Mcneil

[.:BrIDo:.]

That's quite a good way to put it to swing voters, Alibi.

 

I think i'll use that.

 

While we're on the independence bandwagon, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1979 referendum?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_referendum,_1979

[Guest David Edwards]

That's quite a good way to put it to swing voters, Alibi.

 

I think i'll use that.

 

While we're on the independence bandwagon, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1979 referendum?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_referendum,_1979

 

Now that you mention it, yes. 51% in favour of devolved power. A fairly healthy and encouraging turn around from the 51% vote in favour of the Unionist Party in 1955.

[Rossco]

That's quite a good way to put it to swing voters, Alibi.

 

I think i'll use that.

 

While we're on the independence bandwagon, I don't think anyone has mentioned the 1979 referendum?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_referendum,_1979

 

 

That is quite interesting & makes you wonder were Scotland would be had more people exercised the right to vote.

 

 

[Rhubarb Mess]

That is quite interesting & makes you wonder were Scotland would be had more people exercised the right to vote.

 

 

And if the first past the post favoured by Labour and the Tories the yes vote would have won. Ironic the Tories are so hell bent on retain first past the post (while their own internal voting system for the party leader is a form of AV).

 

Hypocrits.

[vikingTON]

I don't think so. I reckon it could be more to do with the genetic memory (if such a thing exists) of Scottish working people. There seems to be a 'collective unconscious' that perceives the Tories as the party of privilege, the party of the bosses and the landlords, and in more recent memory, the party of Thatcher.

 

No, you're definitely missing a key strand here. Let's remember that 'Scottish working people', as a class, account for far less than the combined non-Tory vote in Scotland. And many in the middle classes benefited significantly from Thatcherism. Why then, do they not vote in co-ordination with the Bs, C1s and C2s down south?

 

It's not because Scots have a 'moral compass' or are in any way more sophisticated voters than in England. It is because the Tories represent a British nationalism that Scots increasingly reject, and which influences Tory policy.

Listen to Auntie Annabel on Tuesday's debate, the reason she came into politics because she believes in the United Kingdom as the only means of delivering policy. She is a British nationalist more than a unionist.

 

I definitely believe their current unelectability in Scotland is far more down to the Thatcher legacy, rather than an innate genetic trait. I'm sure there's a place in Scotland for a right-of-centre party, but as long as the Scottish Tories remain tied to their masters in London, it ain't going to be them. Not for a least a generation anyway.

 

Do Scottish Tories even see themselves as distinctly Scottish? The Tories have called for a rejection of the devolution process at every single step up to Calman, which was a sop to water down the SNP. They represent a 'British not Scottish' identity and attitude that was long lost from the Protestant working classes and is why they lost that vote and are now a marginal force. More so than the legacy of Thatcher, which is a simplistic argument.

 

[Alibi]

Oh dear, who did you copy that from? If you want change it is up to you to show what the change will bring. The onus is less on the supporter of the status quo, although hopefully a proper debate will allow both groups to put across cogent arguments as opposed to what passes for debate at the moment.

 

I disagree. The starting point should be that there is no status quo (they must be going to chuck it soon surely?) and the options can then be compared on a level playing field without preconceived ideas. The piece I posted was written from the viewpoint of an independent nation deciding to join the union, and illustrates quite well why that would be very unlikely to happen nowadays. Such an annexation could only happen where the decision was made by a few unelected or undemocratically elected individuals who were likely to benefit personally. Much as was the case in 1707 actually.

[Guest David Edwards]

No, you're definitely missing a key strand here. Let's remember that 'Scottish working people', as a class, account for far less than the combined non-Tory vote in Scotland. And many in the middle classes benefited significantly from Thatcherism. Why then, do they not vote in co-ordination with the Bs, C1s and C2s down south?

 

It's not because Scots have a 'moral compass' or are in any way more sophisticated voters than in England. It is because the Tories represent a British nationalism that Scots increasingly reject, and which influences Tory policy.

Listen to Auntie Annabel on Tuesday's debate, the reason she came into politics because she believes in the United Kingdom as the only means of delivering policy. She is a British nationalist more than a unionist.

 

Perhaps I haven't read the works of McCrone and Devine as studiously as you may have, nevertheless I don't think I'm missing any 'key strands' of your argument.

My argument centres on realities and perceptions, moreover the differences between them.

I accept the reality that Scottish working people differ very little from their English counterparts, that patterns of so called 'social mobility' in Scotland reflect those in England, and that living standards north and south of the border have risen in similar measures since the 1980s.

I accept also that the Scots do not have a superior morality, and that they are no more egalitarian or socially conscious than the English.

My contention (albeit based on personal experience rather than any systematic study or analysis) is that the Scots perceive themselves to be more egalitarian and socially conscious. There's a hypocritical 'wha's like us' mentality that harks back to Burns (the tax collector and would be slave driver that wrote about freedom, social justice and the like) that's still redolent today.

These attitudes I contend, can explain the reluctance of Scots to vote Tory. The Scottish electorate seems just as content with Thatcher / Blair economics, and just as replete with consumerism as the English, but we won't admit it.

We don't vote Tory, not because we identify them with British Nationalism, but because we're all too humanly hypocritical when social justice issues arise. We've been voting Labour in our droves, and they are as much 'British Nationalist' as the Tories.

I believe that the trend towards independence is not driven by nationalism in a negative sense, or any sudden reawakening of Scottish identity and iconography, rather it's a result of evolving desires both to extend democracy and for self determination. Long may it continue.

[forza ton]

Two illustrations of the perils of the blame and victim culture. We can all blame it on Tories, Labour, Liberals, Bosses, the Unions, the English and so on, blame it on anyone but ourselves. But we elected them (well, apart from the Bosses and the English), we let it happen.

Yes it is about time we took responsibility, not just for what's happened in the past, but for the present and, most importantly, our future as well. Time to stop being victims, to stop blaming others for our own predicament.

this post kinda reminds me of when dougie rae moans about attendances to the fans who do go.

[Cet Homme Charmant]

Do Scottish Tories even see themselves as distinctly Scottish?

No they don't, that's my point!

 

I suspect there are a large section of Scottish society who are politically right leaning but reject the Tories because of their fervent Unionist agenda, and the 'baggage' of Thatcher. My point was that I believe a fully autonomous Scottish right-of-centre party would fare a lot better than the Tories do, for these reasons.

[TRVMP]

There's a hypocritical 'wha's like us' mentality that harks back to Burns (the tax collector and would be slave driver that wrote about freedom, social justice and the like) that's still redolent today.

 

If anything sum's up the "wha's like us" myopia of Scots it's actually your post because you don't (won't, more like) acknowledge that this hypocrisy extended right through the enlightenment in dozens of different ways. Half the US founding fathers were slaveholders, holding the whip with one hand while writing "all men are created equal" with the other. Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote one of the greatest works of pedagogy of all time yet essentially abandoned his own children. This s*** ain't just Scottish - it's all of us.

[Guest David Edwards]

If anything sum's up the "wha's like us" myopia of Scots it's actually your post because you don't (won't, more like) acknowledge that this hypocrisy extended right through the enlightenment in dozens of different ways. Half the US founding fathers were slaveholders, holding the whip with one hand while writing "all men are created equal" with the other. Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote one of the greatest works of pedagogy of all time yet essentially abandoned his own children. This s*** ain't just Scottish - it's all of us.

You may have misunderstood. I'm not saying this trait is exclusively Scottish, on the contrary, it's universal. Note my phrase 'all too humanly hypocritical'.

[Guest David Edwards]

this post kinda reminds me of when dougie rae moans about attendances to the fans who do go.

I aint the one that's moaning. I'm super-positive and upbeat.

[TRVMP]

You may have misunderstood. I'm not saying this trait is exclusively Scottish, on the contrary, it's universal. Note my phrase 'all too humanly hypocritical'.

 

I didn't misunderstand. Note this other phrase:

 

My contention (albeit based on personal experience rather than any systematic study or analysis) is that the Scots perceive themselves to be more egalitarian and socially conscious.

 

Everyone touched by the enlightenment project would describe themselves as egalitarian, even if they're not. The US, again, was supposed to be the model of equality. It may have lost some of the class system but it had bloody slaves.

[Guest David Edwards]

I didn't misunderstand. Note this other phrase:

Everyone touched by the enlightenment project would describe themselves as egalitarian, even if they're not. The US, again, was supposed to be the model of equality. It may have lost some of the class system but it had bloody slaves.

 

Oh but you plainly do. The Americans still believe themselves to be democratic, egalitarian paragons, like so many others. Like so many Scots.

[TRVMP]

Oh but you plainly do. The Americans still believe themselves to be democratic, egalitarian paragons, like so many others. Like so many Scots.

 

... yes, as do the English, which was also touched by the enlightenment. So your explanation is completely insufficient.

 

Do you think the B1/C1 voters who pick Tory in England are doing so because they don't have an image of themselves as democratic and egalitarian, that they feel the opposite? Of ****ing course not.

[Guest David Edwards]

... yes, as do the English, which was also touched by the enlightenment. So your explanation is completely insufficient.Do you think the B1/C1 voters who pick Tory in England are doing so because they don't have an image of themselves as democratic and egalitarian, that they feel the opposite? Of ****ing course not.

 

No, it's your understanding that's insufficient I think. Yes both groups (Scots and English) may think of themselves as democratic, socially conscious and egalitarian paragons, but they're not. Both the Scots by preferring Labour, and the English by preferring Tory, are kidding themselves on to a large extent. Tories and Labour are one and the same in reality, whatever others may perceive them to be.

[TRVMP]

No, it's your understanding that's insufficient I think.

 

Nah.

 

Yes both groups (Scots and English) may think of themselves as democratic, socially conscious and egalitarian paragons, but they're not.

Yeah, nobody is as good as they think they are. Present company excepted, of course

 

Both the Scots by preferring Labour, and the English by preferring Tory, are kidding themselves on to a large extent.

 

Absolutely - but not in the same way, or for the same reasons. VT's spot on - the nationalist angle is the elephant in the room here and the data backs it up.

 

Tories and Labour are one and the same in reality, whatever others may perceive them to be.

 

This is grossly oversimplified. That they're not at completely opposite ends of the spectrum doesn't mean that they're the same.

[vikingTON]

This 'perceived egalitarianism and social conscious' argument doesn't have any basis anyway. Look at the Tories' election results in Scotland: they are seen in steady decline from the 1960s, long before the 'excesses' of Thatcherism. The only upturn in fortunes they had was from general Labour incompetence and the devolution farce which cost the SNP in 1979.

 

Labour are Unionists in that sense, they are not British nationalists. What they do is try and manipulate Scottish nationhood to its own means, giving them tidbits here and there to preserve the overall Union settlement. The Tories have continued to position themselves as supporters of Britain as a nation-state (formerly empire) of its own right. No matter how you view the constitutional arrangements only a select few see Britain as the nation and distinctly not Scotland. And yet the Tory attitude and policy plays to that dwindling crowd. Holyrood's place in the Tory British nationalist mindset is a glorified regional council.

[Guest David Edwards]

Nah.

 

Yeah, nobody is as good as they think they are. Present company excepted, of course

Absolutely - but not in the same way, or for the same reasons. VT's spot on - the nationalist angle is the elephant in the room here and the data backs it up.

This is grossly oversimplified. That they're not at completely opposite ends of the spectrum doesn't mean that they're the same.

 

Grossly oversimplified? I think not. Over the past three decades, and judging them by action and result rather than promise, I think most might agree that's there very little difference, if any, between them.

[vikingTON]

I suspect there are a large section of Scottish society who are politically right leaning but reject the Tories because of their fervent Unionist agenda, and the 'baggage' of Thatcher. My point was that I believe a fully autonomous Scottish right-of-centre party would fare a lot better than the Tories do, for these reasons.

 

The killer is that the basis of a truly autonomous, Scottish, right-of-centre party is almost entirely within the SNP.

 

So unless the SNP's hold on the national question splinters into factions, there will be no relevant right-of-centre alternative unless the Union is broken up. Or the question itself becomes irrelevant. If not, then Scotland within the devolved Union is destined for continuous left-of-centre government. This ought to dawn on the Tories at some point, perhaps when the old Enoch Powell biddies die off.