UK finally ends 300 years of Imperialism

[FUCK THE POLICE]

If anything it's the other way round. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were both part of the Scottish Mafia and whilst Scottish MPs can vote on English issues, English MPs cannot vote on Scottish affairs.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_mafia

It is a bit of an odd state of affairs, created by the fact that parliament granted certain regions devolved legislatures while leaving the rest under the old unified system. Labour tried to solve it by giving certain English regions devolved parliaments as well, but this turned out to be extremely unpopular (not sure why). I think the Conservatives favor simply giving English MP's exclusive rights to vote on English affairs, rather than creating a new devolved legislature for England (or English regions). But they haven't implemented it during Cameron's term. Not sure if it's just Cameron that opposes it, or if its because their Lib Dem partners won't agree to it. I suppose that, if we are to look at this cynically, the left-wing parties are averse to such policies mainly because England tends to vote Conservative.

For their part, the SNP does exclude itself from votes on purely English issues.

EDIT: Now that I look at things, it appears that the Liberal Democrats support an English Parliament, the Conservatives support English MP's voting on English issues, and Labour supports devolved parliaments for small English regions with populations roughly the size of Scotland or Wales. Because there's no agreement, you're stuck with the status quo.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

YEAH, how dare they whine about being ruled by the English.
[/sarcasm]

They aren't ruled by the English. The country is not called "England", it's called the "United Kingdom". The Scottish participate in the Union with the English, the Welsh, and the Northern Irish. And a majority of each of those countries prefer union. There are a great deal of cultural and economic ties that have emerged over the centuries, and most people realize that it would be foolish to break it apart. I think the only reason it has any serious traction at all is because the European Union would allow them to still maintain many of the benefits of union, such as the freedom to travel and work in England. Really, you're the one being the imperialist, ignorantly sticking your nose into domestic UK affairs which you have no real knowledge of.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

They aren't ruled by the English. The country is not called "England", it's called the "United Kingdom". The Scottish participate in the Union with the English, the Welsh, and the Northern Irish. And a majority of each of those countries prefer union. There are a great deal of cultural and economic ties that have emerged over the centuries, and most people realize that it would be foolish to break it apart. I think the only reason it has any serious traction at all is because the European Union would allow them to still maintain many of the benefits of union, such as the freedom to travel and work in England. Really, you're the one being the imperialist, ignorantly sticking your nose into domestic UK affairs which you have no real knowledge of.

So you consider Cromwell a benefactor and not a conquerer?

As to the rest of your inane chatter, thanks for proving that you're still an idiot.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Really, Braveheart takes a very curious stance from a historical perspective. It injects into the war between Scotland and England modern notions of ethnic nationalism (as modern authors have a tendency to do when looking back at such wars). But back in the middle ages, nationalism didn't really exist in the modern form. Things were really more about fealty to your lord, and wars mainly consisted of one set of tyrannical lords fighting against another. Neither option can truly be said to be "freedom". The proles didn't really care what the accent of their dictator happened to be.

Also, back then, change between cultures was not as drastic as it is today. It was more like it is in China, where millenia of union results in gradual cultural change over the landscape, rather than sharp changes at national borders we see in modern europe. This is because, once nationalism was invented in the 19th century, countries imposed a single nationality from the center, crushing local variations and greatly reducing cultural diversity. At the time of the French revolution, for instance, half of the country didn't even speak French. Now those regional languages are fighting for their life, with many of them now extinct.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Really, Braveheart takes a very curious stance from a historical perspective. It injects into the war between Scotland and England modern notions of ethnic nationalism (as modern authors have a tendency to do when looking back at. But back in the middle ages, nationalism didn't really exist in the modern form. Things were really more about fealty to your lord, and wars mainly consisted of one set of tyrannical lords fighting against another. Neither option can truly be said to be "freedom". The proles didn't really care what the accent of their dictator happened to be.

Also, back then, change between cultures was not as drastic as it is today. It was more like it is in China, where millenia of union results in gradual cultural change over the landscape, rather than sharp changes at national borders we see in modern europe. This is because, once nationalism was invented in the 19th century, countries imposed a single nationality from the center, crushing local variations and greatly reducing cultural diversity. At the time of the French revolution, for instance, half of the country didn't even speak French. Now those regional languages are fighting for their life, with many of them now extinct.

And........................

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

So you consider Cromwell a benefactor and not a conquerer?

I didn't take a position on Cromwell's actions. They don't change the reality on the ground today. Unwillingly separating the Scottish from the Union in order to correct an injustice you perceive to have occurred hundreds of years ago would be stupidity. It would be stupidity on the magnitude of, say, removing the Palestinians from their homeland because the Jews lived there 2000 years ago.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I didn't take a position on Cromwell's actions. They don't change the reality on the ground today. Unwillingly separating the Scottish from the Union in order to correct an injustice you perceive to have occurred hundreds of years ago would be stupidity. It would be stupidity on the magnitude of, say, removing the Palestinians from their homeland because the Jews lived there 2000 years ago.

An injustice that I "perceive"!!
So what is your perception of Cromwells behavior in "uniting" those independent countries?

 

[cancel2 2022]

They aren't ruled by the English. The country is not called "England", it's called the "United Kingdom". The Scottish participate in the Union with the English, the Welsh, and the Northern Irish. And a majority of each of those countries prefer union. There are a great deal of cultural and economic ties that have emerged over the centuries, and most people realize that it would be foolish to break it apart. I think the only reason it has any serious traction at all is because the European Union would allow them to still maintain many of the benefits of union, such as the freedom to travel and work in England. Really, you're the one being the imperialist, ignorantly sticking your nose into domestic UK affairs which you have no real knowledge of.

He basically doesn't have a clue and seems to get his history from Hollywood.

 

[cancel2 2022]

An injustice that I "perceive"!!
So what is your perception of Cromwells behavior in "uniting" those independent countries?

The funniest thing about your attempt at understanding Cromwell is that you don't seem to know that he was a Puritan and fanatically anti-royalist having Charles I executed. Puritans are often portrayed as going to the American colonies to escape religious intolerance when it was exactly the opposite. They refused to accept other religions and that strand is very much present in America today amongst right wing fundamentalist Christians. You need to look at the history of persecution of the Quakers by Puritans in New England, it is something that's not known generally.

http://thehistoricpresent.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/why-the-puritans-persecuted-quakers/

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

An injustice that I "perceive"!!
So what is your perception of Cromwells behavior in "uniting" those independent countries?

I was attempting to use "you" in a general sense. It would be stupid if I perceived an injustice as well.

Anyway, I imagine a lot of Scottish were upset at Cromwell. But mainly because of the fact that he oppressed Catholics, a fate which befell English, Welsh, and Irish Catholics as well. Religion was more important than nationality back then, with nationality only really taking primacy in the 19th century. And if you look at the state of the United Kingdom today, once it became unfashionable to treat your subjects like possessions, the Isles split based on religion, not nationality. The Catholic areas chose independence, and the ones that had converted to protestantism chose union. It's really not your place to decide for them which decision they should have made.

I don't imagine the Scottish cared that much specifically about the fact that the Scottish lord was deposed and replaced with a different one. It's not like he was on any moral high horse anyway; lords back in these days treated lands as possessions, and squabbled over them like children, only hoping to increase their own power with little concern for the cost in lives. He would have gladly taken England or any other country he had the ability to had their positions of power been reverse. The fact is that this wasn't a choice between the Scottish ruling themselves or the English ruling them. It was a choice between the Scottish being ruled by one of two people. They wouldn't get the opportunity to rule themselves until the modern age.

As to the squabbles of ancient lords, I am indifferent. It was rare that you had justice or injustice, just stupid barbarians who care nothing about anything but themselves. The level of exploitation by one peoples against another largely had to do with how powerful one was compared to the other. In the case of the protestant parts of the United Kingdom against the Catholic parts, things were very bad. The Scottish participated in this oppression as well. The Irish are perfectly justified in their resentment against the rest of the UK. In the case of Africian or American imperialism, things were downright awful. However, the English and Scottish were more even, and that's the reason you don't have the sort of historical resentment you see elsewhere. You also don't see this resentment in, for instance, France's Brittany, which was historically a seperate nation as well.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

As to the squabbles of ancient lords, I am indifferent. It was rare that you had justice or injustice, just stupid barbarians who care nothing about anything but themselves. The level of exploitation by one peoples against another largely had to do with how powerful one was compared to the other. In the case of the protestant parts of the United Kingdom against the Catholic parts, things were very bad. The Scottish participated in this oppression as well. The Irish are perfectly justified in their resentment against the rest of the UK. In the case of Africian or American imperialism, things were downright awful. However, the English and Scottish were more even, and that's the reason you don't have the sort of historical resentment you see elsewhere. You also don't see this resentment in, for instance, France's Brittany, which was historically a seperate nation as well.

It depends on whom you speak to in Brittany. There is a fairly large segment that seeks at least autonomy if not independence from France.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

He basically doesn't have a clue and seems to get his history from Hollywood.

Instead of bitching and moaning, you could always post something in opposition to what I've presented; or, you and zippy can just sit around circle jerking each other and showing the extent of your abilities.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

The funniest thing about your attempt at understanding Cromwell is that you don't seem to know that he was a Puritan and fanatically anti-royalist having Charles I executed. Puritans are often portrayed as going to the American colonies to escape religious intolerance when it was exactly the opposite. They refused to accept other religions and that strand is very much present in America today amongst right wing fundamentalist Christians. You need to look at the history of persecution of the Quakers by Puritans in New England, it is something that's not known generally.

http://thehistoricpresent.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/why-the-puritans-persecuted-quakers/

Gee, thank you for your interest it such and how well you've presented it; but this is about Scotland, England, and lately Cromwell.
Would you care to make another attempt at a cognitive exchange?

 

[Disillusioned]

IMHO This is just another sign of the growth of the radical right in Europe, you can see it in Germany, France and Italy, citizens feel their country is being lost in the shuffle as they shift into the EU, this is even more so with the sub-countries, you could call them, Bavaria, Scotland, Brittany was mentioned, northern Spain, cultures and ethnicities that are no longer countries and feel that they might lose their identity in the shift of the EU.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

IMHO This is just another sign of the growth of the radical right in Europe, you can see it in Germany, France and Italy, citizens feel their country is being lost in the shuffle as they shift into the EU, this is even more so with the sub-countries, you could call them, Bavaria, Scotland, Brittany was mentioned, northern Spain, cultures and ethnicities that are no longer countries and feel that they might lose their identity in the shift of the EU.

How is cultural individuality a sign of 'the radical right'?

 

[Disillusioned]

Hardcore patriotism, which is a synonym for facism. It's the need to exert individual cultures and make sure that they are noticed which is the sign. You'll note nobody is interested in slicing scotland into pieces. It's scotland wanting to be it's own country that is the point, making sure everyone knows they're not england, not part of england and are their OWN MEN*

*with skirts

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Hardcore patriotism, which is a synonym for facism. It's the need to exert individual cultures and make sure that they are noticed which is the sign. You'll note nobody is interested in slicing scotland into pieces. It's scotland wanting to be it's own country that is the point, making sure everyone knows they're not england, not part of england and are their OWN MEN*

*with skirts

So...independence=fascism?

 

[cancel2 2022]

IMHO This is just another sign of the growth of the radical right in Europe, you can see it in Germany, France and Italy, citizens feel their country is being lost in the shuffle as they shift into the EU, this is even more so with the sub-countries, you could call them, Bavaria, Scotland, Brittany was mentioned, northern Spain, cultures and ethnicities that are no longer countries and feel that they might lose their identity in the shift of the EU.

There is only one flaw in your argument. The Scottish National Party is left of centre, as is most of Scotland. Indeed, there is a only one Conservative MP in the whole of that country.

http://polizeros.com/2011/05/09/left-wing-populist-party-wins-huge-in-scotland/

 

[Disillusioned]

So...independence=fascism?

I love how you keep taking my comments out to text. So I'll start over again, to give you another chance to take aim.

Europe right now is going through a shift, a transition from multiple countries into a single conglomerate entity composed of hundreds of cultures, many languages and a history of violence and bloodshed. The problems come from the worry of smaller groups that their identities are being quashed into the mingling. Areas with a history of being the minority want to keep their culture and heritage, not that the EU is going to quash them but that is the fear. Now, the radical right in Europe is growing in support by adressing these issues, telling people that their country is worthwhile and better, "Germany for the Germans" is one that is going around right now in response to having to foot the bill for Greece, not wanting Arabs or other refugees in their country. In even smaller cultures, such as scotland, the fear is greater. They've been next to England for a long time, and been somewhat assimilated, now that bigger fish is being assimilated into the EU, where is scotland going to be in all that? The desire for independence is prompted by the radical right, along with other "patriotic" desires. They want to keep their culture, they want their culture to grow and become more predominant and probably more than anything else they want not to be England's kept dog.

 

[The Dude]

we conquered and rule over mexico?

Yes where u live was Mexico