by Simon 109 Replies latest jw friends
We had this debate already.
The Tories argued that the 2014 referendum settles it and we should move on. They lost the election in Scotland.
The SNP argued that we need another vote because the circumstances have changed. They won the election.
If we accept democracy that settles it, we will have a referendum. Or what is the point of having any more elections in Scotland? No matter how Scotland votes it can’t have a referendum? Democracy?
" They lost the election in Scotland"
Who cares! It was a UK election. The Tories won emphatically. That was the election that everyone in the UK, including Scotland, were voting for.
The SNP pretending that they are already independent of the UK that Scotland voted to remain in back in 2014 is where the lack of respect for democracy lies.
Take a hard look in the mirror before crying about the lack of democracy.
Who cares? People in Scotland care, obviously. Johnson won the UK election but he lost in Scotland. He needs to accept that. The UK position has always been that Scotland can become independent if it wants to, until now. Has that position changed?
The SNP are not arguing that Scotland is already independent, otherwise we would not send MPs to Westminster or accept Johnson as prime minister. We accept the 2014 referendum. The SNP argued that Scots should have the right to have their say whether we want to be independent in view of being taken out of the EU against our will, and they won the election. (Four elections since 2016, in fact) If they lost the election we wouldn’t be having the conversation. But they won. If democracy means anything that means we have a referendum.
If Scotland voting for another referendum is not good enough grounds for another referendum, should we stop having elections in Scotland? What’s the point?
"If Scotland voting for another referendum is not good enough grounds for another referendum, should we stop having elections in Scotland? What’s the point?"
And if you are not going to respect a democratic vote just because things move on then you are violating democracy and have no basis for complaint.
Scotland respected the result of 2014 by not becoming independent. We still send MPs to Westminster and have not declared independence. Scotland will not become independent unless the people vote for it.
Democracy doesn’t mean people can’t vote differently in the future.
People who think 2014 is the end of the matter are free to argue and vote for that position. If they won the election there would be no referendum. The unionist parties argued for that position and they lost. The SNP argued that another referendum is needed and they won. Is that mandate going to be respected or not?
Is Scotland free to choose to be independent or not?
If voting for a referendum doesn’t mean we have a referendum, should Scotland stop having elections? What’s the point of us having elections?
People in Scotland are paying attention to this. We voted to stay in the UK in 2014. We did not vote to give up any right to have a say on our future no matter what happens. If that’s what the Westminster thinks the referendum means, then Scots are not going to make that mistake next time. We will vote for independence in a landslide.
" If voting for a referendum doesn’t mean we have a referendum, should Scotland stop having elections?"
The UK didn't vote for another referendum.
Not all people voting for the SNP were voting for a second Scottish referendum. Brexit was the major factor in the UK elections. So there is no way of knowing if those who voted SNP were actually voting for another chance for independence.
I think the SNP should stop adding things to an election that were not pertinent to a UK election vote.
Riding the wave of Remain has backfired. Sturgeon was banking on using a Remain Coalition in order to overturn brexit and at the same time force through her agenda for a second Scottish referendum.
It didn't happen. She now needs to respect the democratic vote made by the entire UK.
If you can't respect democracy you can hardly complain about it.
Is Scotland free to choose to be independent or not?
Define "Scotland". Presumably you mean the electorate, because there isn't some country wide consciousness. But saying "Scotland" makes it sound like it's will is being denied. The reality is it's a disparate collection of people, and most, when asked, chose the status they have now.
Are those people free to be able to make a choice and then have it followed, without someone coming back to them again, and again, and again, until they get the option they want?
A referendum for things like leaving the EU and the union or joining a different one should be a once-in-20-year type decision. It can't be endless flip-flopping.
A referendum for things like leaving the EU and the union or joining a different one should be a once-in-20-year type decision. It can't be endless flip-flopping.
As I said, it took a war for the US to figure this out. The problem is you can't run a country when people think they can decide to pick up their marbles and go play somewhere else every time somebody does something they don't like. Being a good citizen in a democracy sometimes means you live with decisions you don't like because you got outvoted. Twenty years is way too close together, if you're going to allow it at all.
Twenty years is way too close together, if you're going to allow it at all.
Agreed. We went into Europe, we were in for 45+ years (?) then we changed our minds. The people clamouring for a recount the month after simply had no respect for democracy or even of basic practicalities - constant swapping would be worse than whatever the worse of the other two options would be.
No doubt the rabble rioting in London because the election didn't go there way make up some of their number.
I'm struggling to remember when the conservative side rioted and marched in the street after an election didn't go their way ... on either side of the pond. Violence in the streets seems to be a penchant of the left.
