|
Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
The Civil War? Cromwell et al, I mean glorious revolution, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:34
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook. The English Civil War 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Mind you, I went to the great cemetaries of WW1 in Flanders, and people left notes there about "defending freedom" etc. which made me legitimately and irrationally angry
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:He doesn't need a deal, either the SNP support him unconditionally, or they support the Tories at which point they lose Scotland and Miliband is all but guaranteed to win largest party at the next election. I can see the case that the SNP will have basically no power over Labour (at least when it comes to queens speech and budget), but how would that actually work out without any kind agreement at all? Miliband would have to try and form a minority government (on the hope/assumption that SNP/Plaid etc won't vote against his queens speech) even though he (probably) has fewer seats than the anti-labour block. What's the actual process here? Some kind of Great Race style romp through the streets of London to see who can get to the Queen first? Pork Pie Hat posted:Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook. Flodden
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:35
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook. Most people mean WW2.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:35
|
|
|
To be fair, the Nazis weren't big on parliamentary democracy. I mean, the British government of the time could get fairly dodgy, but there's still a pretty large and important gap between the two sides in terms of how they felt about citizens' rights.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Really, this. We could do it like Switzerland, where there's two chambers, one with two representatives per canton and one with representatives proportionate to population sizes of each canton, and they both have to hash things out between them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:37
|
|
"
|
dispatch_async posted:Flodden V. Illych L. posted:The Civil War? Cromwell et al, I mean Disinterested posted:The English Civil War You know, if I thought for a moment that they meant any of these I'd have a scintilla of respect for them. Sure, they'd be utterly moronic and hilariously wrong, but at least they'd put in a tiny amount of thought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook. Yeah the common narrative is that the World Wars were fought for Our Freedoms. It's one of those things where the narrative around it is so ominpresent that people just repeat it without thinking. If you get them to stop and think about it you can get them to realise how bizarre a claim that is but it takes a lot of effort, the ARE FREEDOMS narrative so heavily pounded into them that it's pretty hard to break down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:39
|
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:Hey thread, I hate to break up the fascinating ScotChat for a moment, but I've always wondered something. When people claim that "thousands of our ancestors fought and died for your right to vote" (or similar), which conflict do they think these people fought and died in? Do they seriously think it's either of the World Wars? Asking here because I figure that some posters may have used this argument before and if not, it's better to ask here than facebook. People have in the past have fought, died, and been executed in the pursuance of electoral reform. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterloo_Massacre
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
Regarding the federalism debate, its worth pointing out that devomax couldn't work with federalism. devomax has been defined repeatedly as 'all powers' excluding foreign affairs and defence. Combined with full fiscal autonomy, under devomax there couldn't really be a federal government, certainly not the powerful federal governments that the USA and Germany have. Devomax is much more similar to what the Isle of Man currently has - basically full independence with a shared foreign and defence policy. US states don't even have full fiscal autonomy, what with federal taxes and fiscal transfers to poorer states, and they certainly don't possess 'all powers' (as much as Ron Paul might want). I do agree that a federal UK would be best and probably the only long term solution, but at the moment I honestly don't think a workable federal system could be constructed between Scotland and the rest of the UK - the attempt to construct a federal government would be endlessly denounced by the SNP as a betrayal of The Vow. mediadave fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:People have in the past have fought, died, and been executed in the pursuance of electoral reform. Yeah, I'm well aware of this, but I was asking about what other people generally mean. Again, I'd love to believe that the majority of people mean Peterloo etc, but I really doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Pork Pie Hat posted:Yeah, I'm well aware of this, but I was asking about what other people generally mean. Again, I'd love to believe that the majority of people mean Peterloo etc, but I really doubt it. The two World Wars, generally. And some people conflate the events of both into one, poo poo like "All those people died on the Somme to stop Hitler."  And despite the fact that vast atrocities occured during both, there's been an attempt of sorts to brush it off as "ARE GLORIOUS BOYS", etc ,etc. Pesky Splinter fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
When people say that 'people fought for your freedom to vote', generally they DO mean suffragettes and unionists, don't they? Of course I'm sure they also mean WW2 (and yeah, I guess incorrectly WW1), but most people are aware of the suffragettes at least I'd have thought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
mediadave posted:When people say that 'people fought for your freedom to vote', generally they DO mean suffragettes and unionists, don't they? Of course I'm sure they also mean WW2 (and yeah, I guess incorrectly WW1), but most people are aware of the suffragettes at least I'd have thought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:poo poo like "All those people died on the Somme to stop Hitler."  Reducing motivations to single causes (or eliminating one entirely) is too simplistic. I'm pretty certain many soldiers in WW1 and 2 viewed the enemy as an existential threat, just as they also welcomed a paycheck or fought to keep their comrades alive. It's still incredibly tasteless to use their experiences and motivations to justify present day bigotry though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
A federal UK could potentially solve many of the issues that have annoyed so many scots enough to want to leave and therefore reduce the desire for independence. IMO we should split the UK into Wales, Scotland, N Ireland and then split England into states of roughly equivalent population sizes to Scotland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Phoon posted:A federal UK could potentially solve many of the issues that have annoyed so many scots enough to want to leave and therefore reduce the desire for independence. Tom Holland's Progressive Heptarchy. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/londoners-diary-let-game-of-thrones-lead-us-to-a-new-uk-9748609.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:The two World Wars, generally. And some people conflate the events of both into one, poo poo like "All those people died on the Somme to stop Hitler."
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
mediadave posted:When people say that 'people fought for your freedom to vote', generally they DO mean suffragettes and unionists, don't they? Of course I'm sure they also mean WW2 (and yeah, I guess incorrectly WW1), but most people are aware of the suffragettes at least I'd have thought. I don't know whether you're optimistic or just encounter nicer people, but round my way it's because are boys died for are freedoms against the Boche, and the suffragettes were right I suppose but they could have been a bit better behaved 
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
mediadave posted:When people say that 'people fought for your freedom to vote', generally they DO mean suffragettes and unionists, don't they? Of course I'm sure they also mean WW2 (and yeah, I guess incorrectly WW1), but most people are aware of the suffragettes at least I'd have thought. Shouldn't be surprising really, that's when propaganda really started to be used systematically and on an industrial scale. And amazingly, even though we know it was all bullshit, it was so incredibly effective that it still resonates in our culture today. It'd be enough to turn a man to drink, if he wasn't turned already (he was).
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Never take the Swiss as an example of anything.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:It's really stunning how poo poo a job the Tories have done of attacking Labour. This guy would agree! http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/rupert-murdoch-berated-sun-journalists-for-not-doing-enough-to-attack-ed-miliband-10191005.html I'm sure we'll seem him in court for trying to unduly affect the election any day now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:USA is probably not the best example there. And no states have left since then. Secessionist movements are a fringe novelty at most.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
SNAKES N CAKES posted:New vote projection from a trusted source: Gonna love the misery from his twitter when Cameron's out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Fans posted:This guy would agree! How far is this from the standard, expected newspaper partisanship, though? I mean, you can drat well bet the Graun and Mirror are pushing hard for Prime Minister Miliband.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Cerv posted:I think the civil war was long enough ago that we can overlook it. The conditions that led to it seem quite unlikely to reoccur in a modern western nation. The supreme court ruling that declared Texas' secession illegal during the civil war is still used as precedence today. Basically the US government contends that the Union is "unbreakable", it doesn't particularly care what the people think either way. So the point is still somewhat relevant I feel. And more Americans support secession than I think you're giving credit for, a Reuters poll during the Scottish referendum showed something like 20% supported the right of their state to peacefully secede (although the phrasing in this is important, "I support the right" is not necessarily the same as "I want this to happen").
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
So apparently Jon Gaunt still exists, just without a radio station to carry his bigotry. He's still whining about the LibLabConSNPGreen, calling LGBT people perverts while blocking anyone who respectfully disagrees with him on Twitter. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
TinTower posted:It's not up to Clegg, or Ashdown, or Brinton, to decide who the Lib Dems go into coalition with or support; it's the membership. You can stomach the tories?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:People have in the past have fought, died, and been executed in the pursuance of electoral reform. For those of you into folk music, the Oldham Tinkers did a commemorative song about Peterloo which can be heard here. The youtube video also has some general info in the massacre as well, plus some contemporary drawings etc. The song starts about 30s in. Prince John fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
dispatch_async posted:I can see the case that the SNP will have basically no power over Labour (at least when it comes to queens speech and budget), but how would that actually work out without any kind agreement at all? Miliband would have to try and form a minority government (on the hope/assumption that SNP/Plaid etc won't vote against his queens speech) even though he (probably) has fewer seats than the anti-labour block. Labour only really needs SNP's votes once, on a motion "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's government". After that, they're home free - defeat on a budget or a Queen's Speech no longer entails the government's resignation. Only an explicit motion of no confidence can force a government out, and that leaves a minority government a lot more breathing room.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Mike Leigh is making a feature film of the Peterloo massacre soon which should give it more attention. It wasn't something we ever learned about in school though. I'm ashamed to admit I didn't even know what it was until visiting Manchester Central Library's brilliant new interactive archive last year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
The SNP are likely to vote with Labour on that anyway, since the alternatives are either the Tory Queen's Speech getting through (which looks bad for them "you could've prevented this"), or neither Labour nor Tories can form a government, so we have another election. This would end up hurting the smaller parties more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:It was a bit of a trite statement, but I disagree we can overlook it so easily. Fair enough. Pretend I said Switzerland or Australia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Can Ed Miliband argue with a different idiot every day leading up to the election? He's best when he's incredulous. The Boris bit today was great, he's phenomenally good at throwing shade.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
Is anyone else today getting mad snowfall? What the gently caress is this poo poo, it's April.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Is anyone else today getting mad snowfall? What the gently caress is this poo poo, it's April. I just ate a barbeque, so no.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Is anyone else today getting mad snowfall? What the gently caress is this poo poo, it's April. How long have you lived in Scotland now? And you've never encountered of lambing season snow? Lucky. I'd not say that April snow showers are an annual occurrence but probably every 2-3 years it happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Is anyone else today getting mad snowfall? What the gently caress is this poo poo, it's April. 2 years ago we had 6 foot snow drifts in parts of Northern England in April. While 2013-2014 winter we had 0 snow at all and it never dropped below freezing. Its the pattern, Winter can be November to April; While the Wet Season aka Summer is May to October.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 18:48
|
|