FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Of course you can, that's the only way you can compare them. Scotland isn't a region of anything, anymore than England is. If Scotland is a region of the UK as you say then so is England. Yorkshire doesn't come into it. You really are the archetypal British nationalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I've got a few friends in Liverpool who are very, very jealous. If I lived in Liverpool I would feel very, very jealous of anyone who lives anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Of course you can, that's the only way you can compare them. Scotland isn't a region of anything, anymore than England is. If Scotland is a region of the UK as you say then so is England. Yorkshire doesn't come into it. You really are the archetypal British nationalist. All three are regions. Should Scotland get un-proportional representation at Westminster simply because it's a 'country'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Regions of what? No, Scotland being part of a political union in which its voice doesn't matter is a problem. England doesn't have that problem. That is an imbalance. Scotland should be independent so it doesn't have to suffer this imbalance for another 300 years. Yorkshire or any other region of England doesn't come into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SodjesSixteenIncher Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I bet jmo didn't see this exact conversation happening when he mentioned Yorkshire. Except yes, he did. Get a fucking grip the pair of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I think its an important conversation and am happy to have it. If you don't like reading I'm sure there are other threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Regions of what? No, Scotland being part of a political union in which its voice doesn't matter is a problem. England doesn't have that problem. That is an imbalance. Scotland should be independent so it doesn't have to suffer this imbalance for another 300 years. Yorkshire or any other region of England doesn't come into it. Regions of the UK. Scotland does have a say, proportionate to its size. You seriously think Scotland's influence on Westminster should be the same as England's despite England making up the vast majority of the country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 All three are regions. Should Scotland get un-proportional representation at Westminster simply because it's a 'country'? If our vote makes it that way, certainly. It's the same rules throughout the UK. Sometimes we are ruled by a Government without a single Scottish MP. This time we might hold the balance of power. That's Parliamentary democracy for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 What country? Scotland makes up all of Scotland. The UK doesn't have regions champ, it has four constituent countries. Each of those have internal regions, completely separate to any UK concern. I think Scotland, as a country, deserves adequate political representation. We can only get this with independence, but since you ask yes I do think its influence on WM should be equal to England's, given WM have just spent two years desperately begging us to stay an 'equal' partner of this union. And why would anybody be happy being part of a political union where we didn't have equal representation? Unless they're a raging Britnat of course. If Scotland's representation isn't equal then we still have a problem and always will until that is solved or we're independent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Regions of the UK. Scotland does have a say, proportionate to its size. You seriously think Scotland's influence on Westminster should be the same as England's despite England making up the vast majority of the country? FFS, of course he doesn't. He wants Scotland to be independent. Edit: Maybe he does. That's strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 If our vote makes it that way, certainly. It's the same rules throughout the UK. Sometimes we are ruled by a Government without a single Scottish MP. This time we might hold the balance of power. That's Parliamentary democracy for you. I have no problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 What country? Scotland makes up all of Scotland. The UK doesn't have regions champ, it has four constituent countries. Each of those have internal regions, completely separate to the any UK concern. I think Scotland, as a country, deserve adequate political representation. We can only get this with independence, but since you ask yes I do think its influence on WM should be equal to England's, given WM have just spent two years desperately begging us to stay an 'equal' partner of this union. If Scotland's representation isn't equal then we still have a problem and always will until that is solved or we're independent. We have adequate political representation. Being a country rather than a region makes no difference to how much representation Scotland deserves in the UK parliament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 FFS, of course he doesn't. He wants Scotland to be independent. Edit: Maybe he does. That's strange. Well obviously I don't, but if we are part of the UK that is better than the current system and only fair. I certainly don't want Scotland to be in a position where we can return one Tory MP and get a Tory government, or vote to stay in the EU but still be forced to leave cause England wants to. That is the situation as part of the UK. Which jmothecat doesn't see as a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I have no problem with that. The Telegraph are fucking raging about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 We have adequate political representation. Being a country rather than a region makes no difference to how much representation Scotland deserves in the UK parliament. To you, as you are a British nationalist. To the rest of us who aren't the current situation is untenable. We currently have a government who won less than 2% of the seats in Scotland. If you think that equals adequate representation you need your head looked at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 You can't compare Scotland and England like that. Why does Scotland being a 'country' and Yorkshire being a 'county' make representation of either any different? Both are regions, both are fairly represented in regards to their respective sizes. Scotland is a country, not a region. Only a raging Britnat would say that.... u can take that as the scoop of the election so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 To you, as you are a British nationalist. To the rest of us who aren't the current situation is untenable. We currently have a government who won less than 2% of the seats in Scotland. If you think that equals adequate representation you need your head looked at. They won almost 25% of the seats in Scotland, but it wouldn't matter even if they only won 2%. No more than it would matter if there is an SNP/Labour coalition after this election despite there being no SNP and few Labour MPs in the south of England. That's democracy. Not every area will get what they vote for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 To you, as you are a British nationalist. To the rest of us who aren't the current situation is untenable. We currently have a government who won less than 2% of the seats in Scotland. If you think that equals adequate representation you need your head looked at. This isn't the time to whine about it. SNP could decide who rules Britain with 4% of the UK vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmothecat Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Scotland is a country, not a region. Only a raging Britnat would say that.... u can take that as the scoop of the election so far Scotland is a country, it's also a region of the UK. In this context it's a region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 They won almost 25% of the seats in Scotland, but it wouldn't matter even if they only won 2%. No more than it would matter if there is an SNP/Labour coalition after this election despite there being no SNP and few Labour MPs in the south of England. That's democracy. Not every area will get what they vote for. No, it wouldn't matter to YOU. To people who aren't British nationalists it matters a great deal. Nobody is talking about areas, we are talking about countries. Most countries do get the government they vote for, 100% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.