UniLang

Hey everybody,

I want to know what people here think about the up-coming 2014 Scottish Independence referendum. What do you think about an independent Scotland from a linguistic point of view (Scots and Scottish Gaelic Language rights and promotion)? Also just what do you think about it generally? Happy to hear opinions from anyone (or anywhere).

They should make Scotland a monolingual Pictish-speaking country!

Anyway, Scotland has had a very shifting history, regarding languages, so there is no specific single originally Scottish and Scottish-only language (that is known to us), that they could have a nominal policy to return to, as in Ireland, Wales, Man and Cornwall.

Do people care about the language? From what I have read, it seems that they, in general, are content with English, sometimes turning to Scots when craving to be a little spiced up with local peculiarities, while especially Scots Gaelic is neglected.

For independence, I would not mind having an independent Scotland, but I would prefer something else. Instead of everyone striving for independence, we could have worldwide system of similar levels in government, going from municipal to global level, where Scotland would remain as a selfgoverning part of the UK, among other similar parts. It was unfortunate that they ended the process of British regionalisation.

On the other hand, corruption and mismanagement seems to be rampant everywhere, especially in large and powerful places, so making everything smaller does seem attractive in that light. But I still want some similar developments everywhere, so England should be split in a new heptarchy, or something ... or at least depopulated until in could feed itself on local production.

Given that the establishment is opposed to Scottish independence, I would vote for independence if I had the opportunity, but I am not Scottish. In the Early Modern period, the Swedes considered themselves, the Scots, and the Swiss as being the same people, but that view might not have as many followers today.

Sometimes it is claimed that Scotland does not have the economy that independence demands, but that would be solved one way or another if it became a reality.

1) The Scots can do whatever they want regarding their future, including independence from the UK.
2) I don't think it would help Gaelic much. It'll survive in the future whether being in the UK or not.

I so love it when a country splits. If it's a large and powerful one, I'd have a boner.

Man, you'd have enjoyed the breakdown of the Soviet Union sooooo much if you weren't one year old or so...

Jurgen Wullenwever wrote:Sometimes it is claimed that Scotland does not have the economy that independence demands, but that would be solved one way or another if it became a reality.

I'm sure that if Sweden and Norway were (still) one country, Stockholm would say the same about an independent Norway. In most cases, including Scotland, having your own capital will make you wealthier.

Hunef wrote: In most cases, including Scotland, having your own capital will make you wealthier.

Every municipality should be independent then!

Babelfish wrote:Man, you'd have enjoyed the breakdown of the Soviet Union sooooo much if you weren't one year old or so...

Yeah, I missed a pretty important episode of the humanity series.

Tenebrarum wrote:I so love it when a country splits. If it's a large and powerful one, I'd have a boner.

Yeah! No country should have more than 20 million inhabitants.

To me, the point of a country is to give the power of self-determination to an ethnic group, preferably one that has lived in that location for a long time and somewhere where there aren't any other people with a reasonable claim to the place. Scotland is complicated, as there are people who feel Gaelic but also people who feel Lowlands Scots. Then there are people who just don't give a shit about ethnicity, but those people would probable be happy as part of whatever country will make them the wealthiest (I haven't got much time for people like that). So, given that Scotland and England are historically ethnically different, I would say it makes sense to have to different countries. Economics is a secondary concern. And as for one big global state, I'm not against the idea, but I just don't see why even under such a state Scotland should have any more to do with England than any other country. However, looking at the news, it seems like Scottish people are a lot more concerned with whether or not they will do well financially out of the split than whether or not the world recognizes them as anything more than and English province. Because that's the impression I get from most people from elsewhere I meet; they think "Britain = England".

ciaran1212 wrote:To me, the point of a country is to give the power of self-determination to an ethnic group, preferably one that has lived in that location for a long time and somewhere where there aren't any other people with a reasonable claim to the place.

Only, it's more like the most powerful group creates a national identity and the rest is assimilated over time - or there's bloodshed. Mostly, both.

I so love it when a country splits. If it's a large and powerful one, I'd have a boner.

Sounds like sour grapes that yours did despite not being either.

Welcome back, Talib.

inb4 you get banned again

Bao wrote:Only, it's more like the most powerful group creates a national identity and the rest is assimilated over time - or there's bloodshed. Mostly, both.

Unfortunately, yeah. If only there was some kind of supra-national army that could go around kicking the crap out of countries and ethnic groups that tried to unjustifiably dominate others. That would be awesome. 'Cause the UN aren't very much help.

Would an independent Scotland automatically become an EU member? Would they join the Schengen Area? The Euro zone? Scotland's economy wouldn't have to be self-sufficient...

As to the size of the country, Scotland has the population of Finland, slightly more than Ireland. And the nominal GDP of Singapore, slightly more than Ireland. In area, Scotland is the size of the Czech Republic, slightly larger than Ireland. Are these countries big enough to survive on their own?

Saaropean wrote:... Scotland's economy wouldn't have to be self-sufficient...
...
Are these countries big enough to survive on their own?

The question is rather the opposite. Any country could survive on its own (if there is enough food production), but what place would it have in the global economy?

Things were easier in the earlier industrial economies, when we did not have every consumer good produced in low-cost countries. Why can't they have decent wages? A global economy demands global labor unions.

Scotland might need a floating currency of its own, so the economy can develop freely, instead of being dependent on financial support from a larger economy (England or EU).

Saaropean wrote:Would an independent Scotland automatically become an EU member?

As far as I am concerned, it's a legal dilemma due to the lack of precedents.

Most likely it'll need an approval from all other member states, something that might not be likely since France and Spain could veto it just not to give the Basques, Catalans, etc. the reason to follow the Scots' path. Yet, the nationalists argue that Scotland voluntarily joined with England to create the UK and it's always been seen as a country within the UK. It might please the French and Spaniards enough since the Basque Country and Catalonia didn't voluntarily join France and Spain.

Would they join the Schengen Area?

No, because the UK is not part of it. That's what stops Ireland from joining too. I believe it's not mandatory be part of that zone if I remember correctly.

The Euro zone?

Given its state right now, it would be idiotic to get into the bandwagon.

However, if it's forced to negotiate to join the EU, it probably wouldn't have the option of inheriting the UK opt-out staying out of the eurozone. Something that's not really popular to the Scots.

Are these countries big enough to survive on their own?

Singapore seems to be fine alone despite being a city-state. What else? New Zealand. Luxembourg. Slovakia. Estonia. Malta. It doesn't have to be big to be self-sufficient.

To be completely honest, I don't think Scotland will be independent in the near future since they probably won't be able to stomach the potential losses that go with independence (shut out of the EU, being forced to join the euro, etc.).

Still, they have my back.

JackFrost wrote:As far as I am concerned, it's a legal dilemma due to the lack of precedents.

Most likely it'll need an approval from all other member states, something that might not be likely since France and Spain could veto it just not to give the Basques, Catalans, etc. the reason to follow the Scots' path. Yet, the nationalists argue that Scotland voluntarily joined with England to create the UK and it's always been seen as a country within the UK. It might please the French and Spaniards enough since the Basque Country and Catalonia didn't voluntarily join France and Spain.

I think it's pretty straightforward. I really don't think anyone would veto Scotland joining the EU. It just needs to meet the criteria for entry.

JackFrost wrote:Given its state right now, it would be idiotic to get into the bandwagon.

However, if it's forced to negotiate to join the EU, it probably wouldn't have the option of inheriting the UK opt-out staying out of the eurozone. Something that's not really popular to the Scots.

Countries cannot be forced to join the the EU (or the eurozone, which I think is what you meant). The UK isn't the only country which opted out (Denmark), and most countries simply held a referendum about whether they want to adopt the Euro or not.

hlysnan wrote:I think it's pretty straightforward. I really don't think anyone would veto Scotland joining the EU. It just needs to meet the criteria for entry.

Maybe just to make you think a bit more with another example of a country using its own interest to keep a country from joining the union. I'm sure you're aware of the situation about Cyprus in some way, so do you think it would not veto Turkey's entry into the union while Turkey still de-facto controls half of its territory?

The UK isn't the only country which opted out (Denmark), and most countries simply held a referendum about whether they want to adopt the Euro or not.

I know. The question is, will an independent Scotland be considered a new applicant or not? The UK and Denmark were already members of the EU when they negotiated the euro opt-out.

JackFrost wrote: The question is, will an independent Scotland be considered a new applicant or not? The UK and Denmark were already members of the EU when they negotiated the euro opt-out.

Sweden had agreed to the euro, in its member application, which was accepted in the 1994 referendum, but in the 2003 EMU-referendum, the voters did not want the euro, so its introduction in Sweden has been postponed (indefinitely).

(The entire Swedish establishment urged the people to vote "yes", so no independent citizen could agree to that.)