World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[ded srs]

I also agree that the thread title should be changed since we are now talking about Ukrainian issues.

I also predict that there could be major unrest later this year in the UK. There are people, just like myself, who will not accept a loss in the Scottish independence referendum. I'm resigning from my job this summer and I will travel home to be there on the 18th of September, 2014. Even though I am denied the right to vote, I will do my best to influence others to vote yes. There's no turning back now.

All I want is to live in a real democracy. I'm tired of being held back by Westminster. They are literally ruining my life. I only have a real future under an independent Scotland.

Though I'm American who has no clue about the politics of your country, I always thought it'd be cool to say one day that Scotland is independent for the first time in like forever. But I guess that's the history geek in me talking.

[RCBH928]

There is something I still couldn't figure it out about democracy. What happens when you have a situation like that it is going now in Kiev, where the government kill its own people or work against the people's will (isn't that exactly anti-democracy?)
.

I'm not sure about Canada or France, which I believe are socialist democracies, but the US is not a true democracy, it is a democratic republic, with a system of checks and balances that ideally should keep things from that like happening, although it is very possible that the government could decide to whatever they wish and oppress us. I do think it would be interesting to see in somewhere like the US, where firearms are so much more readily available to the public.

In a true democracy, the people are the government, so something like this technically couldn't happen- if it did, it would no longer be a democracy.

I don't know how many types of democracies are out there, but to me a democracy is one thing, the government does what the people want. If that is not happening, then it might as well be called a dictatorship because he who is more powerful will do what he pleases. A good example of this is the current privacy issue, which the government monitors the people and people are very upset about it but they still force it upon them.

[Sload Soap]

There's no such thing as Scottish and English citizens. I can't vote because I don't currently live in Scotland. That is fair enough.

The vote is only open to residents of Scotland. Anyone who currently lives in Scotland legally, whether you are Scottish or Somali, then you have the right to vote.

Overseas Scots are denied the vote. That includes Scots living in other parts of the UK.

I know. I asked because if you arrive home early enough you should be able to register and then vote if it means so much.

Personally, I think it would be a bad move for Scotland to go independent in the long run. I don't think north sea oil is enough to keep the nation going. That Salmond assumed they'd get to keep the pound shows a laughable amount of oversight. There are a few important EU nations, Spain and France, who would force Scotland to reapply to be a member state, a lengthy procedure. In fact Spain would probably never vote for Scotland to enter for obvious reasons, so that's another life-line cut. No Ireland style bailouts if it goes tits up.

It seems though that NO is the answer, for the time being anyway. I understand the grievances towards the current and former governments, but full independence does not seem the answer. Kicking the Tories out and more devolution, maybe.

[Forlorn Drifter]

I don't know how many types of democracies are out there, but to me a democracy is one thing, the government does what the people want. If that is not happening, then it might as well be called a dictatorship because he who is more powerful will do what he pleases. A good example of this is the current privacy issue, which the government monitors the people and people are very upset about it but they still force it upon them.

Its important to understand that these are not pure democracies. In a true, pure democracy, all those that are able to vote cast their vote on every issue. Want to raise taxes? Take a vote. Want to ban guns? Take a vote. Want to go to war? Take a vote. Want to change the turn lane on a road? Take a vote.

I don't really think there has ever been a true, full blown democracy. I imagine the Greek system was the closest, but I can't say for sure off the top of my head. The problem arises that someone has to enforce all the laws, and someone has to make sure that everything goes as it was decided. That's the problem with something like communism, which could work in an ideal environment, but then enforcement becomes a problem. If everyone is equal, then what allows someone to tell me how things should be or how they should go? If everyone is equal, then someone with a view in the minority is just as important and correct as someone with a majority view. What do you do in that case?

A government essentially has to be had, unless you get down to something like a tribal level, which we have far surpassed. It essentially breaks down that you just have to hope that something doesn't become a dictatorship, and work to keep that from happening by balancing power as best as can be done, which is a near impossible feat.

[RCBH928]

You can't vote on every single thing, but I think you should be able to vote on bigger things. In the case of the USA I think stuff like invading Iraq, invading Afghanistan, privacy, should be voted on because its a huge deal.

I heard there were riots against the Vietnam war back then, if it was a democracy then people should vote for what they want, but it looks like some one else is calling the shots.

The way I see it is that no matter what system you have, it is always going to be the rich who is in power in the long run. And if I learned anything from this world, its that the rich are usually the corrupt bad people. I am not a communist but many, if not most, rich people are sleazy and there are always some shady back-story on how they acquired their wealth. In the book Freakonomics, it states that top tier managers stole more bagels than lower managers making the author conclude that its not because they see bagel prices too low for them to consider it a crime not to pay for them, but its because they reached their high positions by being corrupt in the first place and if they can get away with stealing a bagel they will.

I read in the media that multi-billion dollar corporations are the ones who control American politics but I can not comment on that if its true or not.

[Aramonde]

I read in the media that multi-billion dollar corporations are the ones who control American politics but I can not comment on that if its true or not.

^ This right here, they do own the country.

[MrPopo]

I read in the media that multi-billion dollar corporations are the ones who control American politics but I can not comment on that if its true or not.

^ This right here, they do own the country.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Have you met the average American? Do you really want him making decisions on ANYTHING? At least multi-billion dollar corporations have demonstrated enough intelligence to turn a profit.

[Sload Soap]

That map would indicate to me that the majority of people in Scotland actually vote Labour, with a few of the more rural areas going for the SNP in a general election. In fact there are more Lib Dem's than SNP. (Labour in red, conservative in blue, Liberals in orange and SNP in yellow for those who don't know.)



On the oil, I would think that like Norway, Scotland would have to have some state ownership of fields and refineries to be fiscally viable especially when considering that iScotland would presumably take on a slice of the UK's debt (that slice is estimated to be about 110 billion quid). However Alex Salmond has said he would just continue to gain revenue from oil via taxation. That would not be enough at current rates from what I gather.

Scotland does have other avenues for revenue I agree, but enough to keep the NHS and university tuition free? I don't know if there are enough drunken japanese businessmen to keep Scotland afloat on whisky and tourism.

I'm not going to argue on the pound as I don't have the required economics degree. However I was just trying to point out that an amount of Salmond'd White Paper is based on assumption, not fact.

The thing with the EU to consider is you don't want to start off on their bad side. Aside from the US and UK, almost all of Scotland's exports go to EU member states. Spanish fishing boats would be the least of Scotland's european concern.

I like Scotland, I think what happens there is far more progressive than anything happening in England. What I find it odd though is this perception Scot's have to swallow what we give you. You know you has to swallow more shit than anyone under this government? People in England, Wales and Ireland. We don't have enough autonomy to say NO to tuition fee's, to stop the constant and deranged privatisation of the schools, banks, police and hospitals. We riot in the streets against high youth unemployment and get called yobs, we protest against forced job losses and council cutbacks and no one listens. Scotland bans the bedroom tax, England keeps it. I didn't vote for this shitty coalition of fat-faced Etonian's trying to push civil liberty back to victorian standards. At least Scotland gets to say Nae to some things.

For me it's not an issue of cultural difference anymore as there aren't really any differences between the English and Scottish (or Welsh and Irish for that matter). This is about the current government being incapable of understanding the needs of the ordinary British people and in response the SNP have found a crack in which to push through their nationalist agenda, whether it be for good or not. The world needs less division and more unity in my opinion.

[Ack]

ATTENTION:

As per request, the title of this thread has been changed from:

So the Islamic world is kind of falling apart...

to:

So the whole world is kind of falling apart...

This reflects the shift of this thread from issues dealing with stability in the Middle East to problems dealing with nations around the world as a whole.

[Sload Soap]

See, the thing is that I fear people have voted for the SNP in the same way people in england have voted UKIP: they are entirely frustrated with the mainstream parties and seek a new voice. Now, in itself there is nothing wrong with this, but unlike the traditional parties, UKIP and the SNP have much narrower goals and policies.

I feel that from what I've read and what you've said that true independence isn't what is wanted, but rather a return to the centre-left governments of the pre-9/11 Labour government, ones that had the interest of the nation at heart.

A few other points.

Well it isn't really, we only have those benefits due to winning greater autonomy and building our own parliament. We never gained these advantages from the Union.

Without wanting to aggravate but autonomy wasn't gained, it was given. The Blair government thought that more devolution of powers would make scot's less likely to want independence. And it worked until recently.

For example, being dragged into the Iraq war or having little or no say on what path our nation can take.

I went on the marches against that war. Again, I see more of a dismissal of recent governments in this post than an actual thirst for independence. Also on this point, the Scottish assembly voted strongly in favour of the war.

There's also been a lot of pro-UK bias in the media when they promised to be impartial. If anything, they've aided the Yes Scotland campaign significantly. The Scottish people never forget.

Only the BBC have to remain impartial due to their remit. The other media outlets can say and persuade as much as they want. Free press you know.

Scottish independence is not the type of division you are describing. It would merely just be the shifting of power, and the creation of a fairer democracy.

I'm sorry, but it is more than a shift of power. It's Scotland operating as an individual nation for the first time in 311 years. It means no more money from the treasury and no more jobs created by the UK public sector. It means finding its own outlets for trade and commerce. It means your own currency, passport checks on the border and reapplication to the EU. It'd certainly mean a few years stuck in a legal limbo while certain aspects of an assumed new charter were drawn up.

But that isn't what I'm hearing from the YES campaign. I'm hearing, at best, devolution max. So, what's the point?