What maketh the 'Scottish' Vote for Independence




Scotland's deputy first minister has unveiled plans to cut energy bills by about 5% a year if the country votes for independence.
Nicola Sturgeon told the SNP's conference in Perth the reduction of about £70 would be achieved by removing a number of "green" charges.

She believed the measure would not be a short-term fix, but a "real and lasting cut".
People in Scotland vote in an independence referendum next year.

On Thursday, 18 September, 2014, they will be asked the straight "yes/no" question:

"Should Scotland be an independent country?"
- bbc


I was, and suppose, am, pro-Scottish independence because that undoes the notion that colonisation is ok if enough time passes to make it ‘old news so it’s alright’, or because ethnic colonisation by the occupying force has diluted opposition to colonisation - like in the case of Tibet, Israel, Singapore, or Ireland.  It is a matter of principle really.

However,

I have to wonder how many would be allowed to vote if the vote was open to only those of mainly Scottish descent. 

If the vote was open to all whom are resident, then the English whom are living in Scotland might just steer the vote in favour of England.  So we wouldn’t really know what the Scottish themselves really think as the result wouldn’t reflect their views as opposed to a view muddied by English inclinations. 

If the vote was open to anyone who is resident there, that means your historical and biological heritage doesn’t matter, then that would mean that supporting an independent Scotland becomes pointless as the fact that the English colonised Scotland becomes as irrelevant as the historical heritage of the voter.


On the other hand, if only the Scottish were allowed to vote, then we are going to have a problem with defining who is and isn’t ‘Scottish’.  Would the Asians or Africans, amongst others, whom are resident there qualify?  If not, would a vote only by the Scottish precipitate a division between those whom are resident there, i.e. between the Scots and ‘others’? 



And how many Scots would qualify as Scottish by descent?  How much ‘English blood‘ would disqualify one as a Scot?



If the vote was open to anyone who is resident there, that means your historical and biological heritage doesn’t matter, then that would mean that supporting an independent Scotland becomes pointless as the fact that the English colonised Scotland becomes as irrelevant as the historical heritage of the voter.  If your ethnic and historical heritage doesn’t matter and you can vote whether you come from Poland or Uganda, then the point of independence being sought to correct a past English colonisation of Scotland becomes irrelevant too.

Perhaps knowing that you are ‘independent’ off another country makes your step lighter in the queue for the dole or free soup.  I don’t know why people feel better about being screwed by ‘their own’ than another.  That just perpetuates the former. 




All that said, what is this whole ‘independence’ thing about anyway.  We have those jokers across the straits of the Atlantic who celebrate their ‘independence’, and also many formerly colonised states, and also the English breaking their ties with Rome in the past and claiming independence, but all that it means is that they are trading a more distant elite for a local one.  Perhaps knowing that you are ‘independent’ off another country makes your step lighter in the queue for the dole or free soup.  I don’t know why people feel better about being screwed by ‘their own’ than another.  That just perpetuates the former. 

But maybe the main reason why the English doesn’t want Scotland to break away is because the British flag might not look as good.





ed



0 thoughts:

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Blogger Template by Clairvo