General News Independence for Scotland?

As a US American who needs more maps, I am unfamiliar with this. Can you please explain the possibly human rights impacts with a Scottish independence?

 

I do not understand what advantages Scotland accrues from independence in this era.

 

I am going to say no because of the political instability that is happening all around the world is already very problematic. Let not pile another one on that at the moment.

But of course, if the Scotland people decide it is the time, then what good is my opinion?

 

It's entirely up for Scotland to decide. But I have reservations; the Yes campaign has been more heart-strong than head-strong. It's their right to pull on heart-strings. But it's their duty to make sure that Scotland's independence can survive off something more than depleting oil, which I feel is the most realistic thing they've managed to say in this entire campaign even if they ignore the danger of it running dry. Promising a better life isn't the greatest idea if that life won't last very long as Scotland loses its resources.

I can perfectly understand the desire to be separated from the UK. I just worry that Scotland doesn't have the ability to separate itself, mainly for long-term financial reasons. I'm not saying that the Better Together campaign is in the right. I just think that there needs to be very careful analysis of the consequences, which I feel a scarily large of people voting on the day won't give serious or analytical thought to. Also, I don't think saying "fuck you" to the English is really cause enough, even if England has failed Scotland in several ways. I understand the resentment, but I don't understand the risk-taking when the plan is very vague.

Passion is all very good, but I'm not sure it promises Scotland a secure and prosperous future in the long run.

 

It's not like they are going to turn into Greece or anything. But I am intensely interested in how that changes the political climate of the union they will leave, but also in what it will mean just for Scots themselves.

The power shift in a democratic government is important with such demographic swings. I don't want minorities to suffer more as a side effect of Scottish independence.

That would be a crushingly sad result.

 

At the risk of thread necromancy, I feel several good points were made by Linco and imnotreallysure in this thread.

 

I wouldn't like it. I don't that the separation of the U.K. would make their situation any better. I mean, like here in the states, we have states and regions that don't get along with each other, but separation never proved any good for us. So, just to err on the side of caution and to be rational, I think that a separation won't be good. Just for avoiding any long term consequences.

 

I can empathize a lot with them. In a lot of ways it like the U.S. and Puerto Rico situation. I wish them Scotland goodluck in whatever they decide to do.

Edit: I voted yes. It's their right as a nation and people to decide their own path, and yes, I understand the possible political and economical repercussions that might and will happen.

 

Well if you listened to a Yes campaigner they would tell you they would be free of the oppressive English who ride around on their horses making the Scottish people stay in poverty! Aaaand back in the real world and the 21st century there will really not be that much difference. Their government might become a tiny bit more liberal and focused on localized issues, but they do already have a devolved Scottish parliament in place so exactly how much change this would bring is debatable.

Many in favour of independence do seem to be basing their decisions on what has happened historically. There has been a lot of talk of William Wallace etc. Which to me is a bit irrelevant seen as we have been in a union for some 300 years now. Interestingly other countries in the union have been treated equally bad historically, look at how Wales was conquered by England (truly horrible history there!) - but I doubt you'd find many Welsh people arguing that as a reason for independence (I believe Welsh desire for Welsh independence stands at only 5-10% in favour).

Its perhaps different than US-Peurto Rico though given the proportionate size of the countries. The Scottish population makes up 8% of the UK's population and Scotland encompasses a whopping 32% of the UK's land.

Whilst yes, under the international terms of self-determination people in Scotland have every right to declare independence, there is no denying that this could have a rather devastating effect on the rest of the UK (losing a large chunk of its resources as well as global status and trade) which is why many who cannot vote like myself still feel strongly about it.

Unfortunately, if the Scottish people do declare independence this forces negative change on the rest of us. We will be blackmailed into propping up the new Scottish state via a currency union else face threats of them defaulting on their share of the national debt. Its not a pleasant situation and one I believe will cause considerable animosity. Either we help an independent state to thrive and become more prosperous than our own (if you believe Salmond's predictions) or they refuse to pay a multi-billion pound debt. Not exactly fair.

 

I don't think they're economically ready honestly.

 

If Scotland leaves the UK they will lose the NHS and they won't be able to use the pound, it's a stupid idea.

 

I think they should gain independence.

I mean, Ireland did so. And sure, they had a bloody Republic that was violent but they came around and look where Ireland is now! Pretty peaceful, wealthy, advanced, great social programs (though they should really get their whole island back)

The Scottish want what the Scottish want.

 

Why should they? At present Northern Ireland is part of a separate country and has nothing to do with them.

The vast majority of people actually living in Northern Ireland want to stay part of the UK - do their opinions not count? Saying that the Republic of Ireland should "get their whole island back" would be a bit like saying the UK should be able to "keep their whole island" regardless of what the Scottish want.

 

Hmm. I really don't know enough about this situation to have an educated opinion. In America, secession is treason, so the idea of voting out of a country seems... bizarre to say the least. I could understand independence if the Scots were being oppressed, but as far as I can tell, the oppression is more like mild to moderate dissatisfaction with the government.

This independence movement seems to be fueled by nationalism more than logic, and I worry the Scots don't grasp the scope of what this would mean for them and the rest of Europe. The idea of breaking from England seems to be a national pastime in Scotland, but (with my small amount of knowledge of British history) it has rarely been acted on, and then only when there was significant reason to do so.

 

My comment about Ireland getting their whole island back was in reference to the political controversy of the 1910's-1920's that struck Irish and British politics on the question of Northern Ireland. Back then, the UK just should've given it up completely, though they decided throughout the centuries to dump a bunch of Brits and Scots and protestants in the North to purposely cause tension. My apologizes for not clarifying that, but

I don't think it takes much common sense to make the connection of, "I think Scotland should have independence because the people demand it", with, "I think Northern Ireland should stay within the Commonwealth because the people demand it."

I don't pick and choose when to believe in certain ideas. What the people want is what the people deserve to have. Even if it's bad, they'll learn that it became bad and they'll move to fix it.

 

im voting no, im thinking of everywhere that is independent and its expensive to live there. scotland is a pretty low cost of living place, compared to a lot of the uk (give or take a few) and if we go independent, pretty sure prices will go sky high but our wages wont match it, so it will be a pretty big struggle! thats what i can see anyway.

plus if we do go to the euro. well its gunna be expensive everytime you wanna go to england which is its neighbour!

 

I did not make that connection.

You were saying the Republic of Ireland should now be given back Northern Ireland even if it is against the will of those who actually live there. That would be like the UK forcing Scotland to stay against their will. These are decisions to be made by the people of the area, hence why it is now too late to just hand over Northern Ireland - its an established populace with their own wants and needs.

True, but at present the majority polled do not want independence. Either way it'll be a narrow win regardless with half the population being unhappy with the outcome.

Ordinarily yes, but in this particular case I would disagree. If things go bad in Scotland it would be left to the rest UK to pick up the pieces. We are already being pressured into the idea of supporting an independent Scotland via a currency union, arguably blackmailed into it via the national debt default threat (a debt which was accumulated in part building Scottish roads, schools and hospitals).

If Scotland do want full independence all the best to them. But they should sever all ties with the UK and ask if they require support, not demand it. It is simply unfair on the rest of the UK for Scotland to be given all the benefits of independence and have the UK cover the risks.

My thoughts are that if the Union is truly as bad and oppressive as some Scottish Nationalists have been purporting then they should seek help elsewhere be it Norway or Iceland or Ireland! Its like running away from home from your "horrible parents" then getting financial support from them - makes no sense to me. Likewise if an independent Scotland can be as successful as the Nationalists claim, why do they need support - surely any country can be successful if initially bankrolled and helped by another state.