Re: Scotland, the Brave

[Kaere]

You forgot Is-Ra-El!

No I didn't. Israel has nothing to do with the article I posted.

and this does ->Or American dominance, for that matter...

Yes, it did. The article is about a state in the American union. Sorry if you missed the connection there

[Monk (in hiding)]

You forgot Is-Ra-El!

No I didn't. Israel has nothing to do with the article I posted.

and this does ->Or American dominance, for that matter...

Yes, it did. The article is about a state in the American union. Sorry if you missed the connection there

[IceWendigo]

There must be a better way than creating more division and barriers between people, towns, nations.

If we go to the restaurant, and you have strawberry ice cream and I have caramel ice cream, its not about divisions and barriers between us but about choosing what is best suited for us according to what makes us happy. Not having the same flavour of ice cream does not prevent us from sharing a meal, talking etc. Smaller political units can cooperate too.

In a larger aggregated political unit, you often end up with the 31 buckets of vanilla ice cream syndrome instead of 31 different flavours that maximize the happiness of people.

For example, if a region is very much against wars and killing families on the other side of the planet and prefers to invest in schools instead of being forced to enforce reactionary repressive laws and spend their resources on prisons, the same way I might prefer caramel ice cream, because they are part of a aggregated political unit that happens to adhere to the preferences of people hundreds of km away, they may very well be forced to do the exact opposite of what they want for their citizens. To me that is not very democratic. Larger political scales get less and less democratic. If Canada was annexed to a country with 250 million (like Indonesia) and we were free to vote our laws in an electoral system, we could very well be in a position to be forced to enforce laws that go completely against our values and are unacceptable to us (ex: sharia law).

In addition to defacto imposition of policies that can be inherently offensive/unacceptable and go against the will of a population, larger aggregates are also more insulated from the people's will because of rulers distance (Ivory Tower syndrome) and inertia caused by increasing consensus difficulty (Tower of Babel syndrome); changing a politic or rule in a region of France for example that makes sense and people want, can require a moderately achievable consensus but if you have to convince the whole country before anything can get done it can become challenging but then if you have to get all or most countries in Europe to agree (some of which might be utterly against it, not minding if that location in France enacted it but dead set against this being enacted in their specific region) you might Never be able to do it after years of sustained efforts.

Local/regional political units that grant what the local population prefers (ex:strawberry as opposed to the vanilla of a larger aggregate) does not prevent it from engaging in cooperation in networks of local/regional communities, but the difference is that this cooperation is voluntary/in synch with the peoples values (bottom up) instead of being imposed (top down).

[Kaere]

Hmm... I'll get back to you with my thoughts on all that a little bit later I completely understand what you've said and do not disagree, however I feel there must be something that can be done differently (from either extreme of gov't 'interference') to improve the entire concept. But... I'll get back to it.

[Kaere]

Local/regional political units that grant what the local population prefers (ex:strawberry as opposed to the vanilla of a larger aggregate) does not prevent it from engaging in cooperation in networks of local/regional communities, but the difference is that this cooperation is voluntary/in synch with the peoples values (bottom up) instead of being imposed (top down).

The thing is... that I haven't seen this actually happen in practice. In theory it's lovely, don't get me wrong. But for the most part what I have seen is a "this is ours, piss off, get off my lawn!" and a "not my problem" kind of mentality. I would think that with less borders and separation, it would be easier to move assets around to actually help people. Case in point, North Korea keeps itself isolated and not necessarily by the wishes of it's local populace... people starve there because the rest of the world is kept out. An extreme example, perhaps but do you understand what I'm saying?

I really do think there must be a better way to all of it, any political system. Everyone needs caring for, not just those whose faces we recognize. Personally, I think if Scotland separates from the UK, it's not going to go well for them and I do think the people there will suffer economic and social hardship. I hope they don't though! If they're happier, then who's to say what's a more important tipping factor on the scales.

[Rockhopper]

Quite right Ka. It's up to the Scots as to whether they stay or go.

They can do so because Scotland is a sovereign nation that just happens to be in a unified agreement with England. Ever since Jimmy VI of Scotland became Jimmy I of the UK.

Parts of Colorado can't do it like that though, that's secession and it's illegal according to International Law. The only process for seceding is that a referendum is held across the Whole Country not just the local area. 75% of the population must agree to the secession.

Tim.

[IceWendigo]

The thing is... that I haven't seen this actually happen in practice. In theory it's lovely, don't get me wrong. But for the most part what I have seen is a "this is ours, piss off, get off my lawn!" and a "not my problem" kind of mentality. I would think that with less borders and separation, it would be easier to move assets around to actually help people. Case in point, North Korea keeps itself isolated and not necessarily by the wishes of it's local populace...

Canada is separate from the US, and its not North Korea, Finland is separate from Sweden and its not North Korea, why should it be ok for Canada, Finland and Sweden to decide on their own, and not ok for other parts of the world like Scotland to choose for themselves? Not being annexed to the US didnt prevent Canada from cooperating on the International Space Station, the difference is that unlike being annexed to the US we get a chance to choose to cooperate on the ISS if we want to, and also choose not participate in the invasion of Iraq if we don't want to. Some aspects of these principles of autonomy and cooperation could be applied on a smaller scale with practical considerations becoming more relevant/potentially problematic as you go down in scale.

I do think the people there will suffer economic and social hardship.

Switzerland is half the size of Scotland and doing fine as far as I know. The world is experiencing hardships in part because of an international banking mafia that is manipulating states behind the scene, preventing states from controlling the creation of money and waging economic warfare (or real warfare when they cant control a state behind the scene as was the case in Libya).

During the Great Depression, Worgl in Austria experienced prosperity without unemployment or inflation by issuing a local (melting) currency.

[Monk (in hiding)]

Local/regional political units that grant what the local population prefers (ex:strawberry as opposed to the vanilla of a larger aggregate) does not prevent it from engaging in cooperation in networks of local/regional communities, but the difference is that this cooperation is voluntary/in synch with the peoples values (bottom up) instead of being imposed (top down).

The thing is... that I haven't seen this actually happen in practice. In theory it's lovely, don't get me wrong. But for the most part what I have seen is a "this is ours, piss off, get off my lawn!" and a "not my problem" kind of mentality. I would think that with less borders and separation, it would be easier to move assets around to actually help people. Case in point, North Korea keeps itself isolated and not necessarily by the wishes of it's local populace... people starve there because the rest of the world is kept out. An extreme example, perhaps but do you understand what I'm saying?

I really do think there must be a better way to all of it, any political system. Everyone needs caring for, not just those whose faces we recognize. Personally, I think if Scotland separates from the UK, it's not going to go well for them and I do think the people there will suffer economic and social hardship. I hope they don't though! If they're happier, then who's to say what's a more important tipping factor on the scales.

Admiralty law

[Kaere]

I suppose the only thing to do is to sit and wait and then watch what happens *shrugs* Western Canada often has separation rumblings as well. A lot of itchy feet and desire for freedom in the genetics of those who made it to North America I think

[Agartha]

So many regions want to separate from the 'main' country, a few examples: the Basque region wants to leave Spain (and a few other regions actually), the island of Sardegna, the region called Veneto and the region of the Tyrol want to leave Italy, a region in Belgium that speak German wants to join Germany, the island of Corsica wants to leave France, Wales wants to leave the UK.... all this just from the top of my head, I'm sure there are many others.

But sometimes (or most of the time) its all political and those regions could never survive independently.

[Rockhopper]

I agree Ags. Most could not survive. A good example of this is the Transniestra region of Moldova. Transniestra is too small to survive on it's own and relies on huge financial help from Russia.

The Balkans is another; Bosnia can't survive on it's own either and needs help from Europe. It will never be able to survive on it's own.

Iceman; your'e analogies are not quite accurate, Canada is a sovereign nation in it's own right, not part of the USA nor is it in a political union with the USA either. NAFTA is a Trade Agreement that's all. Scotland is part of a political union with England going back to the 1600's. The unifying of the two separate monarchies had special deals allowing each to do certain things on their own. Scotland makes it's own laws  and in general governs itself. The main thing they share is a common currency that's all.

Tim.

[Kaere]

*teehee*

[Monk (in hiding)]

Monaco and the Vatican do quite well. lsol

[Rockhopper]

The Vatican is the head of the Catholic Church, the largest Xtian sect. Considerable funds flow into it from the lands it controls all over the world.

Monaco relies on attracting the rich and infamous to it's casino at Monte Carlo. Charles Wells broke the bank there twice and lost it all on the third time.

Tim.

[Rogue]

Queen Elizabeth II has made her first comments about this week's Scottish independence vote, urging Scots to "think very carefully about the future."
Linked

[Monk (in hiding)]

Almost $27 billion of financial assets were pulled out of Britain in August in the run up to Scotland’s vote on independence

http://rt.com/business/187748-investors-pull-out-billions-uk/

[Agartha]

Many companies have confirmed they will leave Scotland if they split from the UK, including several Scottish companies: Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Banking group. TSB, Clydesdale, Tesco bank, Aegon, Shell, BP, etc etc...

(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11091100/Scotlands-biggest-companies-reveal-Yes-exodus-plans.html)

This is from the director of the CBI, John Cridland:

John Cridland warned that independence could be "deeply damaging" for Scotland, putting investment, jobs and growth at risk.

"If Scotland votes ‘Yes’, a re-negotiation of its EU membership is on the cards, which could mean years of instability for companies, seriously affecting jobs and investment, as well as putting off international companies wishing to come to Britain."

[Monk (in hiding)]

bout time those London banksters start getting some heat. lsol


The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (also known as RBS Group) is a British banking and insurance holding company, based in Edinburgh, Scotland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royal_Bank_of_Scotland_Group

[Agartha]

But the London bankster won't feel the heat, only the common people of Scotland....... it will be very hard for them for years if they split. Unfortunately that's the truth.

[IceWendigo]

"it will be very hard for them for years if they split. Unfortunately that's the truth."

Why? Based on what...?

[Sponsored content]