|
Oct 2016
10:12am, 14 Oct 2016
4,812 posts
|
Winded
I have some sympathy with the pro EU Scottish indi people. If Scotland could retain the advantages of being in the EU then perhaps leaving would be worth it. (It is a fairly big IF as pointed out above)
On the other hand democracy is about respecting the majority decision and it seems to me that every time there is a majority democratic decision that isn't what the SNP wants Sturgeon gets the blue face paint out and sharpens her claymore. Anything that is to her advantage is fine but anything that favours another part of the country is a despicable law made by the evil sassenachs.
|
|
Oct 2016
10:31am, 14 Oct 2016
1,244 posts
|
Surelynot
Atonal - the vote to remain in the UK was focussed largely on avoiding risk. Risks such as leaving the EU.
The constitutional arrangement that was voted on is about to substantially change. No one has any idea what it will look like. If the SNP has a mandate in Scotland to press for a second referendum (it won the popular vote at both the UK and Scottish elections) and can secure a vote in Holyrood, that's democracy. I think it is legitimate to put a question to the Scottish electorate to see if we want what Brexit offers, or something else.
It will be interesting to see if the Tories refuse to allow a second vote.
Winded - you illustrate the problem well. You talk about 'the country'. THe UK is not one country. Scotland is a separate country in a Union. That Unoin has a partner with 90% of the electorate. That country will allways win the majority. I'm not sure this arrangement is representing the best interests of my country. This is especially true given the repsective positions on EU membership.
|
|
Oct 2016
10:44am, 14 Oct 2016
4,816 posts
|
Winded
Surelynot - you could say the same for the advantages of Essex, Northumberland or Cornwall being part of the UK or of the Isle of Mull being part of an independent Scotland. It is the nature of things that a democracy is made up of constituent parts; England is many regions that all compete and the UK more so. We have a situation now that (absent Brexit)I think gives most people a fair representation- in fact the English are under represented given the majority position.
I'm not saying Scotland would or wouldn't be better off going it alone but the minority argument is very poor- EU membership from scratch for example would almost certainly embrace political change leading to an EU of which Scotland would be a very small part. It is mostly the grass being so wonderful and green on the other side of the hill - and that brings us back to Brexit.
|
|
Oct 2016
10:57am, 14 Oct 2016
1,245 posts
|
Surelynot
Winded - we entered the Union and we can exit it. Democracy can also determine the nature of the constituent parts.
Scotland would be a small country in the EU - but we'd have a seat at the table that we don't have at the moment.
I'm too old to think the grass is greener. I just think we would be better served by electing a government that represents the majority of the electorate of Scotland. SHit it may even be a Tory government.
|
|
Oct 2016
11:09am, 14 Oct 2016
17,624 posts
|
DeeGee
When part of the argument for Brexit was that small countries had too much power and could gang up against larger ones (ie the UK), to stop us getting what we wanted, and that we had to leave the EU as we couldn't wield the power that our size demanded, then Scotland being a small country in the EU is not going to be a bad thing.
Or was that argument for Brexit false?
|
|
Oct 2016
11:14am, 14 Oct 2016
17,844 posts
|
Diogenes
The government should decide to ignore the results of the referendum and refuse to begin the exit process. If it needs an excuse then it should get the electoral commission to find irregularities in the voting and counting process which would warrant a re-run, some that is delayed indefinitely. Undemocratic and unethical? Perhaps, but better that than the current debacle.
|
|
Oct 2016
11:18am, 14 Oct 2016
5,959 posts
|
Jambomo
It would not be hard to have a reason to re-run it. Surely the nature of the campaign (lies and project fear rubbish on both sides), the withdrawal of promised actions almost as soon as the vote was won and the lack of hard facts for people to decide upon should be reason enough.
|
|
Oct 2016
11:22am, 14 Oct 2016
1,246 posts
|
Surelynot
If we reran votes on the basis if politicians telling lies we'd never be out of the polling stations. 
|
|
Oct 2016
11:30am, 14 Oct 2016
17,625 posts
|
DeeGee
I presume that there's no evidence that "Scameron" did tamper with the votes and that was all tinfoil hat stuff . Or maybe everyone used a biro.
Hang on, I used a pencil. Maybe my mark was crossed out and replaced with a "Leave" vote. Yes, that must be it...
|
|
Oct 2016
11:31am, 14 Oct 2016
17,626 posts
|
DeeGee
Oh, and don't forget, there was that thing about the postal registration deadlines, that definitely changed the outcome.
Yeah, definitely changed it.
|
