Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


No need to purge Cabinet of Scots – Straw

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 June 2008
JACK Straw, the Justice Secretary, hit back yesterday after calls from Labour MPs for Gordon Brown to replace the Scots in his Cabinet with English politicians.
Mr Straw, who has been named as a possible replacement for the beleaguered Prime Minister, said there were "plenty" of "English people – true-born Englishmen and women" in the Cabinet and there was no need for any changes.

The Justice Secretary was responding to suggestions from two back-benchers who have become worried that the number of Scots in Mr Brown's Cabinet is harming Labour's chances in England.

Stephen Ladyman, a former roads minister who is MP for the marginal constituency of Thanet South, said: "It is important to recognise that the election is won or lost in England. We need to have English voices speaking and giving messages that make sense in English communities."

And Lindsay Hoyle, the MP for Chorley, said: "Voters are looking to see a better balance within the Cabinet to ensure that all the regions of England are represented."

Keith Vaz, a member of Labour's national executive committee and chairman of the Commons home affairs committee, also raised the issue of the vacant deputy prime minister's job and called for Mr Straw, an Englishman, to be given the role.

Labour MPs have become increasingly worried about their chances of political survival at the next election and some believe that Mr Brown's "Scottishness" does not play well with some English voters.

There has also been concern over what has been termed the "Scottish McMafia" around the Prime Minister, the number of Scottish Cabinet ministers and advisers around Mr Brown. But these complaints have been largely kept private, until now.

It is a sign of how worried some Labour MPs are, that such views have now been declared publicly.

One poll last week put Labour at its lowest level since polling began in 1943 with 23 per cent.

Caledonian connections

THERE are 23 members of the UK Cabinet, four of whom are Scottish and represent Scottish constituencies.

This represents 17.4 per cent of the total Cabinet when Scotland accounts for about 9 per cent of the UK population. They are:

1 Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister and MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath.

2 Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and MP for Edinburgh South West.

3 Des Browne, Scottish Secretary and Defence Secretary, and the MP for Kilmarnock and Loudoun.

4 Douglas Alexander, International Develop-ment Secretary, MP for Paisley/Renfrewshire South.




The full article contains 421 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 June 2008 9:41 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Angus Ogg,

01/06/2008 23:48:26

Are there any lawyers on this thread ?

If so, please can I have some legal advise?

Is it legally possible to report Stephen Ladyman to the police for inciting racial hatred?

With all due respect to those from minorities where sexuality, disability or ethnic origin are legally protected from abuse, I suspect that if some idiot like Ladyman were to say there are too many gay people, or disabled people in the Cabinet he would be quite rightly hauled off in the awaiting police vehicle in Downing Street.

So why can Ladyman abuse Scots in such a way ?

The fact that they may not be the most competent Scots in the UK is neither here nor there. The fact that the majority of Scots would like to see many of the Scottish Cabinet Members out of office is also neither here nor there.

The issue is Stephen Ladyman is a racist biggot.
2

ThomasP,

Scotland, Aberdeen 02/06/2008 00:04:14
Wow.

First rising fuel duty and tax.

And now MP's are being racist against Scots?

The Union has had its day.

Bring on Independence.
3

Arrow,

edinburgh 02/06/2008 00:07:04
And Lindsay Hoyle, the MP for Chorley, said: "Voters are looking to see a better balance within the Cabinet to ensure that all the regions of England are represented." by England one supposes this ignorant MP really means the whole of the UK?

swop "Scottish"for "black", "catholic", "muslim" "jewish" and you see how bloody racist some of the comments are.

if you were a left handed, black irish catholic who converted to judaism nae chance of becoming a labour MP
4

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeen/shire 02/06/2008 00:19:02
Whether they are Scottish or English is irrelevant. All four are incompetent.

What is relevant is English MPs debating and voting on English issues, i.e. a separate parliament.

This is the Labour Party in meltdown. Once it starts, there's no stopping it. Brown will be humiliated at the next election, then Miliband will become the new Labour leader thereafter.

5

gerad,

greenock 02/06/2008 00:47:56
#Arrow,edinburgh
What the hell is with you that thinks us left handed, black Irish catholics who have converted to Judaism would want to be Liebour MPs. Don't you think we have it hard enough as it is.
6

Mercian,

UK 02/06/2008 00:52:35
These comments by Stephen Ladyman and Lindsay Hoyle are distasteful. They play right into the hands of seperatists in the UK. I also think they are wrong about the majority of English people's view; certainly, any Scottish reduction in the cabinet isn't going to change who the public will vote for - except may be for Brown himself, but that won't be because he is Scottish.

The English are very use to Scottish people in their communites. There are plenty of popular Scottish celebrities. The the government is unpopular everywhere in the UK, for several other reasons....
7

Stu_R_20,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 00:53:17
Unfortunately these men give us all a bad name......
8

celtic4,

USA 02/06/2008 01:06:47
I think the term Scottish Mafia is detrimental and discriminating. Too much. And I do not think the cabinet need be 100% English. I believe the Scots on the cabinet would be more balancing.
9

,

02/06/2008 01:09:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

,

02/06/2008 01:10:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Senga Jean,

02/06/2008 01:20:58
I am ashamed to be British!..........Oh no I'm not.....I am Scottish And the British (sub text "English") can manage well enough without my clever little compatriots. lets quickly move on ....to INDEPENDENCE.
12

Mercian,

UK 02/06/2008 01:24:17
#9 Donald Mc Google

I wouldn't think my argument is on "shakey ground" due to anti-Scottish comments made in cyberspace. Haven't you noticed how the web is full of nutters hiding behind keyboards?
13

,

02/06/2008 01:25:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
14

,

02/06/2008 01:46:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

ChinaBear,

Hong Kong 02/06/2008 02:06:42
I love the shouts of racist coming from this thread, most of whom have been abusing the English on a daily basis for years. If the cap fits......

For one minute lets just imagine that two seperate groups of people can get together, be happy with their nationality and work as a team and use their respective strengths in both sets of interests. The fact is that Britain was at it's most successful when that was happening.
16

Royster,

02/06/2008 02:13:24
It's racism pure and simple. The fault lies with devolution which is a failed policy. We should only have one parliament.
17

Royster,

02/06/2008 02:13:31
It's racism pure and simple. The fault lies with devolution which is a failed policy. We should only have one parliament.
18

Royster,

02/06/2008 02:13:52
It's racism pure and simple. The fault lies with devolution which is a failed policy. We should only have one parliament.
19

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 02:21:33
14
Up to 12 now?
There's dedication.
20

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 02:23:36
16, 17, 18

Totally right Royster.And we soon will have:-)
21

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 02:25:59
Royster, if you get the error page just go back,then refresh.
22

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 02/06/2008 02:31:30
There are no groups, there are however 2 Different Countries, in a relationship whitch has gone passed it's sell by date. SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE is the only answer to these TROUBLED ISLANDS. There will be no arguements thereafter.
23

Singlepoint,

Fife 02/06/2008 02:45:06
Now, let’s see; the parliament is the UK parliament but Scots are not allowed to be ministers. If that were carried out it would be to dissolve the Union. I could easily live with that not least because by Scots law Scotland would then own 95% of the North Sea oil revenue which in effect would give us a rock solid currency: likely the hardest in the world; at a time when the US dollar is weakening as would the English pound weaken in those circumstances. We’d of course need rational, prudent leaders and an honest, non-affiliated judiciary, which is to sadly say, every silver lining has a cloud. Ah well, it was a nice thought while it lasted.
24

Saltire,

Thailand 02/06/2008 02:47:14
#15 ChinaBear
Of course what you say is right and it is nothing to be proud of.
But what we see now is what has been concealed in the past by an English based media - the English are exactly the same as the Scots in their attitudes to each other. They are imbued with the same ignorance about each other.
The more this situation develops the more we will see the balance changing in England. In the past Labour has relied on Scottish votes to win elections. Now they can have no confidence about that happening again and they need to chase English votes. With continuing anti-Scottish sentiment in England it does seem crazy to have a predominantly Scottish government.
When the 2 groups of people worked together in the past it was because the Scots had no alternative and had to put up with being treated as second class citizens in their own country.
Now things have changed and the Scots have an alternative future where they can, for better or for worse, be in control of their own lives.
25

Jimmy the Pie,

02/06/2008 02:57:48
Scotland being independent would solve all this at a stroke.

Roll on the day.
26

Scottish not British,

Awaiting Independence 02/06/2008 03:57:17
So in a nutshell we can pay UK taxes and have all the responsibilities and even vote but we can't be in power? That is pretty messed up, but its nothing compared with what the press in England want. I am in no doubt that these will be the same people who will complain long and loud when they get the Tories and there are a bunch of Old Etonians in power. These racists should shut up and be glad that in the next couple of years we'll be independent and they won't have Scots in their parliament because we'll be running our own nation free of outside interference. They all banged on about getting Maggie Broon into power before the last election, now he's there they aren't happy with that either. This proves that the Union is not united and is basically a joke, which stopped being funny a long time ago.
Perhaps they are beginning to realise that this is the situation we have had to endure for 300 years and that it's not so much fun to be ruled by people not from your own country.
27

Arthur C,

singapore 02/06/2008 04:28:24
well said #15. There is a lot more anti-english sentiment in scotland than there is anti-scottish sentiment in england.
I lived in london for 6 years and made and still have have a lot of good english friends. The problem now is that, with the creation of the scottish parliament the english feel aggreived that scottish MPs at westminster decide english policy, policy in areas that in scotland is covered by the scottish parliament. This anomaly is obviously highlighted by scottish cabinet ministers and in light of this, Middle England would probably prefer to hear policy initiatives from an english MP rather a Scottish MP.
This is what Ladyman is trying to say.
I voted for the scottish parliament but now wish that I hadn't, the relationship between scotland and england seems to be degenerating. People mention oil as the reason why we are being taken advantage of by the english. Give me a choice between a couple of decades more in oil revenues or the london financial services industry and I take the london financial services industry any time !
28

Royster,

02/06/2008 04:39:42
Shut Holyrood and hold a referendum on independence.
29

izzie,

dundee 02/06/2008 05:38:45
as the former colonials said 'no taxation without representation' could it be that get the jocks out campaign will finally open our eyes to the contempt with which we are viewed by our so called partner in this union?
30

Guga II,

Rockall 02/06/2008 06:01:18
"We need to have English voices speaking and giving messages that make sense in English communities."

Well we need Scottish voices speaking and giving messages that make sense in Scottish communities.

"Voters are looking to see a better balance within the Cabinet to ensure that all the regions of England are represented."

Well we are looking to see a better balance within the Cabinet to ensure that all the regions of Scotland are represented.

The only way to ensure that the English can represent their people, as per the above quotations, and that the Scots can represent their people is by the break up of this archaic and defunct Union.

If the English want the Westminster parliament to be run by Englishmen, that's fine, but we want to be independent from them. We do not want to remain as a colony being exploited by the English, nor do we wish to continue to subsidise the English.

It is also time that the craven and deluded Scots who continue to support the English government and its treatment of Scotland and the Scots as some sort of inferior colony, to be exploited and used to subsidise the English, woke up to themselves. Their attitude towards allowing, even encouraging the exploitation of their own country is closely akin to treason.

Scotland awake. Freedom now.
31

Drum Major,

Brisbane, Australia 02/06/2008 06:20:28
27 Arthur- The problem is a British/English parliament. If the Union is to continue there must be an English parliament and a British parliament. This should have been recognised before Ireland broke away. How slow is the thinking in Westminister?
32

An Beal Bacht,

02/06/2008 06:29:47
The world is at a crossroads. Change, in one form or another, is coming. Today Scotland is at the confluence of events of historical importance. Are we a nation?
33

Colin Wilson,

02/06/2008 06:57:59
"And Lindsay Hoyle, the MP for Chorley, said: "Voters are looking to see a better balance within the Cabinet to ensure that all the regions of England are represented."

That isn't a bad idea. But it would need to be done by having secretaries of state for these places, not by excluding particular categories of people from the Cabinet.
34

Dekester,

Canada's westcoast 02/06/2008 07:06:52
What needs to be said!
35

Louis Catorze,

02/06/2008 07:36:28
"..You wouldn't expect see France being run by Americans or English people would you?"

Well no #13, but as these Scots are British, sitting in the British parliament, it's hardly a very clever comparison, is it?
36

Itchy,

02/06/2008 07:45:38
Reduce the number of Scottish MPs at Westminster to zero.

That will solve the problem.
37

Itchy,

02/06/2008 07:47:33
"This anomaly is obviously highlighted by scottish cabinet ministers and in light of this, Middle England would probably prefer to hear policy initiatives from an english MP rather a Scottish MP.
This is what Ladyman is trying to say."

Ladyman is an idiot and so are you.

The problem is not the number of Scots in the cabinet but the idiotic policies produced by the party.
38

BIG EYE,

Paisley 02/06/2008 07:52:58
Even better send 59 SNP's down there after the next general election and start moving ou the furniture!
39

LEAL,

02/06/2008 07:59:26
Its doubtful if any of the "Scottish" cabinet members will be able to hang onto their seats at the next general election.The labour party are so hard up now that they may not even be in existence come the next election.Do the unions actually have the money to bail them out?
40

eric,

lothian 02/06/2008 08:16:01
Those oppinons arent isolated down south.they know if they vote tory they have someone to fight englands corner against scots.
41

brownlie,

02/06/2008 08:20:01
35 Rules

There is one significant draw-back to your idea of federalism - no-one is interested in it.

If you ever read other postings on here you will note that, apart from your good self and one other - your alter ego, perhaps - no posters show any enthusiasm for the idea.

You, also, pontificate on LVT, which again has generated no interest whatsoever.

Perhaps it is time you had a re-think and looked for a realistic alternative to the status quo.
42

cabrach loon,

inverness 02/06/2008 08:21:43
Funny though I had always been led to believe that Westminster would be Tory if it were not for the Labour Scots MP's!
On the other hand the comments quoted as such were pure racism of a nasty sort. Where has Britain gone?
43

Citylocal Fife,

Fife News 02/06/2008 08:23:24
There is no way we want that dross back up here, they should be left 'down the well' to poison New labour, and allow a competent party to relieve the whole of the UK from this apology for a government. Bring on the election Gordon!
44

,

02/06/2008 08:27:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

salmond spray,

Livingston 02/06/2008 08:29:10
the quicker we get independence the better,as it will be the english who will decide the date, probably around the time the oil has run out
46

,

02/06/2008 08:33:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

Hugo of Garven,

02/06/2008 08:39:33
The sensible solution is for England to have its own parliament.

BTW one poster referred to a 'true born Englishman, can anyone tell me what a 'true born Englishman' is?
48

BK,

Cyberspace 02/06/2008 08:56:40
Remove the Londoner Alistair Darling from your list. He is not Scottish.
49

Publius,

London 02/06/2008 08:58:42
Scots are more influential than 4 cabinet posts would suggest. What about Speaker - 'let's hide the expenses' Martin. And what about Steve - 'let's get the toff and lose the by-election - McCabe?
50

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 02/06/2008 09:04:04
Its known as the "English backlash" and should surprise no one who knows how corrosive an influence nationalism can be. The SNP continue to stir the proverbial s**t whenever it suits them and the continual taunting of the rest of the UK, excepting of course the Welsh and Irish, is a national disgrace. Salmond continually derides the union within the peoples of the British Isles yet he's quick to cosy up to the Irish and Welsh politicians which just goes to show he simply wants to be a bigger fish in a smaller pool (call it a Celtic Union or whatever). The mans an imposter and the sooner Scots waken up to the reality of it all the sooner we can get on with making decisions that affect peoples day to day lives instead of the pie in the sky promises from the nationalists.
51

brownlie,

02/06/2008 09:04:51
51 Rules

"A prophet is often without honour in his own land"

No false modesty there then? I'm not sure about your gifts of prophecy but I would query your powers of reasoning.

In your posting at 35 you state "GB will then consist of different states based on ancient kingdoms ...". You then go on to say at 51 that "Scotland has never been a nation". What happened to the ancient "kingdom"?

You say "Think USA/Canada/Australia". Which ancient kingdoms do they base their different states on?
52

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 02/06/2008 09:08:52
~43 - Re Federalism - you are so wrong. Just because the regular contributors to this column don't want to debate the benefits a federal solution to the UK would bring doesn't mean the benefits will not be fully understood when explained properly. There are very many good examples and in time the UK will become another - why, because the alternatives are destructive whereas federalism is constructive in that it recognises regional differences and needs.
53

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 09:09:29
All these arguments about a 'Scotia Nostra' running the U.K. State only serves to weaken the Union!

Many hardline Unionists want to abolish the Scotland and Wales Acts and return to a centralised British State? Yet they forget that the FIRST devolved government in the U.K. was at Stormont!

After Partition, the Imperial British Government for military, political and then geographic reasons had no hesitation in creating the original gerry-mandered Northern Ireland Parliament along Westminster lines with an Upper House, the Senate, and a Lower House, the Commons.

Like every other undemocratic legislature in history it eventually came tumbling down and after a 30 year violent interregnum has been replaced with ANOTHER Devolved Assembly for ALL the people of Northern Ireland.

Many want to return to a 20th Century centralised British State but do not realise that it is long Gone With The Wind!

This unitary state is only acceptable to the English as long as they are governing it! IF, the English still cannot come to terms with a few Scots (Welsh or Irish) running the government then what hope is there for the future of the U.K.?

IF, any attempt is ever made to amend, restrict or abolish the powers of the Scottish Parliament all these arguments will count for nothing becAuse there can only be one inevitable outcome!
54

brownlie,

02/06/2008 09:11:33
54 Liberal

Perhaps Salmond should go against personal and political principles and "cosy up" to New Labour in the same way as the Libs did to be "big fish in a smaller pool" - call it the Lib/Lab pact.

Despite their opposition to the Iraqi invasion they chose to put privileges ahead of principles by propping up New Labour, the instigators of the invasion, in their governance of Scotland.
55

Mìcheal a Eilean Rùim,

Richmond 02/06/2008 09:13:20
I joined the SNP in 1953 and have been waiting ever since to see an independent Scotland. The problem isn't Scots in Westminster; it's the bedwetters in Scotland who dithered and fiddled whenever they had the chance to do something. So, long ago, I gave up and left, and at my age it's unlikely that I'll ever set foot in Scotland again. I now live in British Columbia, where the second biggest national group is the Scots, very few of whom would give up their comfortable homes and lives to return to live in Scotland.

So I guess my request is, "Waken me if anything happens", because after reading the daily posts about independence, I am constantly reminded of a Gaelic proverb: "Is ladarna gach cù air a shitig fhèin - Every dog is bold on his own midden" amd I am fed up listening to the barking. As they say in Canada, *hit or get off the pot!
56

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 09:15:27
51 Rulesbutnotrulers,
What a load of flaming tosh.
How can I be legally Scottish if Scotland never existed as a nation?
Scotland's international borders were recognised by the international Treaty Of Edinburgh-Northampton 1328.
Prior to 1707 the nation had its own languages, legal system, currency, national flag, monarchy, aristocracy, armed forces and football team(courtesy of Mary Queen of Scots).
It admittedly was not a member of the League of Nations, the UN, NATO or the EU. Prior to World War I neither could anyone else. It became a member by recognised international treaty of the United Kingdom of Great Britain the forerunner to all of those organisations.

The keyword here being inter-national.

Ice ages? The last one was the Devensian glaciation around 10,000 years ago years ago. Doggerland linking Britain to mainland europe was inundated between 5k5-8k years ago resulting in what are now recognised as the British isles.
By its very nature glaciation removes all trace of previous human activity including your ancestors'.
57

Mcsnagpile,

02/06/2008 09:17:20
Quite right, what we need is a few English --Africans, Pakistanis, Chinese in the cabinet. I thing Maharajah Broon would suit a turban.A Scot by any other name.
58

Nikostratos,

02/06/2008 09:19:55
What I don't understand is all these dopes going on about a Scot minister for a Scottish nation and a English minister for the English nation.

When the incontrovertible truth is anyone from any nation within the E.U can be an elected politician (minister) in any nation within the E.U.

So eventually you could have a polish first minister and a Romanian prime minister............have you lot got that and being an Independent Scotland within the E.U will not change that......have you lot got that

you wanna be an truly Independent nation leave the E.U you lot got that?
59

Sile,

02/06/2008 09:21:35
LaBore Mps are writhing in death trying to get what they see as the English vote to keep their jobs, they think that suddenly becoming English MPs instead of Lobby Robots they will be seen in a better light.

devolution was badly devised and put through by bliar and gordychov, the only complaint I have about it is not that they are Scottish but the system imposed is undemocratic, the English watch this govt impose laws from top up fees/care for the elderly to lack of health care in the NHS, and they have no power to vote out the people who hold the most powerful jobs, the others are lobby robots and only do what they think will keep them in power.

As an aside I never see Jim Murphy mentioned, Minister of Europe now hes the one I cannot stand for what he is doing with the Lisbon treaty but it has nowt to do with his nationality, I don't like snakes or traitors..and I class him as both, if thats racist so be it.
60

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 09:23:09
56 Liberal for life
A federation dominated by one body with 85% of the population? N.Ireland with only 1% what kind of representation would they have when we have less than 9%?
Such an asymetrical federation would be little better than the current set up that's why , as you have been repeatedly told, federation is a non-starter for the UK.
61

famie,

australia 02/06/2008 09:31:43
When a country has been colonized as Scotland has been for over three hundred years it can never rise above mediocrity. The colonizers make sure that anyone who is progressive is quickly relegated to oblivion so the seed is set for posterity and continues unabbated. Just look at all the former British colonies to see the examples of this and until the old regime is well and truly extinguished there will be no change for the better. Scotland needs independence to fulfil its potential as a small progressive nation and become an exempler of what can be achieved when there is a real democracy embedded in its political system.
62

James.com,

02/06/2008 09:32:32
It is not Scots that are the problem but Labour MPs. Also Labours Multicultural project forgot to include the residents!
63

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 09:34:24
Rules is nothing more than a troll. His idiotic posing on Federalism and LVT is not real nor is his commitment to it. We have been down this road several times already. Best to let it rant on its own.
64

megz,

glasgow 02/06/2008 09:34:36
i think it is quite obvious that the english don't want scots running their country (though to be fair to them i wouldn't want those 4 running mine either but unfortunately they do). Its a pity we can't get the english to vote on independence, there would be more chance of getting it. As it is (even though i hope otherwise) i think we will be given our independence when the oil runs out and we are more of a burden.
65

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 09:34:51
64 Nikostratos,
Tell us something we don't know!
The Holyrood parliament has continental europeans, an asian born on the sub-continent and a sprinkling of non and part-Scots UK nationals.
Take some time to think about this, ethnicity has got no part in the politics of Scotland.
Try reading up on civil/civic nationalism to get the idea.
If you were born here or choose to make your life here so long as you are prepared to pull your weight and contribute positively to your community there will always be a welcome for you as a Scot.

Get this, there are no 'truely independent' nations anymore even North Korea, Albania and Red China depend on the outside for their continued survival.
All that Scotland requires is to be able to choose whose help we give and recieve.
66

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 09:36:42
69 famie,australia
>>When a country has been colonized as Scotland has been for over three hundred years it can never rise above mediocrity<<

From an Ausie, priceless.
67

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 09:37:11
I cant understand Labour at all these days. They tell us they are a staunch unionist party yet do everything they can to undermine the union at every oportunity do they have a hidden agenda for a post Independent Scotland? Have they secretly reverted back to their home rule doctrine?
68

Calum10,

02/06/2008 09:45:14
A purge of all Scottish Labour ministers will take place. Jack Straw, the mis-spoken man of politics, knows that and is to take advantage of that by becoming the de-facto Prime Minister of England as Gordon Brown's deputy.

This is just the start of the 'English Backlash'. Both Labour and the Tories are committed to cut the Scottish block grant. The Tories will also cut the number of Scottish MPs. Labour and the Tories are now in a dog-fight over who is more Little Englander.

There will no more talk of a Union Of Equals. Scots will no longer command high office at Westminster. The UK will in the future be governed by quota. You forget meritocracy and competence. Your nationality and your class will now determine how far you get up the political grease-pole in London.

69

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 09:45:30
68 Rulesbutnotrulers
You appear to be forgetting the results of Two Jags' referendum on setting up an elected assembly for the North East. The Geordies etc blew it well into the weeds, splitting up England is not even close to being a non-starter.
70

brownlie,

02/06/2008 09:46:20
63 Rules

Like most of your postings completely non-consequential and without any relevance to the subject.

It must be more than just co-incidence that as soon as I mentioned your alter ego and the paucity of support for your point of view then up pops "Liberal" to congratulate you on your postings!!
71

Gael,

SE England 02/06/2008 09:48:09
David Cameron has 13 Etonian Front Benchers and a number of Etonians in the back office of the Conservative Party, yet nobody has raised this as an issue.

Westminster Parliament is a British Parliament for the United Kingdom.
72

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 09:48:29
I have a slightly different slant on the perceived bias towards Scots. Lets take our Country Back and then there is no need to lie awake at night wondering what is to happen to the Traitors to Scotland who will lose their careers down South in the Money Pit called London. You know the place where every penny we pay in taxes and Oil surplus is paid too, only to receive a feeble pocketmoney of less than 10 billion a year. Yes thats right the place where all our money goes to pay for all their grandoise schemes like Olympics and Quangos.

Its surely Time Now.

Keep up the good work Alex and the SNP Scottish Government
73

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 09:51:38
Ethnic cleansing of Scots from the Cabinet. This is the state we're in.
74

Alfie the OK,

Occupied England. 02/06/2008 10:06:44
The answer is simple. A parliament for England, with real powers, plus a First Minister, elected in England - responsible to the people who elected him (it's called democracy, folks!) - then Gordon can go back to Kircaldy and become life president of Raith Rovers.

I find it insulting that Brown waxes lyrical about building 3 million houses, new nuclear power stations and 'eco-towns' "across the country" when he knows he is only talking about building them in England.

If the other home countries have a national representation then it is time England has one - whether Jack Straw thinks it's a good idea or not.
ENGLISH PARLIAMENT NOW!!!!!!
75

Calum10,

02/06/2008 10:07:38
#82 Your are right this is ethnic cleansing.

What we will see is Labour, the Tories and the BNP fighting over the same political ground. Scots better be prepared for the 'English Backlash'.

"Lord grant that Marshal Wade
May by thy mighty aid
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush,
And like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush.
God save the Queen!"
76

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 10:12:35
There's no need to purge the cabinet of Scots. Purging it of Labour politicians would be quite sufficient.
77

Sile,

02/06/2008 10:13:24
Divide and rule indepenence from the English, while Jim Murphy slurps on the gravy train, this argument really will be of no consequence once the Lisbon Constitution is ratified, Your/British oil will belong to Europe try looking beyond these chat boxes and read the Lisbon.
78

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 10:24:32
I dont mind if they clear Westminster of Scots and Scottish representation but it has to come with Independence. They cannot deny elected Scottish representation and hang onto the union at the same time. They cannot form governments based on who lives where within the constituency of the UK. We have had English dominated Government cabinets many times without complaint but now we see the English dont like to have foreigners dictating national policy to them how surprising. Maybe now they understand our need for Independence from their domination and dictation of national policy on us.
79

langtonian,

scotus 02/06/2008 10:26:33
BBC Politics show Sunday past-John Sopel grilling Labour party M.P.regarding the cabinet.Who is an MP for Wolverhampton,and spoke with a very pronounced Glasgow Scottish accent,Sopel at the end of the interview asked him,what he thought about the growing comments about to many Scots in Gordon Browns cabinet as he was obviously of Scottish origin.

Replied -well I was actually born in N.Ireland,taken by parents to Glasgow as a baby,mostly educated in Glasgow(hence the accent),parents moved to Wolverhampton,has spent All his working life in England,but never lost his Scots voice.

Went on to say to Sopel as far as he was concerned it was who is fitted best for whatever Cabinet post is on offer,no matter what their background is.

John Sopel looked somewhat cretfallen at posing his conudrum to the very impressive Wolverhampton M.P,

There would be little point in having any Humpty Dumpties in the cabinet,best to have intellectual awareness and contribute accordingly.

While the top echelon of the SNP cabinet mafia are capable of putting over most of their flawed concordat manifesto,do be aware they have a goodly share of Humpty Dumpties(tartan of course)who could easil fall from the Idependance wall at any election.

From-Independant minded Scot wishing to remain within the UK parameters.
80

Dooogie,

Highland 02/06/2008 10:36:29
Let's do away with having any of the Scottish members in the cabinet. After all we could do away with Des Browne the Scottish Secretary (Governor General)and replace him with an English MP - for all the good he is! Now that would be democracy for you!
If there are 23 members in the UK (Unequal Kingdom) cabinet and only 4 of them are Scots, then simple arithmetic means that there are 19 other NON Scottish noddies left to chose from - SOME CHOICE!
81

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 10:40:38
89

So if the arguement is based on proportionality
where does it stop? Should we have 55% of the cabinet made up of Women? irrespective of talent?
How about every cabinet must have Jewish, Muslim, Hindi, Buddist, representation not to mention
representation from every constituency in the UK.
How big does our cabinet have to be to include everybody qualified within the proportionality argument?
82

Stephen_Gash,

Carlisle England 02/06/2008 10:44:17
LOL! Accusations of racism abound! What a joke. One thing that is obvious to the world is that the Scots love to dish it out but just can't take it.

The Scots have done nothing, but bicker, moan and put down the English while vaingloriously bolstering their own achivements - for the past 301 miserable years.

Now the realisation has dawned that you are nowhere as good as you think you are and you are generally unwanted the best you can do is bleat "racist".

What was that song The Proclaimers sang about others ruling their land? And you have the nerve to call the English arrogant.

Vote SNP and in God's name go!
83

Radical Mac,

Kirkcaldy 02/06/2008 10:47:20
A simple tactic by the overly ambitious Jack Straw to become PM, after all it might be his last chance. Given what we financially contribute to the UK economy oil,gas & whisky revenue half the cabinet should be from Scotland. Since the union of the crowns we have heard ignorant english people refer to England when they mean Britain. After all Scots built the empire once ruled by Great Britain. More importantly we sacrifced our lives to go down and run England for them. Mind you the SNP Government is not helping. We can only stop all this by having an English Parliament or Parliaments to balance things out. I hope G Brown ceases to be PM then I might be able to meet my MP.
84

John Ronaldson,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 10:48:34
This could quite justifiably be viewed as racism
85

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 10:50:41
92

What a very rascist comment. Obviously a Britnat.
86

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 11:02:09
#67 "As to Scotland being a nation with settled borders, then Berwick didn't change hands a dozen times during the years you mention?"

Berwick last changed hands in 1482 when it was captured by Richard Duke of Gloucester. Scotland's borders have therefore been established for the last 526 years. Its borders have been longer established than many European countries including Germany (1871), Italy (1870), Ireland (1922), Finland (1917), and so on.

87

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 11:04:27
#78 The referendum for an Assembly for the North-East failed because what was being offered was little more than a talking shop.
88

Nikostratos,

02/06/2008 11:05:45
#73 livilion,livingston

It aint me saying a persons ethnicity should be the determining factor on entitlement to take part in civil society of any nation. Best look closely at your pals in the 'Nationalist' movement..you got that


And as for no 'truely independent' nations you just repeat the point i was making Again speak to the nationalists i already know that fact..you got that

and finally "All that Scotland requires is to be able to choose whose help we give and recieve" no. no .no

When you sign up to the E.U you give up that right scotland's sovereignty is given..given to the E.U..you got that...good
89

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 11:09:33
92 Stephen_Gash

Cap in Hand: The Proclaimers
Arrogant?
I could tell the meaning of a word like serene
I got some ’o’ grades when I was sixteen
I can tell the difference between magarine and butter
I can say saskatchewan without starting to stutter

But I can’t understand why we let someone else rule our land
We’re cap in hand

I could get a broken jaw from being in a fight
I know it’s evening when day turns to night
I can understand why stranraer lie so lowly
They could save a lot of points by signing hibs goalie

But I can’t understand why we let someone else rule our land
We’re cap in hand

We fight - when they ask us
We boast - then we cower
We beg
For a piece of
Whats already ours

Once I thought I could make God a bribe
So I said I was in his lost tribe
Getting handouts can be so frustrating
Get in line son, there’s five million waiting

I can’t understand why you let someone else rule your land
You’re cap in hand.

I expect you'll know what a 'gash' is in our local pattoir.
You appear to be a completely useless one.
90

Stephen_Gash,

Carlisle England 02/06/2008 11:11:51
95 LOL! I'm English not British.
91

,

02/06/2008 11:14:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
92

,

02/06/2008 11:17:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

Richard,

West Lothian 02/06/2008 11:19:32
Have you taken the Scottish political test, yet?

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=482694

Very interesting.
94

Stephen_Gash,

Carlisle England 02/06/2008 11:20:01
100 FYI

An accusation of racism - the death rattle of a lost argument

Resorting to abuse - incapability of conducting an argument

As my post went way over your head I will explain about juxtaposing arrogance with The Proclaimers.

It was not the song itself, it is the "God-given right of the Scots" to write such songs as Cap in Hand and Flower of Scotland aimed at the English, then to whinge about racism when Scots misruling England.

95

james the geologist,

Mull 02/06/2008 11:20:30
Quote: "all the regions of England"

Scotland just doesnt happen to be one of these "regions" does it?

96

Alan B,

02/06/2008 11:24:08
#97 The Federalist

Think it failed for more reasons than that.

Even if the NE had wanted it there is little appetite for it elsewhere in england even if the decentralisation would be good for them.
97

Florence,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 11:25:16
I don't know why Ladyman and Hoyle feel so aggrieved. The Scots in the Cabinet don't stand up for or represent Scottish voters in any way. In fact they're really pro English and anti Scottish. Have you ever listened to Scottish Questions at Westminster? Try it and see who should feel ill-done-by.
98

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 11:30:29
98 Nikostratos
I expect that English is not your first language so I will forgive the rudeness in your comments.

You seem to overlook the fact that Scotland has been in the EU for over thirty years as the European Common Market, EEC, EC and lately the EU.
I don't feel dire warnings about membership of this body are justified or welcome.

We are about getting rid of the middle man between Edinburgh and Brussels, namely Westminster which represents middle England to the expense of Scotland.

I invite you to read and contribute to the Scottish government's National Conversation for a first hand experience of civic nationalism.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/a-national-conversation
99

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 11:42:09
#51 "3. At no time ever has Scotland been a nation as now understood."

Sorry but I think you are somewhat confused here. You are confusing what makes a country and what makes a nation. They are not the same thing.

To pass the test of being a country Scotland would have to:

* Have internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK) - PASS
* Have people who live there on a continuing basis -PASS
* Regulate its own foreign and domestic trade and issues money - PARTIAL
* Have the power of social engineering, such as education - PARTIAL
* Have a transportation system for moving goods and people - PARTIAL
* Have a government which provides public services and police power - PARTIAL
* Have sovereignty - FAIL
* Have external recognition - FAIL

Under those tests Scotland only passes 2 out of the 8 conditions and therefore cannot be classed as a country.

Nations on the other hand have shared characteristics - usually a shared common descent, common language, common culture and, sometimes a common religion. Some thinkers such as Ernest Renan have defined a nation as being not shared characteristics, but rather on the shared choice for membership. Renan's saw the nation as:

"avoir fait de grandes choses ensemble, vouloir en faire encore"

The nation was a group "having done great things together and wishing to do more"

Under either definition Scotland certainly is a nation.

What I think you are confucing is the nation-stae with a nation. Where the state and the nation coincide then a nation-state exists. Equally, some countries may be may up of more than one nation and cannot be classed as nation-states. And there are nations, such as the Kurds , that are stateless.

100

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 11:46:45
105 Stephen_Gash
Cap in hand - is there one mention of Scotland or England anywhere in the lyric of this song?

How would you feel if this was actually a call for less involvement from Brussels at Westminster?

>>An accusation of racism - the death rattle of a lost argument<<
Unless you happen to be spouting racism.

>>Resorting to abuse - incapability of conducting an argument<< like:>>
Scots love to dish it out but just can't take it.

The Scots have done nothing, but bicker, moan...you are nowhere as good as you think you are and you are generally unwanted<
You should also be familiar with the words of our British national anthem calling on God to save the Queen from 'rebellious Scots' and their knavish tricks.

How shall we extol thee,
Who are born of thee?
Wider still and wider
Shall thy bounds be set;
God, who made thee mighty,
Make thee mightier yet
God, who made thee mighty,
Make thee mightier yet.

Aye right!
101

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:05:10
110 The Federalist
Is there some point to this line? the rule generally is when you find yourself in a rut is not to dig it any deeper, but where you are now standing everyone can p!ss on your head.

>>At no time ever has Scotland been a nation as now understood."<< Wrong, see your own tests.

>>Sorry but I think you are somewhat confused here. You are confusing what makes a country and what makes a nation. They are not the same thing.<<
OK geology, geography and politics are different so I'll give you that one.

To pass the test of being a country in 1603 Scotland would have to:

* Have internationally recognized boundaries (boundary disputes are OK) - PASS
* Have people who live there on a continuing basis -PASS
* Regulate its own foreign and domestic trade and issues money - PASS
* Have the power of social engineering, such as education - PASS
* Have a transportation system for moving goods and people - PASS
* Have a government which provides public services and police power - PASS
* Have sovereignty - PASS
* Have external recognition - PASS

in 1707 Scotland's aristos were coerced into selling the country's independence to England, but only actually signed away the Scottish Parliament into recess.
All the instruments of statehood were left intact, eg legal & education systems,the Church of Scotland, local authorities,etc, hence the reason that the BBC foe example only regularly gives news and coverage of English current affairs and rarely if ever reports on Scottish issues on their own merit.
102

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 12:07:31
#112 The point is that at present Scotland is a nation but not a country. #51 was saying that Scotland was not a nation which patently is not true.
103

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 12:09:29
#112 You need to read - the quote "At no time ever has Scotland been a nation as now understood" wasn't my but Rules.
104

European Scot,

02/06/2008 12:13:23
98 Nikostratos

The EU is a group of individual countries, each with its own identity, each one voting on matters European, but maintaining and controlling its own legal system, culture, diplomatic service, etc. In other words maintaining individual Sovereignty.
Each of those member countries can/ will be seen at the United Nations.
You are confusing one Union, the EU, which actually encourages, and gives financial assistance to promote the identity and individuality of its smaller member countries, with another which does the complete opposite.
The UK, with its agenda, 'encourages' the population of its member countries into being happy little Brits, all living in a 'United' Kingdom, with limited levels of devolution to keep the locals happy, but with real power staying at Westminster
Each of the countries within the UK, cannot be seen at the United Nations.
As a result, each country has no International recognition as a Nation.
Of the two Unions, Scotland would enjoy full status as a Nation and a Country in the EU.
It would be expected, and encouraged, to be both.
105

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:18:23
113 The Federalist
Scotland self evidently is a country, with legal jurisdiction under its own laws and national legal apparatus as recognised at The Haig. Remember the Lockerbie bomber trial?

What Scotland is not is an independent nation, in much the same way that the UK is no longer independent since voting to pool sovereignty with her European partners under the terms of the European Treaty of Union signed by Margaret Thatcher at Maastricht.
106

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 12:21:03
livilion (111): "You should also be familiar with the words of our British national anthem calling on God to save the Queen from 'rebellious Scots' and their knavish tricks."

You should also be familiar with the fact that this line has not been part of the anthem for some 260 years. What's your view of the anti_englishness of "Flower of Scotland"?
107

,

02/06/2008 12:22:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
108

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:22:47
114 The Federalist
So which of your tests of nationhood did not apply then or now?
I take it you've not yet given up digging?
109

Alan B,

02/06/2008 12:27:40
#Fairfax

Do u consider flower of scotland to by anti english?

It is a folk song talking about a battle hundreds of yrs ago. The 3rd verse to paraphrase says these days are past now, and must remain, but we can still rise now and be a nation again. As such it talks of the fighting being a thing of the past and sets out an aspiration of scotland being an idependent country. As such it is not really anti english. What it does tend to show is scotland unhealthy focus on england. ie too much of what scotland does or things is defined by its relationship with england.

110

Alan B,

02/06/2008 12:29:38
#livilion

"European Treaty of Union signed by Margaret Thatcher at Maastricht."

Thatcher did not sign the Maastricht treaty. She was not in power then. She signed the single market treaty in 1985. It was Major that signed Maastricht.
111

brownlie,

02/06/2008 12:34:13
117 Fairfax

There is no "anti_englishness" in "The Flower of Scotland" and there is no mention of England at all.

There is a reference to those who fought against Edward's army - a battle from different times. This is acknowledged in the reference to "Those days are past now and in the past they should remain".

Yes, there are references to self-determination in being a nation again but the inference is that Scots should take their courage in their own hands and attempt to run their own country.

That can hardly be classed as anti-English. Welsh, Irish or any other nationality.
112

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 12:35:32
#116 Scotland fails to be a country for the following reasons:

TEST 3 - regulate its own foreign and domestic trade and issues money (PARTIAL FAIL)

Scottish banks do issue their notes but Scotland does not regulate foreign or domestic trade, the Scottish Parliament is not authorized to do so. The United Kingdom Parliament is able to act on "reserved issues" that include a variety of economic issues: fiscal, economic and monetary system; energy; common markets; and trade and industry.

TEST 4 - Have the power of social engineering, such as education (PARTIAL FAIL)

The Scottish Parliament is able to control education, training, and social work but does not control social security.

TEST 5 - Have a transportation system for moving goods and people (PARTIAL FAIL)

The Scottish Parliament controls the Scottish road network, bus policy and ports and harbors but the UK Parliament controls railways, transport safety and regulation.

TEST 6 - Have a government which provides public services and police power (PARTIAL FAIL)

Although Scotland has its own legal system as well as control over the police and fire services, the UK Parliament controls defense and national security across the United Kingdom.

TEST 7 - Have sovereignty (FAIL)

The United Kingdom Parliament definitely has power over Scotland's territory.

TEST 8 - Have external recognition (FAIL)

Scotland does not have external recognition nor does Scotland have its own embassies in other independent countries.

Scotland is a nation but not a country until it fully satisfies these tests. I'm just surprised that a nationalist like yourself cannot see the distinction.

113

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:35:48
117 Fairfax,
I refuse these days to sing Flower of Scotland in company even when my English relations and friends start singing it to me.

It is clearly insulting to the English just as asking God to Save the Queen is insulting to the Scots she's supposed to be saved from.
I do not believe we can have it both ways if I refuse to sing the 'British' national anthem.
Change the words, to God BLESS the Queen, and you might have a point like the Russian and German anthems.

114

Alberto.,

02/06/2008 12:36:52
"No need to purge Cabinet of Scots – Straw"

Too dam right Mr Straw - considering the poor state the Country is now in ' the whole Bl***y caboodle wants cearing out and got rid of - you've had your day/s and blown it, as they say!

The Country can no longer afford 'New Labour' - from every possible angle!


115

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 12:37:21
Alan B (120): "As such it is not really anti english. What it does tend to show is scotland unhealthy focus on england"

I would say that, in context, it is anti-English. After all, would you argue that it is pro-English or neutral? The de facto national anthem of Scotland, as you say, concentrates on a battle with the English in the 14th century, emphasizing the Scots victory. I certainly agree with your second statement.
116

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 12:38:30
#119 Tests for nationhood - as opposed to country hood:

* common culture
* common language
* common descent
* common historical heritage

Occasionally for some nations there is also a common religion test.

Scotland passes those tests above and is clearly a nation.
117

Alberto.,

02/06/2008 12:39:32
#125 cont'd.....
And we certaionly do not deserve the EU foisting its total control powers on us - ever!
118

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 12:46:01
brownlie (122): "There is no "anti_englishness" in "The Flower of Scotland" and there is no mention of England at all."

There's certainly no explicit mention of England, but the references to "Proud Edward's Army" are fairly clear. You'll notice that Livilion disagrees with your view in post 124. Still, I think we're seeing a Scots irregular verb in use: "You make racist anti-Scots statements, whilst I make reasoned nationalist statements that cannot be anti-English."
119

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:48:18
#123 The Federalist

>>AT NO TIME EVER has Scotland been a nation as now understood<<
You concede then pre-1603/1707 all tests passed?

There is no question that Scotland is no longer independent so the tests you quote are irrelevant to your own ramblings.
Is Scotland a country? By most reasonable criteria it is.
Is it an independent country? Clearly not, but we're working on it.
Your attempts at flaming only serve to hasten the process so thankyou for your contributions.

btw;For someone who gets their knickers in a knot over the definitions of 'nation' and 'country' you seem to me to be a bit cavalier with these terms, using them interchangeably as you please.
120

Alan B,

02/06/2008 12:52:02
#Fairfax

It certainly is not pro english or neutral. But it is a song about a historic battle that is part of scotlands history. Was braveheart a holywood film anti english or US films about US independence anti english rather than just hammed up films centring on the history of a nation.

My comments about scotlands unhealth obsession with england were probably more subtle than i think u took from it. I was meaning scotland tend to look to england to define themselves to much, to solve problems etc.

It can be simple things like the scottish media telling footballers they should go to england rather than ever looking to europe. Or looking at educational systems or health issues they are seldom done with reference to what happens in other european countries and what they do rather than just always comparing scottish and engish systems. In that way i find the scottish media parochial.

121

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 12:52:46
Foo (118): "Every English I know is at some level racist towards the Scots, and this Ladyman character proves it."

He's certainly offensive. However, don't you agree that Cabinet should be representative to some extent? Would you really have no objection to a Cabinet that contained no Scots?

"Down with the English imperialist racists!"

Since you view all of us as racists, to some extent, are you therefore saying "Down with England!"?
122

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 12:56:52
129 Fairfax,
Your comment encapsulates the diaspora.

Scottish 'anti-Englishness' is directed at English institutions which tend to, at best and if we're being kind, patronise Scots.
'Proud Edward and his army'

The English response tends to be: ungrateful shower, why do you hate us when our taxes are all that stands between you becoming the new Albania or Bangladesh?
123

Alan B,

02/06/2008 12:57:49
#Fairfax

Ofcourse the cabinet should be representative. The issue is if a scots person is seen by the pm at the time of being better at a job should they be passed over for their nationality.

I think we all know that the statement are anti scottish and also more about the perceive anti scottishness of certain sections of the english media and popualation at large.

It is funny in a way the current cabinet is now less scottish in it make up than before with reid and cook etc gone. Other than the pm and darling their is not really a big scottish contingent now and certainly not senior ones.

124

brownlie,

02/06/2008 12:57:58
129 Fairfax

You make no comment on the reference to putting matters from the past where they belong - in the past. We live in the present and to class a whole country as being anti-English because of your perception of a song is, in my view, clearly wrong.

Livilion is entitled to his opinion, in the same way as you or I are, and they do not reinforce or detract from your views.

I fail to see the relevance of your pen-ultimate and last sentence.
125

,

02/06/2008 12:59:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
126

Alan B,

02/06/2008 13:01:27
#Fairfax

Tow other things about representation.

1)under the tories when they were in power in 80s other than the scottish secretary scotland only had about 1 token scot in the cabinet.
2)at that time pre-devolution - persons running health and education etc for england all were in the cabinet their scottish equivilents were only granted junior minister status.
127

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 13:03:43
132 Fairfax,
You make my point for me beautifully.
We know who our friends are and plenty are, as it happens, English.
English racists are no friends to anyone even the English.
Same applies to Scottish racists, per head of population I expect there to be very little difference North or South of the border, but as England has ten times the resource to draw from it is perhaps understandable that there are more English racists making their presence known, simple arithmetic.
128

,

02/06/2008 13:05:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
129

,

02/06/2008 13:07:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
130

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 13:08:52
rownlie (135): "You make no comment on the reference to putting matters from the past where they belong - in the past."

I haven't commented on this because the song wants to have its cake and eat it: the next lines are, of course, "But we can still rise now/ And be the nation again/ That stood against him". The subtext is fairly clear . . .

"to class a whole country as being anti-English because of your perception of a song is clearly wrong"

I haven't classed the whole country as being anti-English. I've only given my view that "Flower of Scotland" is inescapably anti-English. After all, consider the following "what-if": suppose the line "Rebellious Scots" were reinserted by English singers. Would you view this as (i) anti-English, or (ii) legitimate comment on the 1745, referring only to the past?

131

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 13:09:48
141: "Would you view this as (i) anti-English"

Of course, I meant to write "anti-Scottish"! Apologies for the typo.
132

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 13:21:34
Post 141:

This really is quite a tedious line of argument you are indulging in.

Is the American national anthem 'anti'British' (it refers to the war of 1812)?

Or is it an anthem celebrating the successful defeat of an oppressive imperialist power intent on dominating it politically and culturally? Or is it, as you would have it, simply 'anti' something?

What is it with some Scots? Are they born with an intuitive need to rubbish everything associated with Scotland? Look at the topics on this board. Idiotic argument attempting to dismiss Scotland as a 'country'; idiotic attempts to superimpose a nebulous concept of 'anti-Englishness' upon everything and anything Scottish with a heartbeat; silly comments implying that Scotland would be a 'third world' country were it to fully democratise.

Is this really all that unionism has at the moment? Seering negativity and whooly, nebulous concepts with emotive connotations masquerading as serious discourse?
133

Scottish not British,

02/06/2008 13:24:08
There must be independence, it is the only way to stop the anger and growing resentment on both sides of the border. Scotland wants independence, England doesn't want Scots in parliament, I fail to see what reason there is for the continued existence of the union.
134

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 13:24:20
141 Fairfax
God Save the Queen -from Scots and catholics- that's why it gets boo-ed wherever it is played in Scotland outside of an Orange parade.

Robertsons jam had to remove the 'gollywog' logo from the back of its jam pots. Most 'white' people had no idea how deeply offensive it was, but it was still deeply offensive for all that.
The British national anthem is deeply offensive to a great many of HMs subjects whether or not you choose to use the lyric which specifically mentions us 'rebellious Scots'.
135

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 13:26:54
Flower of Scotland is a great anthem/song. It recalls a time in our history when our very existence as a nation was at stake and when Scots rose to the occasion to keep the nation in existence and free. It calls on modern Scots to be that nation again, but it expliditly rules out violence to achieve that because we now live in a democracy and canb therefore achieve that non-violently.
136

brownlie,

02/06/2008 13:30:18
141 Fairfax

Quite frankly, I would not care if anyone sings the National Anthem whether they use the sixth verse or not!! I never sing it but if people want to do so I have no problem with that.

You will be aware that "Flower of Scotland" is not the Scottish National Anthem in any case.

From my own insignificant point of view if we had to have an anthem I would prefer "Auld Lang Syne" with its connotations of friendship and good-will to all men. I hope that view will eventually permeate these threads.
137

European Scot,

02/06/2008 13:31:43
127 The Federalist

"Scotland passes those tests above and is clearly a nation."

There is one absolute test for 'Nation' in the World's eyes, and it is the only one that really counts in terms of status.
Does Scotland sit at the UN amongst the other Nations of the World ?
At the moment obviously not, and in your Federal UK it couldn't happen either.
Only Scotland's Independence will achieve the practical reality of actually being, as well as having the International status of, a Country and a Nation.
138

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 13:31:55
#143
"Is this really all that unionism has at the moment? Seering negativity and whooly, nebulous concepts with emotive connotations masquerading as serious discourse?"

Malcolm - yes. We do frequently get the line about "obvious advantages" of the Union but nobody ever tells us what they are even when we ask them. Those advantages of the Union are so "obvious" that the largest, most popular political party in Scotland is dedicated to ending it.
139

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 13:34:25
A nation is self-validating. No external criteria apply. A nation does not need statehood to exist but it usually helps!
140

Displaced Scot,

UK 02/06/2008 13:36:36
Angus, do not worry about Stephen Ladyman, he is on the way out. His seat is in South East Kent and was a solid Tory seat until the New Jerusalem of 1997. He nearly lost it last time and will lose it next time and he knows it. Many in the Labour party are waking up to the fact, that there is a price to pay for Devolution.
I am a Scot and like many others live in England, so I can say what I am about to say. New Labour has done itself no good by putting Scots in charge of ministries that only cover England, and not Scotland. New Labour will not want the breakup of the Union as they will never have power again without Scotland. Tony Blair will not care as he is off to save the world.
141

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 13:37:07
malcolmcean (143): "Is the American national anthem 'anti'British' (it refers to the war of 1812)?"

I would say so. Anti-Britishness in the US has, of course, greatly diminished since their accession to hegemon status, but it's still there: the US view of Brits is akin to a love-hate relationship -- it is only our relative impotence that has diminished the dislike.

"What is it with some Scots?"

I'm English, albeit with many Scots friends and family.

"Is this really all that unionism has at the moment?"

I'm not a unionist. In fact, one of my reasons for believing that the UK has reached its sell-by date is the obvious strengthening of Scots national feeling, of which the adoption of "Flower of Scotland" is an obvious sign, in my view.
142

Commited to Independence,

Scotland 02/06/2008 13:39:23
Why is anybody on this thread giving the troll calling itself Federalist the time of day. Isnt it obvious he is not here to discuss the merits or demerits of Federalism but only on here to wind folk up.
We have done his version of Federalism to death already but he comes back with the same p!sh the following day dont give it any more posting space than you can help let him rant until even he gets bored with it.
143

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 13:39:23
146 Hamish Scott
I agree with you that Flower of Scotland is a geat song and as an anthem well if they're going to sing God save the Queen at us then why not sing FoS back at them?
But consider post independence are we still going to be singing we can still rise now and be the bnation again that stood against Edward's army.

Bear in mind that the Edward in question was not The Hammer of he Scots but his son who by all accounts was 'a bit light on his loafers' for which he reportedly met a particularly gruesome end(the red hot poker) quite unlike his old da, hardly anything to sing about really.
144

livilion,

livingston 02/06/2008 13:42:32
153 Commited to Independence
Good point TTFN.
145

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 13:47:14
#154
livi - Fair point, the question of 'national anthems' doesn't really excite me - I prefer the substance of independence/nationhood - I was merely defending the song and its writer against people who unfairly misrepresent and/or denigrate it. Though I do think popularity is a good factor when choosing a national anthem.
146

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 13:49:32
#151
"New Labour has done itself no good by putting Scots in charge of ministries that only cover England, and not Scotland"

Displaced - Presumably you mean that historically? None of the Scots in the Cabinet have an England-only ministry.
147

,

02/06/2008 13:56:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
148

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 14:02:21
This is Political Correctness gone Mad. Just how the hell is Ladyman's comments Racist? I always considered that racism was commenting on some-ones skin colour or racial background or some such and was to be said in an insulting manner.

Reading his comments I DO NOT see any insulting talk or behaviour.

Stop rattling yer Claymores and eat yer Haggis

Or is that racist too?

Like the comments about 'Old Etonians'?

149

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 14:05:11
Fairfax 152:

You have simply rearticulated the same nebulous and whooly accusations I asked you to question in my first post.

I shall restate my questions: "Is it an anthem celebrating the successful defeat of an oppressive imperialist power intent on dominating it politically and culturally? Or is it, as you would have it, simply 'anti' something?"

An anthem which simply attacks England/the US/Autro-Hungary/ Italy/ France/ or whatever because it simply hates certain aspects of its national characteristics is surely the one which we should consider simply 'anti'.

Your whooly and absurdly general use of the term devalues its power.




150

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 14:07:11
#160 Committed - that is a troll.
151

,

02/06/2008 14:10:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
152

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 14:10:29
Post 159:

I was on the verge of reporting your post - my 'free speech' angel convinced me otherwise.

Spamming the boards with puerile name-calling will not help the development of debate.
153

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 14:11:17
And isn't calling some-one, or comparing some-one to a troll also, in it's way, racist?

More Scottish Double Standards?

If you want Racist . . . .
154

,

02/06/2008 14:11:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
155

Micropacer,

02/06/2008 14:12:22
Were losing sight of the origianl artical here with inane petty arguments about pointless Anthems and whether Scotland was a country or not (doesnt make any difference as it would be after independence anyway).

How any person English or Scottish can defend the implications of what this artical is claiming is astounding.

If Scotland was independent as we has English born Ministers under pressure to be removed simply because of their Nationality I would be ashamed.

I detest lots of the little Scotlander mentality that goes on over these forums but it is nothing like the little Englander mentality thats eminating from most of England these days.

For anyone English to come on here and try and deflect this is amazing. I have many English friends up here and they are all brilliant but there is a stench of zenophobia coming from down South these days.

I have always been in favour of a federal Britain but Independence is starting to look like the only credible option.

England needs to find itself and mature. Scottish Nationalism still has the same immature elements to it but has left most of them behind in the 70s and 80s.
156

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 14:18:18
#164 Apologies Malcolm if I offended you - but Committed has been spouting this troll nonsense for ages and is getting a bit wearing.

#163 I am not AM2. AM2 (as far as I can gather) is from Northern Ireland - I'm from Dundee. AM2 is a fairly hardline unionist whilst I support a very devolved strain of federalism. The only thing we might have in common is that we are both posters on this board.
157

Auckland Arab2,

02/06/2008 14:21:24
Jack needn't worry. The British public are going to purge the Cabinet of Scots and all the rest of Labour's ministers at the same time.
158

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 14:21:37
malcolmcean (161): "You have simply rearticulated the same nebulous and whooly accusations I asked you to question in my first post"

On the contrary, I specifically answered your question on the US national anthem.

"Is it an anthem celebrating the successful defeat of an oppressive imperialist power intent on dominating it politically and culturally?"

At its basic level, that is, of course, true. However, FoS functions on several levels, like all good poetry. My view is that FoS is also a call to arms (in the metaphorical sense) for modern Scottish nationalism, and one that is specifically directed against England.

"Your whooly and absurdly general use of the term devalues its power."

I think my answers have been too specific to be classified as woolly, but I emphasize that I am certainly not denying the power of FoS: every time this de facto anthem is sung, it reinforces Scotland's self-image as defiantly independent of England. Whilst it is logically possible to take the view that this wish is purely historic, in practice it resonates in the present.
159

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 14:24:16
#160
'Racist' is well understood to include prejudice against another nationality as well as race. The comment made by the MP is no different from saying there are too many coloured people in the Cabinet. If that is racist the same applies to saying there are too many Scots in the Cabinet. The critical aspect here is that 'too many' applies to the mere fact of their nationality rather than e.g. that they occupy England only ministries (even then that would be arguably racist). None of the Scots in the Cabinet are ministers for England-only departments. The number of Scots in the Cabinet is 4 out of 23. Whilst this is more than a strict proportionality (which would be 2) it is hardly an extreme disproportion.
160

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 14:25:02
The trouble is that we in England are no longer ALLOWED to be English. Everything we have ever done that is bad is shoved in our faces and is invariably detrimental to our Country and our People. Very rarely is anything put forward as a 'saving grace' even though we have done some amazingly good things in this world.

Every Form, every Electoral Register, Everything, we are asked the question on ethnic origin. You can be Scottish or Irish or Welsh or even (and I have seen it) Gaelic. We are NEVER asked if we are ENGLISH!!!!!

WE ARE SICK OF BEING NON-ENTITIES IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!!!

This is not Racism, this is, like the SNP, Nationalism. My Country for My People, and I don't give a crap about the Colour of your skin or the Creed by which you live.

I WANT TO BE ENGLISH!!!
161

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 14:27:21
Micropacer (167): "If Scotland was independent as we has English born Ministers under pressure to be removed simply because of their Nationality I would be ashamed."

I'm glad to hear it. However, there are important political points here, despite the crass rhetoric of some minor English MPs seeking the lowest common denominator of ethnic nationalism. Specifically,(i) is Scotland over-represented in Cabinet? and (ii) is it admissible for an MP representing a Scottish constituency to take a position whose powers are restricted to England and Wales?

I would say that (i) is currently correct, just as I would equally object to a Cabinet that contained no Scots. I would also agree with (ii), the specific case in point being John Reid's tenure as Home Secretary under Blair.
162

john z,

edinburgh 02/06/2008 14:33:26
We are told that the westminster parliament is a UK parliament. Now we are being told by quite ignorant English Labour MP's that the people in charge should ony be English.

This is truly outrageous. For centuries, the Scots have been ruled from Westminster by a bunch of English MP's, and now finally there is a scot in charge, the English think its unfair. It truly beggars belief!!

Time for the people of Scotland to jettison the 'uk' parliament into the history books. It'd probably be a good thing if the English did so too, as Westminster is inefficient, expensive, undemocratic and very, very dated.
163

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 14:34:18
Fairfax writes:

""Is it an anthem celebrating the successful defeat of an oppressive imperialist power intent on dominating it politically and culturally?"

At its basic level, that is, of course, true. However, FoS functions on several levels, like all good poetry."

The anthem (both of them) are attempts at creating a social national glue which binds the nation together through the assertion of a basic theme. It is not a piece of multi-layered poetry.

Its message is basic: David beats Goliath and David's cause was just.

Simple as that.

It just so happens that the oppresive bogeyman in Scotland's case was England. it could have been France or Norway but history chose otherwise.
164

JCA REID,

Annan 02/06/2008 14:34:21
Just goes to show how racist this English lot are. I experienced this in HM Forces, even from close service pals of several years standing. Once you scratched deep enough below the surface, you found this attitude that somehow the English had this superior view of themselves. We're all equal, but "four legs good, two legs better."
165

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 14:35:45
I apologise for shouting, it just makes me angry that you all can have this debate and can be either Scottish or British or even North British but we have No Choice at all.

"White (Other)" - is all the choice we get.
166

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 14:38:16
#167

"I have always been in favour of a federal Britain but Independence is starting to look like the only credible option."

I made something of similar point in a previous post:

"455 The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),16/05/2008 21:27:55
One thing Brown needs to take care of is alienating the undecideds or those who want change but not outright independence.

I said the other day that if it were a straightforward yes or no vote (not a multi-option referendum) that I would not be sure which way to vote. What I did not say was what the determining factor could be. If it is clear to me that the result would be used to stop any further decentralisation of power then I could see myself voting YES. If on the other hand there was a clear indication that further substantial decentralisation would happen then I would be more likely to vote NO.

The longer he sits and twiddles his thumbs about this issue the more likely it is that people like me will end up voting YES."

"Scottish Nationalism still has the same immature elements to it but has left most of them behind in the 70s and 80s."

On the whole I'd agree - although it has moments like last week's "It's Scotland's oil" argument where it reverts to type. Many active Nats I have had the pleasure of dealing with are quite eloquent in their espousal of their goal.
167

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 14:39:01
malcolmcean (175): ""creating a social national glue which binds the nation together through the assertion of a basic theme. It is not a piece of multi-layered poetry."

I think you're being naive here: adroit political rhetoric seldom functions on merely one level.

"Its message is basic: David beats Goliath and David's cause was just. Simple as that."

Even this is not particularly simple. I have met at least one Palestinian academic who objects to the story of David as Jewish propaganda -- after all Goliath was the Palestinian Ii.e. Philestine) champion.
168

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 14:40:59
#172
I think you'll find most Scots, including and perhaps especially, Scottish nationlists have every sympathy with your position. However, I think you'll also find that just as Scotland's real/only enemy is some of our fellow Scots, the same applies to the England.
169

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 14:43:16
Hamish Scot (171): "The number of Scots in the Cabinet is 4 out of 23. Whilst this is more than a strict proportionality (which would be 2) it is hardly an extreme disproportion."

Agreed. However, those 4 include First Lord of the Treasury, Chancellor and Defence -- not all Cabinet posts are equal. Still, I agree that there is more than a hint of English ethnic nationalism in these MPs' posts. I suspect that it is inevitable that ethnic nationalism will increase in both England and Scotland as the Union further evaporates.
170

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 14:43:26
#178
The whole point of the 'It's Scotland's Oil@ was to counter the assertion of the unionist politicians and media that Scotland was too poor to go it alone. No self-respecting nationalist would seek independence purely for monetary gain.
171

Shave,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 14:48:57
After the next general election it is conceivable that a Tory government would either need to use an MP from an English constituency for the post of Scottish Secretary, or make do with an unsuitable person due to a lack of (talented) Tories with Scottish seats.

That will go down well;-)
172

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 14:50:20
180 Hamish

Yes I can see that point as it goes.

It has just occurred to me that the enforced non-english thing is perpetrated by our 'masters' down here in Westmonster. Presumably so we don't upset the (I hesitate to use the word but. . .) 'Minorities' in the rest of the country.

I do have a small handful of Scottish friends and they can see that we are 'suffering' (for want of a better word) under the yoke of PC. But they and I also see that Scotland has probably suffered more and for longer so I have every sympathy for the SNP Cause.

Perhaps Independence will be mutually beneficial to us both, here's hoping . . .

173

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 14:54:59
Fairfax writes:

"I think you're being naive here: adroit political rhetoric seldom functions on merely one level."

It depends who is presenting the message, who is receiving it, and the context of reception.

I do not think that the Corries were doing anything other than presenting a bardic David and Goliath story to make Scots feel good about themselves.

If later people want to take something out of that message by superimping context-and-time--specific (which are usually always anachronistic) ideas then fine. Communication is a fluid and evolving concept.

Fairfaz also writes:

"Even this is not particularly simple. I have met at least one Palestinian academic who objects to the story of David as Jewish propaganda -- after all Goliath was the Palestinian Ii.e. Philestine) champion"

I fail to see what this has to do with the Scottish general public interacting with the David/Goliath motif. This sotry is part of Judeo-christian myth (2000 years of propagation) which presents a story of the small against the big/ the weak against the powerful. That is how the message is received in common culture.

I think that you are clutching at straws here.
174

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 14:58:50
#184
Neal - I think many people are coming to realise that Scotland and England are diverging in important ways and that the only way to avoid a lot of the ill-will going round, in any case, is mutual independence. Anglo-Irish relations have certainly never been better the more independent Ireland has become from England.
175

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 14:59:51
#182 The counter is actually to say that it does not matter whether or not Scotland has oil - that Scotland can survive without oil given the correct economic policies and investment. The narrow "It's Scotland's Oil" argument plays into the hands of those who say that Scotland could not survive without oil - I'd disagree - but then that's a whole different argument.

One thing I think we can agree on is that the issue of independence is not and should not be a wholly economic debate.

176

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:06:35
186
Hamish - Agreed. It was a shame that it took so much blood-shed to get this far. I'm not sure that I want Wales to do the same but I suppose that WHEN Scotland goes her own way it will only be a matter of time before the call goes out to the Welsh.

Incidently, I have today emailed the EU regarding a Question I have posted on several occasions on these boards and gotten NO reply - When Scotland becomes an Independent Country will she still be IN the EU or will She have to apply for Membership as a Country in Her own Right - Thoughts?
177

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 15:08:04
malcolmcean (184): "It depends who is presenting the message, who is receiving it, and the context of reception."

In that case, you're agreeing with me that it works on more than one level. I feel that it is you who are clutching at straws here, since your original defence of FoS's simple message has become an admission that it does, indeed, work on different levels.

"I fail to see what this has to do with the Scottish general public interacting with the David/Goliath motif. "

My point was merely that the David/Goliath story also works on more than one level, by giving one example of a group for whom this is not simply a story of the weak against the strong.
178

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 15:11:14
#187
Fed - The campaign was to win over people who were scared off by the bogey of being much poorer with independence. It's reasonable to have that as a concern, I was just trying to say that it was aimed at people who don't want independence at any price. I agree the 'Scotland's Oil' approach could prove a double-edged sword the closer we get to running out of the stuff!
179

Hamish Scott,

02/06/2008 15:12:38
#188
Neal - I think the problem with the EU is trying to get out of it rather than trying to stay in or get in anew!
180

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:17:11
191

Hamish - Ha ha ha! :-)

That is SOOOO true, that's cheered me up no end, thank-you brother.
181

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 15:17:51
Fairfax 189:

I am not agreeing with you. You are making the wild claim that Flower of Scotland is anti-English. I am saying that only someone who has a particular agenda and who understands the issues poorly would perceive it as such.

It was conceived as a bardic attempt to present Scotland as a small but still capable defender of justice (up against a colonial imperialistic power - the name of that power is neither here nor there; as only the name of a tyrant is named in the song, the country litarally is neither here nor there).

Only someone with an agenda (like yourself or a rather unbalanced English-hater with a poor grasp of reality) could conceive of it as anti-English.

Your attempt to label it as such is at best the hyper-sensitive musings of an overly emtional type and at worst the rather calculating machinations of someone trashing something because it stands for something (Scotland as a positive political and cultural entity) you do not like.
182

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 15:33:24
malcolmcean (193): "I am saying that only someone who has a particular agenda and who understands the issues poorly would perceive it as such."

I see: only my poor comprehension enables me to see it differently. I note, however, that you earlier stated that you respected Livilion's similar view.

"as only the name of a tyrant is named in the song, the country litarally is neither here nor there"

There is no explicit mention of England, but the nationality of the protagonist is obviously not in doubt.

"at worst the rather calculating machinations of someone trashing something because it stands for something (Scotland as a positive political and cultural entity) you do not like."

I'm not trashing FoS: as I've said, it's adroit political rhetoric. I am, however, amazed that you cannot also accept that FoS is a call to arms (metaphorically) for Scottish nationalism, and that it derives part of its effectiveness from its anti-English component -- it is not mere irrelevant that the tyrant defeated is Edward II of England. To provide another "what if", what would the Scottish reaction be to English sports events including a new song devoted to the defeat of the Scottish invading force at Flodden? Would you really accept that it was simply a bardic attempt to present England successfully defending itself against the agents of an imperialist power (France in this case, since this was the cause of James IV's invasion)? Or would you view it as, in part, anti-Scottish?
183

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:34:49
Faifax / Malcolm McEan

Can't believe you guys are still debating this one.

Surely the point of a Patriotic Song ie Flower of Scotland or God Save the Queen is to provide the Citizens of the Country invoked with an "enemy" to focus on and be the reason to be 'Patriotic' and to have Pride in one's Mother Land.

It doesn't neccesarily then become 'racist' unless used in that context by some group or other (BNP springs to mind)

It is possible to be a Patriot and NOT be racist. As revealed already I am English and English to the Core but am not racist. The world is too small for racism to be allowed to continue and we should all recognize that we are brothers/ sisters under the same sky.
184

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 02/06/2008 15:38:55
No need to purge cabinet of Scots - bankruptcy may purge the Labour party first.

Well, the cracks are showing - as a famous Bonzo once sang (and I don't mean the Bonzos who were sent into Alt Aussee in Austria).
185

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 15:42:01
Neall (197): "Surely the point of a Patriotic Song ie Flower of Scotland or God Save the Queen is to provide the Citizens of the Country invoked with an "enemy" to focus on"

That's entirely my point: the enemy of FoS is, of course, the English.

"It doesn't neccesarily then become 'racist' "

I haven't claimed it's racist, only that it is anti-English.
186

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:46:55
198

Yeah, they have to find some £13,000,000 before Christmas, not including the Interest.

(Sharp intake o' breath)

I don't think that the Tories are far behind Labour in that respect.

It will be interesting to see if they can squirm their way outta this one!
187

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 15:47:47
Fairfax writes:

"and that it derives part of its effectiveness from its anti-English component"

And also:

"English component -- it is not mere irrelevant that the tyrant defeated is Edward II of England."

If the lyrics said something about morris dancers coming over the hill to bore us all into submission with talk about buttered scones for tea, then, just maybe, then you could say that there is an anti-English undercurrent. Or if Edwards was described as a bowler-hatted tyrant or a tea-slurping football hooligan (note how all of these are anachronistic? Why? because Edward perhaps spoke French and really cannot be assumed to be 'English' in any modern sense at all) then also maybe.

As it is, the only characteristics heard of Edward in the song is that he is foreign (homeward to think again) and proud (the common epithet of the tyrant - Tarquinius Superbus and so on).

Flower of Scotland is no more anti-English than Livy is anti-Etruscan or the Star-Spangled Banner is anti-British.

You really need to get a grip of yourself.
188

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:55:10
199

Fairfax - Agreed. Only mentioned racism cos thats where the conversation started.

I am anti-Israeli BUT only because I am pro-Arab/ Palestinian. I don't think that makes me a racist but I have been called so because of that opinion.

It all depends on how you interpret the word ANTI.
189

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 15:58:53
201

Malcolm - you should read the first part of 197 and then use that in context with 199
190

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 15:59:56
malcolm (201): "Why? because Edward perhaps spoke French and really cannot be assumed to be 'English' in any modern sense at al"

Norman French was still the language of the court, but Edward would also have spoken middle English. He's somewhat too late to be viewed as French, despite being a Plantagenet.

"As it is, the only characteristics heard of Edward in the song is that he is foreign"

Now I see: it's entirely irrelevant that he was king of England.

"Flower of Scotland is no more anti-English than Livy is anti-Etruscan or the Star-Spangled Banner is anti-British."

These don't seem to be particularly good examples to me. When Star-Spangled Banner was written, it was consciously anti-British. Even Livy has, as part of his purpose, praise of the benefits of the union of Italy under Rome -- there were still anti-Italian revolts in the last century of the Roman Republic, after all.

"You really need to get a grip of yourself."

You'll note I've avoided ad hominem arguments. I also note you've avoided my Flodden "what if" . . .
191

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 16:26:14
Well I have just read the lyrics for Flower of Scotland for the first time ever and, yes, it is definitely anti-English in the 'Patriotic' sense as I postulated in 197:

And stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him hameward,
Tae think again.

It also exudes a sense of loss and berievement:

O Flower of Scotland,
When will we see,
Your like again,

giving the impression that the Scottish People which fought against Edward have gone and are not foreseeably returning.

Further, the Song hopes for the future:

Those days are past now,
And in the past
They must remain,
But we can still rise now,
And be the nation again,
That stood against him,
Proud Edward's Army,
And sent him hameward,
Tae think again.

This last? verse is again anti-English - Be the Nation that Stands Against the English Hordes?

No, it doesn't mention England or the English but it is implicit in the lyrics - particularly when you know what the song subject is.
192

malcolmcean,

02/06/2008 16:28:09
Fairfax writes:

"Norman French was still the language of the court, but Edward would also have spoken middle English. He's somewhat too late to be viewed as French, despite being a Plantagenet."

According to whom? The sort of historian that thinks King Canute was English? King Richard was English? I am afraid that I don't really think of those sorts of historians as particularly credible.

He spoke French as his first language and was the product of French culture.

Your arguments remind me of those of the Irish republican. It goes along the lines of: the English invaded Ireland 800 years ago and are still oppressing us. No Danes, no Normans, no Angevins, no Plantagents, no Tudors, no Scottish, no British, just 'English'.

It is the history of the Sun reader. It is superficial, and often very silly.

Fairfax also writes:

"Even Livy has, as part of his purpose, praise of the benefits of the union of Italy under Rome -- there were still anti-Italian revolts in the last century of the Roman Republic, after all"

Eh, what does this have to do with it? The tyrant and the tyranny was Livy's concern - not the ethnicity (the 'anti-Italian' riots were anti-enfranchisement - pro-exclusivity)

Fairfax then writes:

"You'll note I've avoided ad hominem arguments. I also note you've avoided my Flodden "what if" . ."

Saying get a grip of yourself is ad hominem? It is actually a relatively (given the silliness of your position) gentle piece of helpful instruction.
193

Iain's,

02/06/2008 16:31:32
Why not get rid of cabinet members who went to Oxford University?
That would get rid of most of the working class representatives in cabinet.

Just think of the stink if they had said "Get rid of the Jew" or "get rid of the Indian born in Aden" from the Labour Party. The polis would be round before you could say yiddish or Goan.

Scots is filth. New Labour say so. You can insult them wherever and whenever you want but just try to put up a sign "No irish need apply!"

Rant, rant, rant.

194

Alan B,

02/06/2008 16:32:20
#205 Neal

I do not think the last verse (or the 3rd verse that u refer to) the last one is actually the first repeated is anti english.

Those days are past now,
And in the past
They must remain,
But we can still rise now,
And be the nation again

is about the aspiration of independence. it refers to wars between the countries as being in the past.

(the rest is the chorus).

195

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 16:42:40
Why not get rid of Political Parties - Full Stop?

They are devisive when it comes to ruling a Nation. How can you rule effectively when you're so busy arguing with some-one else about how to do it?

Sortition is the only Way!
196

,

02/06/2008 16:47:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
197

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 16:50:02
208

Alan - Ah yes, I see what you mean. Not neccesarily to be 'anti-English' but to be the same Strong Nation of People as was capable of standing against Edward?

Then this verse is . . . bemoaning the fact of Scotlands'(at the time it was written) impotence?

Impotence is probably not the right usage but fits, sorry if I offend.

Was not sure it was the last verse - copied and pasted from Wiki and they only have the three verses.
198

,

02/06/2008 16:52:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
199

Alan B,

02/06/2008 16:54:00
#Neal

would say "Impotence" is probably the correct description.

200

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 16:54:01
210

Foo - "All I said was every English I had met was racist in some way"

Doesn't that make you Racist too? Cos that's a really Racist Generalisation!!
201

Nikostratos,

02/06/2008 16:58:42
#214

Perhaps that says more about you and the kind of life you lead if you only ever meet English racists
202

Doh,

02/06/2008 16:58:55

I think there are too many Labour members of the cabinet.
203

Alan B,

02/06/2008 17:00:12
#216 :)
204

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 17:00:35
Alan B (208): "is about the aspiration of independence. it refers to wars between the countries as being in the past."

With respect, I find this implausible, although I agree that it's strictly possible. Still, I've already devoted enough space to this point above . . .
205

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 17:01:19
210

Foo - thats akin to some-one saying 'all the Scotch (deliberate mistake) people I ever met were whiskey-drinking, haggis-eating, violent thugs.'

We all know that there are people out there like that, same as there are, I admit, English people who are racist to the core.

To point out one persons perceived racism and in the same breath use another yourself is more than a little hypocritical . . .
206

Alan B,

02/06/2008 17:02:13
#Foo

While the media can be irritating, generally speaking english people are not anti scottish and have a generally positive view of scotland.
207

Geoff,

sa 02/06/2008 17:05:09
Good Evening fellow Brits and fellow Scots!

What really fascinates me about this whole debate is that the problem and the solutions, to me, are crystal clear yet even people as high up in the UK government as Jack Straw fail to clearly understand what stares them in the face. Westminster cannot be both British AND English Parliament simultaneously. The current situation is tailor made for exploitation by Nationalists on both sides of the border. The solution is simple-England MUST and inevitably will have its own Parliament/Assembly. There is no turning back from Labours half finished devolution excercise. An English body will remove the current tensions based around the nationalities of the BRITISH cabinet, completely. If Westminster governs for the BRITISH people on UNION wide matters only, then no one should care a jot if the PM is from Kent or Kintyre. Scottish Independence or the devolving of further powers to holyrood and indeed the other Assemblies is a seperate issue. The longer the current situation prevails, the more harm will be done to the Union and Labour will continue to shoot themselves in the foot having to deal with headlines such as the above"No need to purge cabinet of Scots"-thsee questions and clumsy replies dont need to happen but as they do they are manna from heaven for the Nationalist cause!
208

Alan B,

02/06/2008 17:05:09
#Fairfax

How else can u interprete the 3rd verse?

Any debate over it being anti english would be over the chorus.


I know what u mean as i left u guys talking about it hrs ago and came back and u were still at it :)
209

Alan B,

02/06/2008 17:10:57
#Geoff

Do not think many people (in scotland) would disagree with u, if u are trying to find a way for the union to continue. However some may say it is better to have just a social union and be politically independent.



210

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 17:11:40
The whole argument over GSTQ is irrelevent to me - I don't particulalry care about the verses but more about the fact that it is a piece of anachronistic royalist p i s h that should be consigned to the dustbin of history.
211

Fairfax,

02/06/2008 17:11:58
malcolmcean (206): "He spoke French as his first language and was the product of French culture."

It's probably not known whether he spoke French or English as his first language, although he would have learned both obviously.

"No Danes, no Normans, no Angevins, no Plantagents, no Tudors, no Scottish, no British, just 'English'."

I agree that such simplification is silly (and, incidentally, the Angevins and the Plantagenets were two names for the same dynasty), but this is not the point I'm making. The initially French aristocracy of the late 11th and 12th centuries were beginning to speak English in the late 13th and 14th centuries. It is for this reason that Chaucer, writing in Middle English, could attain fame later in the 14th century.
Edward II was not like Richard I, say, who hardly spent any time in England at all.

"Saying get a grip of yourself is ad hominem? It is actually a relatively (given the silliness of your position) gentle piece of helpful instruction."

Of course. How could one possibly think that the late 20th century adoption of FoS as de facto national anthem of Scotland could possibly be viewed as anti-English? It's obviously irrelevant that it celebrates Scotland's key 14th century victory against an Angevin King of England. I await your answer to my Flodden what-if with anticipation.
212

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 17:20:39
224

The Fed - Nice to see you've come up with yet another well thought-out comment for debate . . .
213

Alan B,

02/06/2008 17:21:01
#Fairfax

Scotland adopted FOS as a defacto national anthem due to the fact that it was one of few alternatives and it was a popular folk song adopted at sporting namely internation football games.

Fans used to boo GSTQ. It was not seen as a scottish national anthem. We must have been the only country before a football game booing our own national anthem.

Remember GSTQ is adopted by rangers fans and as such it has means other stuff to football fans awell. Defender of the faith and all that stuff.

The sfa tried scotland the brave but that was a joke. Noone knew the words and would just have to hum along. Rugby then moved away from GSTQ and adopted FOS. And then the football authorities followed suit.

With one of the most popular songs at a scottish game now being doh a deer, it could have been all so different :)

214

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

02/06/2008 17:23:36
Anyway, time for me to go home everybody, have a good evening an' I'll probably see you tomo - although my boss is in at some point . . . whoops!
215

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 17:33:21
#226 As a republican I would have no other response.
216

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

02/06/2008 17:36:23
#227 My preferred choice would be Scots Wa' Hae - but then that's bound to start another argument about Burn's perceived unionist/nationalist credentials.
217

Geoff,

sa 02/06/2008 17:38:12
223 AlanB-Evening Alan.Understand that point of view perfectly. I was just trying to make the point that whatever one's position is on the Unionist-Independence debate, we can do without the kind of unnecessary tension that is generated by Labours failure to grasp(or even understand) the nettle here.

224 The Federalist-howsit Fed. My upbringing has left me with a sentimental attachment to GSTQ and I am a Monarchist, but I have to agree it is no longer suitable as an anthem for the UK. It is a unionist-Monarchist anthem and as such can not be acceptable to Republican Unionists or many Nationalist Monarchists. Also never ceases to amaze me how English sporting bodies cant see how damaging it is to both monarchy and Union when they play it as an "English" anthem-the recent FA Cup Final was a good case in point-how confused the Welsh monarchists in the stadium must have felt!
Perhaps the answer for GSTQ is to make it the royal Anthem only as in other commonwealth countries and adopt a new anthem for our new federation!
218

cataibh,

Bo'ness 02/06/2008 17:39:00
When independence is brought up, immediately the unionists shout you nationalist Scots are anti English, that same unionists don't shout at the same time -you nationalist Scots are anti Welsh Why?
219

Geoff,

sa 02/06/2008 17:43:33
How about "Donald wheres your troosers?"
220

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 02/06/2008 17:57:57
I feel all of the Cabinet should be Scottish born, Scottish educated and forced to live in Scotland. Then we might have some decent Scottish infrastructure regarding transport to London. It would then be wonderful to see how the Scottish Nationalists would make a case for ditching responsibility for the rest of the UK, whilst dancing to an EU tune! Just imagine watching the virile 'Smart' Alex threatening to take the UK out of of Europe!
221

Brian M,

Edinburgh 02/06/2008 17:59:51
looks like the English politicians are coming round to the idea of England for the English, and Scotland for the Scottish.

Hope it comes soon. Any 'UK/GB' problems will soon be resolved by change management, something which has been happening throughout Europe in particular as many 'smaller' countries have broken free from their westminster equivalent.
222

Truely English,

02/06/2008 18:08:57
What a nice place Inverness is with all its citizens having such beautiful English voices. It really is a pleasure to know that the inhabitants speak English so well are proud to be British in the main.
223

brownlie,

02/06/2008 18:27:50
237 Truely English

What a nice compliment on the way we speak English in Inverness. It is probably because as native Gaelic speakers we were forced to learn English in school.

Much as I hate to get back to the FOS saga there is an arrogant assumption on some poster's part that the aspiration in the song refers to getting out from under the English yoke.

The United Kingdom is not England and in order for the Scots "to be a nation again" it is the United Kindom - admittedly the major part being England - that has to be departed from - not England.
224

Truely English,

02/06/2008 18:47:44
It is now so clear that as time has progressed that the Scots and the English are one nation. This is clear even in a place as far away from London or Manchester as Inverness.

Our union and our precious English language unites us into one nation.
225

Truely English,

02/06/2008 18:52:49
While on holiday I visited Aberdeen to find to my joy that the main street is called Union Street. This shows the pride and respect that Aberdonians have had for the Union and Britain down through the centuries.
226

Colin Wilson,

02/06/2008 19:04:15
"THERE are 23 members of the UK Cabinet, four of whom are Scottish and represent Scottish constituencies.

This represents 17.4 per cent of the total Cabinet when Scotland accounts for about 9 per cent of the UK population."

A better measure would be, not of the percentage of the UK population, but of the percentage of Labour MPs in the UK parliament.
227

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 19:08:05
Truely. That would be apart from the time you blamed the Rangers' supporters rampage through Manchester and being by the Scottish and the English would never do that.

So you are Truely English? Bog off, troll, and get back to your Scotsman news desk.
228

Colin Wilson,

Aberdeen 02/06/2008 19:09:05
Re Truely English (#239): nowadays, very few people connect the name Union Street with the UK. Personally I'd prefer it to be renamed after independence ("Liberty Street" would be a good choice), but the current name will probsbly be kept simply because most people have forgotten what it means.
229

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 02/06/2008 19:13:21
#238 Truely Ingerlish (sic)

What a troll.

Isn't it amazing that somehow Labour has managed to find the four Scots on the whole planet with the most serious "special needs" to be in the cabinet?

Oh, sorry, I forgot the fifth one: she runs Scottish Labour.
230

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 19:23:17
Truely must suerly be an Eng.

An Eng. An Eng. As would be correct in "English".
231

Mikko,

Drumnadrochit 02/06/2008 19:33:23
#244 "Ingerlund, Ingerlund" is what the English idiots chanting at football matches say. They can't even pronounce their own language.
232

,

02/06/2008 20:19:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
233

,

02/06/2008 20:22:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
234

,

02/06/2008 20:23:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
235

,

02/06/2008 20:27:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
236

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 20:31:00
Yes,245 Mikko,

A Norse, a Norse, my Kingdom for a Norse.

As Shakespeare once wrote.

Nowadays some people write this as,

An horse, an horse, my kingdom for an horse.

Desperanto would be more accurate.

237

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 20:33:01
245
To be fair Mikko it is very hard to chant Eng-lund, which some supporters do.(The ones with the longer hair)
238

Colin Wilson,

Aberdeen 02/06/2008 20:39:42
Re 246 : actually, the HQ is called New Scotland Yard.

Its former location, the original Scotland Yard, is a street off Whitehall. It's where our embassy once was located, hence the name.
239

,

02/06/2008 20:45:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
240

,

02/06/2008 20:51:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
241

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 20:55:15
253
And the current "National Anthem"
Have you been crushed yet?
242

westview,

out of the Union soon 02/06/2008 20:56:43
Just so you do not think that the complaints about Scots in a UK govrnment has only recently surfaced ,here is a quote from a letter in my Union newspaper. The Union has recently Joined up with other unions to increase its power base and even now is joining up with unions in the ( independent) USA ,despite its fight against Scots independence. Quote"--- with the defence cuts that are ongoingit does make you wonder what the influence of the block of Scottish Labour MPs has on all of this.-----Is this to keep work in Scotland and therefor placatethe ScottishLabour MPs? After all itseemsto be their votes that tend to force through the more controversial legislation in England." This was from 2006.
243

Eve,

Scotland 02/06/2008 21:18:31
#15 ChinaBear: What a strange comment.
Where on earth have you been?
Daily bases!!!

I've heard hints of anglophibia in the past. BUT normally it's a wee bit of a slur in metioned in passing (quickly said quickly over on to new topic). BUT never have I wicknessed anyone daily slaging of the English. AND that includeds my time spent in Lanarkshire.

Most people I've met who've suffered from a wee bit of anglophic are naive youths. Who have much to learn about soeity and culture.

These people are Politians who should know better. OR be sacked.
244

Eve,

Scotland 02/06/2008 21:25:47
I must metion that I'm disapointed in Jack Straws comment from a man whos works in the Justice department: "there were "plenty" of "English people – true-born Englishmen and women" in the Cabinet and there was no need for any changes."

OMG how BNP does the words "true born" sound!

I feel sorry for the English for the state that their Justice system is in.
245

Eve,

Scotland 02/06/2008 21:30:29
#236 Truely English: So your going to start a campaign to get the MP for Inverness in the minersteral cabent then!!!!
246

Eve,

Scotland 02/06/2008 21:45:13
#89 Peter Baleares: What is 23 - 4?

I always thought it was 19!!! I must be pure rubbish at unionist adding & subtracting as it's plan obvose to a handful out spoken unionist that it equals 3 or 2!!!

Obousely there would be a few NI and Welsh MPs BUT even then ther would be more English seat hoilders in the minersal cabinet thant Scottish, NI & Welsh put together. BUT then again I'm pure mince at unionist sums.
247

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 21:53:38
Let's face it 'Flower of Scotland' is a boring sentimental dirge. Third rate poetry put to a third rate tune. If this is the best we can do God help us.
248

Ealasaid N,

02/06/2008 21:58:23
#160
I know that 'Old Etonians' consider themselves to be a 'race apart' but that's just a product of their over privileged imaginations. As they are not a race then any remarks levelled at them cannot be racist.
249

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 22:05:21
262
Calvinist
Do you prefer "God save the monarch"

Or are you a troll?
250

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 22:07:08
Many of the posts here are beginning to resemble the Monty Python 10 minute argument sketch. You're a racist! What me, no you're a racist! No you are! No you are! And so on, and so on.... sorry your 10 minutes are up.
251

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 22:08:31
#264
No equally childish atavistic garbage.
252

danbob,

Skipton 02/06/2008 22:10:09
The real tragedy here is the fact that idiotic politicians are so desperate to keep their snouts in the trough, That they are prepared to cause tensions between two great nations that have managed to co - operate through thick and thin for three centuries. Whatever your ideas are on independence dont fall for the lie that somehow scots are hated by the english. It is just not true. What new liebour dont get is the fact that their lies and spin have at last been rumbled. It has nothing to do with scots in the cabinet. To suggest such a thing just goes to show how low this shower have sunk.
253

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 22:13:23
263
Heh...
If there is a people which should BE extinct...

Not likely though. Some F u ckwits voted one the mayor of London. HAHAHAHa...ha.
254

,

02/06/2008 22:14:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
255

,

02/06/2008 22:21:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
256

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 22:22:16
Evening Alberto

How are you doing?
257

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 22:23:42
#262
In principle, I don't like national anthems. Most of them are jingoistic or sentimental or full of hubris. Personally I like the sentiments in 'A Man's a Man for a' That' but this excludes half the population. Its also set to an ancient dirge of French origin.
258

cataibh,

Bo'ness 02/06/2008 22:25:33
Calvinist is it not time for your medication
259

,

02/06/2008 22:26:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
260

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 22:27:42
272
Just as well neither of them are anthems then. Yet.
261

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 22:28:39
#273

Watch your punctuation- you missed out the question mark. I assume by insinuating that I'm insane you don't like what I write. Are you a follower of Joe Stalin?
262

,

02/06/2008 22:29:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
263

Calvinist,

02/06/2008 22:33:19
277
No.
264

murren59,

Isle of Arran 02/06/2008 22:36:09
With regard to FoS and Bannockburn...did not Edwina II lead an 'English army' supplemented with the formidable Welsh archers, conscripts from Ireland, and mercenaries from the Low Countries?

So dammit...FoS is NOT anti English but a two finger salute to bully boys from England, Ireland, Wales, Belgium, Holland, Flanders, Germany... :-)
265

Conan the Librarian™,

02/06/2008 22:40:07
278
So
Calvinist does not like anthems/hymns?

266

,

02/06/2008 22:43:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
267

,

02/06/2008 22:48:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
268

,

02/06/2008 22:50:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
269

,

02/06/2008 22:54:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
270

,

02/06/2008 22:57:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
271

Phil the Flooter,

Perth 02/06/2008 23:00:22
Eve, I am English and never in my 45 years living in Scotland have I been slagged off to my face on a daily basis for being from 'Engerland' as some of you seem to use regularly like a sort of insult.. Its all done on the NET and Media such as this forum particularly when it involves England and Football, but I can understand that. I love living up here, people are much more friendly and Tolerant in Perthshire than in my native East Anglia. I dont really like Flower of Scotland-I suppose if it was sung well it would be OK but usually it sounds a bit dirgy. I find the Anti English comments which appear regularly on this forum highly amusing though ..they seem to have died off now.. but give it a few days after this forum has closed..
272

,

02/06/2008 23:09:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
273

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 23:14:35
Bedtime story.

The dirge music to God Save the King/Queen is a central European folk tune. The words were all that was changed for the Hannovarians.

At least our dirge music is indigenous.
274

,

02/06/2008 23:16:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
275

,

02/06/2008 23:19:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
276

Phil the Flooter,

Perthshire 02/06/2008 23:26:27
Bird of Prey 289

Them morris Dancers can look pretty silly.. I come from 'Silly Suffolk'
Not because they are very silly (tho they can be) but because silly is also an old English word for 'Holy' because there were so many churches in that county..

You should move to Arbroath though, plenty Shytehawk crap there..

277

Phil the Flooter,

Perthshire 02/06/2008 23:32:01
288 Jock Thomson

Dont like GSTQ either, another dirge, whether it non indigeinininus or didgeredoo..
278

Truely English,

02/06/2008 23:33:07
Scotland it seems is so English that the Scots cannot even recognise this fact. There is little or no difference between the people on both sides of the Border and why should there be.

One language, one culture, one people.
279

,

02/06/2008 23:35:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
280

,

02/06/2008 23:43:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
281

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 23:45:04
293, Truely.

Unless, of course, Scots happen to trash Manchester or become Prime Minister or take up Cabinet positions.

Try taking Arret tablets for your verbals.
282

Phil the Flooter,

Perthshire 02/06/2008 23:46:00
294 Bird of Prey

Fit??

Kippers??.. KIPPERS?? . One gets SMOKIES in Arbroath..

Although you probably can get kippers as well.
283

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 23:52:31
295, Pird of Bray.

You look like chicken tonight and sound liked a caged hen.
284

,

02/06/2008 23:53:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
285

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/06/2008 23:54:13
Phil the Flooter. How often do you play the Floot? Is it seasonal?
286

,

03/06/2008 00:10:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
287

Phil the Flooter,

Perthshire 03/06/2008 00:57:47
Jock Tamson


Actually dont play the floot-an Uncle from Turriff used to call me that.

But I do play

Fiddle, geetar and Banjo, strictly a Plucker
288

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

03/06/2008 07:37:01
"#249 Alberto Y Lost Trios Paranoias,02/06/2008 20:27:46
#230 What ho Federalist, just wondered if you might enlighten us to what nationality actually you are?

Merely wondering after you posted this on the Sunday Hootsman yesterday.

"Why must one wade through ignorance and rudeness on these postings? The Scots I know well are reasonable and polite."

Amazing - considering:

(a) I did not read Scotland on Sunday this week either online or the paper edition

(b) I did not post on any website on Sunday

(c) My internet connection was down most of the day.

Can you actually give a link to the relevent post?

Because if it exists it was not me - it must have been a fakey (space before or after name).

And for your information I was born in Maryfield Hospital, Dundee at 11.00am 8 May 1967. I still live and work in Dundee.
289

livilion,

livingston 03/06/2008 08:33:08
293 Truely English
>>One language, one culture, one people<<
ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer eh?
How very cosmopolitan of you.

Is that shyte I can smell?
290

Ken Mac,

Glasgow 03/06/2008 09:05:59
300 comments and counting. Maggie Thatcher & John Major had loads of Scots in their cabinets, Younger, MacKay, Whitelaw, Rifkind,Lang, Lamont,Forsyth. Sometimes as many as Gordon Brown has at the same time. Don't remember the outcry about that. If you have a United Kingdom of it shouldn't matter which part of the country ministers come from. I've been prepared to believe that the anti Scots feeling has largely been down to the English not liking the Labour government rather real anti Scottish sentiment. If you don't like someone you highlight what sets them apart. It's the playground bully syndrome, you fat so & so, you big nosed so&so etc. With Labour, as the majority of voters are English, it is the Scottish bit that stands out. However that can't be a reason if Labours own MPs are saying there are too many Scots in the cabinet. Of course these people are complete idiots and their argument doesn't stand up for a second but you have to ask yourself why would you want to be a part of a Union with these people?
291

The Scotchman,

03/06/2008 11:16:28
Alister Darling is as Scottish as Eric Bristow. Remove this "Crafty Cockney" from this erroneous list.
292

WMSART,

MUSSELBURGH 03/11/2008 09:37:55
DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY ENGLAND IS NOT DEVOLVED WITH TI'S OWN ASSEMBLY. AT PRESENT THE UK PARLIAMENT IS BEING USED ILLEGALLY
293

WMSART,

MUSSELBURGH 03/11/2008 09:39:14
DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY ENGLAND IS NOT DEVOLVED WITH TI'S OWN ASSEMBLY. AT PRESENT THE UK PARLIAMENT IS BEING USED ILLEGALLY

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.