statement...

"You to suggest that Scotland has “benefitted” from the union. I believe the opposite it true. I believe the union has benefitted from Scotland. Just another thing we disagree on that neither of us would be able to prove either way. "

I was simply proving (in only one of the ways) that it could be proved that Scotland HAS indeed benefited.  It wasn't the best I've got, since you asked - just the initial and most salient fact.

All unions flourish from the mere fact of combining resources and talents.  Undeniably, England ( along with the other 3 countries) has also benefited.

 

"I pay zero heed to the teachings of Christ (I am not religious in the slightest) nor the teachings of pontificating scholars AKA "philosophers". I make my own mind up about things. I listen to the "teachings" of everyday people. Even you Antrin!"

ALL of our ideas and philosophies are erected on the ashes of those who thought before us.  It doesn't matter if you think you pay zero heed or not - subconsciously you ARE drawing on the knowledge of those you're dismissing.  Even your Nationalist ideas were espoused by pontificating scholars. (Though I personally believe those scholars to have been universally arsewipes.)

Also...   a bit dismissive that last wee throwaway slag... surely?  :)

"... everyday people.  Even you antrin!"

Moi?  "everyday"?  surely, surely not!

 

And, finally...

"How on earth can the desire for Scotland to determine it's own future, be skewed to mean we are demarcating against the nationality of others? "

Obviously countless thousands of people Scots, English, Welsh and Ulsterfolk are very proud and  happy to  declare themselves as British.  Nationalists wish to deny them of that ongoing pride, pleasure and sense of something they believe can be and is a force for good.  (despite current Tory misrule)  Scottish Nationalists are determined to wipe and deny British nationality, that  round which many Scots (and others) have built their self-identity.  It's a big ask - small wonder that there is resentment from people with little else in their lives about which to feel happy and content.

I'm a Scots Londoner so that "British feeling" is secondary/insignificant for me.  There is nowhere in the "Uk more open to other nationalities, races and creed's ".  

'That London' should be the model on which would-be separatists should base their ideas, instead of knocking it.  It is multicultural, diverse and gloriously unremarkable  and unremarking on that incredible matter of fact of our London lives.

Carping on about "people down there" - in London and in the south/south east is missing your target.  It's Capitalists, the Tory Party and brexiteers - who were mainly disenchanted poor people from the provinces, easily conned by glib promises.

It's may be a shite state of affairs but we should deal with it rationally and not running away from the problems.  They won't vanish.  There's no easy fix and blaming others seldom works well - and never works in the long term..

 

I seriously hope this clarifies my thinking a bit.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

It may surprise you to know that at the age of 15 I joined the Young Socialist Party and at the age of 18 joined the Communist Party (Govan branch). I then moved to Jersey and (in my opinion) grew up.

Naw.  Disnae surprise me.

@Desperately Seeking Susans was chair of Paisley YS for years (till he grew too auld, I guess... :unsure: )

Tragically he nowadays flirts with scottish nationalism. 

In his case, I suspect dementia...   :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, antrin said:

The initiation of the Union and it bailing Scotland out of bankruptcy was in answer to your earlier statement...

"You to suggest that Scotland has “benefitted” from the union. I believe the opposite it true. I believe the union has benefitted from Scotland. Just another thing we disagree on that neither of us would be able to prove either way. "

I was simply proving (in only one of the ways) that it could be proved that Scotland HAS indeed benefited.  It wasn't the best I've got, since you asked - just the initial and most salient fact.

All unions flourish from the mere fact of combining resources and talents.  Undeniably, England ( along with the other 3 countries) has also benefited.

 

"I pay zero heed to the teachings of Christ (I am not religious in the slightest) nor the teachings of pontificating scholars AKA "philosophers". I make my own mind up about things. I listen to the "teachings" of everyday people. Even you Antrin!"

ALL of our ideas and philosophies are erected on the ashes of those who thought before us.  It doesn't matter if you think you pay zero heed or not - subconsciously you ARE drawing on the knowledge of those you're dismissing.  Even your Nationalist ideas were espoused by pontificating scholars. (Though I personally believe those scholars to have been universally arsewipes.)

Also...   a bit dismissive that last wee throwaway slag... surely?  :)

"... everyday people.  Even you antrin!"

Moi?  "everyday"?  surely, surely not!

 

And, finally...

"How on earth can the desire for Scotland to determine it's own future, be skewed to mean we are demarcating against the nationality of others? "

Obviously countless thousands of people Scots, English, Welsh and Ulsterfolk are very proud and  happy to  declare themselves as British.  Nationalists wish to deny them of that ongoing pride, pleasure and sense of something they believe can be and is a force for good.  (despite current Tory misrule)  Scottish Nationalists are determined to wipe and deny British nationality, that  round which many Scots (and others) have built their self-identity.  It's a big ask - small wonder that there is resentment from people with little else in their lives about which to feel happy and content.

I'm a Scots Londoner so that "British feeling" is secondary/insignificant for me.  There is nowhere in the "Uk more open to other nationalities, races and creed's ".  

'That London' should be the model on which would-be separatists should base their ideas, instead of knocking it.  It is multicultural, diverse and gloriously unremarkable  and unremarking on that incredible matter of fact of our London lives.

Carping on about "people down there" - in London and in the south/south east is missing your target.  It's Capitalists, the Tory Party and brexiteers - who were mainly disenchanted poor people from the provinces, easily conned by glib promises.

It's may be a shite state of affairs but we should deal with it rationally and not running away from the problems.  They won't vanish.  There's no easy fix and blaming others seldom works well - and never works in the long term..

 

I seriously hope this clarifies my thinking a bit.  :)

I tell you what it clarifies, that you’re as good at using the sub quote tool as me. 🤣.

As for your response, I was reading it intently until you used the word separatists. I stopped reading then and heaved a very heavy sigh. 
 

Edited only to add. Being British and the United Kingdom are not the same thing. People in an independent Scotland would still be British if they do chose to be. Great Britain is not a Sovereign nation. The United Kingdom is. 

Edited by TPAFKA Jersey 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Ordinarily I’d hear you loud and clear Oaky and I’d go as far as saying I’d begrudgingly agree with you. However, I struggle to get past the fact that the 2014 No vote was founded on at worst barefaced lies or at best false promises. Not just wee white lies either. Big whopping game changers. How can that vote be held up to scrutiny when so many (particularly swithering voters who need guidance) were so shamelessly misled. 
Realistically, even if one was called tomorrow it would be unlikely to be anytime soon. Let’s call it 2024. 10 years seems like a nice round number to me. 

2024 is on the low end of what I think we should be looking at but that might actually be something I could support personally.

Apart from anything else it gives the Brexit and covid situations a chance to settle down. I think we could all do with a break from major upheaval for a couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Furlough scheme extended till September, jeezo, what a cost.

I hope when it’s time for us all to contribute to paying it back, people’s accept this is an acceptable necessity.

Covid-19 isn’t free, it comes with huge personal cost to families & loved ones and of course sadly all that have died linked to Covid-19.

I will have no complaint when we are presented with our share of the bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scott-Leeds said:


I hope when it’s time for us all to contribute to paying it back, people’s accept this is an acceptable necessity.

Covid-19 isn’t free, it comes with huge personal cost to families & loved ones and of course sadly all that have died linked to Covid-19.

I will have no complaint when we are presented with our share of the bill.

Most sensible people will be the same, however I could name a few on here who will slip straight into the blame game and name calling. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incidentally, will Scotlands first minister be keeping her job ?

I’ve genuinely not followed this story.

So just wondering is her job at risk of this enquiry ?
If it was a boxing match the ref would have warned Fraser and Baillie.... for not landing a punch. At the end the Chairperson had to stop her deputy from embarrassing herself any further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

If it was a boxing match the ref would have warned Fraser and Baillie.... for not landing a punch. At the end the Chairperson had to stop her deputy from embarrassing herself any further. emoji1787.png

Not quite the whole story.

Wee Nicky had plenty of uncomfortable moments, looked very uneasy at times when pressed. 

Saying that, as I've said, 8 hours, not entirely fair IMO, to put one person under scrutiny for that period of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

Not quite the whole story.

Wee Nicky had plenty of uncomfortable moments, looked very uneasy at times when pressed. 

Saying that, as I've said, 8 hours, not entirely fair IMO, to put one person under scrutiny for that period of time. 

Overall I thought she was magnificent. Full of admiration for her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Overall I thought she was magnificent. Full of admiration for her. 

You're a captive audience TBH but, the short clips I've seen she was mixed, not easy conditions. 

Hey, it's part of the job, I've said for a while I hope this isn't the end, although that all depends on the next few days/weeks.

PS I should add Salmond, IMO, came across as very assured overall in the few clips I watched.

Edited by faraway saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a slavering incoherent mess. Nicola did well to provide any sort of response other than “I’m sorry could you repeat that in English?”.

https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/committee-on-the-scottish-government-handling-of-harassment-complaints-march-3-2021?clip_start=16:56:30&clip_end=17:09:00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Scott-Leeds said:

Incidentally, will Scotlands first minister be keeping her job ?

I’ve genuinely not followed this story.

So just wondering is her job at risk of this enquiry ?

she could / should end up in jail............ mind you so should a hell of a lot more too

Edited by jaybee
second thoughts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
she could / should end up in jail............ mind you so should a hell of a lot more too

Cheers, I honestly haven’t read/watched this story, however It was on the news banner all yesterday.

I wasn’t sure if her job is genuinely at risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incidentally, will Scotlands first minister be keeping her job ?

I’ve genuinely not followed this story.

So just wondering is her job at risk of this enquiry ?
Here's a summary of the current state of play by Another Angry Voice

Priti Patel sacked for breaching the ministerial code by holding treasonous secret meetings with foreign state officials, aimed at siphoning off the UK aid budget into their illegally occupied territories.

Tories: Let's bring her back into government, and put her in charge of the Home Office, that'll be good for a laugh.

Tory Housing Minister Robert Jenrick breaches the ministerial code (and the law) by colluding with a property developer diddle £40 million off one of Britain's most deprived local councils.

Tories: This is all a fuss over nothing. £40 million is mere pocket change to people like us. He can stay in his job.

Tory Prime Minister Boris Johnson unlawfully suspends parliament to evade democratic scrutiny of his shambolic Brexit bodge job, then bare-faced lies to the entire nation that he's not creating a regulatory border between Northern Ireland and mainland Britain, when that's precisely what he did do.

Tories: This is all above board, and Boris is doing a fantastic job

Priti Patel is found to have breached the ministerial code again, this time by savagely bullying her subordinates to such an extent that one of them was reduced to contemplating suicide, and another highly respected civil servant quit his job claiming constructive dismissal.

Tories: We must "form a square" around Priti. She will not be held to account over this.

Tory government ministers repeatedly and egregiously breach the ministerial code by briefing major policy announcements to their chums in the corporate media, instead of announcing them in parliament, as stipulated in section 9.1 ("the most important
announcements of Government policy should be made in
the first instance, in Parliament").

Tories: Why on earth would we announce things in parliament, where opposition politicians could potentially hold us to account, when we're guaranteed the easiest possible ride whenever we leak the plans to friendly hacks in the right-wing propaganda rags?

Tory Health Secretary Matt Hancock uses the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse to launch an absolute orgy of corruption, handing out £billions in untendered contracts to his spivvy mates, tax-dodgers, scammers, empty shell companies with no employees and no experience of medical procurement, and even his former pub landlord. Furthermore he's found to have acted unlawfully by keeping the details of these ridiculously dodgy untendered contracts secret.

Tories: This is so unfair, all the corruption and lawlessness we engaged in was necessary because our policy of deliberately allowing the virus to spread in the crucial early stages created absolute pandemonium!

🟠 SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon is accused of breaching the ministerial code over her handling of the false accusations against former SNP leader Alex Salmond.

Tories: This is an absolute disgrace, Sturgeon must resign!

I've seen reports that the SNP picked up another 7,000 new members yesterday on the back of this farce, so, to answer your question, there's not a chance she'll lose her job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:

Here's a summary of the current state of play by Another Angry Voice

emoji838.png Priti Patel sacked for breaching the ministerial code by holding treasonous secret meetings with foreign state officials, aimed at siphoning off the UK aid budget into their illegally occupied territories.

Tories: Let's bring her back into government, and put her in charge of the Home Office, that'll be good for a laugh.

emoji838.png Tory Housing Minister Robert Jenrick breaches the ministerial code (and the law) by colluding with a property developer diddle £40 million off one of Britain's most deprived local councils.

Tories: This is all a fuss over nothing. £40 million is mere pocket change to people like us. He can stay in his job.

emoji838.png Tory Prime Minister Boris Johnson unlawfully suspends parliament to evade democratic scrutiny of his shambolic Brexit bodge job, then bare-faced lies to the entire nation that he's not creating a regulatory border between Northern Ireland and mainland Britain, when that's precisely what he did do.

Tories: This is all above board, and Boris is doing a fantastic job

emoji838.png Priti Patel is found to have breached the ministerial code again, this time by savagely bullying her subordinates to such an extent that one of them was reduced to contemplating suicide, and another highly respected civil servant quit his job claiming constructive dismissal.

Tories: We must "form a square" around Priti. She will not be held to account over this.

emoji838.png Tory government ministers repeatedly and egregiously breach the ministerial code by briefing major policy announcements to their chums in the corporate media, instead of announcing them in parliament, as stipulated in section 9.1 ("the most important
announcements of Government policy should be made in
the first instance, in Parliament").

Tories: Why on earth would we announce things in parliament, where opposition politicians could potentially hold us to account, when we're guaranteed the easiest possible ride whenever we leak the plans to friendly hacks in the right-wing propaganda rags?

emoji838.png Tory Health Secretary Matt Hancock uses the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse to launch an absolute orgy of corruption, handing out £billions in untendered contracts to his spivvy mates, tax-dodgers, scammers, empty shell companies with no employees and no experience of medical procurement, and even his former pub landlord. Furthermore he's found to have acted unlawfully by keeping the details of these ridiculously dodgy untendered contracts secret.

Tories: This is so unfair, all the corruption and lawlessness we engaged in was necessary because our policy of deliberately allowing the virus to spread in the crucial early stages created absolute pandemonium!

🟠 SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon is accused of breaching the ministerial code over her handling of the false accusations against former SNP leader Alex Salmond.

Tories: This is an absolute disgrace, Sturgeon must resign!

I've seen reports that the SNP picked up another 7,000 new members yesterday on the back of this farce, so, to answer your question, there's not a chance she'll lose her job.

I really admire your (or is it off the internet?)  long angry whataboutery comparison of the things done by different folk in different organisations.  They ARE naughty!

 

Now... closer to home... any chance that you (or anyBuddie else?) can apply such analytical rigour to addressing my genuine question from yesterday morning, below?

McLeish was, after all, one of Sturgeon's predecessors in that job.. For me he was there one minute, gone the next?

 (I really dunno wot McLeish did that was comparitively naughty)

On 3/3/2021 at 8:16 AM, antrin said:


I vaguely recall Henry McLeish resigning when he was leader - for some obscurereason.  So such a tragedy wouldn't be unusual in Scottish politics.  Genuine question - had his 'crimes' been as heinous as Sturgeon's are being portrayed?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites





 I really admire your (or is it off the internet?)  long angry whataboutery comparison of the things done by different folk in different organisations.  They ARE naughty!

Now... closer to home... any chance that you (or anyBuddie else?) can apply such analytical rigour to addressing my genuine question from yesterday morning, below?
McLeish was, after all, one of Sturgeon's predecessors in that job.. For me he was there one minute, gone the next?
 (I really dunno wot McLeish did that was comparitively naughty)



Of course it's off the Internet, didn't you read the credit at the beginning? It's from an English socialist who understands and is supportive of what Scotland is trying to do. As are many other English people barring the odd exception.

To answer your question (and again it's unashamedly off the Internet and took me around 30s to find), "McLeish resigned as First Minister in November 2001, amid a scandal involving allegations he sub let part of his tax subsidised Westminster constituency office without it having been registered in the register of interests kept in the Parliamentary office. The press called the affair Officegate."

So not relevant to the FM's case whereas those I quoted are direct comparisons.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:




 

 


Of course it's off the Internet, didn't you read the credit at the beginning? 

er... I actually thought you were asserting how angry you were to differentiate yourself from all the other utterly rational and calm snp supporters.  :)

You didn't mention internet, nor any other sources for the words that followed, so I gave you credit.

To answer your question (and again it's unashamedly off the Internet and took me around 30s to find), "McLeish resigned as First Minister in November 2001, amid a scandal involving allegations he sub let part of his tax subsidised Westminster constituency office without it having been registered in the register of interests kept in the Parliamentary office. The press called the affair Officegate."

So not relevant to the FM's case whereas those I quoted are direct comparisons.  Of people NOT in the same job and in different organisations, unlike McLeish...?

 

Ta. 

So only relevant to the Sturgeon case in that he resigned due to allegations of apparently minor form-filling misdemeanours? Is that right?  Was he ever shown to be guilty or did he just resign as he believed that to be the honourable thing to do?

I'll look for Officegate on the internet, but if you'd offered a link...?


 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to reply coherently (insert comment here) on the phone when you comment in my quoted post like that but I'll try.

"Of people NOT in the same job and in different organisations, unlike McLeish...?

Ta."

Of people who are UK government ministers just like the FM, the UK that Scotland is still (for now) a part of so answerable to. Or do you mean that different standards should apply in the two governments?

 
" So only relevant to the Sturgeon case in that he resigned due to allegations of apparently minor form-filling misdemeanours? Is that right?  Was he ever shown to be guilty or did he just resign as he believed that to be the honourable thing to do?
I'll look for Officegate on the internet, but if you'd offered a link...?"

I have no idea if he was guilty or not but he obviously felt he needed to go, fair play to him for that. The FM has clearly and lucidly explained that she is not guilty of any misdemeanour - 8 hours - so doesn't feel any need to resign. Nor do the reported 7,000 new members or the existing members. And May's election will show whether or not the majority verdict is the same (spoiler - it will be).





Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:

Difficult to reply coherently (insert comment here) on the phone when you comment in my quoted post like that but I'll try.

"Of people NOT in the same job and in different organisations, unlike McLeish...?

Ta."

Of people who are UK government ministers just like the FM, the UK that Scotland is still (for now) a part of so answerable to. Or do you mean that different standards should apply in the two governments?

 

I was wondering - I still am - as to why there should be such unrelenting whataboutery, comparing Sturgeon's situation with that of the Tory denigrates in London, not Scotland (and this matter is a determinedly Scottish affair!), whereas I suspected there is a perfectly good - no, better - example nearer to home.

And having read a little more about it, it seems that the holier-than-thou SNP were more than complicit in hounding McLeish (and his wife) so that he did the honourable thing and left office as his personal life was becoming bigger than the job, itself.

I've always disliked Salmond (no relation, I hope?) but considered Sturgeon to be a very able politician and probably more trustworthy than usual.  (A bit like I kinda thought McLeish was.)

SNP demanded high standards and now don't want to uphold them, it appears to me - a humble outsider.  :)

 

 

I admire your unwavering belief in the "reported" 10 million new members that this debacle has generated...   :rolleyes:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...