The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

I'd rather view myself as a libertarian pragmatist. Cutting civil liberties to try and mitigate against an irrelevant risk is a bad idea. I'm all for some checks to be done, but I probably draw the line further than you do. I just appreciate that a lot of Security Theatre is just theatre rather than security (like bottles of water in airports).

Do you agree that we should be engaged in full cavity searches on entry to all public places? No? So you've got a line as well, where do you define it? How much security is too much?

Ok you're being a bit more pragmatic now.

There is a need for some security, we've established at least that much. I would also agree that there can be too much. I'd also consider myself to be a libertarian. I believe that these internal checks don't discriminate racially, culturally, religiously, or by any other measure of discrimination. They are simply a security procedure.

In the UK we have body (not cavity) searches on entry into public events. I was searched recently attending a Rhianna concert (I was made to go by the wife before anyone starts about Rhianna or however you spell her name). I saw no problem with that, I was glad to see they're actually trying to catch people who might want to cause trouble/harm.

So are you in an independent Scotland scenario happy to rely on the border controls and institutions of other countries, paying particular attention to the former Eastern Bloc countries where corruption is still alive and kicking, to secure Scotlands borders and maintain the safety of you and your compatriots in a Schengen area, in full knowledge of the porous nature of those borders and the corruptible nature of the staff that operate those borders?

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

Do you understand anything about the Scottish Independence debate? Like, any of it?

Almost no-one on either side has xenophobic tendencies towards the English. It's mostly due to political differences and the want to take their own governance in their own direction. They don't want decisions about Scottish citizens being made by Westminster politicians that have no interest beyond London and their Country Clubs.

I'm a big fan of the English (on the whole), but that doesn't mean I want your politicians trying to privatize my health service, or for Trident on us, for instance.

I understand that 'any one but the english ' is wide spread attitude in scotland
I understand that 'flower of scotland ' was highly voted for by the scots as a potential anthem

I understand scots don't want the english making decision about them but welcome the Poles, French, Germans, Greeks etc doing the same thing

do you know anything about scotland atall

anyone that can write 'I'm a big fan of the English (on the whole)' without embarrassament shows amasing lack of self awareness.

Herzlos

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

So are you in an independent Scotland scenario happy to rely on the border controls and institutions of other countries, paying particular attention to the former Eastern Bloc countries where corruption is still alive and kicking, to secure Scotlands borders and maintain the safety of you and your compatriots in a Schengen area, in full knowledge of the porous nature of those borders and the corruptible nature of the staff that operate those borders?

Yup. As said, the numerous advantages far outweigh the risks.

I wouldn't say no to them sorting the corruption issues and doing better (smarter, rather than more) checks too, but I think it's a worthwhile risk.

Herzlos

I think the distinction between EU and Westminster governance is that the EU is all for the same stuff we are and does a lot to benefit it, whilst the Westminster government seems to be polarly opposed to what we want and is actively trying to screw us. If we joined the EU properly, we'd get some say over what's happening, where as now we're pretty much ignored.

"Anyone but the English" is a sporting thing, but that happens in every country with a rivalry, no?

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you know anything about scotland atall

Nah, no idea at all mate. I just live here.

I couldn't say about Flower of Scotland, it's been the unofficial national anthem since my parents were in school.

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

Yup. As said, the numerous advantages far outweigh the risks.

I wouldn't say no to them sorting the corruption issues and doing better (smarter, rather than more) checks too, but I think it's a worthwhile risk.

See I would like to see freedom of movement maintained, with more internal checks. So Hungary and Austria check to see if children have been smuggled in through Greece because the Greeks cannot pay for their border force.

Or checks in Germany to make sure that sex workers are not exploited and trafficked across the EU after gaining entry via Poland.

Not just for our benefit, but for the benefit of the people these issues exploit. I cannot see ANY benefit to unchecked movement except to criminals. The minor inconvenience of having identification and queuing for 30 minutes to get checked is not enough for me to justify allowing criminals to do as they please internally in the EU for me.

What are these advantages you see that cannot be maintained with internal checks in Schengen?

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

I think the distinction between EU and Westminster governance is that the EU is all for the same stuff we are and does a lot to benefit it, whilst the Westminster government seems to be polarly opposed to what we want and is actively trying to screw us. If we joined the EU properly, we'd get some say over what's happening, where as now we're pretty much ignored.

"Anyone but the English" is a sporting thing, but that happens in every country with a rivalry, no?



Nah, no idea at all mate. I just live here.

I couldn't say about Flower of Scotland, it's been the unofficial national anthem since my parents were in school.

unbelieveable lack of self awareness.

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

unbelieveable lack of self awareness.

Cool. I give up. You win, or something :beer:

TrickyTree83

Herzlos wrote: »

Cool. I give up. You win, or something :beer:

Don't lose heart.

I ultimately want similar to what Scotland wants, single market membership and the freedom of movement deal the UK currently has.

I hate the bureaucracy within the EU regarding trade, and I hate the lack of internal security due to Schengen. I would have voted to remain had the EU been willing to change on these issues, Dave couldn't get them to agree so my only course of action in line with my conscience was to vote to leave. The EU political elite, in particular Junker, appear to be idealogues who are incompatible with change and reality.

The main reason I post on this thread is because even if we didn't get single market membership or freedom of movement, it's not the end of the world and Scotland is indeed better off in the UK rather than the EU on its own. The best way I can illustrate where I stand on these issues is that if you were to plot my position on a graph with the views of UKIP on the right and remainers on the left, I would be closer to the remainers than I would be to the UKIP view.

Shakethedisease

Herzlos wrote: »

Cool. I give up. You win, or something :beer:

Oh no, don't give up over the National Anthem thing. Clapton has been round the block and back with that on these sorts for threads for as long as I've been here. Most of us know not to get drawn in on that one, or the 'anti-English' narratives he believes exist up here.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Don't lose heart.

I ultimately want similar to what Scotland wants, single market membership and the freedom of movement deal the UK currently has.

I hate the bureaucracy within the EU regarding trade, and I hate the lack of internal security due to Schengen. I would have voted to remain had the EU been willing to change on these issues, Dave couldn't get them to agree so my only course of action in line with my conscience was to vote to leave. The EU political elite, in particular Junker, appear to be idealogues who are incompatible with change and reality.

The main reason I post on this thread is because even if we didn't get single market membership or freedom of movement, it's not the end of the world and Scotland is indeed better off in the UK rather than the EU on its own. The best way I can illustrate where I stand on these issues is that if you were to plot my position on a graph with the views of UKIP on the right and remainers on the left, I would be closer to the remainers than I would be to the UKIP view.

But you're trying to separate the economics absolutely and exclusively away from the underlying politics that exist. As well as trying to isolate off the SNP and their continued success as somehow not being a result of the underlying politics in Scotland at the present time. As if they came to power with no votes or something.

Brexit is just the latest example of how politics is diverging very markedly between rUK and Scotland. Even between Westminster MP's and their Scottish MSP counterparts in Holyrood ( Scottish Labour being against Trident renewal being a recent example ).

There are many differing opinions on what an independent Scotland might look like, short, medium and long term economically. Most of it quite bad short term it has to be said. But on the other hand, you have to accept also, that politically just going along with absolutely everything when it goes against what the majority of Scots voters wish ( such as Brexit ) isn't really sustainable for much longer either.

After all, it's a large part as to why England and Wales voted out of the EU after all. Other countries dictating aspects of politics which they feel aren't acceptable any more.