|
baronvonsabre posted:Which as I said will come with a corresponding cut in Barnett funding, which we'll have to compensate for by increasing taxes. It is a massive trap. Also, as a matter of realpolitik, I'm not sure Barnett could survive for long if Holyrood used it as an excuse to slash taxes. I suspect the rest of the UK would start complaining pretty loudly, and get Barnett abolished or re-worked in Parliament.
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 12:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:03 |
|
|
of course it's a massive trap, it's exactly what the SNP would have gotten under independence though - oil but no Barnett - so it can hardly backtrack now. And the Tories are running on whatever they propose in 2015, one year before the SNP will run in Scotland. There is nil chance that Westminster will have to deal with another party in Holyrood, even if Scottish Labour miraculously grows a spine
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 12:43
|
|
|
baronvonsabre posted:Which as I said will come with a corresponding cut in Barnett funding, which we'll have to compensate for by increasing taxes. It is a massive trap. Nationalism is a zero sum game. Scottish Nationalists have framed their demands as requiring their ingroup to be privileged and have thus opened the door for other groups to push to demand their ingroup to be privileged instead because anything that benefits Scotland is now perceived to be detrimental to all other groups in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 12:45
|
|
|
Spooky Hyena posted:Not really surprising, given how they've been bending over backwards to keep the far right little england vote from defecting to UKIP. Is there really a case for disenfranchising prisoners, though? I can see why it'd make some people uncomfortable, but it's a cack-handed way of disenfranchising criminals and it's not like there's a "let's abolish prisons and the justice system" party that they'll all try to vote in. And that's if they even would, literally everyone I know that's been to prison supports having a justice system, even if they differ on relatively minor points like individual laws and police transparency/accountability. Whether prisoners should be allowed the vote is a question, but it isn't the one which the ECHR actually answered, which is a caveat that our right wing isn't particularly interested in. The court ruled that our blanket ban was unlawful because occasionally it leads to someone who has not yet been found guilty being disenfranchised. twoot fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Nationalism is a zero sum game. Scottish Nationalists have framed their demands as requiring their ingroup to be privileged and have thus opened the door for other groups to push to demand their ingroup to be privileged instead because anything that benefits Scotland is now perceived to be detrimental to all other groups in the UK. It is indeed a zero sum game, but the sets are disproportionately weighted. There is no reason to reason we cannot entitle all the peoples who work in this country to ensure our sick are never left untreated, our children never left uneducated, and our families never left hungry, from the unnecessary surpluses of those who make millions from their combined efforts. London is able to carry the burden. As we expand, the birth of HS2 and the growth of a working consumer class would allow us to shift this burden to Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool, and then over the Tyne, Tees and Wear. Also let's bomb vodaphone or something because seriously what the gently caress was that about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
ronya posted:of course it's a massive trap, it's exactly what the SNP would have gotten under independence though - oil but no Barnett - so it can hardly backtrack now. And Zephro, the point about slashing taxes is true, but also irrelevant. Not only are (for example) Labour planning to only allow Scotland to raise income tax rather than lower it below the UK level to avoid that exact problem, your exact argument explains why devolution in this way would be disastrous for Hollyrood but very beneficial for Westminster. Hollyrood will be unable to cut taxes either because its not within the scope of devolved powers or because of (as you stated) the political problems involved, while Westminster can cut Scottish funding drastically and simply state that if we want that equivalent funding back, all we have to do is use that power to raise taxes over the rest of the UK. baronvonsabre fucked around with this message at 13:45 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:It is indeed a zero sum game, but the sets are disproportionately weighted. There is no reason to reason we cannot entitle all the peoples who work in this country to ensure our sick are never left untreated, our children never left uneducated, and our families never left hungry, from the unnecessary surpluses of those who make millions from their combined efforts. sure - but if the southeast keeps its own revenue, it can bring salvation to its own sick, its own uneducated, and its own hungry at far lower cost while flipping a huge finger to anything and anyone north of the Watford gap this is the calculus of nationalism: that a child in Edinburgh has a different value from a child in Surrey, and by the same logic from a child in Tyne & Wear. Why bother?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:44
|
|
|
ronya posted:sure - but if the southeast keeps its own revenue, it can bring salvation to its own sick, its own uneducated, and its own hungry at far lower cost while flipping a huge finger to anything and anyone north of the Watford gap Oh for sure. That's why you keep London and Kent under strict control. You can't make everyone happy, and being from Kent myself I'd be more than willing to genocide these fucks, a bit of shouldering the burden for those who don't have the advantage of being born into, for example, millionaire rhodesian slave-trade emmigrant families would be good for them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
baronvonsabre posted:I don't think anyone needed it clarified that Barnett wouldn't exist in an independent Scotland, but thanks for your input anyway. I... think that perhaps you misunderstand devo max? By coincidence the oil revenues are about in the same ballpark as the net public expenditure transfer to Scotland - the SNP argues it is slightly more, in fact. Hence the idea of swapping the oil for the transfer. As was pointed out before the referendum, such devolution is well within the interests of the Tories, which is why Scottish Labour is now in the uncomfortable position of supporting limitations on taxation powers instead of devo max per se.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Is this all hypothetical or are some people seriously claiming we'll get devo max? Because we won't. The term's even been corrupted and misused by the media so much it's not even obvious anymore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Oh for sure. That's why you keep London and Kent under strict control. You can't make everyone happy, and being from Kent myself I'd be more than willing to genocide these fucks, a bit of shouldering the burden for those who don't have the advantage of being born into, for example, millionaire rhodesian slave-trade emmigrant families would be good for them. who's this 'you' of which you speak, some hypothetical old-old-Labour-flavoured consensus from the Attlee era? Who gets elected without the southeast? Coohoolin posted:Is this all hypothetical or are some people seriously claiming we'll get devo max? Because we won't. The term's even been corrupted and misused by the media so much it's not even obvious anymore. I think it is quite likely that the Tories will propose full fiscal autonomy for Scotland, although how defence will be funded remains to be seen. That is how the SNP appears to understand the term 'devo max', anyway. ronya fucked around with this message at 14:04 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:54
|
|
|
ronya posted:who's this 'you' of which you speak, some hypothetical old-old-Labour-flavoured consensus from the Attlee era? Who gets elected without the southeast? Anyone smart enough to realise you could probably drive a wedge between Essex and Kent, and thus render the southeast bloc irrelevant? So your point is a good one I guess.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
ronya posted:I... think that perhaps you misunderstand devo max? Devo Max is not and has never been on the table at any time. The chance of it ever being so is so unrealistic that you might as well propose that everyone in Scotland should get a free unicorn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
baronvonsabre posted:Devo Max is not and has never been on the table at any time. The chance of it ever being so is so unrealistic that you might as well propose that everyone in Scotland should get a free unicorn. The derail is pretty boring but to clear up a technicality: Did the Tories actually offer Devo Max at the time they were dropping the Saltire on the floor, or was that newspapers not knowing what words mean?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
Have you not yet realised the Tories have played you? We're all hosed and you're never getting away without guns. They've come out of this so far on top I have trouble believing that this was anything other than their plan all along.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:
In what possible world is this true? They've been farcical the entire way through, some utter bastard of a strategist managing to spike Scotland with a poisoned chalice doesn't undo the damage they did to their non-homeland votebase, especially because they can hardly boast about what they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Anyone smart enough to realise you could probably drive a wedge between Essex and Kent, and thus render the southeast bloc irrelevant? Now I am really curious. What wedge do you envision, anyway?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
At the very least Nationalism has been detoxified to some degree and that will always benefit the right and Scottish voters are much more open to FYGM policies than they used to be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
ronya posted:Now I am really curious. What wedge do you envision, anyway? Point out to the home of white flight where all the foreigners arrive from? Dover's currently under a literal blockade, btw. ReV VAdAUL posted:At the very least Nationalism has been detoxified to some degree and that will always benefit the right and Scottish voters are much more open to FYGM policies than they used to be. Nationalism is not a right-wing position. Your second point is valid, though, but the idea of Scotland going Tory remains laughable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
Scotland will not go Tory. Scotland will remain SNP, at least for a few years, and it so happens that SNP and Tory interests in England coincide. The reason Cameron invoked intra-English devolution immediately after the referendum is because the Tory interest in giving Scotland FFA only works if they can use internal English FFA to force northern England to pay for its own services, with the SNP being a useful cheerleader in minimizing intra-regional equalization payments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Scotland doesn't need to go Tory. Nationalism benefits the right because it creates artificial barriers between the working class. Many Scots are now focused on getting theirs from the English rather than addressing how Neo-Liberalism screws everyone over. It also benefits the right because the Tories can now use English Nationalism to deny the poorest in Scotland necessary spending because they want our money. Which in turn let's the SNP pretend it is the evil English rather than Neo-Liberalism that is screwing Scots over. As we talked about with immigrants the other day, Nationalism lets the elite focus popular hatreds on scapegoats.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Scotland doesn't need to "get theirs" from the English in continual transfers, it can just use its oil. Likewise, the Tories don't need to use English nationalism to deny the Scottish anything, since Scotland can pay for its own poor using the oil. And screaming about a nebulous 'neoliberalism' is counterproductive when it disguises the hard reality of having to convince several million southeastern English that they are morally and ethically obliged to aid several million other people who they have never met and quite likely never meet. "But we're all working class" - sure, but only one of us has to bear with the cost of living in the south, comrade. Everyone is now the working squeezed middle, you're nothing special, let me keep my own damned money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
ronya posted:Scotland doesn't need to "get theirs" from the English in continual transfers, it can just use its oil. Likewise, the Tories don't need to use English nationalism to deny the Scottish anything, since Scotland can pay for its own poor using the oil. And screaming about a nebulous 'neoliberalism' is counterproductive when it disguises the hard reality of having to convince several million southeastern English that they are morally and ethically obliged to aid several million other people who they have never met and quite likely never meet. "But we're all working class" - sure, but only one of us has to bear with the cost of living in the south, comrade. Everyone is now the working squeezed middle, you're nothing special, let me keep my own damned money. Posters ITT have repeatedly complained about how merely getting control of oil isn't enough for Scotland and how Westminster is screwing them, let alone the nutters on Twitter or WoS. Detoxified Nationalism is allowing the Tories to screw over everyone including the Scots and... uh why are you restating my point about Neo-Liberalism and asserting disagreement?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Scotland doesn't need to go Tory. Nationalism benefits the right because it creates artificial barriers between the working class. Many Scots are now focused on getting theirs from the English rather than addressing how Neo-Liberalism screws everyone over. It also benefits the right because the Tories can now use English Nationalism to deny the poorest in Scotland necessary spending because they want our money. Which in turn let's the SNP pretend it is the evil English rather than Neo-Liberalism that is screwing Scots over.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:This is all great in theory, but ignores the fact that there isn't even the faintest glimmer of hope of overthrowing the neo-liberal consensus in the United Kingdom right now. With a Scotland riven by "nationalism" or not. How many MPs in Westminster actually think that the relentless progress of market forces is a bad thing for the vast majority of people in this country and across the globe? 20? 30? 50 even? A tiny & insignificant fraction. Things being bad absolves Scottish Nationalism of making things considerably worse somehow?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Scotland doesn't need to go Tory. Nationalism benefits the right because it creates artificial barriers between the working class. Many Scots are now focused on getting theirs from the English rather than addressing how Neo-Liberalism screws everyone over. It also benefits the right because the Tories can now use English Nationalism to deny the poorest in Scotland necessary spending because they want our money. Which in turn let's the SNP pretend it is the evil English rather than Neo-Liberalism that is screwing Scots over. Instead we have Chuka loving Umunna 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Things being bad absolves Scottish Nationalism of making things considerably worse somehow? Look, the cat is out of the bag. Nationalism is an idea that exists, it's not going away, & as much as I'd love it to go away & everyone to be an internationalist with the best interests of all humanity, we're kind of hosed there. Socialist Internationalism died with the start of World War I & the Second International splintering. So you can continue to ignore nationalism like the past 200+ years haven't happened, or you can try and make nationalism a positive force for change rather than leaving it to be used by the right. Unless you have some terrific idea that means the left can continue to leave nationalism in the hands of people who will use it in a negative & divisive manner? I'd love to hear it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Another Tory has defected to UKIP http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29394697
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:This would involve me conceding that Scottish Nationalism makes things considerably worse and I don't concede that. Should left wingers also start acknowledging racism, homophobia etc etc are things that exist and need to be co-opted by the left? If not why is a force that has consistently weakened the majority and empowered the elite be adopted by left wingers? How can hatred of the other ever be a good thing?s
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Posters ITT have repeatedly complained about how merely getting control of oil isn't enough for Scotland and how Westminster is screwing them, let alone the nutters on Twitter or WoS. Detoxified Nationalism is allowing the Tories to screw over everyone including the Scots and... uh why are you restating my point about Neo-Liberalism and asserting disagreement? because it's not an embrace of a neoliberal nationalism as opposed to redistribution, but an embrace of redistribution within a much smaller national group the new populist conservatism does not cut the NHS, it cuts the NHS for those people who are not like us
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Should left wingers also start acknowledging racism, homophobia etc etc are things that exist and need to be co-opted by the left? If not why is a force that has consistently weakened the majority and empowered the elite be adopted by left wingers? How can hatred of the other ever be a good thing?s While I don't disagree with the divisiveness you're talking about, you're STILL conflating ALL nationalism with hatred of an other when we've just seen a perfect example of an inclusive and assimilatory type of nationalism almost succeed in breaking apart a leading member of the neoliberal hegemony.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:While I don't disagree with the divisiveness you're talking about, you're STILL conflating ALL nationalism with hatred of an other when we've just seen a perfect example of an inclusive and assimilatory type of nationalism almost succeed in breaking apart a leading member of the neoliberal hegemony. *cough*
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
I guess I don't mind the vague concept of nationalism as that of regional authority when there's an overwhelming popular sentiment for it (obviously a fine aid in anti-imperialism) but it does require an increase in democracy and democratic accountability beyond 'there are smaller numbers involved and they sometimes think a bit more alike' because then it is simply a case of smaller and smaller subdivisions for increasingly selfish purposes.Gibfender posted:Another Tory has defected to UKIP A totally Reckless decision.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Should left wingers also start acknowledging racism, homophobia etc etc are things that exist and need to be co-opted by the left? If not why is a force that has consistently weakened the majority and empowered the elite be adopted by left wingers? How can hatred of the other ever be a good thing?s loving nora. Nationalism isn't defined hatred of another. Often times it is taken in the direction of hatred of another, but it doesn't have to be. I oppose all right wing nationalism in much the same way all bad right wing ideas. forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 15:00 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:See this housing market? This housing market right here? Well, watch this! Haha, I saw a story that said "Housing prices begin to fall" and gently caress me if they didn't immediately just try to prop it back up again. We're all doomed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
ronya posted:because it's not an embrace of a neoliberal nationalism as opposed to redistribution, but an embrace of redistribution within a much smaller national group I think this is just arguing over semantics. The ingroup gets the spoils and the outgroup can go hang, whether that's whites, one's nation or a suburb getting funded over the inner city. FYGMism. Coohoolin posted:While I don't disagree with the divisiveness you're talking about, you're STILL conflating ALL nationalism with hatred of an other when we've just seen a perfect example of an inclusive and assimilatory type of nationalism almost succeed in breaking apart a leading member of the neoliberal hegemony. An independent Scotland wasn't going to break apart the EU but instead be totally reliant upon it and the Yes campaign by definition promoted divisiveness towards those who lived in the UK but outside Scotland. The consistent refrain of the Yes campaign was once Scotland was free of the UK everyone would be richer and better off, how would the citizens of the rUK do? Well that's their problem, sinking ship and all that. Edit: forkboy84 posted:Yes, nationalism is entirely comparable with racism & homophobia. Please provide examples of good left wing nationalism? Heck provide an example of nationalism that isn't defined by negative cohesion. ReV VAdAUL fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Sep 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:This would involve me conceding that Scottish Nationalism makes things considerably worse and I don't concede that. I have to agree with this, functionally speaking the SNP has been more of a force for the left than Labour has or will ever be. But nationalism is still going to affect the kind of ideas the party will have, surely? Isn't this "nationalism will always be with us, might as well roll with it" the exact kind of defeatist talk leftists are supposed to fight? Replace nationalism with capitalism and you've practically got a Polly Toynbee post on your hands there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
Whether nationalism is good or bad, the main thing is that it's now out there and people are thinking in terms of Westminster vs. Scotland. If the UK is to hold together in the long-term there needs to be not only a comprehensive, full-throated devolution settlement (i.e. federalism) for the entire country, but also a rejuvenated left which offers an optimistic, ambitious alternative to independence. I voted yes in the referendum both out of a sense of despair that only a vanishingly-small (and ever-decreasing) minority of MPs represent the type of progressive, redistributive politics I want the country to be governed by, and also that there exists absolutely no will for the enormous reforms necessary to turn the UK into a viable 21st-century country instead of some disgusting mediaeval anachronism with honest-to-god Lords and monarchs. I'd love for Scotland's much-celebrated oil revenues to go toward funding better lives for people throughout the country, but as it stands it seems they'll just get pissed away on more tax cuts for rich Yanks.* * No, independence wouldn't guarantee a socialist utopia overnight (or ever), but it would give us the chance to break away from centuries of elitist pish.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Many Scots are now focused on getting theirs from the English rather than addressing how Neo-Liberalism screws everyone over. ReV VAdAUL posted:Which in turn let's the SNP pretend it is the evil English rather than Neo-Liberalism that is screwing Scots over. Yes, because the SNP is surely against the English what with their English MSPs, their suggestion of open borders between the two conutries in indy and their supporters who are mostly working class, hating on the Elite of the UK rather then the people of england. Yep, sure is anglophobia... forkboy84 posted:Yes, nationalism is entirely comparable with racism & homophobia. The only nationalism concept that does that is Ethnic Nationalism...which in turn is something to be against. But comparing civil nationalism that in general to Ethnic Nationalism is like comparing a Africanized honey bee to a Western honey bee. Both are the same species but one is much more nicer then the other one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:03 |
|
|
Gibfender posted:Another Tory has defected to UKIP He is forcing a by-election too. This seat should show pretty well how far UKIP might spread into the Tory heartland. Unlike Clacton it isn't particularly poor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2014 15:20
|
|