Brexit, Scottish Independence and Erratic Rambling which may or may not have a point

Reads: 238  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 1  | Comments: 2

More Details
Status: In Progress  |  Genre: Editorial and Opinion  |  House: Booksie Classic
I have seen so much supposition and misdirected outrage over the political situation in the UK so I thought I'd write a little of my opinion and actual experience of the situation, perhaps then people can stop talking rubbish.

Submitted: June 26, 2016

A A A | A A A

Submitted: June 26, 2016

A A A

A A A


Well, here we are. I feel compelled to write this and probably another rambling piece about brexit because I've seen so much tripe thrown about by people who have no idea what they're on about. So, here I am to point out some things that should be obvious to those of you who are inclined to talk to real people rather than reading the Daily Mail - affectionately referred to in the UK as "The Daily Heil" - or The Sun - "The Scum". I will be blunt where required, I may even suggest that you're not very bright for thinking a certain way, but all-in-all I will tackle some common misconceptions where Brexit and Scottish Independence are concerned.

... But you Guys have been around thousands of years and it's insane to want to leave the UK

First things first. Have we fuck been around that long. I'm 33, I know I look much older but I've had a hard life. Secondly, the crowns were united in the 17th Century, then the parliaments were brought together in 1707. 

The kingdoms of Scotland and England - the (sort of) continuous states that we know today - were formed around 9/10th Century AD. 

With the history lesson out of the way I should ask you something here. You probably live in a democracy of sorts, so if your larger neighbour dictated laws to your nation, how would you feel? Would you accept it and just carry on having your people's needs ignored? No? Well you've just stepped into Scotland's shoes for a few moments. 

England has a populaton of around 50-55 million, Scotland has five million living in a land which is one third of the area of the main British island. Now since "democracy" - or what the UK government laughingly refers to as one - has come in, Scotland is effectively living under a tyranny, constantly imposed upon by our rather capricious larger neighbour.



Some people will take exception to that, but what else would you call a land which flirts with socialism and right-wing fuckwitism randomly from one day to the next?

Exactly, capricious is the nice way of putting it. 

The majority of Scotland hasn't voted Conservative in quite some time, yet 9 times out of 10 that's who we get - thank you capricious neighbour.

Let me tell you how tory governments work out for Scotland - Thatcher ripped our industry apart and left the communities to die a slow, lingering death from poverty and inherent drug abuse. Every other tory government sucks Scotland dry, our money goes south and we are handed back a pittance, so unsurprisingly we've had to spend billions - redistributed by the EU - to rebuild those destroyed communities and update our infrastructure which the Westminster government ignore for decades at a time.

You'll probably hear some crap about England propping us up, but that is no more than supposition for two reasons: The first being that we do not have many of the controls needed to make changes to our economy - Westminster is holding those - and the second being "spent on behalf of" is not the same as "spent by". 

A particular example of the latter is the UK's "independent" nuclear deterrent - the one that has to be maintained by the US and probably need their permission to ever consider firing them since it's a US targeting system that it requires. These nukes are located not far from Scotland's largest city. If a catastrophic accident were to occur then Scotland would, in all likelihood, cease to exist. The central belt is where the vast majority of Scotland's population lives and if those nukes go off, even if we aren't all killed in the initial explosion you can bet your arse the radiation will finish the job with secondary detonations of the gas/oil facilities in Grangemouth the icing on the big, fucked up, face-melting cake. 

I did say I'd ramble, but the above is relevent because Scotland's MPs voted against having that monstrosity placed in Scotland, but it was imposed on us by English MPs. What you have is yet another decision not taken by Scotland, but we're still expected to pay for it and its submarines which are due to be replaced shortly. The renewal is also something the majority in Scotland don't want, but it is again likely to be imposed by the "UK" (actually "South of England's") parliament.

Scotland has 59 seats in the Westminster parliament, England roughly 533. Work out how many times Scotland is likely to win a vote on anything, or Ireland or Wales for that matter, then try telling me we're insane for having a substantial number of us wanting to leave the UK.

You have your own parliament...

Yes, Scotland does have a parliament and its members are selected through a constituency vote using a first past the post system and a list vote which makes up a proportional representation aspect of the election. It is a fairer system than the UK parliament system which allows a government to be formed with a minority vote. The problem that arises is that the Westminster parliament overrules the Scottish parliament and could also shut it down without any consultation. So Scotland's democratically elected parliament is subservient to the UK's anti-democratic cesspit. There are currently 56 SNP and 1 each of Labour, Lib Dems and Conservative MPs representing Scotland in Westminster, but that 1 Conservative MP is the Secretary of State for Scotland who has been given the power to reverse any decision he pleases that is made by the Scottish Parliament, all this despite his party being decisively rejected by Scotland, time and again.

Are you beginning to understand why many people want to leave the UK? We're tired of having our nation's needs overruled by our neighbour's government. 

You had your chance to leave...

I've heard this so many times, and my answer is always the same.

One of the major pillars of a democratic and free society is that of political freedom. Funnily enough, my belief that Scotland is better off out of the UK doesn't shift with the wind. However, I did respect the result of the referendum until, ten minutes after the result, my fellow Scots were stabbed in the back by the same government which had been begging and threatening them into staying in the UK. 

Gordon Brown - a former prime minister and a quisling wanker - stepped up on stage and started writing cheques his washed-out arse couldn't cash. He told people they'd have "home rule", and "as close to federalism" as possible whilst retaining the benefits of union and it would be delivered within two years or so. The inferences drawn from his speech led many into thinking that as well as the Scottish parliament becoming permanent, it would also be on the same level as Westminster and more power would be decentralised, full fiscal responsibility would be handed over and the UK would still exist. A win-win scenario in which Scotland wouldn't be imposed upon by the unelected, but the "United Kingdom" remains a political entity. 

What we got instead was the Smith commission - the very definition of a vested interest as it was chaired by a Lord whose company would be impacted by any of the proposed changes. After protracted discussions by all the Scottish representatives they agreed on proposed new powers to request and it was sent to England. It was watered down continuously until what remained was some half-arsed thing called the Scotland Bill. The Westminster parliament pushed it through and then created the English votes for English laws which allows for Scottish MPs to be excluded from Westminster votes, even ones which - through the way funding is allocated to Scotland - can still impact Scotland substantially.

So, Gordon Brown, it's now 2016, where is the near-federalism you personally guaranteed my countrymen? 

Where is the decentralisation of power in your beloved, morally bankrupt union?

Why vote to stay in anti-democratic EU but push for exit from the UK? That sounds daft.

The image above should explain part of that. The darker the red, the more money the area receives per person from the EU and Westminster will not replace that lost money, they will go back to bleeding everywhere dry just to fund "The City" in its ever increasing immoral pursuit of profit. Another part is that the claim of the EU being anti-democratic is dubious and comes from people who are happy for 800 unelected parasites to ratify the laws in the UK and are happy for the existing unaccountable system of UK parliament to continue as is. It really should be taken with a bucket of salt. Next time someone from the UK tells you the EU is undemocratic and unaccountable - ask them how many of the MPs who were exposed for expenses fraud were actually charged with a crime and punished and where is the investigation into children being passed around like toys between parliamentarians? Or even just mention the Queen and the House of Lords. 

The EU regulations stop the more dangerous tory ideologies from taking root and being forced upon us. All you have to do is look at what they've done whilst being in the EU and it should give you an idea of how bad things will be under an unfettered tory government. They want to withdraw from the ECHR and repeal the Human Rights Act, they've claimed that they will replace it with a bill of rights, yet no one has seen this bill and are unlikely to once they have withdrawn the country from those protections. 

The Conservatives exist solely to decimate state spending and lower taxes for the rich and I would choose the EU over perpetual tory governments any day of the week. Why do you think the UK and some of its overseas territories have some of the worst tax avoidance records in the world?

Simply put the EU has never pumped Scotland in the rear the way that the UK government does as a matter of ongoing policy. The EU rebuilt many of the former-industrial communities that the English parliament destroyed. The EU did not decide to pursue an unnecessary programme of cuts designed to shrink the state and ignite a class war which saw the vulnerable, poor and disabled taking the brunt of the pain in a situation that was created by irresponsible bankers. It was not the EU who sold off the Royal Mail at bargain basement prices to their buddies. It was not the EU who decided they were going to sell taxpayer-owned bank shares at a huge loss. The EU isn't killing 10,000 citizens a year in pursuit of an ideology which has pretty much been rejected by everyone else.

Brexiters are all xenophobes and morons...

Ok, so I sniggered a bit at that one. It isn't actually true - "not all leavers are racist, but all racists will vote leave" is probably a little more accurate. 

Calling everyone who voted leave racist or stupid is effectively tarring 17 million people from all walks of life in a way that makes the accuser no better than those who make sweeping statements about immigrants. It's the two sides of the same coin - prejudice. I have been guilty of it myself when I fly off the handle in a debate (I'm from Highland Scottish stock, we don't do this "keep calm" thing at all) but generally I recognise the hypocrisy and try really hard to avoid it and when I call someone out as racist I refer to that person specifically.

I've seen leave supporters tear into the prejudiced minority, en masse, whenever they raise their "all immigrants are..." bullshit in a discussion. Most do recognise how it poisons their valid concerns.

Not all UKIP supporters are prejudiced, a substantial number who voted for them in 2015 were protest voting because the main three parties had become pretty much the same. Why they chose UKIP is probably to shock others, but you'd have to ask one of them to be sure of their real motives. There was even a group within UKIP advocating for a remain vote.

I won't insult people by suggesting the EU vote was a protest. I will say that I believe they have gone about it in reverse. Many hope to reform the Westminster parliament upon exit, but perhaps it would have been better to remain and enlist the EU's help in demanding the change within, first, and then after that had been achieved within the relative stability of the EU, then consider the membership once the self-serving, pig obsessed public schoolboys are ejected from positions of power that they are wholly inadequate to fill. Just a thought.

It really doesn't help anyone to start screaming names at the entire leave camp. They made a decision and most of them are aware that the consequences could be an accelerated break-up of the UK. Most English leave supporters I have spoken to actually support the idea of another Scottish referendum - how could they not? Many have just voted to stop being overruled by the EU, so only a few of the more clueless amongst them can turn around and say things like "you're too wee to survive on your own".

Tell that to Norway or any other small, successful state.


© Copyright 2017 M K Brown. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments:

Comments

avatar

Author
Reply

avatar

Author
Reply

More Editorial and Opinion Articles