Scotland Vote No In Referendum – Selfish, Scared People, Well Done!

The way I see it is that the English took centuries to subjugate the Scottish people. The Scottish people have always called the English 'the Old Enemy'. This has been the only time in history that the Scottish people had a chance to VOTE, not have nobility choose for them, to gain more autonomy as a Scottish nation. They voted to still be ruled by the English and Westminster.
Edward I must be laughing in his grave!

a reply to: eletheia

That whole comment was just stating the obvious although it's not about winners and losers when the winners in the long run are the losers...or vice versa. It is really about the right choice for Scotland.

a reply to: Hurky1

And another, overtly simplistic and totally inaccurate statement with regards to the history between the two countries, how they came together, their relationship since, what the constitutional makeup of the UK is and the vote they just had..

Well done, I think you just got the Grand Slam for daftest and most inaccurate post in this thread so far!

a reply to: midicon

In that regard, I think we have common ground! I have to say, despite your obvious disappointment and earlier comments, you have taken this with much more dignity than some of your fellows around these parts. I am genuinely quite excited about a new constitutional settlement, it could be the catalyst for change we've all been hankering after.

For that, I thank all Scots for kicking it off.

As for Gordon Brown, he has certainly rejuvenated himself after this, hasn't he? When he was Chancellor/PM, I didn't really warm to him but at the same time, I felt he was likeable and more trustworthy than his predecessor. You never know, he may restart his career in Scotland and he may end up as First Minister at some point!

a reply to: eletheia

LOL!!! Looking at your graph only supports the theory that wisdom

comes with age and experience.....

It virtually proves that 'once bitten twice shy' as the older one gets

the less the blatant lies are believed, having been there and done that!

Unfortunately it is the exact opposite of what you say. The no campaign has played upon the fears of the older generation and we always knew they would vote no. The older generation happily believe lies and political spin. They grew up in a different time before the advent of the internet and digital age...the young are now more savvy than they ever were. I think you must have some sort of agenda although god knows what that might be. I have spent the past weeks talking to pensioners and asking how they would vote and why. They are a fearful bunch and have selfishly sold out the young without a second thought.

a reply to: midicon

Something I find it hard to understand and maybe you can explain it to me.

Through out all the threads on the subject I kept seeing as you stated

"getting away from Westminister."

Now in reality "Westminister" is a grand building, and it only 'houses'

democratically elected governments. Currently Conservatives/Lib/Dem

by default, and for the previous 13 years a Labour government.


If like the referendum one gets the opposite result to what one wanted

surely that's just tough luck, majority wins ... that's democracy.


So when people say I hate Westminister or want to be free of it, do they

actually mean the currently democratically voted in government ??

a reply to: midicon

One could argue, using that logic midicon, that the Young would have "selfishly sold out the older generation" for a romantic ideal, without a "second thought" as to how an iScotland could have funded pensions, secured jobs and propped up the economy.

Works both ways....

Double post.....

Reminds me of the 2 Quebec referendums in 1980 and 1995, both times the people of Quebec voted to stay with Canada.

But unlike Scotland and England, Quebec is already like a different country to western Canadians and especially to Americans. Quebec separatists were watching the result of this and living vicariously though the Scottish nationalists, and they lost again.

originally posted by: eletheia
So when people say I hate Westminister or want to be free of it, do they

actually mean the currently democratically voted in government ??

That does appear to be thread running through this whole thing. I don't remember ANY Scot complaining about a "Government they didn't vote for" or "Westminster" between 1997 and 2010. I wonder if that is because as Scotland is a Labour stronghold, they were happy with it..

Roll on 2010 with a Conservative Government and all of a sudden there is a campaign against "Westminster" and complaints about a "Government they didn't vote for".. Add into that sentiment the current moaning about not voting "Yes" and it would appear that some have an issue with how a Democratic society works.

Meanwhile, in England, we had 13 years of a Labour Government (passing legislation with Scottish MP's that English MP's would have rejected I might add) which a good deal of the people "didn't vote for", yet we simply accepted it.

originally posted by: midicon

Unfortunately it is the exact opposite of what you say. The no campaign has played upon the fears of the older generation and we always knew they would vote no. The older generation happily believe lies and political spin. They grew up in a different time before the advent of the internet and digital age...the young are now more savvy than they ever were. I think you must have some sort of agenda although god knows what that might be. I have spent the past weeks talking to pensioners and asking how they would vote and why. They are a fearful bunch and have selfishly sold out the young without a second thought.

Well I could take exception to what you say.... I just happen to be one

of those 'pensioners' you are referring to, and I have grandchildren, who

for fact aren't as savvy as I was at their age.


I agree some are (and probably will end up as politicians) but far from

the majority of them. Most are 'gung ho' and will join in anything new

just for the hell of it!!!


There's nothing wrong with "Looking before you leap" and "the grass is not

always greener in the next field"

a reply to: stumason


LOL!! I have long seen you around the boards and many of your

stars are from me! Many times I see one of your posts and think to

myself "We could be twin souls" (gosh how I miss that laughing emo.)

a reply to: eletheia

It is the whole system that I object to. The House of Lords, Whitehall and the Monarchy not to mention the City of London. All of those institutions pull the strings at Westminster. I can recall Tony Benn talking about the set up at Westminster and how the two party system is really a facade for the Crown. The Crown he explained is what the minister's call the established institutions that are the power behind Westminster. I have no illusions about Holyrood we have our own corruption I am sure, however I just want to bring the politics home to where they are accountable. What some don't realise is, that although we have Holyrood it is Westminster that holds the populations attention.

The vote result might be regarded as tough luck but it is not about luck. I for one don't think the campaign was run as it should have been but we have to move on.

Pledge one from the three Westminster party leaders was that a motion would be laid before the UK Parliament within 24 hours of a No vote, a motion agreed by each, one which would provide the detailed timetable for the legislative process for Devo max.

That hasn't happened. In fact, they can't agree on anything.

I heard former Foreign Minister Rifkind on BBC Radio yesterday. He was furious at PM Cameron's attempt to link the Scottish Pledges to constitutional reform in the rest of the UK. Surprising, considering he is an influential Scotsman in the Conservative Party. He clearly sees the dangers ahead if progress in Scotland is delayed to any extent.

Because he's a clever man. But then so is Salmond. Salmond has withdrawn from leadership before and gained advantage from that. I suspect he's doing the same now. He's allowing his party and government to be diverted into elections for new leaders etc. That diversion will let Westminster think it's off the hook, reform will slide, nothing will get done, there will be debates about debates, reform will stall.

Then Salmond will be back.

Not in a generations time, but within a year or three. And he'll win next time by quite a margin.

It would be best if UK wide constitutional reform be made at the same time. Anomalies like the West Lothian question need resolution urgently. But Scotland can't and won't wait for the English to decide what reforms they want in their own nation. That's the real problem the three leaders face, that and the cleverest, most manipulative politician in the EU as an opponent.

the referendum has put a high fence between 2 sections of scottish people, the 'ayes' and the 'nos'. now exposed so clearly, the division will harden over the coming years. the 2 camps will never cooperate. they might even become 'enemies'. good luck Scotland, you're going to need it. and don't hold your breath waiting for downing street to make good on the pre-vote bribes/promises.

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

A motion within 24hrs? But how is that possible considering Parliament is in recess....

That said, they have already released a statement with the text of such a Motion:

“That this House welcomes the result of the Scottish independence referendum and the decision of the people of Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom; recognises that people across Scotland voted‎ for a Union based on the pooling and sharing of resources and for the‎ continuation of devolution inside the United Kingdom; notes the statement by the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition regarding the guarantee of and timetable for further devolution to Scotland; calls on the Government to lay before Parliament a Command Paper including the proposals of all three UK political parties by 30th October and to consult widely with the Scottish people, civic Scotland and the Scottish Parliament on these proposals; further calls on the Government to publish heads of agreement by the end of November and draft clauses for the new Scotland Bill by the end of January 2015."


news.stv.tv...

So, that's one of your points knocked down right there.

As for your assertion that Salmond and/or Scotland will have a second bite of the cherry - not going to happen. You can't keep re-running referenda every couple of years until you get the result you want... There will be a 20-30 year wait before there is even a chance at another, just like last time.

So, basically, everything you just said is total bunk.

a reply to: eletheia

Hehe

It isn't often I find someone who thinks like me! Then again, that might be a good thing for the world.....

a reply to: stumason

Tell that to the Irish.

In that regard, I think we have common ground! I have to say, despite your obvious disappointment and earlier comments

What earlier comments? You will never find anti-English sentiment in any post I have ever made on ATS. I can say that because I don't harbour that sentiment. If you are talking about my comment that 'the English people need to get off their backsides', I stand by it. You took it the wrong way. Shall I refer to any of your comments, I can think of a recent one, but I won't it is pointless and not worth the effort.

Midicon.

It's all good.

a reply to: stumason

The pledge said within 24 hours. They didn't meet it. Pledge failed. You might consider that bunk, but Scottish people are watching this with a level of forensic interest that you simply don't grasp. I'm merely passing that to this community as Scots pass it to theirs. Take it, leave it.

I think the issue of Scottish independence will be revisited through another referendum within 5 years.

a reply to: midicon

I think you might be confused - I didn't mean anything anti-English, but rather the attitude you have towards your fellow Scots