|
Regarde Aduck posted:Westminster parties/THE UNION is just what they have to keep saying in place of ENGLISH. Everything would be a lot more simple if they could say "The SNP is a Scottish party and Scottish Labour is ENGLISH run and so not legitimate". But they can't. Yet. Westminster isn't England, it's around 85% England. There isn't a huge distinction between a "Westminster party" or a "Scottish Parliament party" (actually most parties running in Scotland are both, including the SNP), but there is a significant distinction in terms of devolution. Westminster rulings are, after all, a 90% English decision with the rest of the UK being a tiebreaker while the Scottish Parliament is purely Scottish (kind of, Westminster still holds sovereignty). The problem with having a party that straddles the border is that they have to prioritise to win votes, and nearly all of them are in England. ScotLab aren't seen by some as a distinct party from Labour, and that's where the problem lies. If 85% of the people voting for them are in England, you need to have a whole lot of trust in English voters not to want to act in a way detrimental to Scotland's population. These last couple of decades, that trust is just not there. As to Scotland being significantly different on a societal level despite being similar on a individual level, that's just the way it is. Conservatives don't get votes, left-wing parties get disproportionately more support and right-leaning voters tend to choose Lib Dem. Identical people behaving differently depending on the social groups they belong to is basic sociology, so it's not even far fetched in the slightest. Rain Temple posted:I cringed every time I heard Salmond say "Team Scotland" vs. "Team Westminster" during the campaign. Given that he'd have been out of the UK (and Westminster with it) entirely if he won the vote, I don't think it's unusual that he distinguished between Westminster and Scotland's government. He would have no mandate to do anything under Westminster after a split so representing them would be misleading at best. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jan 26, 2015 |
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
Good job 'English society' is just some homogenous, block voting blob or else what you're saying might make no sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:Given that he'd have been out of the UK (and Westminster with it) entirely if he won the vote, I don't think it's unusual that he distinguished between Westminster and Scotland's government. He would have no mandate to do anything under Westminster after a split so representing them would be misleading at best. You're missing the point, I suspect willfully. The independence campaign was not supposed to be about "us versus them", it was about whether Scotland was better as part of "us" (or "them", depending how you feel). By defining it in terms of us versus them, Salmond was playing to a racist and bigoted narrative that everyone who isn't Scottish - or who is, but doesn't support independence - is in some way aligned against Scotland's interests.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Good job 'English society' is just some homogenous, block voting blob or else what you're saying might make no sense. It might as well be thanks to FPTP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Jedit posted:You're missing the point, I suspect willfully. The independence campaign was not supposed to be about "us versus them", it was about whether Scotland was better as part of "us" (or "them", depending how you feel). By defining it in terms of us versus them, Salmond was playing to a racist and bigoted narrative that everyone who isn't Scottish - or who is, but doesn't support independence - is in some way aligned against Scotland's interests. I don't think promoting his own idea about what's in Scotland's best interests is unreasonable, given that the campaign was about promoting his own party's idea of what's in Scotland's best interests. I don't think reading bigotry into it without some sort of evidence beyond the vague notion that Westminster is code for the English ethnicity is worthwhile. I don't think that insinuating that those who voted for Westminster's continued involvement in Scotland maybe support Westminster in some way is an unreasonable point to make. But - and this is important - it's seperate from ethnicity. I'd even go as far as saying that conflating British nationalism with ethnic pride is somewhat objectionable. Coohoolin posted:It might as well be thanks to FPTP. Doesn't have to be homogeneous at all, all a social group needs to be a social group is some form of cohesiveness. Lugaloco posted:How will you guys be voting in the GE? Honestly, I'm a bit stumped. At first I thought it'd be a toss-up between the Greens (if they have a candidate running in my area) and SNP but my current Labour MP is actually quite good and is at least a known entity on what they've voted for. I guess there's nothing wrong with actually being spoiled for choice. The only redeeming factor that my Labour MP has is that the seat's not held by Michael Martin any more. As a SNP/Labour swing seat (even then, it's a push) with no other party coming close, the least bad of the bunch is SNP. British democracy is a wonderful thing. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
How will you guys be voting in the GE? Honestly, I'm a bit stumped. At first I thought it'd be a toss-up between the Greens (if they have a candidate running in my area) and SNP but my current Labour MP is actually quite good and is at least a known entity on what they've voted for. I guess there's nothing wrong with actually being spoiled for choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Lugaloco posted:How will you guys be voting in the GE? Honestly, I'm a bit stumped. At first I thought it'd be a toss-up between the Greens (if they have a candidate running in my area) and SNP but my current Labour MP is actually quite good and is at least a known entity on what they've voted for. I guess there's nothing wrong with actually being spoiled for choice. SNP. Slightly embarrassing as I'll be campaigning with my SSP charter, but eh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:SNP. Slightly embarrassing as I'll be campaigning with my SSP charter, but eh. You're going to ask people to vote for party that you don't believe in enough to vote for yourself ? Why don't you just campaign for the SNP ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
jre posted:You're going to ask people to vote for party that you don't believe in enough to vote for yourself ? Why don't you just campaign for the SNP ? It's not a question of belief so much as it is tactical in this case. I'll be voting SSP in 2016, and I'm pretty sure most of our SSP people will be voting SNP at the GE as well. EDIT: SNP just voted for the fracking moratorium. Labour abstained. Jim Murphy didn't show up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Tom Harris is my local MP currently, though I sincerely hope that he will not be come May 8th. I'll be voting SNP in the General Election, FPTP pretty much demands it as there is no seat that can be realistically won by anyone else who is not Labour. For Holyrood I'll do my usual SNP/Green vote depending on the GE results.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:SNP. Slightly embarrassing as I'll be campaigning with my SSP charter, but eh. Amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
gently caress tactical voting. I get irrationally angry about it and it's the hill I choose to die on. That could make a good thread title.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Well, it's a hill you'll die on alone and unnoticed because it's the only way to have a voice in a FPTP system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
If only the "I'm not a nationalist, honest guv, I just think the Westminster system is broken" lot had turned out a few years ago and bothered to campaign for AV when we had that referendum. In which Scotland voted no. In which London voted yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Almost literally everywhere voted no to be fair. The AV referendum was just a loving car crash to watch as someone who voted yes since the No to AV campaign was just awful in how misleading it was (I think we all remember the posters) while Yes to AV was awful in just getting their message out there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
mediadave posted:In which London voted yes. 60% of those voting voted no in the AV referendum in London.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
mediadave posted:If only the "I'm not a nationalist, honest guv, I just think the Westminster system is broken" lot had turned out a few years ago and bothered to campaign for AV when we had that referendum. Actually, the numbers are about equal to the separation question at the time. It was around a 2:1 split in favour of no, which was pretty much the same as the 2:1 support for the union at the time (this was before the campaign kicked off, remember). So if the ""I'm not a nationalist, honest guv, I just think the Westminster system is broken" lot" all voted yes on it then it'd be pretty much the same. In fact, it's likely that that is what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
IceAgeComing posted:60% of those voting voted no in the AV referendum in London. Huh, turns out you're right. Everywhere voted no, though Northern Ireland was most positive with London second.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
AV was a loving pointless change, and I'm glad it was rejected. Would much rather have a visibly awful system like FPTP than being lumped with that stupid sticking plaster for god knows how many decades. Still can't believe that the Lib Dems were bought off so easily with the offer of such a minor change to the electoral system... actually I can believe because the Lib Dems are shits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:AV was a loving pointless change, and I'm glad it was rejected. Would much rather have a visibly awful system like FPTP than being lumped with that stupid sticking plaster for god knows how many decades. Still can't believe that the Lib Dems were bought off so easily with the offer of such a minor change to the electoral system... actually I can believe because the Lib Dems are shits. I agree that AV is mostly poo poo but it's at least slightly less poo poo than FPTP. At this point any change for the better, no matter how slim that change may be, is welcome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:It's not a question of belief so much as it is tactical in this case. I'll be voting SSP in 2016, and I'm pretty sure most of our SSP people will be voting SNP at the GE as well. So why canvas for them if you feel there's no point voting for them in that election ? Do you not think it's a bit hypocritical to ask others to vote SSP when you're not doing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
Jedit posted:You're missing the point, I suspect willfully. The independence campaign was not supposed to be about "us versus them", it was about whether Scotland was better as part of "us" (or "them", depending how you feel). By defining it in terms of us versus them, Salmond was playing to a racist and bigoted narrative that everyone who isn't Scottish - or who is, but doesn't support independence - is in some way aligned against Scotland's interests. qtiyd Spooky Hyena posted:I don't think promoting his own idea about what's in Scotland's best interests is unreasonable, given that the campaign was about promoting his own party's idea of what's in Scotland's best interests. I don't think reading bigotry into it without some sort of evidence beyond the vague notion that Westminster is code for the English ethnicity is worthwhile. I don't think that insinuating that those who voted for Westminster's continued involvement in Scotland maybe support Westminster in some way is an unreasonable point to make. But - and this is important - it's seperate from ethnicity. I'd even go as far as saying that conflating British nationalism with ethnic pride is somewhat objectionable. It's not really a vague notion that Westminster means English though. The term 'UK Government' or 'British Government' isn't used by the SNP specifically because that might, you know, make people think that we're a country of countries rather than a bunch of nations yearning to breathe free from the boot of the auld enemy. Also I don't think it's the idea of the English ethnicity as much as it is the concept of the English and all that brings about in the minds of a segment of the Scottish population.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Sion posted:qtiyd Would you care to define what you mean by "English", then? It's not ethnicity and it's not culture, but it is bigoted somehow and inexorably tied up with Westminster somehow, I get that, but then what is Englishness as you define it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
jre posted:So why canvas for them if you feel there's no point voting for them in that election ? Do you not think it's a bit hypocritical to ask others to vote SSP when you're not doing it. Sure, a bit, but it's not out of principle that I'm voting SNP for the GE, just a necessity, and one that might strengthen the SSP's presence in Scotland. I don't think there's no point, on the contrary, I just have a different opinion on what's the best use of my vote at the moment. I'm with the SSP because I'm a socialist and I believe in an independent socialist Scotland, and I want to spread the message of socialism and that there is a potentially viable party representing socialism. What I do with my own vote is my business, tbf.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
So let me get this straight, you intend to vote SNP to deliver a better situation in future to strengthen the SSP presence in Scotland. While at the same time campaigning for the SSP and potentially drawing votes from the SNP (who you believe could benefit the position of the SSP in future)?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:So let me get this straight, you intend to vote SNP to deliver a better situation in future to strengthen the SSP presence in Scotland. While at the same time campaigning for the SSP and potentially drawing votes from the SNP (who you believe could benefit the position of the SSP in future)? Pretty much, except I might end up voting SSP anyway, SNP are going to walk it regardless, and we're targeting Labour voters more than anything though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:Would you care to define what you mean by "English", then? It's not ethnicity and it's not culture, but it is bigoted somehow and inexorably tied up with Westminster somehow, I get that, but then what is Englishness as you define it? in this context? SNP boogieman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:SNP are going to walk it regardless, That's a bold claim. What's it based on?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Coohoolin has to be gimmick poster? Please someone say it is so  jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:That's a bold claim. What's it based on? The polling data I presume ? gorki posted:Coohoolin has to be gimmick poster? Please someone say it is so He's a pissflaps alt account 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 10:06
|
|
|
I thought I didn't like the British political system but apparently that's exactly the same as hating the English? when did westminster change from a terrible electoral system combined with an unelected chamber and whole heaps of institutional privilege to a direct brain link to a hivemind made up of every english person? I think I missed that. I guess I must be a big ol' dirty racist. I know you really want every supporter of independence to be a simple-minded bigot but it might be possible to favour a different governmental arrangement without being motivated by foaming ethnic hatred edit: Also, I think there's some value in campaigning for a party you aren't going to vote for in this election, election time is one of the few times that people are motivated to actually think about politics and it's a good way to get your name out for future elections where there might be some point in voting for them. You're not going to be able to canvass every single house in one electoral cycle so canvassing some in 2015 and some in 2016 might do some good. Angepain fucked around with this message at 10:12 on Jan 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
jre posted:The polling data I presume ? I was hoping for something more substantial.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
Sion posted:in this context? So Westminster is the boogieman representing the English because of what exactly? And what aspect of Englishness does it represent? Their government?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:So Westminster is the boogieman representing the English because of what exactly? And what aspect of Englishness does it represent? Their government? It's a socially acceptable way of saying "the hated English yoke".
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Jedit posted:It's a socially acceptable way of saying "the hated English yoke". I think we're going full circle and coming back to the SNP believing that Scotland would be better off without England having a majority rule over it, but that doesn't explain the bigotry angle. Unless Englishness as a concept relies on having sovereignty over Scotland, but I'd say that's an issue with English identity rather than how separatists treat them. Also conflating English with Britain's government is part of the problem. England has a say over 85% of the government where a majority is everything so they are the de facto rulers, but there are other nations within that who have a say over the remaining 15%. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Jan 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
This morning I decided that any noun beginning with a vowel is a secret code word for "the hated French". I've met so many racists today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Will the SNP also be intervening on Welsh and Northern Irish matters, or just English ones?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:England has a say over 85% of the government where a majority is everything so they are the de facto rulers, but there are other nations within that who have a say over the remaining 15%. Yes you have successfully identified that 85% of a population is a majority. It matters to you that Scotland's minority population grants them only a minority sway over electoral proceedings because you're a Scottish nationalist. You could carve out any number of subsets of the population of the UK and say the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
kapparomeo posted:Will the SNP also be intervening on Welsh and Northern Irish matters, or just English ones? Right now, they've only declared a position on England&Wales's NHS because of the Barnett formula. Wales doesn't have an entirely separate NHS, changes to England's NHS will affect them too. NI's HSC is a completely different thing, so that isn't within the SNP's interest. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 16:13 on Jan 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
Brits out, end London rule! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2015 17:46
|
|