Britain – sleepwalking to separation

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

David Cameron: the last Prime Minister of the UK? http://bit.ly/iS7ibE

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation http://bit.ly/jRxf5x

Don't Panic! @leftfootfwd http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/05/britain-sleepwalking-to-separation/ What's 'Left' about that analysis?

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

Agreed. As Unionists we underestimate the SNP at our peril. Though I think that Cameron welcomes the emergence of a strong Scottish Nationalist party…it will keep Labour fretting and busy trying to work out how they can please those divergent constituencies of Scotland and ‘middle England’…and it surely means an easier job for the Conservatives who will be able to cement their English hegemony.

Urgh – the vile and reprehensible tory Marcus Booth has been writing for @leftfoodfwd on Scottish independence http://bit.ly/kGDsXZ

Britain – sleepwalking to separation: Those of us who oppose the break-up of Britain have a duty to prevent sepa… http://bit.ly/jvFnP2

Mr Booth,

I presume you lost in the 2001 election. I have no explanation as to why, but I would hazard a guess that you would have lost in a safer seat down South had you at any stage mentioned the insulting phrase ‘little Englanders’. I can assure you that there are few phrases more likely to annoy local associations.

You accuse those in favour of independence of ‘short-sighted and misplaced self-interest’ but I note that you don’t make any argument in favour of the Union. In fact, you merely say that it ‘is not the case’ that England would be better off without Scotland. Why? Are the benefits really so self-evident? And, believe it or not, that is a genuine question.

I am not sure which side of the debate I am on: it appears to me that England and Scotland are very separate countries within an uncomfortable Union, while devolution has accentuated this, but I don’t know if that is reason enough for separation. I would like for politicians to make sensible arguments, either way, to help others shape informed opinions.

A repeat of the patronising tone of the ‘Yes2AV’ campaign would be unwelcome.

[...] announces resignationBBC NewsAnnabel Goldie to stand down as Scottish Conservative leaderstv.tvLeft Foot Forward -Scotsman -Herald Scotlandall 67 news [...]

Dear Mr Booth, as a ‘Unionist’, you might find that it’s beneficial to the ‘Union’ to start treating England with a modicum of respect, instead of making racist remarks about us. If the ‘Union’ is to survive, it has to treat all its member nations equally. Yes, that’s right, equally. English voters have to be given the same voting rights as our ‘fellow’ citizens in the rest of the ‘U’K. We should not be forced to pay any more for prescriptions, university tuition, etc, than anybody else. You can start the process by speaking of, to and for England, instead of the Britishness spiel which our neighbours are spared, and which we are increasingly ignoring.

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation http://bit.ly/jRxf5x

“Once in power the SNP ruthlessly use every means at their disposal to advance one cause – separatism.”

Wow – I’d never noticed that, even though their name is the Scottish National Party.

Thanks for the heads up. Though I think they call it “independence”.

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

For decades, the issue of the break-up of the UK has been inextricably linked with Ulster’s future – a very emotive and polarising issue.

This is increasingly not the case in England, where ambivalence is now increasingly prevalent. Few talk of the the need for a shared political destiny or of the benefits of the union to the English, but they might now mention instead the right of the Scots to self-determination.

I suspect that it might be harder to sell independence to the Scots themselves, and for whom the risks are geatest, than it would be to the English.

It’s a little bit insulting that this can be printed under the banner of “Left Foot Forward”. I know the Tories have softened their image in recent years, but a Conservative Party campaigner is hardly an authentic voice of the left, and he’s barely qualified to give an informed opinion on contemporary Scottish politics. Couldn’t you find anyone Scottish – whether unionist, nationalist, or undecided – to write about the implications of our election result? Booth lived north of the border for a couple of years, a decade ago, in a town known as “the last outpost of Kensington”. It would appear that English Labour supporters are so afraid of the SNP that they’d rather side with the Tories on this one. How very Lib Dem…

It’s this very same name-calling, hair-pulling rhetoric that lost Labour the Scottish elections. They were ahead in the polls when campaigning began, but shot themselves in the foot by repeating Mr Booth’s sentiments for six weeks. Instead of regurgitating this nonsense about the dangerous “other” of Scottish Nationalism, you would do well to read some of the insightful commentary that Scottish journalists and bloggers have produced over the weekend; engage with the issue seriously, and you might even start to understand why so many people in Scotland are reflexively pulling away from the Tory government in London.

Disagreed. I don’t deny that England may be worse off without Scotland but I, as a Scot, find myself more pro independence as time goes on. If it wasn’t for Scotland the last general election would have seen a Tory majority south of the border, yet even with a measly 1 Conservative seat we find ourselves stuck with a Tory state-slashing Westminister government. The fact of the matter is Scotland and England are very different countries politically these days, with more of the Scottish people holding left leaning ideologies. I’ve lived in England and Scotland and this is quite apparent.

I believe the easiest way to a more liberal, left and most importantly green Scotland is through independence. Just compare Salmond’s faith in green technology compared to Cameron’s complete neglect of green issues.

This website is called “left foot forward” so I am slightly puzzled by a Scottish Tory writing here. This article is another prime example of the Unionist scaremongering I’ve seen from politicians and journalists alike both sides of the border. At the end of the day, although it may not be great for England, this is not a question of England’s future, it’s a question of Scotland’s future. It should be left in the hands of the Scottish people to decide and if Salmond can put up a positive argument for a Yes vote, like he did for an SNP vote, then so be it.

I agree with Ed that the campaign to defend the union must avoid being patronising. Sadly there are legitimate arguments by the opponents of the union on both sides of the border. One thing that the pro union side must not do is simply say “England subsidises Scotland”. This is not true and the SNP can effectively disprove it.

A tactic that is far more likely to work is to talk up Scotlands contribution to the union, how much damage would be done if they left and what all of us lose out on.

Of course England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are better off united as part of the United Kingdom. With a larger economy we are able to shield ourselves from economic crisis unlike Ireland, Iceland and Portugal for example. We are a major power in the EU, and not bullied and threatened into accepting something like the lisbon treaty as Ireland was. We have a seat on the UN security council, able to veto any UN resolution, we are a member of the G7, G8 and G20. An independent Scotland would not make it into a G40 if one existed.

The separatist threat must not be underestimated as mentioned above. Salmond is extremely dangerous. Unionists from all political parties must unite quickly and crush the separatist cause before the official referendum campaign begins. Atleast if action is taken now, its not done with excessive media regulations on balance to the two sides… as would be seen in the run up to the referendum.

Decades of attacking British identity by all 3 mainstream parties has led us to this position. now everyone has no choice but to fight this dangerous separatist agenda.

Couldn’t agree more Marcus, and I hope that unionists on both the left and right can work together against those who call for seperation.

It would seem most likely to me that the Scots could benefit from independance from England. They have huge renewable energy resources, a low population density and appear to prefer to be governed by people they vote for rather than from the heads of corporations.
Rob

Too often the arguments for and against Scotland’s continued membership of the UK are boiled down into petty spats over tax revenues and subsidies when in actual facts the benefits of mutual union are far more diverse and ideologically profound.

The proponents of unionism need to make their points much more vociferous and diverse in nature.

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

http://bit.ly/lbeTKy Hmmm.. Dear England, I like you, but if you will keep electing Tories we may need to seek an amicable divorce.

RT @bellacaledonia: Don't Panic! @leftfootfwd http://www.leftfootforward.org/2011/05/britain-sleepwalking-to-separation/ What's 'Left' a …

Like almost all of the interpretations of the SNPs election success, this article fails to grasp two essentials.

It’s not just about the failure of the unionist parties. It’s about throwing off the shroud of Xenophobic English nationalism and its about the possibility of a fresh, constructive, consensual, life-affirming politics for a modern world.

We don’t like the racist, imperialist, warmongering tone of English politics and the English media. We don’t like the dawn raids and forced repatriation of refugees who want to live and work in our country. We don’t like the illegal wars of the Anglo-American terror machine. We don’t want your nuclear weapons, we don’t want your nuclear pollution industry. We don’t like the arrogant assumption that the English are born to govern. We don’t like the Engllish national ubermensch ideology. We don’t like the stupid jokes about the French, the Belgians, the Italians, the Welsh or anybody else who isn’t as English as a BBC newsreader.

We are fed up with the utter failure of the main English parties to grasp that an independent Scotland might result in a more co-operative, more consensual, fairer and more inclusive society. That is what we want. We want to break free of the suffocating anglocentrism that pervades English media and cultural life. We want to understand other peoples and cultures, learn their ways, learn their languages, trade with them on consensual terms and generally have a lot of fun. We like to sing and dance and be happy. We like to eat unpolluted food and drink fresh water. We see no reason why other people around the world should be denied those simple rights.

Nobody knows at this stage what exact form independence might take. There would have to be a wide range of treaties and co-operative iinitiatives from everything from security and defence to the provision of lavatory seats for royal arses on state visits.

Our movement towards assuming control of our own lives, our own resources, could have positive long term benefits for everybody in these islands. Call it community. Call it democracy. Call it what you like, it’s happening.

But maybe you do grasp that. Maybe you just don’t like the challenge to English hegemony. English nationalism has been the dominant force in British politics since before the union. It’s what sells English newspapers, It’s what gets English voters to go to the polls. It’s what shapes English foreign policy. It’s what produced the present ConDem coalition. English voters didn’t want a Scottish Prime Minister.

The Left and Right in England are hardly distinguishable although you pretend to have different parties. Blair, Milliband, Cameron, Clegg — all English nationalists.

We’ve just elected a national party in Scotland. It has a broad spectrum of support. It’s a braid kirk as we say.

It’s a democracy — almost. We have free and fair elections. We won’t be waving too many flags, we won’t be encouraging the Americans to bomb people, torture them and take humiliating and degrading photos to share with their friends back home.

We’ll be getting on with the business of living. And by the way — gerrit up yaise.

“….the benefits of mutual union are far more diverse and ideologically profound.

The proponents of unionism need to make their points much more vociferous and diverse in nature.”

I often here this but rarely see anyone put up any convincing arguments for why the Union must remain (or is the better option than a Federal UK).

As for the term Little Englander – well I prefer that than the colonising imperialist that are holding onto the last embers of the British Empire. If there were more Little Englanders, we would not have to travel the world cap in hand apologising for Britains past deeds, or told we should live in shame for past actions by our ‘progressive’ betters.

What a load of Luvvies commenting on this bit of piffle.

keep it up chaps, please.

You still don’t get it.

So SNP separatism stems from regressive “nationalism” but Tory unionism does not? Please.

Nationalism is a key defining characteristic of the Conservative party and always has been: from past support for empire and opposition to Irish independence, to present day unionism and passionate hatred of the EU.

These positions have been far too uniform and vehement to arise from some sort of dispassionate analysis of pros and cons. Nationalism in any form (‘celtic’ or unionist) always has everything to do with the heart and very little to do with the head.

RT @leftfootfwd: Britain – sleepwalking to separation: http://bit.ly/iS7ibE writes Marcus Booth

Modicum – People in this country vote with their hearts not their heads. If they didn’t Labour would never have been elected twice. Without exception every time they are booted out of office the country is left with a financial nightmare. I know it’s always someone else’s fault: “The pound in your pocket”, “It’s a global recession caused by the bankers” – whatever. The results are always the same.

You say the key defining characteristic of the Tory party is “opposition to Irish independence”. WTF?

Stop rewriting history please. In 1971 Ted Heath (he was a Tory btw Modicum) tried to set up power sharing in 1971 with the IRA and when was John Major, the architect of the current NI administration, suddenly airbrushed out of the picture?

Oh and on the subject of Conservative governments who do you think took this country into Europe. I’ll give you a clue Modicum – it wasn’t Labour or the Liberals….

Well said Mr Booth. The SNP victory means all Unionists, north and south of the border, need to step up to the mark and set out the positive benefits of the Union in every sphere- economically, socially, culturally etc. This is a timely article and very welcome in Scotland.

Anon E Mouse

“People in this country vote with their hearts not their heads. If they didn’t Labour would never have been elected twice. Without exception every time they are booted out of office the country is left with a financial nightmare.”

Steady on – you usually pretend to be a disaffected Labour voter, remember? Loudly declaring that voting Labour has always been irrational because Labour have always been shit kind of gives the game away.

Ah, see here we have a classic error in editorial decision making. The choice to write an article on independence at all attracts to the comments that special brand of nutters known as ‘cybernats’ (whose bizarre lifestyle apparently allows them to scan every online newspaper and swarm the comments thread whenever anything remotely critical of the SNP is released) and the choice to have a Tory write it (and a Scottish Tory, no less – a very strange beast) practically guarantees he’ll discredit himself by trying to hard to ingratiate himself with an unfamiliar audience. “Well… I know that lefties hate the Daily Mail, so I’ll make a crack about Little Englanders”. Recipe for disaster.

@Seon and everyone else likeminded – Do you honestly believe that the massive swing of LibDem voters to yourself was because after decades of voting for a unionist party they’ve finally drunk the independence Kool Aid? I’m not saying that an independence referendum is unwinnable, nor am I saying there isn’t a mandate for a referendum but don’t kid yourself that every vote for the SNP was a vote for independence, it just ain’t so. I suppose what a lot of us ought to ask is why someone voting for the LibDems – an economically liberal, socially liberal unionist party would decide to vote for someone like John Mason, an economically socialist, socially conservative nationalist. I suspect it’s because you managed to fight a very politics-free campaign, the question is how long you can manage to maintain a politics-free government.

Ash – Which is my point exactly. If one voted Labour as my family and I did our whole lives we knew they couldn’t handle the economy but we voted anyway. Especially as we knew public services would have money lavished on them (practically my whole family works in public service).

The interesting thing in this country is that essentially the nation is centre left in it’s heart but no one, not even the most tribal Labour Party supporter, could argue that the behaviour of Gordon Brown and his his thuggish leadership methods were acceptable from any political party.

Left Foot Forward? Surely some mistake? Left Foot Forward, Right Foot Back. That’s better.

So, “Salmond will only go the people when he knows he will win”. Gosh, do let us know when you discover the moon! I take it you didn’t study politics at St. Andrews.

I’m confused though. On the one hand, I keep reading in the press and the blogosphere this mantra from Scottish unionists that Scots don’t want independence. On the other hand, I also see this frequent reference, in the same sources, that the ‘wily’, ‘mischevious’, ‘canny’, ‘cunning’ Alex Salmond will only hold a referendum when he knows he can win it. Could I suggest that Scottish unionists make more of an effort to reconcile these contradictory statements as this is beyond parody now. It might also help your cause if you didn’t characterise Salmond as part of the axis of evil.

Rather than adopt the desperate measures that you recommend here, could I suggest that it might be a better idea to let the democratic process run its course? Oops, silly me, I forgot, we’re talking about the British here.

A more appropriate title for this piece, in fact, a more appropriate piece altogether would have been: ‘Scots, once again, sleepwalking into another generation of Westminster Tory governments that they don’t want’.

The only appropriate reply to this, after last Thursday’s result, would be: well it looks like they’ve woken up at last.

i dont see what the problem is its up to the scotish voter to break up the uk not england you stole our land our industry and oil you can take your royal family and union and stick it face the union is over we hate you always have and always will.

jimmy – Forget all your William Wallace and Bonnie Prince Charlie running round dressing up as a woman nonsense.

The fact is your country was ungovernable after the death of Alexander III died and in 1290 you asked Edward I of England to arbitrate (he selected John Balliol as John I) for which Scotland became a dependancy of England.

You started it all by not being able to sort out your affairs without the help of the English. Although it doesn’t feel like much has changed in that respect, the whole of the UK should decide if Scotland should be independent not just the jocks.

And you may be surprised at the outcome because an awful lot of English voters would like to see the back of your money sucking country and you can take all your Scotch politicians back as well.

To have MP’s deciding laws that affect someone else’s country and not their own stinks and with Gordon Brown being the most unpopular Prime Minister in history (according to the polls going back to 1923) the feelings towards you from us may be the same as yours so see you jimmy…

Good to see Scottish insecurity and rampant xenophobia is alive and well.

Duncan’s post is remarkably perceptive. This is exactly the type of post which attracts virtual bile from nationalists (who could do with a liberal helping of salt and vinegar to go with the chips on their shoulders), while the needless reference by Mr Booth to ‘little Englanders’ was a pathetic attempt from an ex-Tory candidate to ingratiate himself with a left wing audience. Never going to work. Besides, that’s suicidal talk for a Conservative who fancies being selected as a PPC again.

Seon, fair enough, you don’t like jokes directed at the French, Belgians etc. But surely life must be pretty boring if the only target for your invective is the English? I would suggest life might be a little more interesting if you embraced lighthearted banter directed at a variety of countries. Also, just wanted to tell you that I enjoyed your rant regarding England’s supposed endorsement of American warmongering. Do remind us, again, which country released a Libyan terrorist and which flags were waved when this murderer got off his plane?

Oh and Jimmy, if we take the Royal Family can you take Gordon Brown, Dougie Alexander, Ming Campbell et al and we’ll call it a fair deal? We’ll thrash out your share of the national debt later on. Priorities…

Ed old chap, sorry to be a bore but just wanted to check this with you, you have deducted our share of the national assets before demanding our share of the national debt haven’t you? I mean fair play old boy. By my reckoning, with national assets of £304 billion that makes our share around £30 billion (rounded up, in our favour, but what’s a few hundred million quid between chums). Once those Tory toffs of yours have reduced the national debt sufficiently (should coincide nicely with our independence) we might still owe you around £20 billion.

While we’re on the subject of the balance sheet, would you mind terribly taking those weapons of mass destruction off our hands? Oh, and sorry to push you on this, but do you think you could stop using our territory for your military manoeuvres? And would you mind awfully if we took our military personnel out of your armed forces? A bugger I know, but every man for himself eh?

Now if you’re nice to us on this debt malarkey thing, we might cut you a deal with our oil exports. After all old chap we know that peak oil prices are scheduled to rise to $200 a barrel in the not too distant future and we wouldn’t want to see you go short, lights out and all that. We won’t be needing it ourselves of course, for we’ve got this renewable energy thingy (25 per cent of the entire EUs capacity apparently), I know talk about an embarrassment of riches.

Just think as well old boy, after independence we won’t have to endure all those shocks that your Oxbridge Labour and Tory toffs keep forcing our small economy to absorb every five to ten years. We can get some stability, plan for the future and all that. And we can improve our export performance with the EU, mind you old boy I think the political benefits will be significant for us as well. Just think, no more Labour and Tory toffs mis-representing us in the EU?

Don’t worry old chap there’s something in it for you too. After independence, all those Scottish MPs who make the 900 mile round trip to Westminster every week will be based in Edinburgh. Should save us all a few bob, might even work wonders for our democracy, closer to the people and all that.

Ta ta.

Seems a fair deal in many respects, SHB.

It would be good to hear the new scapegoat when you find out that the sun doesn’t actually shine out of Mr Salmond’s derriere.

But yes, you’re right that you’d no longer be ruled by Tories. Good for you. You can rotate between SNP and Labour to your hearts’ content. It would be a refreshing change for those of us down South to get the blue government we tend to vote for. Fairer representation all round, I’m sure you’ll agree.

As for any political benefits you might gain, I’m none the wiser I’m afraid. I guess the EU subs might come as a shock to you (not much fun for any of us, really) and I guess you’ll have to adapt to dealing with the likes of Merkel and Sarkozy. Interesting characters, but I’m sure they’ll warm to Salmond. He too is an interesting character.

I would hazard a guess, however, that relations with America might be a touch frosty. There was that business with a convicted terrorist a while back, and the American people don’t like that sort of thing, from what I hear.

Jimmy and Anon E Mouse,

I didn’t realise that this site wasn’t moderated. I’ll take myself elsewhere. I hear that the Sun is providing some (comparatively) edifying reading.

Anon E Mouse,

Please read my remarks more carefully. I didn’t claim any of the things you’re ascribing to me (such as that the Tory party of the present day or of the 1970s is anti-Irish).

My point was simply that the Conservatives are a nationalist party, and that it’s ridiculous for Mr Booth to suggest that unionism is not a form of “nationalism”, or that unionism is somehow intrinsically more rational and enlightened than Scottish or any other kind of nationalism.

Probably missed the boat but just in case……

life’s too short and complicated to get bogged down trying to control what other people do with their own country (resisting invasions excepted). I hope the people of Scotland make their decision based on positive reasons about the kind of country they want to create for their children and not based on the brow beating manipulation of a bunch of rich “leaders” in England or north of the border.

If they do choose to go independent I hope they make a success of it – that way I get to have a cheap foreign holiday without getting on a plane….kerching.

You’ve tempted me out for one last post, never was over-keen on inexactitude.

First though, an apology. In spite of your moniker and being new to this site (don’t worry I won’t be back), I had you down as one of those New Labour parvenus who’ve contaminated our political system on both sides of the border since 1994. It now appears that you are a Tory. Well good for you – and I am genuinely sorry for confusing you with that other lot – from up here though, it’s hard to tell the difference nowadays.

Now to the meat. Sun shining out of Salmond’s derriere? That’s for the birds Ed. We have our scapegoat ready for the cull, it’s called, or it calls itself the Scottish Labour Party. You may not have noticed but they’ve won every single British general election in Scotland since 1964. In 2010 they won a 42 per cent share of the vote in Scotland, 70 per cent of Scottish seats and returned 41 MPs to what I believe you still refer to as, without a blush as well, the ‘mother of parliaments’. So we’ll have less talk of this “rotating” business. You’ll be pleased to hear that they’re toast (this should be confirmed more emphatically at the next British general election, maybe earlier once it’s clear that your lot are a shoo-in for 2015).

“Fairer representation all round”? I do agree. I’m eternally grateful that the war criminals Blair and Brown (or Maggie Broon as we call him up here) never had the bottle to establish an English parliament or to take devolution in England seriously (three cheers for Ed Miliband on this too), as that might just have saved the disunited kingdom from the inevitable. Phew! Thank God too that, even for the poor old Lib Dems, federalism is la-la land.

EU political benefits? First thing I’d say is that I want us (i.e. us not you, we already know how you’d vote) to have a referendum on Scottish membership, an emphatic decision one way or t’other (b) we already pay subs (c), assuming the referendum yields a yes vote: positive network externalities (d) effective protection of our fishing industry (we’ll never forgive Heath for that sell-out and it’s been downhill thereafter) (e) more bargaining strength than the sfa we exercise at the moment (not over-stating this but, as the saying goes, every little helps) (f) we’ll be sending politicians to represent us at European institutions who’ll be dedicated to defending and advancing our national interests (g) and don’t laugh at this one Ed, it could smooth our entry to the euro (after another referendum of course, why should the Swiss have all the fun?). We’d need to radically increase our share of fixed rate mortgages and we’d need to build up that oil fund and gear up our economy but, if we want to significantly increase our share of exports to Europe this, in the long-run, would make sense. (h) I do have others but I’ll stop there.

As for this business with the Americans? Naughty Ed, naughty naughty Ed. I think you’ll find that the Americans are becoming more interested in the war criminal Blair’s attempts to have al-Megrahi released in exchange for oil deals and ‘British’ business interests in Libya. A little aside here Ed. I hear that Tartan Day is extremely popular in New York, last year’s march even passed by the World Trade Centre site (Ground Zero). Oh, and Joe Stiglitz is one of the economic advisers to the SNP government, Hilary Clinton congratulated him on his appointment, such a nice man compared to that earnest young toff you’re lumbered with as ‘chancellor’ – you know, the one who strikes you as always being out of his depth (tee-hee).

Final point, I think you’ll find that one of the important differences between us and you is that we have no desire to be America’s poodle. What was it De Gaulle said again, “Ah England, America’s Trojan horse in Europe”. Wise man.

It’d be a shame if you didn’t stick around, SHB, so I hope you’re here to read this.

Your tone isn’t in the least bit condescending and that is welcome: certainly in stark contrast to some of the authors on this site.

In terms of substance, I’m interested by your paragraph on prosective Scottish membership of the EU. I think if you look over the Irish Sea you might be less keen on the idea of joining the Euro. Not being tied to that ill thought-out currency is one of the few things I can bring myself to thank Gordon Brown for! I’d also be intrigued to see the result of a Scottish referendum on EU membership (it’d be interesting to see the result of the English version too, but hey-ho…) I actually have no idea what Scots think about the EU.

My comments regarding America? Well, they were rather tongue-in-cheek. They were mainly aimed as retaliation for Seon’s vitriol above. I don’t believe it was a good decision to release Al-Megrahi; I was thoroughly unimpressed with MacAskill, Sturgeon and Salmond in the aftermath; waving of Saltires must have shamed Scotland; but (and, it is a key but, in fairness) I’m still none the wiser as to Labour’s involvement. I’ve never been one for conspiracy theories so am inclined to believe it was a Scottish decision. However, Labour lies weren’t uncommon in that period (nor now, come to think of it) and the pieces seem to fit. I guess I’ll never know.

As for the final comment, I would question whether England as a whole wants to be America’s poodle. I’m not quite prepared to say that ‘poodle’ is a fair description either. We need strong allies inside and outside of Europe and America fits the bill. Perhaps sometimes I’m keener on those across the Atlantic than I should be, but that might be a reaction to the irrational hatred shown by many in the UK. Our government needs to strike a balance, as would Salmond’s, should he get his wish. Antagonism of such a superpower would be ill-advised. Incidentally, I’m sure Salmond would love to export haggis to the US: I read recently (seriously, I promise) that there’s a big, ready market out there.

Modicum – In fairness you did say: “Nationalism is a key defining characteristic of the Conservative party and always has been: from past support for empire and opposition to Irish independence, to present day unionism and passionate hatred of the EU”

I take your point though.

Have you actually considered that the SNP vote may be a permanent thing? Remember how badly Labour did in England as well. The Tories now have control of 86 more council seats than their massive gains in 2007.

If Labour can’t reconnect with middle England and Miliband shows no sign of having the ability to do that the party will become more irrelevant than it currently is. Personally I hope the SNP convince the Scots to go it alone just to stop the inequity of the Barnett Formula…

Thanks Anon E Mouse.

You might be right about the SNP becoming dominant, at least in the Scottish Parliament. They have an advantage over the others in so far as they’re not associated with the policies of the UK government or of any UK-wide party. They can tailor their policies and political identity very specifically to the Scottish electorate.

SNP success doesn’t necessarily mean independence, of course. I gather support for secession is only around 20-30%.

The SNP state that short of independence they would like full fiscal autonomy. That should settle once and for all the disputes about the Barnett formula, Scottish oil, etc.

19 I don’t know what you mean by Kool Aid – is that an American drink? And aye, I do believe that the election result indicates a wish to move towards independence. I think that it has a lot to do with being fed up with the English nationalist parties. You talk as if I’m a member of the SNP. I’m not.

25 You say “Scottish insecurity and rampant xenophobia”. Then you defend racist jokes as “light-hearted banter”. As I said, it’s partly because we’re fed up with the anglocentric, xenophobic triumphalism of English politics, English media and English cultural life that we voted SNP.

32. I don’t know what you mean by “vitriol” in relation to my post. English nationalism is the dominant force in English politics and media. English nationalism is inward-looking, backward looking, parochial, xenophobic, intellectually and culturally impoverished. There is still a strong Labour vote in Scotland. But since Labour in England have moved so far to the right and have become so obviously English nationalist in a bid to attract the right-swinging voters of the south-east of England, they leave people with nobody to vote for but the SNP. An avowedly nationalist party that doesn’t take it’s nationalism too seriously. Did it never occur to you that most of us here think that flags and the external paraphernalia of national identity are essentially a load of pish? We like to dress up in mental outfits and have a drink and a dance and a laugh. We want to escape from the prison

I’m surprised nobody here mentioned the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha wedding just before the election. Has it not occurred to any of you that voters here might have been affected by the ecstatic, almost religious veneration of icons of English nationalism? But that’s what English nationalism is. A national religion with believers in control of all your parties. A religion that prevents you from engaging with other cultures, other beliefs.

You have no idea what Scots think abut Europe? You have no idea what Scots think about anything.

. . . the prison of anglocentrism.