Woo Hoo! So When Do We Invade Scotland?

To save the union, Britain will have to find its own Abraham Lincoln

Yup, Martin Kettle says so so it must be true. So who wants Sherman’s job of burning Strathclyde? All, you know, to free the Scots from their slavery to the SNP and nationalism?

Actually, on second thoughts, why bother. Place ain’t worth the bones of a single Prestonian Grenadier, is it?

33 thoughts on “Woo Hoo! So When Do We Invade Scotland?”

  1. If The South had had access to a Barnett formula, the American Civil War would probably have never happened.

  2. And John Major is writing in the Telegraph that Labour must rule out a coalition with the SNP. The political class are going to have to accept that the Westminster system is now irretrievably broken, and that they broke it.

    I have some Scots ancestry. I find the idea of secession weird to contemplate, and imagine my grandfather must be spinning in his grave. But we cannot go on like this, and there is no justrication for keeping Scotland in the Union by force.

    But one could I think reasonably argue that secession as an act denies UK citizenship to Scots who do not wish to secede. Should they not be entitled to (a) asylum in the rest of the UK and (b) compensation paid by Holyrood?

  3. So Much for Subtlety

    The political class finds itself utterly out of sympathy with ordinary voters. Nor are they offering any solutions to any of the problems voters care about – “Dave” promised to do something to bring immigration down and so we are now having a discussion about whether they let in 250,00 or 300,000. That’s not even counting the illegals.

    So it is time to bring on the clowns. Either the Tories and the Labour Party can pull themselves together to promise a story people want to hear, or they will be driven off the stage and replaced by the Second Eleven.

  4. Ian, the citizenship question is interesting. I wonder if we would have a British Subject status again, like we did for the Irish? That would amusingly irritate the Nats.

  5. The horrible consequence of the fragmenting of political support will be the introduction of State funding for political parties, probably in the autumn.

    Then I really will take to the streets…

  6. . But we cannot go on like this, and there is no justrication for keeping Scotland in the Union by force.

    @SMFS
    We had a referendum 6 months ago and voted to stay part of the Union. Which part of ‘no’ do you not understand?

  7. So Much for Subtlety

    Dr Cromarty – “We had a referendum 6 months ago and voted to stay part of the Union. Which part of ‘no’ do you not understand?”

    That quote is not mine. I never have a problem justifying force. After all, as Castro shows, chicks dig it.

  8. We had a referendum 6 months ago and voted to stay part of the Union. Which part of ‘no’ do you not understand?

    And the disappointment felt around here was almost palpable…

  9. The problem is the Scots seeming love of statism in general and socialism in particular. Full-on SNP arrogance will cure them but English money paying for it means that the SNP can delay Scotlands progression to “twinned with Venezuela” status indefinitely.

  10. What the good doctor Cromarty said.

    The SNP lost, but have been behaving as if they won a great moral victory. For some reason, the unionist parties seem content to let them.

    A lot of politics is about framing the terms of the debate. So why allow the losers of the SNP to set the agenda? They were democratically rejected at the polls.

    The collapse of the oil price has made an absolute mockery of their fiscal projections – which had called for more deficit spending despite assuming $100 a barrel would continue forever. Comrade Salmond would have been phoning the IMF right about now had he won the referendum. Why is nobody reminding the public of this?

    Scottish politics is a socialist wasteland. It’s like Britain as a whole was in 1974. Both sides of the Scottish Parliament agree that the State should do more – tax more, spend more, meddle more.

    The only real argument is over which set of crooks gets to wield the big stick.

    Scotland needs its own Margaret Thatcher.

  11. And the disappointment felt around here was almost palpable…

    I’ll admit to that. At that time I had like many other English people developed a sense of anger and frustration with the Scots, due to the constant hateful rhetoric coming from North of the border. It gets to that, “if you really don’t like it here, just fuck off” feeling.

    The Nationalists seem to be genuinely hateful people, from what I can see. And I think they want to be hated, because they know that the more pissed off the English get with them, the more likely they are to get their glorious tartan Albania.

  12. Ian B – The Nationalists seem to be genuinely hateful people, from what I can see.

    As a whole they are. It’s not even the English they hate the most – it’s other Scots, the wrong sort of Scots.

    And I think they want to be hated, because they know that the more pissed off the English get with them, the more likely they are to get their glorious tartan Albania.

    A large part of the SNP’s strategy involves trolling the English into reacting negatively.

  13. “Dave” promised to do something to bring immigration down and so we are now having a discussion about whether they let in 250,00 or 300,000. That’s not even counting the illegals.

    Why is the question all about the quantity and not the quality? I don’t get this. Have we let in 250,000 Russian mathematicians, or 250,000 Pakistani goat herders?

  14. Imagine a Sherman marching through Gorgie to the sea.

    I hope he’d be very careful not to let his men damage Tynecastle.

  15. “As a whole they are. It’s not even the English they hate the most – it’s other Scots, the wrong sort of Scots.”

    This. In spades.

  16. K.R. Lohse
    March 6, 2015 at 8:33 am

    ==============

    As an American, and Southerner, and to the extent I can understand “a Barnett formula,” I can say unequivocally that you are correct. The Civil War was about money. The South was paying for the United States, but Northerners and Westerners were getting to choose how the money was spent.

    It appears the current situation in Scotland is different, in that the Scots are not paying the preponderance of the cost for the central government.

  17. Whilst money is always important the fundamental issue is about representation, Scots socialists feel even if Labour win a Westminster general election they don’t get what they vote for. If Labour lose they don’t just get what they vote for they get what they detest. Once Westminster elections are seen as lose lose the dynamic is created for secession.

  18. Tim Newman

    “Have we let in 250,000 Russian mathematicians, or 250,000 Pakistani goat herders?”

    This is a question to which we need an answer…

  19. @Tim N
    Have we let in 250,000 Russian mathematicians, or 250,000 Pakistani goat herders?
    It’s at minimum 600,000, not 300,000 or 250,000! The creeps are quoting net not gross.
    Migration Watch says that in the year to September 2014 we let in 543,000 non-British immigrants. Of these, 251,000 came from the EU and 292,000 from outside the EU. About 30,000 claimed asylum, and an unknown number just came and hid.
    Given that the brightest tend to emigrate, that means we had a large influx of smart goat herding pedophiles (southern EU and Asia). Plus, of course, bankers. And we lost gross about 137,000 smart natives.
    See: http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/latest-immigration-statistics

  20. Re Scotland, why not partition it on the India/Pakistan model (hopefully without the 1,000,000 dead)? That way the Nats go independent with Glasgow and surrounding areas, and the rest stays in the UK.

  21. bloke (not) in spain

    Trouble with partitioning Scotland, under the Barnett Formula the SNP’d want 625,000 of the dead to be English.

  22. I’ve never quite understood this blog’s antipathy to Scottish Nationalism. Although the societies they wish to see are markedly different, it’s always struck me that Alex Salmond’s anti-Westminster eloquence is pretty much interchangeable with Nigel Farage’s anti-Brussels rhetoric. They both use the same arguments of inappropriate control by out-of-touch institutions, democratically unaccountable at a national level.

    Am I missing something?

  23. “This blog” is, to some extent at least, me. I’m just fine with Scots Nats. Go for it. Bye Bye!

  24. Surreptitious Evil

    Yes. This is an economics blog.

    Salmond isn’t a complete fuckwit, which is why he is the figure-weasel, but the SNP are an unholy mixture of Maoists, Marxists, Gramscians, farmers, people who think Mad Max painted himself blue, and certifiable idiots. In so far as you can discriminate.

    Scotland, much as I love the place, is about to become the North Korea to your South.

  25. Scotland also appears to be about to illustrate the problem with First Past The Post rather succinctly, if the polls are to be believed; more than half the Scots electorate will have virtually no representation whatsoever.

  26. So Much for Subtlety

    Churm Rincewind – “I’ve never quite understood this blog’s antipathy to Scottish Nationalism. …. Am I missing something?”

    Well I think that an independent Scotland would not be a bad thing. It is a good size for a country. Better than being ruled by a distant and incompetent capital. It would suit the Scotch economy to have their own currency and so not help up by the financiers of London.

    But, and it is the Kim Kardashian of big buts, not this lot of Scottish nationalists. What the SNP wants would be utterly disastrous for Scotland and the Scots. They make Polly look like an intellectual and George Galloway a statesman.

    It is not the concept as a whole that is a problem, it is the specific implementation. I don’t have to be a big fan of White Rhodesia to know that Mugabe was not an improvement. The Scots do not need a Zimbabwe-on-Clyde but at this rate they will get it. Well, a Belarus-on-Clyde anyway.

  27. I think this is the wrong way around. Scottish Independence is a good or bad idea, take your choice, regardless of the current state of individual parties.

    Scotland is not currently as it would be. Many who should be running the place are in the UK capital (London should not be seen as “English”). If Independence occurred, then the SNP would not draw votes because they support it. The political centre of gravity would shift, and a right-of-centre party would become viable (ie not “English” Tories. Indeed, in terms of votes, even they don’t do too badly all things considered).

    As always, Socialism would fail, and new alternatives would be sought. The Conservatives don’t have a permanent claim on England either.

  28. So Much for Subtlety

    Jack C – “The political centre of gravity would shift, and a right-of-centre party would become viable”

    As we see in Zimbabwe every day. Or South Africa.

    Or Italy for that matter. Culture matters.

  29. Given that the brightest tend to emigrate

    That’s because most nations only let the brightest in, at least legally. As far as I’m aware, that doesn’t apply to the UK… they just need to be willing to vote Labour.

    And, yeah, most of the people I’m still in contact with from my degree in Oxford have left the UK now. I was one of the last to go.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *