@Jez No! This debate would have been far worse if they didn't have their parliament. It would be fodder to the separatists.

@terdon oh right, so the separatists would have an even better chance of an independent Scotland?

But imagine how great the fights will be at football matches after Scotland secedes.

@Cerberus I guessed as much. Hence stale kiwis (since the fresh ones are in new Zealand, obviously)

Or...the ones shipped thither grew stale!

Three months in a ship does not make one happy.

@Jez No. That's what I meant by "cosmetic". In Spain for example, there was a huge scandal because the Catalans wanted their own national team to compete in hockey of all sports. They were denied it and that fanned the nationalist flame.

@terdon I'm still waiting for a Newer Zealand. That one will be fresh.

Had they been allowed to, the extremists would have been mollified. The same applies to having the Scots have their parliament.

@terdon aaaand.... they formed their own country?

oh wait no, they're still Spain

@Jez They're currently trying.

i predict they will fail

Just like the Scots actually but with less sense.

less sense? how?

seriously, you've gotta be kidding me. you're actually arguing that a Union that was perfectly peaceful, with a few minor social problems, stood a worse chance of holding together if a Scottish parliament hadn't been introduced

that is just false

@Alraxite have you reset your sleep cycle yet?

unless the Scots were openly marching on Westminster, the parliament was going to make separation and nationalist sentiment more likely

@Jez Yes, I am. Think of the parliament and similar perks as safety valves.

@IceBoy I think so.

It takes away the complaint of "Man, we don't even get to have a parliament in this bleedin union".

I've been awake the whole day, so yes.

@terdon a safety valve that can result in the breakup of the union is ... well it's not a safety valve

If Scotland secedes, I wonder how long it will be before England blames America for kicking off the whole independence-from-Britain thing.

@terdon yes, and it replaces it with "we have a parliament, we have a flag. fuck it, let's be a full country"

@Jez I fail to see why you link the two.

@Alraxite now all you need is a good sleep and your set :-)

@Jez Again, that sentiment has been there for centuries.

@terdon link what two?

@terdon In this case, quite possibly. But it depends. Sometimes repression is more effective than mollification, it depends on many factors.

The existence of parliament and separatism.

@terdon nope, because they didnt have a parliament for centuries

@Robusto Are you secretly chuckling?

@IceBoy yes, I should be!

@terdon well um, because the parliament is what is allowing them to have the option of separating?

@Cerberus Did that seem secret to you?

@Jez Oh come on! As though that was needed, what they can't talk to each other? Use twitter?

@Robusto For an American, you were being reserved.

Parliament gives a feeling of independence without the actual thing. It can be a placebo.

@terdon of course it was needed! how else would they separate? they would need a full-blown armed rebellion, which wasn't on the cards

Thereby taking some wind out of the extremist's sails.

@Cerberus For which American was I being reserved? Or perhaps you meant preserved?

@Jez You don't need a parliament for a plebiscite!

You didn't say "I love you" or "I'm going to blow your head off", which I know are the customary American phrases for "very well" and "you might want to reconsider".

@terdon no, you need an armed rebellion. ask yourself this: how many Scots who vote yes would be prepared to take up arms against the British army?

@Robusto Your behaviour was reserved, for an American. Had you been a Brit, it would not have seemed reserved.

@Cerberus Normally it takes me longer to get to the nuclear option.

and how many would survive and actually win?

@Robusto But I want fireworks!

@Jez Ask yourself this. Would you really, in the 21st century support sending troops to kill people simply 'cause they don't want to be part of your country?

Seriously?

@terdon i don't think it would come to that.

that's the point

@Jez Not many. But a few are enough to be very disruptive, cf. the IRA.

almost nobody would be prepared to rebel like that

Because they'd be massacred?

You actually think this is a good argument?

everyone says the IRA are terrorists. so would they about a few Scots separatist terrorists (which didn't exist, by the way)

Anyway, my point is that separatist sentiment in Scotland predates their parliament by several hundred years. If anything, the parliament kept the issue from coming up earlier.

considering the massive economic shitstorm that will hit if Scotland separates, i'd consider that worth fighting a few separatists for frankly

the public good would be better served

@Jez The English good you mean.

@terdon lol! the parliament has been around like 10 years

If the Scots leave, maybe the Irish will join :)

it put it off by 5 years? wow incredible

@Jez Precisely.

@terdon no. i strongly suspect Scotland will suffer more with an exodus of businesses

basically, i think both sides will suffer

it's a serious mistake

@Jez Perhaps. Probably even. It is still their choice to make.

@Cerberus You'll have to wait till Independence Day for that.

@terdon Quite possibly.

@ter what's your nationality?

@Robusto Yay!

How is that relevant?

im interested

Greek and US.

@terdon living in the US?

The Ottomans should have quelled the Greek revolt!

Living in France at the moment. Never lived in the US.

@Cerberus They tried... :P

Jon Purdy has a new picture.

quells Terdon

refuses to be quelled

gives Terdon a parliament

@terdon France huh? ok well if Brittany had a full-on separatist movement, maybe not you, but I bet a ton of French people would be strongly inclined to say "non"

Quelled at last

whether the Bretons liked it or not

That was easy!

@Jez Of course they would. So?

@Cerberus :)

How do you feel about rich neighbourhoods of cities declaring independence? Do they deserve their autonomy?

Point is that, morally, you have no right to force a people into your political union.

@terdon so, bit of a double-standard. it's "the scots' decision to make" but not the bretons...

We talked about this earlier when you weren't there.

@Cerberus Damn straight. But they have to leave their riches behind.

How?

@Jez Of course it's theirs to make! That's my point.

Their riches are theirs.

@terdon i think your view is highly atypical. most people have a much stronger sense of patriotism than you do, and view separatism as a personal slight

"your nation isnt good enough for us"

@Jez That's called nationalism.

@Jez No, "your nation occupied us, killing many of us in the process, and has been bleeding us dry ever since". I'm not saying all of that is necessarily true mind you, but that's the position.

I am so Q@##$^% sick and tired of the same #$%^#^$$# idiot question every @#$#$ day.

MAKE IT STOP!!!!!

@tchrist Morning Tom. Have you had your coffee yet?

@terdon no. in fact, none of it is remotely true.

@tchrist Relax. It is just someone on the internet.

@Jez Weeeell. The first two bits are. The bleeding dry is arguable but it was certainly true at times in the past.

I want a canonical question to close all these against.

@terdon there's been give and take over hundreds of years which is what you'd expect from a united nation

and why are England and Wales better integrated? i say it's because Wales doesn't have a parliament, what's your explanation?

@Jez Of course there has. All I'm saying is that Scotland was, in fact, occupied by the English. A long, long time ago, but occupied nevertheless. And the Scots have never really gotten over that.

@terdon heh

@Jez Very, but very different peoples.

??

Different mentalities. The Scots got their parliament because they'd been clamoring for one. The Welsh hadn't, ergo...

But that's my point. All these sentiments predate the Scottish parliament.

i went up to scotland as part of my job last year. we drove up, on one road, and i barely noticed we were in what could become another "country". the accents were different but that's about it. calling England and Scotland "very different" betrays imho a massive misunderstanding of the situation

England and Scotland are pretty damn close, in every sense of the word

what the problem is is nationalists driving the wedge and knowing how to manipulate public opinion

@Jez Ummm. I find the character of the two nations very different actually. The Scots are more exuberant than the English by and large, and the geography is strikingly different. There are actually mountains in Scotland!

@terdon so a kid is clamouring for a chainsaw. do you give him one?

@Jez That might be a tad patronizing dontcha think?

@terdon well that's not my experience and i bloody well live here

@Jez Fair enough. It was mine when I lived there.

@terdon nope, considering they were by and large considering Westminster as their parliament before Blair gave in

they have Scottish constituencies and everything!

Calling them kids clamoring for chainsaws is the patronizing bit.

firstly, "they" is the nationalists, not all Scots. second, yeah a chainsaw is destructive. the Scots parliament is destructive to British national unity.

they could have been given devolution that didnt allow full separation

or frankly, no devolution. i bet the situation now would not be full-scale rebellion

@Jez You keep repeating that but have only provided post hoc ergo propter hoc evidence for it.

I am not convinced of the relevance of the parliament.

@tchrist You are taking out your anger at someone who doesn't deserve it. Don't blame one man for what an army did.

the parliament gave them the legal right to separate from the UK

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the Scots have been part of the UK (or variations thereof) for more than 500 years and yet still want independence.

before that they didn't have that legal right

who would've conducted the independence referendum? the Scottish Terrorist Organization?

@Jez Not sure about that. In any case, it's irrelevant. They had the desire legalities notwithstanding and that desire is what is causing trouble.

@Jez The SNP for example. Any group of people well enough organized to do so.

depends how you define "trouble". i define it as "separation", not "desire for separation".

they could've held a referendum, sure. but no-one would've given a crap.

and legally it would mean nothing

it would basically be a survey

Politics is so boring.

and crazy

@WillHunting are you in Hong Kong or Singapore?

@Jez S.

@Jez actually, as far as I know, the legalities are still not quite clear. What is perfectly clear is the morality. If a group of people really don't want to be part of your nation, you have no right to force them.

@WillHunting Hong Kong would've made for a better example. Increased Chinese meddling in its affairs is going to fuck it over in a few decades IMHO

@Jez I already said the whole world should come under me.

@terdon so, Abraham Lincoln was a terrible person then? he forced half the US to stay.

@Jez It's bad enough here. I can't even buy chewing gum.

you can't buy it now? i thought you just couldn't spit it out on the street

@Jez It is not allowed to be sold here.

@Jez You can't spit anything on the street.

@WillHunting so they've tightened that law up then?

@Jez In a way, yes. Though there were other considerations in that particular case. For starters, there weren't two different nations with a different language and several hundred years of history behind them.

@Jez It has always been like that for a long time, I think.

@terdon "in a way Lincoln was a terrible person", good luck selling that one.

@Jez So you're saying that prior to their having parliament, they didn't have proper legal governance over their own affairs? They were subjugated by a foreign power, who wouldn't let them leave if they wanted to? That barring having a parliament, there was no way for them to organize and demand separation? That, but for Scottish parliament, there was no other possible way for them to legally separate?

sometimes, a people's desire to be independent is wrongheaded and based on lies and misinformation. i say in that case, it is reasonable to ignore their desires and override them

@Jez Most "great" figures of history would be labeled horrible, murdering bastards today. All those to whom the epithet "the great" has been applied for example.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 pretty much, yes. except for the "foreign power" part. that's like calling DC a "foreign power" over California

@Jez Wow. OK, so fascist regime?

@Jez Mother knows best, as they say.

@Mahnax mother often does know best.

as do calmer heads in Scotland itself

shame they get shouted down

@Jez Well, actually, California used to be owned by the Spanish.

@Mahnax Hi! How is school?

@WillHunting It's going well, thank you! How are you?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 right, that strengthens my point. even considering that, it's ludicrous to call DC a foreign power over it. right?

England is most certainly perceived as foreign! How could it not be?

Less so today obviously but historically speaking...

@Jez Depends on who's calling whom a foreign power.

@terdon well, it would not be if Scotland had been properly integrated as a region.

@Jez How distinctly authoritarian.

Is there any question but that England and Scotland are two separate nations?

as i mentioned earlier

@Mahnax I feel better these few days. I really hope to start studying math next and get totally well by the end of next year.

@Jez You can't just undo centuries of history.

no, i mourn it

@WillHunting Great! I'm glad to hear that. I wish you luck. Where do you hope to study?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 More's the pity.

@Mahnax UCLA is one of my top choices. I will probably apply to some of the other UC's too as they are mostly good.

In the new world, new nations were formed from colonies and we still ended up with the American Civil War and Quebec separatism. Not to mention the American revolution and Canadian independence.

@WillHunting Great!

Why aren't you mourning the loss of Canada and the rest of the Empire, Jez?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 because God didn't use the command pattern. it's just sloppy, really.

@WillHunting You should look into MIT as well, hehe.

@Mahnax So have you thought of what you wanna do after you graduate?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 geographically, it makes more sense for Canada (and Australia) to be independent. i'll accept that.

@MattЭллен God's got a lot to answer for, now that we're seeing the code.

@WillHunting I have some ideas, but it'll take time to decide.

geographically, it's braindead for Scotland to be independent. i want to be able to drive up there ffs

without showing my passport

@Arrowfar Age criteria for grad school? Why would there be?

i also want to easily be able to do business there by being a British citizen

@Jez So... geographically, should Canada be part of the US? Should Europe be all one country? Really, the UK should just join Europe and become one big nation.

Geographically, it would make sense.

@Mahnax OK. Are you and Maria getting married anytime soon?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 yeah but you take a bunch of factors into account. geography, language, culture, religion, etc.

obviously europe doesnt work for all of them

@Jez history....

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 yeah. that one i'd love to eliminate.

@Jez As braindead as France or Italy or Spain. Or as having Ireland which is a whole separate island be part of the same country.

@Arrowfar You can go there at any age, as long as you get in.

totally irrational

I mean, seriously, Jez, there have been Scottish separatists since before the UK was a thing.

^^^

@terdon Ireland should be part of Britain :-)

@WillHunting Goodness, no.

we let it go, for reasons beyond my comprehension

@Jez But why? By your own argument, that's "geographically braindead".

Scotland and England have fought wars over which dude gets to wear a crown, because they cared so much about such abstract concepts

Let alone things like the Falklands or Gibraltar.

And then eventually they ended up both with the same dude with two crowns

and for anyone who talks about the oh-so-terrible morality of crushing a small rebellion, look at what Putin did in Chechnya... and yet a ton of people admire the guy for being strong.

I have no design to be married until I have—at the very least—a career.

so explain that.

It's basically political maneuvering that brought them together, and a shared delusion that royal bloodlines are important.

@Mahnax Your academic career has already begun!

@Jez Well, that's a straw-man argument. I think he should have let the Chechnyans go. I fully supported them until they started being terrorists. Now I support neither.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 so nothing to do with its being sensilble and useful for the peoples of Britain to be able to live and work together, speak the same language, etc? then

@WillHunting But until it starts paying me ten or more times what I'm paying it, I won't get married.

@Mahnax I see. I only hope that I am not too old to find a Maria when I get there. I hope to get married there and live there happily ever after...

Heyy y'all!

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 ah. so all you have to do is not give in. if we'd not given scotland a parliament, their only recourse for independence would be terrorism, and then you'd not support them. what was I saying, @terdon?

@Jez Speaking the same language? That hasn't always been the case. Living together? They don't exactly. Work together? Lots of nations work together. By your argument Canada should be part of the US, Belgium shouldn't exist, and Austria and Germany should be one country.

Hello

@Jez Once again, post hoc ergo propter hoc.

@Jez Your conclusion is fallacious. It's a false dichotomy.

@WillHunting It's never too late!

Just because they have a parliament doesn't mean that gives them some kind of legal right to separate. Most nations don't have any process for that, for obv reasons.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 very easy for an American to say from thons ivory tower. how would you feel if California wanted to secede? how would your countrymen feel?

@Mahnax Are you working part time?

@WillHunting I'm working 30 hours a week.

I wouldn't support people planting bombs for independence. Hell, I don't even think it's a good idea for Scotland to secede. All I support is their right to do so if they please.

@Jez I'm sure he couldn't care less!

Just because a region doesn't have a parliament doesn't imply that they don't have legal representation which would give them a voice in government to demand secession.

Exactly.

@Jez Um, I'm Canadian.

@terdon Is there no limit to this right?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 americans, canadians, all the same. :-D

@Mahnax Are you sure you can focus on your studies at the same time?

@Cerberus Not really, no. I don't believe in forcing people(s) into political unions.

@WillHunting Sure.

@terdon Not even individual families?

@Jez Yeah, I guess as a Canadian of mixed Ontarian/Quebecois heritage I have zero perspective on the whole separatism issue. Must be talking out my ass...

mmm, we just had 3 cute girls giving us krispy kreme doughnuts

@Cerberus No, I'm talking about large, homogeneous groups. Nations if you like.

@terdon I mean if a family wants to secede from a country.

Consider the situation in Canada: we have 11 parliaments here. One federal, 10 provincial.

@Cerberus I know, that's why I specified large groups. Basically, nations. A people.

Quebec doesn't have its own federal parliament that's different from the regular one.

@Jez Get their numbers.

So when they have some kind of separatist thing going, they elect MPs from a seperatist party called the Bloc Quebecois.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 And I'd bet that giving them one would go a long way towards calming the separatists.

@WillHunting no! get their doughnuts!

Adios, folks.

later

@Mahnax CU

@WillHunting too late, heh

@MattЭллен Geezis, I wonder what kind of donut...

@terdon No, we give them other things instead. The federal government lets them do some things differently, like income tax is different there.

@WillHunting jam

@MattЭллен A donut has a hole, so... lol

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 OK. That's my point really, just give them enough to make them feel good about themselves.

@terdon either that, or the parliament would be holding an independence referendum in a decade and seceding.

But the point is, they demand things, we sometimes give it to them. If they demanded to leave, we'd probably let them.

@Jez We've had several referendums.

@WillHunting Sorry, but I'm going to have to flag that NOT!!!

The last one, in 1993, was 50.5% stay vs 49.5% go.

Cue The Clash.

It was a tense moment.

And guess what? They're still here.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 we've had zero. so you can see why i have reason to believe we wouldn't be having one now were it not for that damn parliament

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That is so close.

@Jez It doesn't take a parliament to organize a referendum. If they were serious about seceding and didn't have their own parliament, they'd just fill England's parliament with separatist MPs.

@Jez If there is enough support for secession, you would probably have been facing armed rebellion down the road. As has happened before in so many countries. What makes you think that sans parliament, everything would be hunky dory? These feelings did not evolve over the last decade.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Or that.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 "fill"? hahaha, the most they could muster would be 10 or 20

And if they don't have enough MPs to get anything done in England's parliament, then that is PROOF that they are not being heard.

Proof that they are not being served.

Exactly.

> Since 1973 there have been ten referendums held in the UK, the majority of them have been related to the issue of devolution. The first UK-wide referendum was held in 1975 on the United Kingdom’s continued membership of the European Community (European Union).

Proof that they should separate.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 or that they demand more influence that they should reasonably get.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 BS. does any one state in Canada or the US have massive influence over the national parliament?

Proof to them that they should separate.

@Jez Don't people have a right to self-governance?

@Jez Not applicable. England does in the UK.

@MattЭллен I never really think of the UK as being part of Europe, lol.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 depends how small you go, doesn't it? at some point, the answer is "no". my street can't just secede from England.

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 no. we are all subservient to our robot masters

it's just where you draw the line

@Jez Well, the US is still fighting the civil war in some ways. But in Canada, there are lots of people who complain that Quebec gets too much preferential treatment.

@WillHunting a lot of people would prefer that to be true (not me though)

@terdon Oh, okay. So where does the limit lie, then? Presumably the city of Amsterdam shouldn't be allowed to secede, it being too small? About 2 million people if you take the whole conurbation.

@MattЭллен I still think it is best to let me rule the world.

@Jez So you draw the line at the coast, and others draw the line at the historic boundary between Scotland and England. Why are you automatically right?

@WillHunting I see. You'll forgive me if I disagree :D

@MattЭллен You can be my assistant.

@Cerberus Can't say off the top of my head. I'd need to think about it more. In principle though, if you don't want to be in my party, I can't force you.

@WillHunting thanks :D

@Cerberus Why couldn't it secede?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 the coast is at least less arbitrary. there's a real barrier there to actually moving further. the line on the map is invisible when you're walking past it.

I am waiting for easy questions to answer.

@Jez That's true of just about any border in the world. Less so in Scotland actually. The landscape does change up north.

combine that with the same language, similar culture, similar religion, and massive history of integration, and my position makes a lot more sense

@terdon In general, that is also my point of view. However, if 60% of a region vote for independence, 40% are left in the lurch. They may be the victims of problems that ensue from the independence.

@terdon not at the line drawn on the map it doesn't.

@Jez Not the same language! That is one of the things that was imposed.

it's not drawn along a mountain range or a river

@Jez Not precisely, no. But again, that's true for most borders and cannot be used as an argument.

@terdon so what, it's the same now. that also applies (in a BIG way) to France, which is one country.

@Cerberus I agree. it seems unfair to just thrust it upon folks

@Jez You're forgetting the massive history of dissatisfaction with the forced integration.

@Jez Yes, and they have finally allowed the other languages back. They suppressed them until a few years ago.

@terdon yeah, and they should've continued to do so. spitoon

@Jez You can't be serious!

they know full well English and other widely-spoken languages are much more useful to learn than Welsh

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, I have two arguments: 1. a city seceded from the surrounding country will profit immensely from the latter and contribute nothing to it. 2. It's never 100% of the people of Amsterdam who are in favour: a large minority may suffer from negative consequences.

i certainly am

Forcing people to not speak their own language is a hallmark of oppressive, nationalistic regimes.

i see more languages as just a barrier to human communication

Spoken as a person who only speaks one.

And that one happens to be the current lingua franca.

@terdon i speak 2, actually

sort of.

@MattЭллен Or at least that makes it less simple. I'm still not sure I wouldn't allow them to do so, but it isn't as simple as saying "that is what the people want".

More languages enhance communication. You just need to learn them, that's all.

@Jez I see more languages as a way for people to express themselves.

Anyway, "usefulness" is irrelevant. I want the right to speak the language I feel most comfortable in.

If I rule the world, everyone will speak only one language.

@MattЭллен because they cant just add new words to English to express themselves that way

@Cerberus Well, the city profiting from the country and contributing nothing; that's not really relevant in my opinion. If the city votes to leave, why shouldn't it be allowed, regardless of the outcome? People should have a right to form their own tribes. The second argument is a better one; at what threshold do you determine that right?

@Cerberus exactly.

@Jez because they don't speak English, right.

Yes, most (all?) Scots have English as their mother tongue but that was not always the case and is not the case in other places (Spain for example).

@Jez sorry, I meantin general. I wasn't referring to the Scottish issue

Attempting to eradicate a language is one of the most heinous crimes possible.

@Jez More languages might be a barrier to communication. But forcing people to use a particular language usually makes them hostile to you rather than happy with you.

@terdon That sounds extreme.

@WillHunting Why? A language is an entire culture, history and way of thought made manifest. Losing one is a tragedy, killing one is a crime.