When will indyref2 happen?

[pandarilla]

Not really.  The problem with Scottish Independence is that it has become wrapped up in Tartanism.
Try and decouple a movement that has social and economical merit from jingoistic shortbread-tin rattling.  Try and step back from the odious SNP and create a non-partisan independence movement.  Something pluralistic.  Then you could be on to something.
Right now you're on to plums.

This is a dreadful misrepresentation of the independence debate. I hope you've not lowered yourself to wind-up attempts?

[pandarilla]

The polls aren't moving because voters are entrenched Oaksoft. I wouldn't be at all surprised that if we ran the Scottish Independence referendum again we'd still get the exact same 55% - 45% outcome. Nationalists are reduced to hoping that "No" voting Scots die at a faster rate than "Yes" voting ones - that's how desperate their straw clutching is. 

That's not a desperate strategy, it's a fact. Older people are (understandably in many cases) more likely to vote against independence.

[The_Kincardine]

2 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

17 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

Not really.  The problem with Scottish Independence is that it has become wrapped up in Tartanism.
Try and decouple a movement that has social and economical merit from jingoistic shortbread-tin rattling.  Try and step back from the odious SNP and create a non-partisan independence movement.  Something pluralistic.  Then you could be on to something.
Right now you're on to plums.

This is a dreadful misrepresentation of the independence debate. I hope you've not lowered yourself to wind-up attempts?

When you have highly intelligent blokes like @MixuFixitregarding Independence as a test of 'Scottishness' then I think my comment is justifiable.

[pandarilla]

When you have highly intelligent blokes like [mention=75884]MixuFixit[/mention]regarding Independence as a test of 'Scottishness' then I think my comment is justifiable.

That's not what he's doing at all though, and surely you can see that.

I regularly hear unionists attacking the independence movement for tartany and it really is so far from the truth. It's their obsession with this 70s SNP cliche that they can't get past.

The independence movement is so far removed from any ethno connection and any comparisons with the brexit debate are absolutely laughable.

[Stellaboz]

Are the staunch types still shiting in in here? Good.

[Billy Jean King]

These will be the same pro-union types that regularly refer to Nicola Sturgeon as Jimmy Crankie or Wee Burnie / Nippy. The hypocrisy is rife amongst them

[The_Kincardine]

2 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

The independence movement is so far removed from any ethno connection and any comparisons with the brexit debate are absolutely laughable.
 

We know 1. that an ethno-nationalist aspect to the Indy movement is there.  We've all seen the AUOB marches and the Jimmy wigs, Glengarries etc.  2. We all know that a key aspect of the vile Brexit movement was the politicisation of nostalgia - a paean for an England that never existed except in the minds of Brexit proponents.  The Natters are on the same tack, sadly.

[thepundit]

5 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Statistically, the polls have still not moved in anything like a meaningful, relevant or consistent manner.

IMO, the support for independence peaked at 45% and as the Brexit farce continues I highly doubt Yes is going to gain any kind of traction any time soon. Certainly not by 2020 if that is indeed when indyref2 will take place.

There's only one way a Yes vote would win in my opinion and that's if the public had a guaranteed exit date and all the answers before  the vote. 

Then again, the general public probably wouldn't like the answers to those questions. (questions purposely left unanswered last time???)

[welshbairn]

10 minutes ago, thepundit said:

IMO, the support for independence peaked at 45% and as the Brexit farce continues I highly doubt Yes is going to gain any kind of traction any time soon. Certainly not by 2020 if that is indeed when indyref2 will take place.

There's only one way a Yes vote would win in my opinion and that's if the public had a guaranteed exit date and all the answers before  the vote. 

Then again, the general public probably wouldn't like the answers to those questions. (questions purposely left unanswered last time???)

Westminster will refuse to negotiate a settlement deal before a vote and will promise zero cooperation. Of course that would turn on its head after a Yes vote, in their own interests for a smooth separation. But it means definitive answers to the questions before a vote just isn't possible, same as last time. They all depend on what results from negotiations with an honest partner, which won't happen till after a vote.

Edited October 14, 2019 by welshbairn

[strichener]

17 minutes ago, thepundit said:

IMO, the support for independence peaked at 45% and as the Brexit farce continues I highly doubt Yes is going to gain any kind of traction any time soon. Certainly not by 2020 if that is indeed when indyref2 will take place.

There's only one way a Yes vote would win in my opinion and that's if the public had a guaranteed exit date and all the answers before  the vote. 

Then again, the general public probably wouldn't like the answers to those questions. (questions purposely left unanswered last time???)

You predicting this is the best thing that has happened to the Indy movement!  I have seen some of your past predictions and if I were a betting man, I would be rich betting the opposite of yourself.

[pandarilla]

We know 1. that an ethno-nationalist aspect to the Indy movement is there.  We've all seen the AUOB marches and the Jimmy wigs, Glengarries etc.  2. We all know that a key aspect of the vile Brexit movement was the politicisation of nostalgia - a paean for an England that never existed except in the minds of Brexit proponents.  The Natters are on the same tack, sadly.

We know 1. that an ethno-nationalist aspect to the Indy movement is there.  We've all seen the AUOB marches and the Jimmy wigs, Glengarries etc.  2. We all know that a key aspect of the vile Brexit movement was the politicisation of nostalgia - a paean for an England that never existed except in the minds of Brexit proponents.  The Natters are on the same tack, sadly.

1. Yes, a small but noisy minority. I own a kilt and wear it to weddings (sometimes), dinner dance things (sometimes), and Scotland games (hardly ever). I think there's even a Jimmy hat in my kids dress up box. Does that make me part of this ethno-nationalist aspect? You're making a huge leap of faith in the second sentence of your post. Folk go to marches and want to make it bright and colourful. I'll repeat the point though, I don't deny that there is a small minority of ethno-nationalists in Scotland, it's just nowhere near the driving force of the movement. Go flick through the 'common weal' website and see the types of politics that is driving it.

2. I hear Scottish artists and politicians talking about the future whenever they discuss the issue. What kind of nostalgia do you think exists? A hark back to the 17th century? There is no nostalgia for Scottish independence. Brexit had a clear imperialistic, war theme going on. Britain standing alone against the Germans. It was utter dugshit, and bares no resemblance to the yes movement.

[The_Kincardine]

7 minutes ago, pandarilla said:

I own a kilt and wear it to weddings (sometimes), dinner dance things (sometimes), and Scotland games (hardly ever)

 

 

 

I also own a kilt and wear it for the same reasons.  When my son (born in Edinburgh and raised 'down here') had his school's leaving do in June I had him measured for a kilt at his behest.  As a tall, handsome egg-chaser (like his auld man) he looked terrific.  He, like me, is patriotically Scottish.

Would either of us get garbed-up in kilts to express our political opinions?  Not in the slightest.  We're not Nationalistic fuckwits.

I have said on a few occasions that I'd have no issue with a pluralistic Scotland seceding from the UK and stand by this.  However, when it becomes all about tropes, garb, symbols and 'Scottishness' then you have to question the motivation.

[Bairnardo]

I also own a kilt and wear it for the same reasons.  When my son (born in Edinburgh and raised 'down here') had his school's leaving do in June I had him measured for a kilt at his behest.  As a tall, handsome egg-chaser (like his auld man) he looked terrific.  He, like me, is patriotically Scottish.
Would either of us get garbed-up in kilts to express our political opinions?  Not in the slightest.  We're not Nationalistic fuckwits.
I have said on a few occasions that I'd have no issue with a pluralistic Scotland seceding from the UK and stand by this.  However, when it becomes all about tropes, garb, symbols and 'Scottishness' then you have to question the motivation.

Objects to Rangers fans being conflated with the white gloved wankers of the Orange Order.

More than happy to direct the equivalent at Indy supporters.

Something chagrin, something something trope demerit.

Boring troll.

[Bairnardo]

There's about 50k folk in Scotland who go in for the blue face paint and whatnot. About the same number don or sympathise with those who don bowler hats and white gloves and ruin Glasgow's mornings.
There's a much, much bigger group who do neither and are not motivated in the least by either of these things but you don't see us on telly. This is foundation level stuff.

[emoji7] my man....

[The_Kincardine]

3 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Objects to Rangers fans being conflated with the white gloved wankers of the Orange Order.

Of course I have never even hinted at anything like that.  My stance has always been the exact opposite:  That diddy bellends (and you're a prime example) conflate, "the white gloved wankers of the Orange Order" with Rangers fans.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

These will be the same pro-union types that regularly refer to Nicola Sturgeon as Jimmy Crankie or Wee Burnie / Nippy. The hypocrisy is rife amongst them

Yes and lets face it the sorts of folks you see hitting out with the crankie patter aint no oil painting. They just know they’ve lost the political argument and make it about looks.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

I cant wait to tell my indian born mate Amit that he’s an ethno-nationalist because he wears a kilt.

[welshbairn]

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

I also own a kilt and wear it for the same reasons.  When my son (born in Edinburgh and raised 'down here') had his school's leaving do in June I had him measured for a kilt at his behest.  As a tall, handsome egg-chaser (like his auld man) he looked terrific.  He, like me, is patriotically Scottish.

Would either of us get garbed-up in kilts to express our political opinions?  Not in the slightest.  We're not Nationalistic fuckwits.

I have said on a few occasions that I'd have no issue with a pluralistic Scotland seceding from the UK and stand by this.  However, when it becomes all about tropes, garb, symbols and 'Scottishness' then you have to question the motivation.

I'm firmly on the civil nationalist (with a small n) proud European side of the cause, with patriotic pride coming from the Scottish Enlightenment rather than ancient battles. But you can't win elections on rational anymore, and you need a bit of flag waving and spun history to get the Sun and Record readers to shift the balance. I think the SNP are paying it right on the AUOB marches, congratulating them without playing a full part or getting identified with them too closely.

[pandarilla]

I also own a kilt and wear it for the same reasons.  When my son (born in Edinburgh and raised 'down here') had his school's leaving do in June I had him measured for a kilt at his behest.  As a tall, handsome egg-chaser (like his auld man) he looked terrific.  He, like me, is patriotically Scottish.
Would either of us get garbed-up in kilts to express our political opinions?  Not in the slightest.  We're not Nationalistic fuckwits.
I have said on a few occasions that I'd have no issue with a pluralistic Scotland seceding from the UK and stand by this.  However, when it becomes all about tropes, garb, symbols and 'Scottishness' then you have to question the motivation.

I think the main person mentioning those tropes and making symbolic points about Scottishness is you (and other unionists that want to divert from the main issues).

[The_Kincardine]

5 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm firmly on the civil nationalist (with a small n) proud European side of the cause, with patriotic pride coming from the Scottish Enlightenment rather than ancient battles. But you can't win elections on rational anymore, and you need a bit of flag waving and spun history to get the Sun and Record readers to shift the balance. I think the SNP are paying it right on the AUOB marches, congratulating them without playing a full part or getting identified with them too closely.

That Scotland has about 15% of its electorate being non-Scots says otherwise.  These are the people who will make the difference and tubthumping jingoism simply will not cut the mustard.

Make a case of independence without spinning a story and make independence pluralistic.  You could be on to something.