I am a Scottish Nationalist, and make no secret of it....but I do sometimes think that many Unionists don't understand why we would prefer to govern ourselves and do not see what our problem is with the Union at all.
Despite years on forums, trying to explain that the Union was no Union at all, but England taking Scotland over by bribery and corruption, against the wishes of the Scottish population, because they had consistently failed to do it by force of arms..but, in the end, it has left Scotland in much the same position as Wales, which was defeated and absorbed into England as "England and Wales".
This video is satirical...just in case some of you really think he is encouraging Scots to vote for the Union ......and, tbh, is actually rather mild imo.
In Wales they have something similar, only it seems like everyone is trying to split from England. I'll have to view the video later because I've got to nip out to Caerphilly.
If you aren't willing to stand behind your troops, feel free to stand in front of them.
Is there particular reason for a 'United kingdom' these days? It doesn't bother me either way really, although I would welcome NI, Wales, Scotland and England to be more culturally diverse. Be more fun
-----|0| None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. |0|-----
"Capitalism profits from War - Humanity profits from Peace."
smeggypants wrote:Is there particular reason for a 'United kingdom' these days? It doesn't bother me either way really, although I would welcome NI, Wales, Scotland and England to be more culturally diverse. Be more fun
The only particular reason there ever was for a United Kingdom was that England wanted to be in charge of the whole lot. That's why it was a Union in name only....as in reality it was an addition of a few MPs from each country into an English Parliament, which continued in just the same way as it had for as long as the Parliament had existed...all the "traditions" of the Westminster Parliament, which tend to be perceived as British are the traditions of the English Parliament before the Union continued..and they imposed laws on all the other nations, voted in for all of us by the much larger English representation, to suit English aspirations. But nothing new there!
On the Act of Union, England decided the nationality of those in the United Kingdom would be British..and then proceeded to try and make everybody else English, which has why England has been a synonym for Britain for the last 305 years. A bit ironic when you consider that the Britons were, by the time of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Welsh.....as in there are in the island five nations; English, Welsh (or British), Scottish, Pictish, and Latin.
So culturally diverse has never been allowed in the Uk, any more than politically diverse has been.....it has all had to be run according to English dictat..and what little of ourselves we have been able to hold onto has been in spite of Westminster, not because of the Union.
To an extent, the seeds of today were sown 305 years ago....and Scottish Independence (I hope) and Welsh, Irish and English as well probably at some stage, is the culmination of 305 years of drip dripping away at not only the identities of the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish in the Union......but also the subsuming of English identity under the English Government imposed pretendy "British" nationality.
I should think when we can all be ourselves with no government pressure to "assimilate" we will all get on much better as neighbours than we ever did as bedfellows. Worked for my almost ex and me!
Where am I going.........and what am I doing in this hand basket?
smeggypants wrote:Is there particular reason for a 'United kingdom' these days? It doesn't bother me either way really, although I would welcome NI, Wales, Scotland and England to be more culturally diverse. Be more fun
The only particular reason there ever was for a United Kingdom was that England wanted to be in charge of the whole lot. That's why it was a Union in name only....as in reality it was an addition of a few MPs from each country into an English Parliament, which continued in just the same way as it had for as long as the Parliament had existed...all the "traditions" of the Westminster Parliament, which tend to be perceived as British are the traditions of the English Parliament before the Union continued..and they imposed laws on all the other nations, voted in for all of us by the much larger English representation, to suit English aspirations. But nothing new there!
On the Act of Union, England decided the nationality of those in the United Kingdom would be British..and then proceeded to try and make everybody else English, which has why England has been a synonym for Britain for the last 305 years. A bit ironic when you consider that the Britons were, by the time of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Welsh.....as in there are in the island five nations; English, Welsh (or British), Scottish, Pictish, and Latin.
So culturally diverse has never been allowed in the Uk, any more than politically diverse has been.....it has all had to be run according to English dictat..and what little of ourselves we have been able to hold onto has been in spite of Westminster, not because of the Union.
To an extent, the seeds of today were sown 305 years ago....and Scottish Independence (I hope) and Welsh, Irish and English as well probably at some stage, is the culmination of 305 years of drip dripping away at not only the identities of the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish in the Union......but also the subsuming of English identity under the English Government imposed pretendy "British" nationality.
I should think when we can all be ourselves with no government pressure to "assimilate" we will all get on much better as neighbours than we ever did as bedfellows. Worked for my almost ex and me!
I agree. I think of myself and others as human beings first and foremost. I've often been accused of dissing Britain, but that's by people who confuse the regime that is in power over a certain border or borders and the country itself and it's ordinary people. I support decent ordinary people regardless of what skin colour, culture, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or even which alter they worship at.
I'm certainly not going to start attacking, for example Muslims, just because the British Regime and it's backers have an agenda to demonise them.
-----|0| None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. |0|-----
"Capitalism profits from War - Humanity profits from Peace."
smeggypants wrote:Is there particular reason for a 'United kingdom' these days? It doesn't bother me either way really, although I would welcome NI, Wales, Scotland and England to be more culturally diverse. Be more fun
The only particular reason there ever was for a United Kingdom was that England wanted to be in charge of the whole lot. That's why it was a Union in name only....as in reality it was an addition of a few MPs from each country into an English Parliament, which continued in just the same way as it had for as long as the Parliament had existed...all the "traditions" of the Westminster Parliament, which tend to be perceived as British are the traditions of the English Parliament before the Union continued..and they imposed laws on all the other nations, voted in for all of us by the much larger English representation, to suit English aspirations. But nothing new there!
On the Act of Union, England decided the nationality of those in the United Kingdom would be British..and then proceeded to try and make everybody else English, which has why England has been a synonym for Britain for the last 305 years. A bit ironic when you consider that the Britons were, by the time of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Welsh.....as in there are in the island five nations; English, Welsh (or British), Scottish, Pictish, and Latin.
So culturally diverse has never been allowed in the Uk, any more than politically diverse has been.....it has all had to be run according to English dictat..and what little of ourselves we have been able to hold onto has been in spite of Westminster, not because of the Union.
To an extent, the seeds of today were sown 305 years ago....and Scottish Independence (I hope) and Welsh, Irish and English as well probably at some stage, is the culmination of 305 years of drip dripping away at not only the identities of the Scots, the Welsh and the Irish in the Union......but also the subsuming of English identity under the English Government imposed pretendy "British" nationality.
I should think when we can all be ourselves with no government pressure to "assimilate" we will all get on much better as neighbours than we ever did as bedfellows. Worked for my almost ex and me!
I agree. I think of myself and others as human beings first and foremost. I've often been accused of dissing Britain, but that's by people who confuse the regime that is in power over a certain border or borders and the country itself and it's ordinary people. I support decent ordinary people regardless of what skin colour, culture, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or even which alter they worship at.
I'm certainly not going to start attacking, for example Muslims, just because the British Regime and it's backers have an agenda to demonise them.
I have noticed that, smeggy.it is what keeps me coming back when my failing memory reminds me I am a member. Note.....I have added this place to my Bookmarks Toolbar.....so now all I have to do is remember to check along it regularly, and not get bogged down in forums where they seem to hate everybody if they are not them.
Where am I going.........and what am I doing in this hand basket?
......and, tbh, is actually rather mild imo.
