When will indyref2 happen?

[sophia]

50 minutes ago, alta-pete said:

It’s a fair point. There’s enough of a number that wouldn’t take it at all well. I’ve heard it referred to as the ‘Ulsterisation’ of Scotland that I think is a wee bit OTT but if Independence does happen then there’s a chunk of the population that won’t be part of the civic joyousness. And the P&B stock answer of ‘just fire them into the sea’ doesn’t really resolve the issue either. 

It is a worry but the transition from apartheid in South Africa was managed and no small part due to the leadership offered.

In Scotland the section of society that have been encouraged by a partisan message will need to be managed and those who are presently indulging themselves with whistles that attract dogs have a big responsibility to recalibrate to help the easily led to settle down.

[alta-pete]

1 hour ago, sophia said:

It is a worry but the transition from apartheid in South Africa was managed and no small part due to the leadership offered.

In Scotland the section of society that have been encouraged by a partisan message will need to be managed and those who are presently indulging themselves with whistles that attract dogs have a big responsibility to recalibrate to help the easily led to settle down.

There’s the problem right there. Salmond in his pomp and Sturgeon at her empathetic best (however long she might hing aboot if Indy is won) are brilliant but I struggle to see any sort of depth of deep thinkers or future leaders behind them. 
 

ETA: And I think the S African comparison is more than a tad disingenuous I’m afraid. 75% of their wholly disengaged population were then fully engaged. How you gain a parallel with that unimaginable injustice and the Yoon/Nats discussion both wholly overstretches our discussions and demeans their struggles all in the one. 

Edited July 30, 2021 by alta-pete
Slow thinker

[Wee-Bey]

Ultimately, post independence, the options for Unionists will be

1 acceptance and engagement 

2 disengagement 

3 resistance 

4 leave the country

I'm sure that there will be people in all of those categories.

I genuinely hope that the majority would choose no.1. 

[NotThePars]

The vast, vast, vast majority will fall into camps 1 and 2. The stakes are not that great and certainly not remotely comparable to South Africa.

[welshbairn]

On 30/07/2021 at 09:32, NotThePars said:

It’s a tough choice tbf: either I believe Sturgeon doesn’t read or she reads and thinks there’s something worthy and non-partisan in reading and appreciating Kissinger.

On balance, I think I’m going to plump for the former.

As genocidal war criminals go, some of his articles are worth a read and sometimes enlightened.

[Wee-Bey]

7 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

The stakes are not that great and certainly not remotely comparable to South Africa.

Craig Murray's triumphant freedom walk from Barlinnie to take up the role of a unifying President.

Brian Spanner and Effie Deans calling for the necklacing of all collaborators with the regime.

[NotThePars]

As genocidal war criminals go, some of his articles are worth a read and sometimes enlightened.

I guarantee that anything he says has been said better by people who crucially aren’t genocidal war criminals

[btb]

I see Gove has been quoted in the Evening Standard that the government would not stand in the way of IndyRef2 if it is the "settled will" of the people although I suppose that opens up a debate as to what the phrase actually means.

Quote

The UK Government would not stand in the way of another vote on Scottish independence if it is the “settled will” of voters, Michael Gove has said.

Is Gove saying that a repeat of the status quo  in the next GE would be a mandate?

Edited August 1, 2021 by btb

[ICTJohnboy]

1 hour ago, btb said:

I see Gove has been quoted in the Evening Standard that the government would not stand in the way of IndyRef2 if it is the "settled will" of the people although I suppose that opens up a debate as to what the phrase actually means.

Is Gove saying that a repeat of the status quo  in the next GE would be a mandate?

 

Has all that tax payers money they recently spent on surveys into the desire for Indyref2, and the likely outcome told them something? 

[BFTD]

It means nothing, but is a much smarter move than just saying, "no, no no!" over and over again.

The real answer is still, "from our cold, dead hands".

[SANTAN]

He's basically quite correctly saying that there isn't support for it, if there was majority support then it would happen. I know the 3 or 4 weeks of polls at the tail end of last year must have been awfully exciting but now we're back where we've always been. 

The appetite is not there. 

[Antlion]

19 minutes ago, SANTAN said:

He's basically quite correctly saying that there isn't support for it, if there was majority support then it would happen. I know the 3 or 4 weeks of polls at the tail end of last year must have been awfully exciting but now we're back where we've always been. 

The appetite is not there. 

There wasn’t majority support for Brexit either, so I’m not sure why the little scrotum thought a referendum was justified.

[SANTAN]

13 minutes ago, Antlion said:

There wasn’t majority support for Brexit either, so I’m not sure why the little scrotum thought a referendum was justified.

That's a fair point. Most politicians change their opinions dependant on which way the political winds are blowing anyway and he clearly thinks this line on Indy is palatable, someone else on the thread who I believe supports Indy almost complemented the change in tone. 

[Dawson Park Boy]

24 minutes ago, Antlion said:

There wasn’t majority support for Brexit either, so I’m not sure why the little scrotum thought a referendum was justified.

Brexit had been a festering sore for a long time. A referendum was needed to decide the matter once and for all (a generation). Similarly, with Scottish independence, the decision was made in 2014.

Get over it.

[welshbairn]

1 minute ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Brexit had been a festering sore for a long time. A referendum was needed to decide the matter once and for all (a generation). Similarly, with Scottish independence, the decision was made in 2014.

Get over it.

Brexit was only an issue in the right wing of the Tory party until they forced Cameron to promise one if he wanted to remain leader. The Independence Referendum was won on a false premise, that a No vote was the only way to stay in the EU. If the 2014 voters had known what would happen 2 years later, we'd be a thriving independent member of the EU by now.

[SANTAN]

38 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Brexit was only an issue in the right wing of the Tory party until they forced Cameron to promise one if he wanted to remain leader. The Independence Referendum was won on a false premise, that a No vote was the only way to stay in the EU. If the 2014 voters had known what would happen 2 years later, we'd be a thriving independent member of the EU by now.

When you say only relevant within the right wing of the Conservative party I think you're getting a bit carried away. A large part of the UKIP appeal and rise of Farage was aimed at hoovering up the working class voters and disenfranchised people and telling them that Labour and Tories were basically the same anyway and if you wanted to MBGA you had to push for Brexit. The whole red wall situation and Corbyn definitely had plenty of typically Labour voters supporting Brexit. It wasn't at the forefront of political discourse until the groundswell got brought to the surface through UKIP and co. 

As for the Scottish Indy referendum you've completely simplified the point. There's plenty of Scottish people that wanted to Remain in the EU that also don't want to leave the UK because of it. Your last sentence isn't accurate imo. Both sides told porkies and used clever language. The thrust of the EU argument centred around an Independent Scotlands ability to actually join the EU, we still have no more certainty on that position. At the time of the referendum it was possible that after a No vote people could have voted Remain whereas in the result of a Yes vote then there would be uncertainty over joining the EU, out of  interest was there proposals for leaving the UK and not joining the EU? 

[Antlion]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Brexit had been a festering sore for a long time.

Yet there was no support for it, at least not in the polls. Gove still supported a referendum on it going ahead. Why?

Edited August 1, 2021 by Antlion

[Dawson Park Boy]

16 minutes ago, Antlion said:

Yet there was no support for it, at least not in the polls. Gove still supported a referendum on it going ahead. Why?

This is  testing my memory but, as I recall, Cameron never expected to get an outright majority and he promised an in out EU referendum to keep his Brexiteer supporters on board.

When he got the majority he had no choice.

Anyway, old news. Time to move on.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, SANTAN said:

When you say only relevant within the right wing of the Conservative party I think you're getting a bit carried away. A large part of the UKIP appeal and rise of Farage was aimed at hoovering up the working class voters and disenfranchised people and telling them that Labour and Tories were basically the same anyway and if you wanted to MBGA you had to push for Brexit. The whole red wall situation and Corbyn definitely had plenty of typically Labour voters supporting Brexit. It wasn't at the forefront of political discourse until the groundswell got brought to the surface through UKIP and co. 

As for the Scottish Indy referendum you've completely simplified the point. There's plenty of Scottish people that wanted to Remain in the EU that also don't want to leave the UK because of it. Your last sentence isn't accurate imo. Both sides told porkies and used clever language. The thrust of the EU argument centred around an Independent Scotlands ability to actually join the EU, we still have no more certainty on that position. At the time of the referendum it was possible that after a No vote people could have voted Remain whereas in the result of a Yes vote then there would be uncertainty over joining the EU, out of  interest was there proposals for leaving the UK and not joining the EU? 

I just think the combined vote of liberal English born expats and EU born expats eager to keep freedom of movement, alongside others nervous of Indy but thinking that EU membership was a net positive, would have taken us well over 50% if we'd been told what the plan was for 2016.

[Dawson Park Boy]

41 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I just think the combined vote of liberal English born expats and EU born expats eager to keep freedom of movement, alongside others nervous of Indy but thinking that EU membership was a net positive, would have taken us well over 50% if we'd been told what the plan was for 2016.

I disagree.

I think most English born residents in Scotland would have voted no despite Brexit. I think they still will.

Just my opinion.