You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I met a lassie in a pub in Portree who told me she hadn’t forgiven the Germans for the war.
She was referring to the Hanoverians and 1745
Did you need much convincing that Germany was at fault for Scotland's problems in 1745? I bet not. Like putty in her hands I imagine.
I just find the accent(s) around Berwick a very interesting curiosity.
You'd think it would be somewhere between Northumbrian and southern Scots.
Bit it isn’t (to my ear anyway), it’s either or.
Another curiosity.
I was listening to England New Zealand rugby league on the way up the road yesterday.
Now if it was union I’d be vaguely supporting NZ, but I found myself supporting England in league.
Odd.
I met a lassie in a pub in Portree who told me she hadn’t forgiven the Germans for the war.
She was referring to the Hanoverians and 1745
What did she think of the Italian prince though?
She was referring to the Hanoverians and 1745
What did she think of the Italian prince though?
He was very Bonnie apparently.
Scotroutes story was amusing. Reminded me of a time I was drinking in a pub in New Zealand with a guy from Shetland who had quite a broad accent. We were chatting to a local lady who assumed he was putting on a voice and did thought Shetland was a made up place.
His reply was "Where do ye think the effing ponies come from!"
suprisingly informed and non ranty! better than the leavers on the guardian comments but the disdain for the devolved administrations is pretty clear
tjagain
...but the disdain for the devolved administrations is pretty clear
It was ever thus in the colonies... 🙂
It was ever thus in the colonies…
Describing Scotland as a colony is hyperbole, but not so Wales. Or possibly Ireland, not sure.
Colonies usually had a government that could be over-ruled by Westminster and a governor-general to be the Westminster's representative.
Scotland has a government that can be over-ruled by Westminster and a Secy of State to be the Westminster's representative.
If it looks like a duck, flies like a duck, is treated like a duck, then it's likely to be a duck. Quack 🙂
"If it looks like a duck, flies like a duck, is treated like a duck, then it’s likely to be a duck. Quack"
I beg to differ.
Describing Scotland as a colony is hyperbole,
It plays to the poor oppressed victim mentality that the SNP adores.
Scotland has a government that can be over-ruled by Westminster
Except that Scotland has representation in Westminster. That's the flaw in your argument.
My point was reference to the history. Wales was military conquered then occupied. Scotland wasn't.
Colonies usually had a government that could be over-ruled by Westminster and a governor-general to be the Westminster’s representative.
Scotland has a government that can be over-ruled by Westminster and a Secy of State to be the Westminster’s representative.
If it looks like a duck, flies like a duck, is treated like a duck, then it’s likely to be a duck. Quack
Colonies don't have direct representation in Westminster.
Once again stop with the oppressed card. It's in your head and does your argument no favours.
American states for example can be overruled at the federal level, as can German states. This doesn't make them colonies.
"@patriotpro, if you honestly don’t understand the difference between being a member of the EU, and being part of the UK, I’d be surprised."
Both are votes for sovereignty in which case it's hypocritical to criticise those who essentially voted for the same thing as you did.
Those who say we had a vote in the EU; how so?
Those who say we had a vote in the EU; how so?
You had representatives who could vote on legislation, just like you do in the UK.
It plays to the poor oppressed victim mentality that EPICYCLO adores.
FTFY
scotroutes
It plays to the poor oppressed victim mentality that EPICYCLO adores.
I expect the usual superior sneery shit from the BritNats, but that's unpleasantly personal coming from you.
For the record I do not feel oppressed, but I want to do something about oppression.
The weak and vulnerable in Scotland are living under oppressive conditions and foodbanks are burgeoning. If we can get Scotland's governance and finances in our own hands and unable to be over-ridden by Westminster, that would be a start.
But there is also the long history of oppression in Scotland of various groups and families, and much of it from our own ruling classes (before anyone thinks I'm blaming the English for it). That's the past, but there's a lesson to be learned from it, and that lesson is we need control of our own country.
The weak and vulnerable in Scotland are living under oppressive conditions and foodbanks are burgeoning. If we can get Scotland’s governance and finances in our own hands and unable to be over-ridden by Westminster, that would be a start.
But this is happening all over the UK. You don't seem bothered when it happens to anyone in England, because they aren't Scottish. Now, you could say that 'oh but England is Tory' and yes, that's true, but only by virtue of that invisible line that is as I've said is so arbitrary.
The poor of England who have voted for left wing parties do not deserve to be kept weak and vulnerable any more than those in Scotland do. But you're willing to wash your hands of those on this side of the line because others on the same side of the line voted for it.
Both are votes for sovereignty in which case it’s hypocritical to criticise those who essentially voted for the same thing as you did.
Those who say we had a vote in the EU; how so?
EU membership doesn't affect the sovereignty of the member countries.
If you think the UK has surrendered its sovereignty to the EU, how are we going to leave? Logically it must be impossible, surely?
molgrips
...But this is happening all over the UK. You don’t seem bothered when it happens to anyone in England, because they aren’t Scottish...
That's because I think the English are perfectly entitled to run their own country without interference from other countries. What are the English doing about it?
That’s because I think the English are perfectly entitled to run their own country without interference from other countries. What are the English doing about it?
England and Scotland are both run by the UK.
We know what the Scottish are doing about it: they voted to retain the current arrangements.
We know what the Scottish are doing about it: they voted to retain the current arrangements.
You can't get around that epicyclo. The scots want to be british for the timebeing.
seosamh72
You can’t get around that epicyclo. The scots want to be british for the timebeing.
Aye, right.
It's a simple fact borne out a majority vote, you can't waffle on about democracy and not recognise that. Do you honestly think if there was a ref tomorrow it would win?
As well as the majority wanting to be British, at the moment. They are also shite bags, when it came to the ballot box, loads would keek it to be out of the EU and out of the British union, and would believe the torrent of fear mongering that would come our way.
I predict a ref in the next 1/2/3 years would result in a scudding, and if you are a nationalist wanting a ref in those couple of years, you are also off your nut. You'll kill it stone dead for 30/40 years.
Hold your guns and let Brexit play out over the short to medium term.
England and Scotland are both run by the UK.
Not in his world. He is of the belief Scotland is an oppressed little nation under the cruel jackboot of our English overlords, with an occupying army opposed only by the plucky little bunch of SNP freedom fighters.
It's only a matter of time before the tyrants in Westminster pass laws to criminalise deep-frying and Irn-Bru, where illicit Braveheart DVDs are smuggled around under kilts and where the downtrodden masses huddle together in their but and bens to pray for the return of their saviour, St Sean the Untaxable.
Both are votes for sovereignty in which case it’s hypocritical to criticise those who essentially voted for the same thing as you did.
I voted to remain in the UK and the EU, and in fairly equal measure feel Scottish, British and European. I have said I would quite happily amalgimate remain voting areas into one new country with the aim of rejoicing the EU. In reality this is not possible. What may be possible, is the ability to join in a political and social entity that is inclusive of the greatest number of people. This may best be achieved through Scotland leaving the UK and joining the EU. It depends on what some of Europes leaders say, and my feelings towards the EU and the UK are at the time.
I am certainly no SNP supporting ScotNat, and I do find many I have met and epicyclo's historic victimhood complex very off putting in relation to my potential support.
What are the English doing about it?
The North isn't looking to secede. Should they? Is that the answer?
What are the English doing about it?
Well Cameron did suggest a couple of pretty minor changes but the more nutty ScotNats got a tad excited about the entire affair.
Well Cameron did suggest a couple of pretty minor changes
Who?? The name sounds vaguely familiar.
The scots want to be british for the timebeing
Don't you mean a majority of the people who voted in IndyRef wanted to remain in the UK?
no.
molgrips
The North isn’t looking to secede. Should they? Is that the answer?
Shouldn't you be asking them that?
I largely agreed with your earlier post, but this
They are also shite bags, when it came to the ballot box, loads would keek it to be out of the EU and out of the British union,
Classy!
perhaps, but true though. uncertainty doesn't make people brave.
Anyhow, given the brexiteers shambolic snatch and grab on precarious majority, the idea of the same thing happening with scotland stinks. Ye want to see the polls hitting about 60% before you call a 2nd ref.
I expect the usual superior sneery shit from the BritNats, but that’s unpleasantly personal coming from you.
If it's unpleasantly personal it's because I think that talk of colonies and oppression is counter-productive (see later comments from others) and you seem to be the only poster on this - and other - threads using that sort of language. Independence won't come through turning off the more moderate voters.
You don’t seem bothered when it happens to anyone in England, because they aren’t Scottish. Now, you could say that ‘oh but England is Tory’ and yes, that’s true, but only by virtue of that invisible line that is as I’ve said is so arbitrary.
The poor of England who have voted for left wing parties do not deserve to be kept weak and vulnerable any more than those in Scotland do. But you’re willing to wash your hands of those on this side of the line because others on the same side of the line voted for it.
Why should the voters of Scotland restrict themselves to helping out the English and Welsh when they could be part of the EU and helping out all those folk? Is that because of some arbitrary line you've drawn through the English Channel?
Shouldn’t you be asking them that?
I might but now I'm asking you.
Why should the voters of Scotland restrict themselves to helping out the English and Welsh when they could be part of the EU and helping out all those folk? Is that because of some arbitrary line you’ve drawn through the English Channel?
I'm a federalist now, so no. In my United States of Europe I might well have the constituents of the UK with equal status. And Catalonia, and Basque country and whatever else. You could split up however you felt like because you'd still be part of a big hitter organisation as well.
I think Scot's do have some of the characteristics of a colonised nation.
Was there an attempt to get political control over Scotland by another country? Yes
Was there an attempt to devalue the indigenous cultures ? Yes
Was there forced mass migration? Yes particularly in the Highlands.
Was there an attempt to prevent people from speaking their own language? Yes. Scots speakers were told that their language was good enough for the playground but not for the classroom. Gaelic was banned. In the mid 70s my ex wife was belted for speaking Gaelic in the playground.
The fact that the majority of these policies were carried out by other Scots doesn't mean that it's not colonisation. Many empires had one group or another who got preferential treatment because they were useful in controlling the rest of an indigenous population. Their reward would be to consider themselves a better class of people than the other indigenous people.
This can lead to a community who feel disenfranchised and disengaged from society. It certainly affects the Highlands today.
There's a good book by James Hunter called On the Other Side of Sorrow which explains the ongoing effect of the clearances etc on the present day Highlands.
It's history though gordi, I'm well aware of it. but it doesn't really have any relevance to the independence argument, it's entirely counter productive. There's many aspects of scotland even in more recent history you could bring up, but looking forward, what the point? Surely if independence is anything it's about imagining a brighter future?
I think Scot’s do have some of the characteristics of a colonised nation
If you want to devalue the term then yes you might have a point. As a general thing though when you have a representives in the main government and have had multiple leaders of the government from the "colony" then its pretty hard to justify.
Was there an attempt to get political control over Scotland by another country? Yes
So that is every country under the sun then. It could also be reversed. Once James 1st and 6th turned up there was lots of upset English aristocrats annoyed about the Scottish takeover.
Was there an attempt to devalue the indigenous cultures ? Yes
The key question though for this and the others is whom by.
Was there forced mass migration? Yes particularly in the Highlands.
I am not sure of this being a characteristic of colonisation. Even if so see above about who was doing it. The Scottish aristocracy may have got the idea from their English equivalents but claiming it is a sign of colonisation is quite special. Admittedly getting the English crown did make James a lot more powerful and capable of dealing with uppity Scottish nobles but claiming that to be colonisation is quite special.
Was there an attempt to prevent people from speaking their own language?
The push for standarised languages was happening across Europe. Interesting though you dont mention the Scots language. Why is that? There seems to be an attempt to romanticise the highlands whilst ignoring the lowlands. Probably because thats where the real conflict is.
The fact that the majority of these policies were carried out by other Scots doesn’t mean that it’s not colonisation.
The fact a Scottish King was responsible for kicking a lot of it off and that it was the Scottish arisotocracy responsible for it does pretty undermine it. The problem with blaming the correct people is it knackers all the romantic gubbins about the clans and so on.
Yes the highlands got screwed over but then so did pretty much every peasant type throughout Europe. The English peasant did do better but that was down to how the English system had evolved to mean the local lord wasnt quite so powerful.
"the Scots want to remain British" is the same sort of lazy language as "the British voted for Brexit". It ignores the fact that there is a hugely divided population on both issues.
perhaps, but true though. uncertainty doesn’t make people brave.
Were those that voted for Brexit being brave, and those remainers not grasping the opportunity actually big fearties?
Surely if independence is anything it’s about imagining a brighter future?
Yes it has to Seosamh that's why I mentioned James Hunter s book. He's a highlander and an environmentalist the book envisages a better future for the Highlands but also records his frustration at the failure of environmental agencies and Highland communities to work together because of their different backgrounds and the different way they see the land around them. Agencies see land as an asset to be guarded and managed , the Highland folk see the place where a family used to live and work but don't any more
“the Scots want to remain British” is the same sort of lazy language as “the British voted for Brexit”. It ignores the fact that there is a hugely divided population on both issues.
i assumed you were intelligent enough to figure the blinking obvious all out on your own.
Were those that voted for Brexit being brave, and those remainers not grasping the opportunity actually big fearties?
if ye like, tbh while I voted against brexit, I don't see it as automatically bad nor automatically going to fail. They may well be only time will tell.. biggest problem with brexit is the utter lack of direction.
The fact that the majority of these policies were carried out by other Scots doesn’t mean that it’s not colonisation.
I think it does, by definition.
Unless you are talking about the conflict between the different groups within Scotland i.e. Highland Vs Lowland,, which kind of backs up my original point, because the arbitrary line encompasses more than one cultural group.
Shouldn't the injustice be lowland Scots having colonised the Highlands?
Dissonance - why did the english peasants not get kicked off their land or starved off their land like the highlanders and that Irish?
Was it not imported "nobility" kicking the highlanders off their land to make way for the english to go deer hunting ( as well as sheep farming)
the Highland folk see the place where a family used to live and work but don’t any more
from the mid 1800s? kinda pushing the sentiment there a bit are you not?
I'm all for repopulation of the highlands, I doubt looking back to days of old is going to be particularly helpful. If you want to really populate the west and the islands, build a planned city out there somewhere and that'll see regeneration surround it for quite a distance. Maybe that's not the right idea, but If you want to repopulate you need to build a diverse economy and a bit more imagination.
@dissonance I said some of the characteristics of colonisation because I have no desire to devalue any experience of colonisation .
I did mention the Scots language, and I didn't ignore the lowlands at all
The forced migration was entirely due to the landlord classes needing lots of land for sheep and later deer so they had to get rid of all the people in order to exploit the countries natural resources. That's a characteristic of colonisation.
I also made it plain that this was largely done by other Scots .
Not really Seosamh depopulation is still going on now people are still living in the Highlands but more and more in the town's and villages and not in the glens. The clearances stopped a long time ago, but the hydro schemes, forestry and less labour intensive farming have all resulted in folk being moved out of their homes to town's and villages. Land itself is still kept under tight control and is often preventing communities from creating jobs and therefore becoming self sustaining. There's opportunities around in the Highlands but many of the estate owners are dead against any development that means them losing some of their land Some of the public agencies are just as bad
I don’t see it as automatically bad nor automatically going to fail.
Perception of failure depends on the success criteria used. 2 measures I used are my and my families ability to travel and work visa free across the EU, and also the ability of people in the EU to come here unhindered. In my eyes Brexit has failed.
why did the english peasants not get kicked off their land or starved off their land like the highlanders and that Irish?
Plenty were thrown of the land in England. Look up the enclosures. It wasnt as extreme though to the fact the English peasants relationship with the lords was not quite as ballsed up as the Scottish clans. Same way the lowlanders in Scotland werent so screwed over.
As for starvation. A cursory understanding of history would make it obvious starvation was a problem elsewhere at the time of the Irish potato famine. Although, of course, a knowledge of climate would help explain why the problem was exacerbated there.
That’s a characteristic of colonisation.
No its a characteristic of uneven power balance. Which in the highlands case was down to those nice romantic clans. Anyone sensible would be cursing them but I guess its easier to blame the English.
I also made it plain that this was largely done by other Scots .
But then you still tried to claim it was colonisation. Which to put it mildly is complete bollocks.
@Molgrips yes with the growth of Scots language around Edinburgh and Gaelic retreating slowly North and West there were 2 distinct groups in Scotland.
There much more intermingled now though
I don’t see it as automatically bad nor automatically going to fail.
Perception of failure depends on the success criteria used. 2 measures I used are my and my families ability to travel and work visa free across the EU, and also the ability of people in the EU to come here unhindered. In my eyes Brexit has failed.
neither of those has played out yet. I'm not confident in a tory brexit by a long shot mind.
i assumed you were intelligent enough to figure the blinking obvious all out on your own.
No, you're overestimating my intelligence. What's the blinking obvious?
That's an interesting perspective you have on the Clearances Dissonance, and to be honest your bending of well...actual real history, makes you the other cheek of Molgrims arse. I look forward to your rebuttal of Tom Devines socio-economic theories on why the Clearances took place. I am sure your paper will take into account the fact It is generally considered to have been Government policy to "improve" the Highlands, and also the changes in who owned the land from traditional clan chiefs to industrialists especially as the 1800's progressed and wanted a financial return. I could go on; but I don't want to many spoilers for anybody else.
<p>Colonisation of Scotland by England?</p><p> http://bfy.tw/Kbjg</p><p>Spoiler - we were never colonised since the Celts. In fact I think the only time I ever heard that notion before was in this gem</p>
<p>It's SHITE being Scottish! We're the lowest of the low. The scum of the ****ing Earth! The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some hate the English. I don't. They're just ****ers. We, on the other hand, are COLONIZED by ****ers. Can't even find a decent culture to be colonized BY. We're ruled by effete assholes.</p>
So these Scottish landowners who booted the peasants off their land - who were they? How did they come to own the land?
Some were traditional clan chiefs and some were from other parts of the UK. The important point would be that all had the backing of the state ie the police and the army. They also had the backing of the church. Both Church of Scotland and the catholic church.
Ok but they, as Landlords would have been operating within the law, no?
The real injustice is the one where they didn't own the.lanf they worked. How did that come about?
Ok but they, as Landlords would have been operating within the law, no?
Who makes the laws?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Poor-Had-No-Lawyers-Scotland/dp/178027310X
While I don't agree with the use of the word "colonization" there are certainly examples of how Scottish history and culture were ignored and played-down, either through conscious action or not.
History: when I was at primary school in Edinburgh we had a frieze along the walls that showed every ruler since the Roman invasion. That would be every ruler of England. I used to be able to recite them all. There was never any suggestion that where I lived was any different. 1066 and the Magna Carta were both explained as pivotal points in our history - and both are mainly irrelevant. For years Culloden was made out to be a battle of Scottish v English - and the Scots lost. Very much a Brexit-type you lost so just get over it. It was only when I started reading about history that I found out the truth.
Culture: if history is written by the victors then the best songs and poems are surely written by the plucky losers. What little Scottish culture we were exposed to was twee and limited and much of it focussed on our gallant defeats or on times well past (e.g. the Mod). The concept of a vibrant Scottish culture was ridiculed both here and south of the border. We even have a name for it - the Celtic Cringe. Thankfully, that has changed a lot in the past 30 years.
I'm guessing that much of this is true for Wales too, though it's not my "bubble" and, culturally at least. it doesn't appear to have reached such a low ebb.
Wales had its low points. They tried to stamp out the language just the same, they just didn't manage it. They did strip the country of it's minerals, destroying the landscape in the process though and bringing in millions of incomers.
There is still a strong inferiority complex here too I think. More so than Scotland.
I would also recommend that book, although with the caveat that the author isn't EXACTLY impartial.
This is all well and good but ultimately a diversion from the independence discussion.
I could bring up more recent examples of orange dominance of Scotland over the last 100 years and it's affects in the Irish diaspora and half of current Scotlands refusal to acknowledge it even existed but whats the point it's counter productive.
Better to talk of what scotland will be going forward.
I don't see the relevance in this line of discussion to independence. It's not a valid reason for it.
This is all well and good but ultimately a diversion from the independence discussion.
I don’t see the relevance in this line of discussion to independence. It’s not a valid reason for it.
Welcome to internet forums. Part of the discussion is about identity. These side-issues help inform that discussion.
Hmm dunno I think they generally trap the discussion into narrow definition of identity.
The reason I ask about the Scottish landowners is that (AIUI) feudalism in England mostly came with the Normans, meaning the English were then dispossessed. Many of the injustices of English history can be attributed to the Norman distribution of land and privileges to their own.
Someone more learned than me can correct me though.
I don’t see the relevance in this line of discussion to independence
Remember this is STW where a thread that starts about bottom brackets can within two pages be discussing whether the moon landings were faked and end up 15 pages down the line a a discussion about log burners. As usual.
It's an interesting question mind, if you open it up. What is the Scottish identity in 2018?
Or indeed the identity of the rest of us.
I'd say it's more overtly Scottish than any time I can remember. Devolution has had a part to play in that, but it's difficult to say if that was achieved through more confidence or is the cause of it.
Culturally more vibrant. You can laugh, but bands like Runrig injected some life into Highland culture and, as a result, there are revivals in Gaelic, in new bands, in theatre etc. For me, reading Irvine Welsh/hearing the Proclaimers were watershed moments as here was something I could identify with, not just some re-hashed Burns. Hell, even the old Jacobite songs have faded into the memories somewhat.
Can't say if it's a more international outlook. Scotland has produced may sailors whose experience coloured those around them back home, and the diaspora created links to all sort of places that have withstood the test of time. I think that being in the EU has helped in this regard too and it concerns me that we could lose some of that as a result of Brexit, trapped in an inward-looking UK.
Still harbouring a grudge? Yep - many do.
Obviously split politically. There are even still a few die-hards who think that devolution was a huge mistake.
What is the Scottish identity in 2018?
Don't think it can be defined. Varies hugely from person to person. The country has certainly been very divided since the referendum in 2014. It caused a lot of unpleasantness.
I didn't experience that unpleasantness (I know some people got a bit worked up about it). Plenty of disagreement (my family voted in different ways) but we didn't fall out about it. Most folk manage to cope with people having different political viewpoints.
Independence had nothing to do with colonialism for me. I voted Yes because I thought it was the best opportunity of getting away from the inward looking, xenophobic direction that UK politics was taking, driven by populist opportunists like Farage. I'd much rather be in an independent Scotland that is an EU member and has a go<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">vernment that isn't elected by first past the post.</span>
What if Farage had been Scottish?
Luckily he wasn't. Ifs buts and maybes are just that.
Interesting you bring up Scottish sailing and it's links, by that do you mean the tobacco plantations and such? Just another bit of Scottish history or tradition that, if not an outright lie, then is an inconvenient truth (like the statue celebrating Glasgow "welcoming" Irish immigrants in the 19th century).
I think in order to define our future we need to take an honest look at our past, something that we have failed to do in any meaningful way up until now. Once we have faced that honestly then we can decide as a nation what it is we want to aspire to. I think we talk a good talk but if we were really honest the reality is somewhat at odds with the romantic picture we paint. I suppose that's one thing we've done consistently through the years.
What if Farage had been Scottish?
I'd have exactly the same opinion of Farage and his behaviour if he was Scottish.
I think there's more than one Scottish identity, I certainly don't think I am any more Scottish than someone who voted No.
I voted for independence because I believe people who live in Scotland are the best ones to govern Scotland.