Scottish Independence Talk

[mccaughey85]

10 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Apologies, you said it was naive at best to think Farage would decide our future . I tend to think he could as a ‘ straw that breaks the camels back’ kinda way, but you didn’t say it was naive to want independence 👍

I agree we are a huge asset to the UK which creates massive political pressure here, but I think the interest from the rest of the world is exaggerated. Considering everything else that is going on worldwide, should Scotland vote to leave the UK tomorrow the news would be chip paper by the weekend.

That of course is an exaggeration but it would not command headlines for months . Other countries will work round it the way they work round any change to the normal order of things.

Being fearful of political pressure is exactly what they want,  and should be one of the main reasons for people to stand up and be counted. 

He might cause the polls to shift towards independence but i doubt it will solely come down to him wether we have another referendum. 

British establishment will decide with pressure from global corporations and elites and both will put pressure on farage, assuming he becomes prime minister.

[mccaughey85]

31 minutes ago, AlfieMoon said:

Only 58% in that hypothetical scenario is quite pathetic. Not to mention that it’s soft as fvck anyway.  We’ve already seen this bogey man scenario with Boris and it has not mattered a jot. Scotland is soft and take what we’re given. 

That said, if support is edging up over time then there’s a chance we will get there at some point but I think it would be another 10-20 years. 

Scotland could be a very different place in 20 years time. English ppl moving here and immigration from abroad will have changed Scotland massively. If the immigrants from abroad support independence then theres a chance it could happen but thats a big if.

If English ppl keep moving here in large numbers then independence could die a death.

I think independence needs to happen in the next 5-10 years while Scotland is predominantly made up of Scots or it might never happen.

[TDYER63]

6 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

He might cause the polls to shift towards independence but i doubt it will solely come down to him wether we have another referendum. 

British establishment will decide with pressure from global corporations and elites and both will put pressure on farage, assuming he becomes prime minister.

Well if polls held at 60 % or more I think the decision would be out of global corporations remit. The UK would look distinctly like a dictatorship if this was constantly ignored . Especially if the last referendum was 15-20 yrs previously. 

[TDYER63]

4 minutes ago, mccaughey85 said:

Scotland could be a very different place in 20 years time. English ppl moving here and immigration from abroad will have changed Scotland massively. If the immigrants from abroad support independence then theres a chance it could happen but thats a big if.

If English ppl keep moving here in large numbers then independence could die a death.

I think independence needs to happen in the next 5-10 years while Scotland is predominantly made up of Scots or it might never happen.

Loon gets a bit of stick on here because of his concern about English people moving up here , but I think its because he talks about folk being told to come here to get benefits. I do think generally however that more and more  people moving from the rest of the UK is a genuine concern for independence . 

[mccaughey85]

7 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Well if polls held at 60 % or more I think the decision would be out of global corporations remit. The UK would look distinctly like a dictatorship if this was constantly ignored . Especially if the last referendum was 15-20 yrs previously. 

Not sure the UK would care. Good chance the last referendum was rigged and nobody gave a shit. 

The british establishment see the indy movement as a few million disgruntled peasants in the north of Britain. They know we won't cause much problem to them other than bitch and moan a bit.

[scotlad]

1 hour ago, TDYER63 said:

He probably hasn’t encountered West of Scotland sectarianism problems but has heard of them, in the same way he has heard of immigration problems, but hasnt actually encountered them. . 

I'm not sure he has heard of them. He probably knows about the situation in the North of Ireland but don't underestimate the ignorance of English people when it comes to Scottish society and culture, including the predilection in west central Scotland for the ersatz, cosplay version of Northern Irish style sectarianism favoured by the banal and the intransigent in that part of the country.

What Farage probably recognised in Sarwar's speech - the one Reform cribbed for their campaign propaganda - is an echo of how South Asian communities managed to manoeuvre themselves into positions of political power and governance in English towns and cities, particularly in the North and Midlands, and concluded that if the same thing hasn't  already happened here then it soon might. It's a potential state of affairs almost beyond the ken of the sclerotic oafs stuck in their moribund Cafflick/Proddy groove.

[Caledonian Craig]

7 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Well if polls held at 60 % or more I think the decision would be out of global corporations remit. The UK would look distinctly like a dictatorship if this was constantly ignored . Especially if the last referendum was 15-20 yrs previously. 

It is the constant goalpost changing from unionists I cannot stomach. Thatcher once said Scotland can have it's independence when it delivers a majority of pro-independence MPs in Scotland at a GE. That happened and nothing. Post 2014 referendum the rhetoric was to point to Salmond's 'once in a generation' comment so comeback in a generation for the next referendum. A generation is normally seen as 20 to 25 years so Scotland should be able to have a referendum in 2034 but I bet the goalposts will be changed again by then.

[RDFH64]

9 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Loon gets a bit of stick on here because of his concern about English people moving up here , but I think its because he talks about folk being told to come here to get benefits. I do think generally however that more and more  people moving from the rest of the UK is a genuine concern for independence . 

They shouldn’t huv had a vote in the last referendum or in the next one if it comes around.

The last referendum was loaded against a yes vote from the start & that continued throughout the whole process with big companies threatening to move head offices out of Scotland & even the queen throwing her tuppence in which wasn’t supposed to happen. The non stop scare mongering worked especially with older folk.

if Scotlands such a drain on the UK why are they so desperate to keep us under Westminsters control?

[TDYER63]

4 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

It is the constant goalpost changing from unionists I cannot stomach. Thatcher once said Scotland can have it's independence when it delivers a majority of pro-independence MPs in Scotland at a GE. That happened and nothing. Post 2014 referendum the rhetoric was to point to Salmond's 'once in a generation' comment so comeback in a generation for the next referendum. A generation is normally seen as 20 to 25 years so Scotland should be able to have a referendum in 2034 but I bet the goalposts will be changed again by then.

The once in a generation stuff is utter nonsense, otherwise why dont we only have elections once in a generation. 

2 hours ago, RDFH64 said:

 

if Scotlands such a drain on the UK why are they so desperate to keep us under Westminsters control?

The usual answer from the folk that believe we are being carried is ‘ no PM wants to be known as the person that splits up the UK’. Then when you say ‘ why not, would that person not be proven correct when England goes on to flourish without us dragging on them , and they then become a folk hero ’. 

Then there is no reply. 
 

 

[TDYER63]

10 hours ago, scotlad said:

I'm not sure he has heard of them. He probably knows about the situation in the North of Ireland but don't underestimate the ignorance of English people when it comes to Scottish society and culture, including the predilection in west central Scotland for the ersatz, cosplay version of Northern Irish style sectarianism favoured by the banal and the intransigent in that part of the country.

What Farage probably recognised in Sarwar's speech - the one Reform cribbed for their campaign propaganda - is an echo of how South Asian communities managed to manoeuvre themselves into positions of political power and governance in English towns and cities, particularly in the North and Midlands, and concluded that if the same thing hasn't  already happened here then it soon might. It's a potential state of affairs almost beyond the ken of the sclerotic oafs stuck in their moribund Cafflick/Proddy groove.

 He must know about the Rangers/Celtic background and the pantomime that goes with it, even if he hasn’t witnessed anything himself. Surely this by election will have raised the issue, assuming his staffers have done minimum research. 

[Caledonian Craig]

2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

The once in a generation stuff is utter nonsense, otherwise why dont we only have elections once in a generation. 
 

 

I agree it's a nonsense but the unionists are twisting words/meaning to make it a thing. Salmond was trying to rally people into voting in 2014 urging it was a once in a generation chance (or words to that effect) and it has since been twisted by unionists to say Salmond  said it was a once in a generation referendum. Well in any case if they are holding him (totally erroneously) to that then in 2034 we should be expecting without question a referendum as it will be a generation passed.

[TDYER63]

7 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

I agree it's a nonsense but the unionists are twisting words/meaning to make it a thing. Salmond was trying to rally people into voting in 2014 urging it was a once in a generation chance (or words to that effect) and it has since been twisted by unionists to say Salmond  said it was a once in a generation referendum. Well in any case if they are holding him (totally erroneously) to that then in 2034 we should be expecting without question a referendum as it will be a generation passed.

I could absolutely understand the once in a generation thing if support for independence had dropped into the 30’s and stayed there but its barely ever moved much below the 2014 result. Not only that , it has regularly surpassed the result and  also moved over the threshold.

I don’t care what anyone says, if support moved above 55-60 % over a sustained period there is absolutely no chance this could be ignored. It’s getting it to that sustained place thats the difficulty. It may take till 2034 till it happens, but if it happens before then the pressure will be too great. 

[RanelaghScot]

The 'once in a generation' thing gets right on my tits. If the Scottish population votes in an election for a party that promises another referendum pronto and that party wins the election then that's it, a referendum should be held.

[Caledonian Craig]

3 hours ago, RanelaghScot said:

The 'once in a generation' thing gets right on my tits. If the Scottish population votes in an election for a party that promises another referendum pronto and that party wins the election then that's it, a referendum should be held.

The Supreme Court says otherwise. It says we are too retarded to organise and hold a referendum 

[daviebee]

8 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I could absolutely understand the once in a generation thing if support for independence had dropped into the 30’s and stayed there but its barely ever moved much below the 2014 result. Not only that , it has regularly surpassed the result and  also moved over the threshold.

I don’t care what anyone says, if support moved above 55-60 % over a sustained period there is absolutely no chance this could be ignored. It’s getting it to that sustained place thats the difficulty. It may take till 2034 till it happens, but if it happens before then the pressure will be too great. 

How? The SNP will grovellingly request (REQUEST FFS!) a section 30, the English will say No and the SNP will say, "Och well, we tried. Whit can ye dae eh?"

I'd say there's not a snowball's chance in hell of the English agreeing to a referendum where they're likely to lose their cash cow.  2014 scared the sh*t out of them. (I still don't believe we lost that either.)

[Caledonian Craig]

11 minutes ago, daviebee said:

How? The SNP will grovellingly request (REQUEST FFS!) a section 30, the English will say No and the SNP will say, "Och well, we tried. Whit can ye dae eh?"

I'd say there's not a snowball's chance in hell of the English agreeing to a referendum where they're likely to lose their cash cow.  2014 scared the sh*t out of them. (I still don't believe we lost that either.)

And your solution? And do not say UDI. Alienated and not recognised globally and no position to negotiate any trade deals etc etc.

Edited June 3, 2025 by Caledonian Craig

[Ally Bongo]

9 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

And your solution? And do not say UDI. Alienated and not recognised globally and no position to negotiate any trade deals etc etc.

This is 3 years old

https://wingsoverscotland.com/how-you-do-it/

 

[TDYER63]

10 hours ago, daviebee said:

How? The SNP will grovellingly request (REQUEST FFS!) a section 30, the English will say No and the SNP will say, "Och well, we tried. Whit can ye dae eh?"

I'd say there's not a snowball's chance in hell of the English agreeing to a referendum where they're likely to lose their cash cow.  2014 scared the sh*t out of them. (I still don't believe we lost that either.)

Do you honestly think that at 60% continuous support they can keep saying ‘no’? That is a level that folk might actually feel angry about and get off their arses and protest, rather than simply complain on social media that nothing is happening. Politicians regularly have to concede to things or do U turns. And I wouldn’t discount a number of people in England supporting a Scottish referendum at those levels. There are still people out there with some integrity. But it wont happen at 50%. 

I have asked a number of times on here who gets involved in indy campaigning and its generally a big fat zero, or close to it. If people want independence they need to continuously feed the idea in order to increase support. They cant keep waiting for a bell to be rung. 

I personally think that sadly we probably did lose the referendum. There were just too many people uncommitted or scared. Where I worked there was only 3 out of 20 people voting yes so I was kinda half prepared . Still didn’t help the utter devastation I felt for months afterwards right enough. 

 

1 hour ago, Ally Bongo said:

This is 3 years old

https://wingsoverscotland.com/how-you-do-it/

 

Really? Paralysing the Scottish government is going to get us independence? This is a country whose people shat it when handed a legally binding agreed route . I dont think Wings realises that not everyone is as gung-ho as he is. Not a chance in hell that this would work unless support was  a good bit higher. 

[Toepoke]

41 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

I personally think that sadly we probably did lose the referendum. There were just too many people uncommitted or scared. Where I worked there was only 3 out of 20 people voting yes so I was kinda half prepared . Still didn’t help the utter devastation I felt for months afterwards right enough. 
 

I remember my missus took a straw poll in her office and it was even less than 3 in 20 voting Yes.

Confirmation bias would have you thinking Yes was romping it when you looked at the rallies in Glasgow compared to what Better Together drummed up. But the majority was a large and mainly silent block. Let's face it aside from loonball yoonballs not many Scots would be comfortable admitting that they would rather have the country run from elsewhere.

 

[daviebee]

53 minutes ago, TDYER63 said:

Do you honestly think that at 60% continuous support they can keep saying ‘no’? That is a level that folk might actually feel angry about and get off their arses and protest, rather than simply complain on social media that nothing is happening. Politicians regularly have to concede to things or do U turns. And I wouldn’t discount a number of people in England supporting a Scottish referendum at those levels. There are still people out there with some integrity. But it wont happen at 50%. 

I have asked a number of times on here who gets involved in indy campaigning and its generally a big fat zero, or close to it. If people want independence they need to continuously feed the idea in order to increase support. They cant keep waiting for a bell to be rung. 

I personally think that sadly we probably did lose the referendum. There were just too many people uncommitted or scared. Where I worked there was only 3 out of 20 people voting yes so I was kinda half prepared . Still didn’t help the utter devastation I felt for months afterwards right enough. 

 

Really? Paralysing the Scottish government is going to get us independence? This is a country whose people shat it when handed a legally binding agreed route . I dont think Wings realises that not everyone is as gung-ho as he is. Not a chance in hell that this would work unless support was  a good bit higher. 

Seriously???  OF COURSE THEY WOULD!  Theirs is an establishment that still think they run half the globe, with a built-in superiority complex, who had no problem enslaving millions while extracting trillions from them.  They're quite proud of it in fact and many of them long to have these days back.  They absolutely cannot afford to let us go and will do anything to "keep her fast".

The reason I have doubts about the referendum is simply because of the lack of exit polls.  When I got to our polling station before it even opened it was mobbed with folk waiting to vote Yes, absolutely mobbed.  The postal vote done us and the discrepancy would've been glaringly obvious.  Postal returns were suspiciously high and anyone who thinks they couldn't have been easily rigged is pretty naive tbh.

[daviebee]

11 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

And your solution? And do not say UDI. Alienated and not recognised globally and no position to negotiate any trade deals etc etc.

I don't have one.  I just know that if I'm banging my head against a brick wall it feels good when I stop.

I'm interested in hearing more about what Salvo and Liberate Scotland have to offer and the latest "all or nothing" idea on Wings is pretty good.  The SNP are trough-swilling grifters though who are making an easy living off the back of the pro-indy vote.  They need to GTF out the way and let a real movement take over.  Could you imagine these fkin idiots negotiating independence anyway?  They'd be more interested in having a proportionate number of trannies on their committee.

[Caledonian Craig]

17 minutes ago, daviebee said:

They'd be more interested in having a proportionate number of trannies on their committee.

Grand bit of stereotyping there. I get lots canvassing for SNP and never seen one transvestite. Your view is mainly because like Spain and Denmark (rated the happiest country in the world to live)the SNP supported rights for transgenders. I do not see anyone rating Spaniards and Danes as loons.

[daviebee]

3 hours ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Grand bit of stereotyping there. I get lots canvassing for SNP and never seen one transvestite. Your view is mainly because like Spain and Denmark (rated the happiest country in the world to live)the SNP supported rights for transgenders. I do not see anyone rating Spaniards and Danes as loons.

They already had all the rights they could possibly want or need.  The problem is that they wanted even more than that.  You surely can't disagree that the SNP got sidetracked from their supposed reason for existing by that madness?

Anyway, that's derailing the thread a bit.  If anyone has an idea other than the English will suddenly cave in just because we want something and - well... "That'd just be cricket, old boy," then I'm all ears.

[scotlad]

4 hours ago, Toepoke said:

I remember my missus took a straw poll in her office and it was even less than 3 in 20 voting Yes.

Confirmation bias would have you thinking Yes was romping it when you looked at the rallies in Glasgow compared to what Better Together drummed up. But the majority was a large and mainly silent block. Let's face it aside from loonball yoonballs not many Scots would be comfortable admitting that they would rather have the country run from elsewhere.

 

I can't say that's been my experience. I've tended to find No voters to be a lot more vocal about their leanings than independence supporters. 

[scotlad]

16 hours ago, daviebee said:

How? The SNP will grovellingly request (REQUEST FFS!) a section 30, the English will say No and the SNP will say, "Och well, we tried. Whit can ye dae eh?"

I'd say there's not a snowball's chance in hell of the English agreeing to a referendum where they're likely to lose their cash cow.  2014 scared the sh*t out of them. (I still don't believe we lost that either.)

Sadly, you're right. They only agreed to a referendum last time because 1) they thought they'd skoosh it; and 2) if they'd refused they knew Salmond, having recently won the Holyrood election handsomely and with political momentum on his side, would have raised merry hell if they'd refused.

Nowadays, however, they're facing a much, much tamer incarnation of the SNP, one led by managerial types possessing little to no apparent vision or strategy either to achieve independence or to get the new state off the ground.

The only set of circumstances I can think of where a WM government might, might agree to another referendum would be as part of a deal if there was a hung parliament and, say, Labour needed the support of the SNP to remain in government; and even then I wouldn't trust the current SNP to hold their ground and insist on those terms.