Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Should Scotland go independent?

Based on news reports it might actually come to pass, an independent Scotland for the first time in 300 years.

Seems like an act of lunacy to me.

Curious what other folks think and why.

Birdwatcher

If the people of Scotland want independence, then yes of course.

Why would that be lunacy? Was our independence lunacy also?

No reason Scotland shouldn't be independent. Scotland was a nation back in the day. Wales probably isn't far behind and Northern Ireland will eventually become a part of Ireland. Eventually England will be England.

The American Empire is next.

In division lies weakness.

It might be that Great Britain's status as a military power is irrelevant in the world today anyway, but for starters they'd have to negotiate to keep their nuclear subs in Scotland anymore.

Also, Scots and English have been settling all over each other's areas for decades at least, tons of Scots in England, lots of English up north. To impede or set boundaries on that seems ludicrous.

The appeal of an independent Scotland is emotional to be sure, but Scottish Nationalists over here should realize the Scottish government leans further Left than even the Brits.

Birdwatcher

You're right. We would have been better off staying with the Brits.

We obviously became weaker by winning our independence.

No way England and Scotland could work together as two independent nations. God knows it's never happened before.

Really? Do you hear yourself? A people desire to govern themselves, as we did and so many died for, and you think it's lunacy. Unbelievable

Scotland is a lot poorer than the rest of the UK and sucks up a huge amount of welfare money. If they become independent then their purse strings will get cut. It would be in their economic interest to stay in the UK, they need England more than England needs them.

Nationalism is a powerful thing though and God knows they've got enough reasons to hate the English given how England's treated them over the last 1000 years or so.

Yes I think Scotland should go independent, along with Texas, Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, AZ, Idaho and a whole slew of others

centralized govt's doesn't seem to have much benefit to the average citizen in this day and age.


sure it leaves the Ruskies and the Chinese as the superpowers, but I believe enough alliances could be formed to stymie any Manifest Destiny they might entertain.


freedom is a good thing, Birdwatcher sleeps on the floor and teaches school, I sleep on the bed and phart around alot.


I like the idea of smaller countries, heck it might even take root in Russia and China

I don't think a lot of folks here really give a chit what the Scots do, Brits either for that matter.
We had to fight for independence, I guess it's a kinder, gentler time these days.

The balkanization of countries around the world continues. With the UN, even tiny little chit holes have 'political power', and they can always agitate and demonstrate for wealth sharing.

I care because my lineage starts there.

As Crow Hunter said they will suffer financially and will have to go off the pound. I doubt they will adopt the Euro.

I think nationalism is clouding their view of reality. I wish them luck as they will certainly need it.

I work with an azzload of Scot's being from the old school of offshore projects and they all deeply feel yes.

I kinda have to take Crocodile Dundee's position on that. "None of my business".

I read somewhere that Scotland gets 90% of the North Sea rigs if they bail. That might help their situation. Not sure.

Impossible to prove but I'm guessing ...

Higher taxes, fewer jobs in the first five years. After that, I dunno.

It's not about if it's economically better or worse.

It's about a chance for these people to finally govern themselves.

Even if they fail. Even if they are socialists. It's not about anything other than them getting a chance at self government.

As Americans, I'd think we'd support that ideal.

This.

And, this.

A linked-question: Will England be better off, culturally and financially, without Scotland?

Treated whom one wonders? Gotta be careful with that "historic injustice" stuff.

Everyone right away thinks Highlanders who were a minority of the population, for the most part endlessly warring and massacring among themselves. Heck, even at Culloden in '45 there were more Highlanders present fighting on the English side than for the Jacobites. And if yer talking Lowland Scots, where precisely does/did Lowland Scot leave off and "English" begin?

Birdwatcher

When did that happen before?

And as an aside, as an example of what an independent Scotland might aspire to, let us look back on the enormous contributions made by an independent Ireland towards the cause of advancing democracy and decency and opposing evil around the world......

um.........

You must be Celtic, I am too, hence I quickly recognize such hysterical "logic".

I submit that if the American colonies had only the resources and land mass of Scotland as opposed to an entire larger depopulated continent to develop then the US would be just a quiet and insignificant backwater today, entirely dominated on the world stage by greater powers.



Didn't say they didn't have the right to split, just said it'd be an act of lunacy if they did.

Birdwatcher