What Made you Smile/What Ticked you off Today?

[Sload Soap]

What? You do realise that the Union's meddling in Ireland caused all this nonsense in the first place, right? If it weren't for the British invasions and land grabbing, then Ireland would be undivided today. A lot of that sectarianism came to Scotland due to mass Irish immigration, to get away from all the hardships in Ireland, mostly to blame with the British.

Right, but why would sectarianism suddenly end if Scotland was independent? It might have started, albeit unintentionally, by British interference in Ireland (great famine and all that) but how does it magically end with independence? From what I understand it's very much tied to the religious and football culture of Glasgow as well as the usual socioeconomic problems with jobs and education.

As for the media, how many daily newspapers in Scotland are in support of Scottish independence? None. They are all full with Unionist scaremongering and utter tripe. What about the TV? Well, most are London based and biased and are not impartial. Two televised debates, that is like what, 3 hours airtime at most? There are also some smaller debates, but they're on late at night.

None? So, today's Scottish Herald frontpage is just a clever ruse then is it? I'll admit that there has been some convincing evidence the BBC has been negligent with its reportage of the vote, (and some academia suggests it has become more disposed to give right wing sources airtime) but you are asking for impartial reporting from outlets that have no reason to be impartial. It's shitty journalism for sure, but it's not the same as state media censorship.

For example. That guy who got an egg cracked over his shirt is on Sky News right now bitching about it while the woman in hospital who got kicked in the gut is not even being mentioned at all.

He's not just some random guy though, he's a Labour MP who had been harassed by YES voters on a few stops of his tour across Scotland for the Better Together campaign. A minority of YES voters to be sure but it's still harassment.

Scotland has little benefits to staying in this Union. We pay more in than we get back. We get governments we didn't vote for. We are a dumping ground for nuclear weapons against our will. We are dragged into illegal wars against our will. Is that democracy?

I also didn't vote for the current government and I protested the war in Iraq so you can stop trying to possess that issue right off the bat. Hating the Tories and being against the war isn't something exclusive to Scotland. And yes, Scottish MP's voted for the war as well as Welsh, English and Irish.

The government also spends more per head on Scottish people than it does Welsh, English or Irish people. On average a Scottish person pays slightly more in tax into the coffers, from what I understand, but obviously overall England adds the most due to our much larger population. Is it worth paying slightly less tax when you're going to lose all that shared wealth? The benefit of staying in the union is the same benefit all of the UK gets: the incredible wealth London generates for the country.

On democracy, Scotland had enough powers devolved to decide against tuition fees and paying for prescriptions. If we subtract the very personal opinions surrounding nuclear weapons out of the equation, the base and factory provides more than 8,000 jobs to Scotland. Those nukes would take the jobs with them to Newcastle with an independence vote. And guess what? It's nukes aimed at you from Russia you should be more worried about.

So is it democracy? If it wasn't, the independence vote wouldn't be on the table to begin with.

[Ack]

We are a dumping ground for nuclear weapons against our will.

If we subtract the very personal opinions surrounding nuclear weapons out of the equation, the base and factory provides more than 8,000 jobs to Scotland. Those nukes would take the jobs with them to Newcastle with an independence vote. And guess what? It's nukes aimed at you from Russia you should be more worried about.

Admittedly with Russia's nuclear policy these days and Putin's veiled threats(and in some cases not so veiled threats), you might want to keep those for the time being. Housing nuclear weapons as a deterrent is at best a Schrödinger's cat, where we can never be sure if it really works until it fails, but you might be keen to hold that one in your back pocket in case it actually does.

That said, we also don't know if Putin is crazy enough to actually launch a nuclear attack, which would most certainly result in retaliatory strikes. Russian nuclear doctrine has been in flux for the last decade, but the decisions they've been making for the use of their arsenal have been more than a little disturbing.

[samsonlonghair]

Fun fact: In the United States, we don't even entertain the notion that individual states can become independent of the U.S. Federal government.

Like it or not, neither Texas, nor California, nor any other state can legally declare independence from the U.S. regardless of economic viability. States cannot leave the union without anything short of outright war. Even that, doesn't make it legal. See the Supreme Court Case of Texas v. White. The U.S. justices unsurprisingly ruled that there's no legal way for states to seceed regardless of petitions, votes, or anything else.

Eleven states tried it once. Things didn't go well for them.

So if you think that England isn't giving Scottland a fair chance at independence, just remember that Uncle Sam doesn't even entertain the notion that his states can leave the Union.

[Sload Soap]

In fairness though, your States were never individual countries with their own culture and history. We have to go back 300 years to the last time Scotland was independent but it was a separate entity for 700 years prior fighting many battles with England over that time.

I can certainly see the argument for Scottish independence, I just worry that it has been molded into an emotional issue rather than a logical one. The only question Scottish people need to ask themselves is if they truly are better off alone. I haven't seen any real evidence to support they would be and I dislike how YES campaigners have co-opted issues like the War in Iraq and Tory cuts as if they affect Scotland alone. That's my stance.

[samsonlonghair]

In fairness though, your States were never individual countries with their own culture and history.

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hawaii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Hawaii

[Sload Soap]

I'm not sure if Hawaii is the best comparison. Scotland was not forced into joining the Union nor was its native population subjugated by a minority of Englishmen. Added to that, Scotland isn't some geographically remote part of the UK with a drastically different ethnic heritage.

I sure can see why Hawaiians would want their own independence movement but Scotland splitting from the UK is akin to say Texas or California gaining independence.

Edit: But yeah, Hawaii definitely is its own place with its own history. So I concede that point.

[Ack]

In fairness though, your States were never individual countries with their own culture and history.

Oh really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hawaii
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Hawaii

One could also argue that US territories like Puerto Rico count towards this. They also have a legitimate nationalist movement.

[samsonlonghair]

Also, there's the delicate matter of American Indian tribes - which has been handled none too delicately.

Honestly, I feel like this has strayed pretty far from the original topic "what made you smile/what ticked you off today" . I admit that I contributed to that. I will refrain from anymore lengthy tangent discussion in this thread for the time being. Maybe it would be a neat discussion for its own thread sometime in the near future.

[Sload Soap]

Yeah, it is a proper tangent. This discussion was mostly being held in the World is Falling Apart thread before all of this.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Fun fact: In the United States, we don't even entertain the notion that individual states can become independent of the U.S. Federal government.

That is mostly true. If, however, a vast majority of the U.S. House of Representatives, a vast majority of the Senate, and an overwhelming majority of the state were in a favor of a particular state leaving the Union, we could make it happen. It would likely require amending the U.S. Constitution, but, conceivably at least, we could kick a state out of the Union against its will.

EDIT: Thinking about it, it would be pretty funny if all the states ganged up and kicked a place like Kansas or Missouri out of the union against its will.