Born Under a Union Flag: Rangers, Britain and Scottish Independence

[Thinker 887]

Thinker, if the question of independence had never been asked in my lifetime, it wouldn't have bothered me. I'm 42, so I've seen in my opinion the tories & labour have a go & both made an arse of it. Lib dems have looked week since the coalition, so who do I vote for now? Only answer is to either abstain or vote for independence. I've chosen independence. Again only my opinion but I feel it's a moot point as I think the vote will be approximately 60-40 to maintain the union.

I agree with you & American philosopher Dan Dennett point that "how religions in many cases offer a gold-plated excuse to stop thinking"

 

Well, I suppose the critical part of the decision in the referendum is that we're voting for the system of government, not the government itself. During their histories, all the major political parties have had successes and failures, strong leaders and weak leaders etc. and any political party that may be elected should there be a Yes vote will be no different. IMO, It's a question which is far bigger than Milliband, Cameron and Salmond (or even Thatcher and Blair).

 

I think the referendum will be a very close-run thing, and I'm by no means certain who'll win.

[sairdyy 0]

Thinker I accept that threw history the parties in power have done good. It's just in my lifetime I remember the spectacularly bad, that can't be undone. I feel that threw independence we get a chance to start again.

Bluedell, The level of debate from both sides has been poor.

As for the book? Not for me thanks.

[Scott7 6,168]

Governing is a helluva difficult thing to do. You can't get everything right all of the time. I've seen a dozen come and go and they're all much the same. Some good things. Some bad things. Mrs Thatcher was right for her time. Blair was right for his. You can put the government in Drumnadrochit and wrap a kilt round it but it will still be a few telling the rest of us what to do.

 

The few seem to be getting more and more inept because most of them have never done anything but politics. Watch parliamentary set pieces on the telly and you'll see cringingly ignorant grandstanding. Holyrood is worse than Westminster.

 

And none of it has anything to do with football in general or Rangers in particular.

[Bluedell 5,679]

Thinker I accept that threw history the parties in power have done good. It's just in my lifetime I remember the spectacularly bad, that can't be undone. I feel that threw independence we get a chance to start again.

 

Sorry but that's a frightening logic. You may think things have been bad (they really haven't but think how we would have coped being independent during the banking crisis) but they will be much worse as an independent country.

 

Just saying I want a change and independence is a change so I want it will not mean things will get better.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Governing is a helluva difficult thing to do. You can't get everything right all of the time. I've seen a dozen come and go and they're all much the same. Some good things. Some bad things. Mrs Thatcher was right for her time. Blair was right for his. You can put the government in Drumnadrochit and wrap a kilt round it but it will still be a few telling the rest of us what to do.

 

The few seem to be getting more and more inept because most of them have never done anything but politics. Watch parliamentary set pieces on the telly and you'll see cringingly ignorant grandstanding. Holyrood is worse than Westminster.

 

And none of it has anything to do with football in general or Rangers in particular.

 

seriously, mate? seriously? Westminster, where politics now no longer makes any pretense at being about or for the people; where you'd need a forensic scientist to tell any of the posh-boy-to-public-school-to-oxbridge-to-westminster politicians apart.

 

In Holyrood, whether you like them or loath them all the party leaders are recognisably different, and all the parties, (apart from Labour) actually stand for and believe in something.

 

Your remark about "because most of them have never done anything but politics" is certainly true about Camerocleggiband and Westminster's established parties, but doesn't apply to the SNP. When the current SNP MSPs joined the party, there was next to no chance it would ever be in power, so they weren't motivzted by political career advancement. Fortunately, as things turned out, they did get into power.

Perhaps its beause the MSPs are made up of real people, rather than party aparatchicks, that they were reelected with a greater majority last time.

[chilledbear 16]

Sorry but that's a frightening logic. You may think things have been bad (they really haven't but think how we would have coped being independent during the banking crisis) but they will be much worse as an independent country.

 

Just saying I want a change and independence is a change so I want it will not mean things will get better.

 

Voters put their cross in the square for these kind of reasons in every election, it's democracy !!

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Sorry but that's a frightening logic. You may think things have been bad (they really haven't but think how we would have coped being independent during the banking crisis) but they will be much worse as an independent country.

 

Just saying I want a change and independence is a change so I want it will not mean things will get better.

 

Had we been independent, what makes you think we'd have allowed ourselves to get into that mess? How did Switzerland get on during the crisis? Sure, those Swiss banks which were exposed to London/NewYork casino-banking suffered, but it doesn't seem to have done too much harm to the overall Swiss economy, (which actually suffered because it was too successful and thus offered a safe haven for foreign currencies, thereby pushing the Franc into the stratosphere).

 

Or, on the theme of small European nations, how about the Norwegian or Swedish or Finnish or Austrian or Danish banks?

 

They all seem to have weathered the storm very nicely, despite having the massive disadvantage of being independent countries in charge of their own economies.

[Thinker 887]

Had we been independent, what makes you think we'd have allowed ourselves to get into that mess? How did Switzerland get on during the crisis? Sure, those Swiss banks which were exposed to London/NewYork casino-banking suffered, but it doesn't seem to have done too much harm to the overall Swiss economy, (which actually suffered because it was too successful and thus offered a safe haven for foreign currencies, thereby pushing the Franc into the stratosphere).

 

Or, on the theme of small European nations, how about the Norwegian or Swedish or Finnish or Austrian or Danish banks?

 

They all seem to have weathered the storm very nicely, despite having the massive disadvantage of being independent countries in charge of their own economies.

 

Would RBS have acted any differently had Scotland been independent? You and I certainly wouldn't have had any say in what they were allowed to do. How would we have dealt with the bailout? Our situation may well have been more like that of Ireland ( i.e. borrowing from the UK to cover the cost, and austerity measures introduced to claw back the debt).

 

As Scott7 said above though we've veered off-topic for the football forum here.

[TheWee BlueDevil 0]

I'm not sure where I fit in this debate.

Seems like I'm the odd one out - Me being Loyalist, Unionist, and Protestant.

 

Looks like even some "friends" are now using religious designation as a tool to forward their anti English Agenda.

 

Roll on Saturday so I can once again feel like I belong!! Family!! 12th.

[neutralscot 0]

relationship between sport and national identity.

 

=======

 

I remember Argentina 1978 and scarring trauma of it all. Scotland lost some of it's swagger directly because of it it's fair to say, and it may have negatively influenced the devolution vote of 1979. I'm sure the book will be an interesting read.