Moderator: Forum Administrators
Jurgen Wullenwever wrote: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.
JackFrost wrote: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?
JackFrost wrote: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.
Yes, I agree. It only suffices to have a common foreign policy (for safety reasons). Only the Stockholm region's (now the capital of Sweden) municipalities would lose on this, especially the filthy rich ones with no endemic entrepreneurial culture (*caugh* Danderyd *caugh*).Jurgen Wullenwever wrote:Every municipality should be independent then!
I agree, but I'd say no more than 10 million. And no country should be bigger than 1,000,000 km2 (unless the population falls below 100,000). I don't like the thought that a small group of people (presidents etc.) can have such a huge power by controlling a large country. Optimally every country should have a direct democracy added to the population and area restrictions. If one country behaves badly there should be the possibility that the remaining countries perform a direct vote what to do about it (annihilating it from the surface of the earth or whatever).Saaropean wrote:Yeah! No country should have more than 20 million inhabitants.
Tenebrarum wrote:I so love it when a country splits. If it's a large and powerful one, I'd have a boner.
JackFrost wrote: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.
loqu wrote:Surprisingly enough, unlike Catalonia and the Basque Country, my nation was indeed conquered by Castile in a century-long holy war, but no one seems to remember that, inside or outside Spain.
Surprisingly enough, unlike Catalonia and the Basque Country, my nation the territory in which I live was indeed conquered by Castile in a century-long holy war, but no one seems to remember that, inside or outside Spain.
Did your nation even exist as a concept before it was Castillianized though? I
Glasgow? Or Aberdeen, even.Set wrote:Have they said what they'd make their capital? I always just assumed it'd be Edinburgh, but I can tell you that this is a pretty damn English city and any Scottish resentment for England is also directed in a weaker way towards Edinburgh.
I'm in favour of people deciding their own fate rather than some old guy in some far off city doing it for them, especially if it's someone with a completely different language and culture, especially especially if that someone also aims to suppress minorities in fear of losing territorial integrity. However, none of this is really the case in Scotland. To me it just seems like an issue of pride and thus this form of nationalism isn't too far different from English nationalism and in my opinion a completely invalid reason for independence. The Scots I've come across who are the most fervent independentistas are also the most anti-English and the most insuffrably stupid.
In my perfect world, there would be no nations, just local forms of pure democratic councils with channels for global cooperation, but I think Scottish independence comes from a place of needing to feel different from another group (who really aren't that different anyway) and that only creates further tensions between people, tensions which for the most part don't exist anymore. Why re-ignite them?
It would be better to have no England, no Scotland, no Wales, etc. rather than even more nation states. Let nationalism die already!
EDIT: BTW, I am actually from England, and probably a bit of an imperialist bastard!
The Scots had a unique language and culture.
Perhaps the Scottish border should be redrawn to only include Gaelic Scots,
Or maybe the Low Lands Scots can move back to England.
Either way, the pre-Anglo-Saxon Gaelic people of Scotland are most emphatically NOT the same as the English and they deserve their own country.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest