Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

elantan wrote: »

Oh I will deff give you there are some anti English SNP/Scot's but they are thankfully very few and if caught displaying or talking any anti English rhetoric they are usually kicked out quite fast.

It's not just the SNP though ... I have read/ listened to some right nasty anti Scottish bile by English people, I certainly don't believe all English are like that though, I know the majority of English are supportive of their neighbours, like their neighbours are supportive of them.

I am quite friendly with a lad in uni that comes from Yorkshire and we have had several talks about the whole Scotland/ England issue and the political upheaval going on here he is a Tory voter that strongly believes in trident and that Scotland should stay within the UK, he also hates Salmond ... we have dinner together once a week and go to the speakers club together so we spend Atleast 6-7 hours a week together.

It's been very interesting talking to him, he says he never ever thought of Scotland as a country it was always just Britain, he see's himself as British first then English, he says though the majority of Scot's see themselves as Scottish, some see themselves as Scottish then British and some ( very few he noted) see themselves as British then Scottish. He says when he first moved up here he suddenly realised we are a different country, we have our own identity ( he didn't say he liked it lol)

He also has found were more environmentally concious compared to what he is used to ... anyway I digress I could go on all day here ... but ultimately what I asked him to do ( and he kindly did) was to give me 25 things about Scotland that he would share with his friends in Leeds to try and explain Scotland to them, I did this as I am doing a speech on the way people brought up and living in Scotland feel about Scotland compared to how people that come from outside of Scotland feel about it.

I hope I've explained that independence for me is not about hating the English, for me it's about a country being in control of its decisions and I believe that should be for every country, it just so happens s I live in this one ... so for me I am anti WM ... the fact it's riddled with liars, thieves murderers, !!!!!phile etc just adds to my hatred of the symbol of what it is.

Sheesh I share a dinner with a Tory Trident loving no voter ... he's a lovely guy though so all's guid

It cuts both ways: there are plenty of English people that aren't that keen on Scottish people. We all know the football chant, "I'd rather be [a person from Pakistan] than a Jock.

I still can't help but feel that for many of the 45% there were a lot of people that just wanted shot of England. I can't back it up with numbers and I'm sure that for every quote I can find supporting my case you can find one to undermine it but we all know that many Scots (a large minority) will be ABE in sports support as an example.

elantan

Yes as you say it cuts both ways ... tell me then how do u deal with the dichotomy of English hating the Scot's it doesn't appear to bother you as much as the Scot's/ nationalists/ SNP hating ( in your perceived view) the English

You do focus more on one direction of travel for the hatred I've noticed

mardatha

If we really did cost England money - then why the whole "Better Together" garbage? Why would Cameron hang onto us? The only thing that interests a Tory is MONEY. So we must bring the stuff in if they want to hang onto us.

Generali

=

zagubov wrote: »

Are all swans white? Especially where you live?;)

I don't think a Nationalist party containing racists could be described as a Black Swan event (if that's what you are alluding to).

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

As for how you can fabricate , that this blog, specifically aimed at zealots , about Wings rants, in any way related or was critical of you when you voted for Phillipa is beyond the stretch of normal imagination.

Oh it was pretty easy actually. You said it yourself.

Anyway your response reminded me of an article I read earlier in the month called 'What reading a Wings Over Scotland rant does for the Nat mind ' which I think is rather apt in the circumstances.

Anyway, enough of blog wars. I used Wings as he had graphs and data to back up my point. Nothing is stopping you doing the same with Hague's... I think Hamish has linked to him several times. But Hague is far from unbiased himself.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

If Labour have been using it then I would argue that Labour too in that case have been guilty of the same pretty disgraceful and frankly racist politicking. Very poor indeed and I suspect that their hubristic behaviour has led to them meeting their nemesis in the slightly unlikely shape of Mr 'Fish Face' Salmond and Ms 'Fatty Sturgeon' (or is that the other way around?).

A unionist party with a majority of MPs coming from England claiming to be anti-English contains an obvious incongruity that could never be sustained and as with anything unsustainable, eventually it stopped.

I don't claim that any of the main parties are free of Dog Whistle politics. As I say, the Tories often pander to the unpleasant socially illiberal wing of their party with thinly disguised words and actions: we have come a long way from Section 28 (which the Scottish Parliament, to their eternal credit, got rid of as one of their very first actions) but they still make apparently badly thought statements on things like immigration and Europe which are actually a signal to that wing that the Tories are still the party for that unpleasant group of nasty idiots.

You've completely missed the point. Scottish Labour were shouting about how crap Westminster was for Scotland when the Tories were in ( because the rest of the UK voted them in several times ).

Between 1976 and 1987 the nation lost nearly a third of its manufacturing capacity. The great heavy industries that had made Scotland’s global economic reputation over more than a century disappeared in a matter of a few years.

A post-industrial economy did emerge in the 1990s, but the crisis left behind a legacy of social dislocation in many working class communities and created a political agenda north of the border in marked contrast to that of the south of England. Rightly or wrongly, the devastation was blamed on the Conservative governments led by Margaret Thatcher. Scotland soon became a Tory-free zone in electoral terms. Another bastion of the union passed into history.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/14/history-turned-on-tory-voting-scotland-thatcher-1980s

And who do you think was shouting loudest about the above ? There's nothing anti-English about it. It was/is politics, pure and simple. And after all, the Treaty of Union is in essence a political union between two governments.

.string.

elantan wrote: »

Yes as you say it cuts both ways ... tell me then how do u deal with the dichotomy of English hating the Scot's it doesn't appear to bother you as much as the Scot's/ nationalists/ SNP hating ( in your perceived view) the English

You do focus more on one direction of travel for the hatred I've noticed

It's not as simple as that. Many regard themselves, as British first and English second, if at all. I fit into that category, like your friend. You have to grasp that core distinction before you can understand the loathing that people have of the SNP which is dedicated to destroying GB.

There is a danger of that loathing spilling over into an anti-Scots mentality, but there is not a tradition of anti Scottish feeling here in that part of GB that we call England, whereas I don't think the reverse is true in Scotland, not for all but for a large section, now amongst the SNP ranks. Remember "anyone but the English"? There is no equivalent tradition here.

The SNP has been, and is, in the process of building on, and extending, an anti-sassenach mentality in Scotland in order to drive a wedge into the country I love, all with "independence" in mind.

To understand my posts here you need to understand what I have just written.

It's clear that "English good will" will be necessary for a separated Scotland (Natland) to survive comfortably, consequently the fluffy words about not hating the English are designed to gloss over that SNP tactic. I doubt there are any but a few south of the border that take that tactic seriously.

The SNP are playing a dangerous game.

Thrugelmir

mardatha wrote: »

If we really did cost England money - then why the whole "Better Together" garbage? Why would Cameron hang onto us? The only thing that interests a Tory is MONEY. So we must bring the stuff in if they want to hang onto us.

Complete rubbish adds nothing to the debate. Politicians of all parties do so to serve the public interest. To suggest otherwise is complete tosh.

kabayiri

Mistermeaner wrote: »

...
The Heathrow thing is interesting - for me clearly an English matter.... for reasons I won't pretend to understand it effects the Barnett formula so the snp get all !!!!y about evel ..... but this is what would happen with indi; no barnett and no say on English matters.

Cake and eat it?

...
Heathrow is a red herring. If the UK does not support Heathrow then future air traffic could just as easily move to a hub on the continent...there are plenty of candidates.

A strong Heathrow is good for Manchester/Glasgow/Midlands/Edinburgh/... all the regional airports.

Billions invested in UK airports will pay back the UK financially. A smaller GDP would mean a smaller share for *all* parts of the UK.

.string.

Response to CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

My last response to you....

@Leanne - for your sake I recommend you don't carry that through. Such an action can put you in a position of giving up your ability to challenge a post which you really don't like, even one which damages your own standing... Better to retract now from the absolute nature of what you wrote than make it more difficult later.