PDA

View Full Version : Scotland Versus England



Tabitha
Sunday, June 25th, 2006, 12:55 PM
What are your thoughts on Scotland's refusal to support England in the World Cup? Personally I think it's ridiculous and results of the lack of confidence among the Scots & the First Minister hasn't helped by refusing to support the England team.
This has led to a number of racial attacks, one on a disabled man and one on a seven year old boy who were wearing English football tops.
When the Scots fail to reach the World Cup,why can't we then get behind another British team?

RedJack
Sunday, June 25th, 2006, 08:45 PM
I wondered that myself. I'd support Wales or Scotland if England was out of it.

Angelcynn Beorn
Thursday, July 6th, 2006, 11:26 PM
I'm not that bothered by it. I was quite happy to return the compliment by laughing my arse off as Andrew Murray got knocked out of wimbledon. ;)

The attack on the child, on the other hand, was so far out of order it's not even funny.

Gesta Bellica
Friday, July 7th, 2006, 08:01 PM
Morally i understand their choice as i don't support Italy that much as well (being Northern italian and having just 3 players out of 23 from northern Italy in the team).
if iw as Scottish i would not care about England

Neverthless physical attacks are not acceptable, expecially for a futile reason like a football competition that surely won't change the destiny of a nation..even in case of final victory

VilhelMina
Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, 09:56 PM
I would not go so far as to call them racist attacks. Nationality perhaps.

Regardless, there is no need to go out and attack someone over this tripe. It really is a shame.

Glynd Eastŵd
Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, 10:32 PM
It's strange that the Scots feel so resentful towards the English. They were granted independence, after all.

I can remember watching a BBC news segment which took place during the world cup, where a reporter drove a car adorned with English flags and symbols through some working-class area of Glasgow. Within a few minutes a few Scottish youths smashed in all the windows and started jumping up and down on top of it.

In Wales we couldn't care less. Most Welsh people I know were openly supporting England in the World Cup - Wales didn't qualify this year. The others who claimed that they weren't probably were supporting them silently. I went to the local pub to watch most of the matches, and many people were wearing English football jerseys without any problem at all. There were even some English flags draped next to the TV.

I'm a quarter English, but I think we should all support a British team where possible. I don't understand the mentality behind attacking vulnerable English people. There is a lot of poverty and drugs in areas of Scotland, but even so, that can't be blamed on the English. And it's pretty deplorable to attack children and the disabled. I don't understand this 'thuggish' behaviour by the Scots.

OneEnglishNorman
Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, 11:03 PM
The perception in England overall, seems to be that the Welsh have a healthier pride in their nationalism, and they are keeping the Welsh language alive which most would see as positive.

The Scottish on the other hand are perceived as having a chip on their shoulder and defining themselves in terms of (in opposition to) the English. The Scottish concentrate on their military history at the espense of England, instead of a broader understanding. I suppose Scottish nationalism could be seen as excessively masculine and violent.

By contrast, the Welsh are seen as placid and good-natured, if a little eccentric. There is no real invective behind Welsh jokes.

IMHO if Wales were in the World Cup and England were not, then most English would support Wales. But far less English would support Scotland in the same situation.

RedJack
Wednesday, July 26th, 2006, 10:01 PM
I think we should all support a British team where possible.

Absolutely, we're all British, after all. And that's a mighty fine thing to be. I'm all in favour of each nation preserving it's unique culture, but we should stand together when the chips are down. :thumbup

germanic
Thursday, September 21st, 2006, 06:38 PM
As an Englishman I will always put England first, However as a Brit I will also support my fellow British nations, including Scotland. As a white man I will support every other white nation on earth.

When English or Scots attack one another it is NOT RACIAL. We are of the same stock so how can it be racial, it may be cultural, but certainly not racial. If a Jamaican attacked a Sierra Leonian, that wouldnt be racial either.

The anti-White anti-English media is to blame for stiring troubel between the white people. They are using a divide and conquer tactic. Together we a powerful and they know it.

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL

UNITE THE WHITE CLANS OF THE WORLD, WHERE EVER THEY MAY BE

Oxenfoord
Friday, November 10th, 2006, 02:38 PM
I subscribe to the same view as most of the above offerings. We are all in it together and should support each other. I should add that Scotland doesn't have independence as stated by one contributor. Unless the nation takes collective leave of its senses, I hope that we will remain British. I certainly will regardless.

It is an ignorance of what and who we are that causes half the problems we suffer from right now. Bringing people into the country with totally different value judgements, culture, language and religion, for example, is one reason why we currently have hundreds of potential terrorists here masquerading (and, worse, being described by the Press) as 'British'. They do not consider themselves British, so why should we?

Bhreac
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 06:22 AM
Ok OK I really try to keep my responses high brow buit now i'm angered... NO we are not british NOwe should not recognize nor support anything british...we should reject all things british and remember that it is them that keeps the scottish flag off the books and only refers to the British Iles without any recognition of our seperate nation. They refuse to recognize officaly our parlamant,and every time I get near a brit here in the states all I here are insults at our expense! I refuse to accept anyones opinion of us as subjegate to the brits and frankly tabitha your remarks shock me from one who claims to be a real scot!? now I truly doubt you are anything scottish! I was raised to be proud of my heritage my history my familys past! and none of that involves favoring anything brittish!they only hang on to us now cause we discovered oil off the nor shores of wess! money grubbing theives!!!
See what happens when you rile a scott who considers himself no expatriot but in every way still a homelander!!Just look around you at home and see what britain has done to our city's our economy! it is them that constantly fingers around in our affairs just like in Ireland and in India and all other countrys they've mussed around in,fine examples all. I am sickened by what Ive read here today!

OneEnglishNorman
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 08:39 AM
Ok OK I really try to keep my responses high brow

A promising start!


buit now i'm angered... NO we are not british NOwe should not recognize nor support anything british...Firstly who is the "we" if you are American. Secondly, the Scottish are of the same stock as the English. Some Scottish support a political relationship with England, some do not.

I would remind you that the biggest instigators behind English-Scottish union have been the Scottish ruling classes. And in England today, all 3 major political leaders are born in Scotland or of Scottish descent, the PM & Chancellor both born in Scotland, Speaker of the House of Commons, Lord Chancellor and so on and so on.


we should reject all things british and remember that it is them that keeps the scottish flag off the books and only refers to the British Iles without any recognition of our seperate nation. They refuse to recognize officaly our parlamant,If you are going to insult the British Isles try spelling it correctly. Of course Scotland is recognised as a nation. Scotland has a devolved parliament which is recognised and possesses many delegated powers. This is what the Scottish voted for. If the Scottish vote for full independence that is what they will get. The English are holding nothing back.


and every time I get near a brit here in the states all I here are insults at our expense! I refuse to accept anyones opinion of us as subjegate to the britsThat's because you are a humourless cretin who cannot take a good-natured ribbing.

The Scottish do not need your help and they are not oppressed; they are not mono-toothed village idiots, sat on haystacks, chomping haggis and sipping Irn Bru.


and frankly tabitha your remarks shock me from one who claims to be a real scot!? now I truly doubt you are anything scottish!Haaaaaaa.....


I was raised to be proud of my heritageGot the Braveheart DVD as a Christmas present?


my history my familys past! and none of that involves favoring anything brittish!they only hang on to us now cause we discovered oil off the nor shores of wess! money grubbing theives!!!So if the Scottish vote for independence, that will be denied to them? You are seriously misguided.

You can keep the oil..... the English desire only Scottish babies, eaten after a slow flame grill.....


See what happens when you rile a scott who considers himself no expatriot but in every way still a homelander!!Just look around you at home and see what britain has done to our city's our economy!That would be welfarism, drugs & alcohol to be precise.


it is them that constantly fingers around in our affairs just like in Ireland and in India and all other countrys they've mussed around in,fine examples all. I am sickened by what Ive read here today!Yes, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, Hong Kong, South Africa, really are blights upon the world, aren't they? The English should have stayed at home and left things to the Conquistadors, Nazis & Imperial Japan, they treated foreigners uniquely well compared to the English...

Kaiser
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 09:38 AM
This has led to a number of racial attacks, ?

Not "racial" Lassie, merely nationalistic.



if iw as Scottish i would not care about England



Racial brothers and sisters should care for each other the world over. For "England" the government, however, not in the least.


It's strange that the Scots feel so resentful towards the English. They were granted independence, after all.



"Granted?" Oh how egalitarian of you Dear. How about the Scottish people earned independence? Or better yet, they simply deserve their independence like all free White peoples deserve liberty. Especially so too do our White brothers and sisters in South Africa deserve independence from being exterminated by the negroidal monsters as we speak. If there is going to be immigrants granted port to Mother England, how about our desperate White Afrikaners and White Boers instead of swarms of swarthy muslim pakies?


The Scottish concentrate on their military history at the espense of England, instead of a broader understanding. I suppose Scottish nationalism could be seen as excessively masculine and violent.



The Warrior Culture of Scottland is to be applauded by our White Kin worldwide. Not demonized by politically castrated geldings. Don't get too homosexual on us here, You One Fake Hetro you! Hahahaha.

Here is my sentiments on this whole ordeal.

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=680754#post680754


AND

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=681807#post681807

I love ALL our White people. The Scotts who did this misdead which Tabitha posted of course should be gutted, de-nutted, and quartered to the four parts of Britain. BY THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE THEMSELVES no less! Where is the pride in eliminating the scum from our own cultural stock anymore? Nevertheless, I will be representing the good Scottish Folks in tomorrow's Veteran's Parade dressed in full regalia, kilt, sporan, and all. No, One Fake Saxon, you may not peek up me kilt to answer that age old question. Need I say more?

Melenios
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 11:33 AM
I beleive that Scottish are going to be England's most loyal allies by the time they will manage to gain their independence.
They are simply too proud to accept the second class citizen status they've given by the English ruled British state from the day of the union till today.

Glynd Eastŵd
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 12:37 PM
It always amazes me when people in America act as though they have a better understanding of the situation in Europe than we. If you're Scottish, then your heritage is intrinsicly linked to the other British nations, however much you might despise them, so it's kind of dumb to distance yourself from them. You should be proud of your British heritage and identity, as well as Scottish. Speaking for myself, I was taught about Welsh, English and Scottish history at school. If Scottish culture is fading then you only have the Scottish youth to blame. Besides, it was the Scots, who weren't forced by the English, that signed the Act of Union in 1707, which technically bound them to English and hence British parliament.


"Granted?" Oh how egalitarian of you Dear. How about the Scottish people earned independence?

I used that diction because they WERE granted their independence. If Edward I had wanted to, he could've still occupied Scotland, but at such an expense that he granted them freedom. They did earn it, but that's beside the point. They were eventually granted independence, I wasn't trying to be pompous like you make out, just stating what happened.

Oswiu
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 01:11 PM
Got the Braveheart DVD as a Christmas present?
He missed the end;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkIP8sa1DTE
;)

Tabitha
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 02:35 PM
20mg of intravenous diazepam before you post might work well for you.

Distance, it is said, will make the heart grow fonder and I appreciate your defence of the old land, but the majority of Scots are quite content with the union and appreciate the benefits that it has brought to the country. Your image of Scotland is rose-tinted and unfortunately we are not all striding around manfully in our kilts, chewing on freshly caught haggis and lamenting the subjugation of our bonnie hills and glens by the modern successor of Edward 'Hammer of the Scots'.






frankly tabitha your remarks shock me from one who claims to be a real scot!? now I truly doubt you are anything scottish!

Milesian
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 02:52 PM
What are your thoughts on Scotland's refusal to support England in the World Cup?
I think it's their right to choose who they want to support.
Why get upset about football?


Personally I think it's ridiculous and results of the lack of confidence among the Scots
So if they don't support England there must be something wrong with them?
Interesting theory


& the First Minister hasn't helped by refusing to support the England team.
Yes, perhaps he should be legally obliged to upon penalty of death for High Treason to Her Majesty's government?


This has led to a number of racial attacks, one on a disabled man and one on a seven year old boy who were wearing English football tops.
Scottish and English people have assaulted each other for millenia.
This incident was condemnable but I can't say it's either new or suprising



When the Scots fail to reach the World Cup,why can't we then get behind another British team?
Maybe because they don't like England or what it stands for?
In any case, is it really that important to England that they see others supporting them? If so, one wonders who really has the "lack of confidence" here ;)


I wondered that myself. I'd support Wales or Scotland if England was out of it.


So the whole of Scotland has to return the favour?
People will support who they want. Some Scottish people do support England's football team, more don't. It's entirely upto the individual.

I sense a persecution complex here.


I'm not that bothered by it. I was quite happy to return the compliment by laughing my arse off as Andrew Murray got knocked out of wimbledon. ;)

A sensible attitude, Jamopy :)


The attack on the child, on the other hand, was so far out of order it's not even funny.

Yes, that was out of order indeed.

OneEnglishNorman
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:01 PM
Maybe because they don't like England or what it stands for?
In any case, is it really that important to England that they see others supporting them? If so, one wonders who really has the "lack of confidence" here ;)

No dis-respect to Tabitha but 1) she's Scottish and 2) female, so maybe she doesn't appreciate the macho football rivalry. The English would never or rarely support a Welsh team, but that does not impair the affection and interest (and trading harmless jokes) for the Welsh on behalf of the English.


Scottish and English people have assaulted each other for millenia.That's obviously rubbish outside of formal armed conflict and border raids. Millions of Scots & English co-exist on a peaceful basis across the British Isles.

To assume otherwise is just a fantasy existing in the heads of partisan Irish Americans or Scottish Americans or whatever, wallowing in self-righteousness. Just an unhealthy self-identity which exists in a perpetual cycle of victimhood and rabble-rousing, topped off with cheesy cultural icons (Guinness / leprechauns / itchy jumpers etc etc etc).

Genuinely, the last thing these Americans (fortunately a minority of the great Americans) want is for Scotland & Ireland to exist as normal nations with no outstanding issues, because then these plastic nationalists would have nothing to whinge about.

Milesian
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:03 PM
It's strange that the Scots feel so resentful towards the English. They were granted independence, after all.
When did this happen?


I can remember watching a BBC news segment which took place during the world cup, where a reporter drove a car adorned with English flags and symbols through some working-class area of Glasgow. Within a few minutes a few Scottish youths smashed in all the windows and started jumping up and down on top of it.
What's more interesting is why a BBC reporter felt the need to drive throughout some of the most underprivilged areas of Scotland while trying to provoke a negative reaction. The amusing thing is that most places he went people just ignored him, laughed, or maybe just drew their eyes off him.
As I heard, it actually took quite a bit of effort to finally get this reaction.

Now why would this reporter for the British Propoganda Service have went to all this (considerable) trouble in the first place?



I'm a quarter English, but I think we should all support a British team where possible.
Why does Britain have four teams anyway when every other country is permitted only one?


I don't understand the mentality behind attacking vulnerable English people.
Despite living in Wales? That's suprising.


There is a lot of poverty and drugs in areas of Scotland, but even so, that can't be blamed on the English.
Do you think hat's the reason for their dislike? They blame England on their poverty and drug problems?


And it's pretty deplorable to attack children and the disabled.
Yes, it is


I don't understand this 'thuggish' behaviour by the Scots.
Try following English soccer fans on their escapades and riots throughout Europe if you want to see real thuggish behaviour.
The Tartan Army have recieved awards from football authorities for their fans exemplary conduct. I can't quite seem to remember the last time English fans earned something similar........:)

Tabitha
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:08 PM
:D
My sisters both married Englishmen, we have the best rammies at the Scotland V England football games.



No dis-respect to Tabitha but 1) she's Scottish and 2) female, so maybe she doesn't appreciate the macho football rivalry. The English would never or rarely support a Welsh team, but that does not impair the affection and interest (and trading harmless jokes) for the Welsh on behalf of the English.

That's obviously rubbish outside of formal armed conflict and border raids. Millions of Scots & English co-exist on a peaceful basis across the British Isles.

To assume otherwise is just a fantasy existing in the heads of partisan Irish Americans or Scottish Americans or whatever, wallowing in self-righteousness. Just an unhealthy self-identity which exists in a perpetual cycle of victimhood and rabble-rousing, topped off with cheesy cultural icons (Guinness / leprechauns / itchy jumpers etc etc etc).

Genuinely, the last thing these Americans (fortunately a minority of the great Americans) want is for Scotland & Ireland to exist as normal nations with no outstanding issues, because then these plastic nationalists would have nothing to whinge about.

Not at all Milesian but the casualty department of our biggest hospital that night was full of Englishmen who had been attacked by Scots, we are known for our violent subculture and I do think that the First Minister should lead by example.

I respect & admire those Scots who favour independence, they have strong arguments and good hearts but it's just not an opinion which I share.





So if they don't support England there must be something wrong with them?
Interesting theory


Yes, perhaps he should be legally obliged to upon penalty of death for High Treason to Her Majesty's government?


Scottish and English people have assaulted each other for millenia.
This incident was condemnable but I can't say it's either new or suprising



Maybe because they don't like England or what it stands for?
In any case, is it really that important to England that they see others supporting them? If so, one wonders who really has the "lack of confidence" here ;)

Fortis_in_Arduis
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:20 PM
I am with Tabitha and One Fake Saxon.

There are some Scottish Nationalists who I respect. However the sort of nonsense we are debating here is morons who are really just anti-British without realising why.

British Nationalists are also opposed to the British State. The enemy is the City of London generally and the Bank of England in particular.

If the Scottish people really wanted full independence then they would also want to have a separate economy. If the Scottish National Party is to be seen as the expression of Scottish national feeling, then it is a very funny one, with its pro-EU liberal economic agenda.

The Conservatives have always encouraged Scots to be patriotic and maintain their own national institutions.

Many of the memorials to William Wallace and other figures were put up around Scotland's cities by Unionists. Scottish people have been free to be patriotic within the context of the Union.

I believe that the union is important for strategic reasons.

I am ostensibly 'English' with Scottish, English and Austrian ancestry and when I occassionally encounter anti-English sentiment, it generally comes from Scottish Leftists or people who simply have no idea what the real issues are and have watched 'Braveheart'.

One of the things which has kept Scotland distinct from England is Scottish Freemasonry which is separate from English Freemasonry.

Scotland expresses herself through her culture and national institutions and the most pro-Scottish political party in Scotland, apart fom the BNP is the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party.

The SNP, who want independence believe that the solution to Scotland's falling birthrate is to encourage more immigration.

Milesian
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:22 PM
No dis-respect to Tabitha but 1) she's Scottish
I don't understand your point here


and 2) female, so maybe she doesn't appreciate the macho football rivalry.
Maybe she doesn't appreciate macho rivalry, but I give her enough credit to assume she can understand why a Scottish person might choose not to support the English national team, unless she's been living in isolation her entire life. I don't seriously believe anyone could go through life in Scotland failing to understand that, regardless of whether they agree with it or not.


The English would never or rarely support a Welsh team, but that does not impair the affection and interest (and trading harmless jokes) for the Welsh on behalf of the English.
Hmmm....


That's obviously rubbish outside of formal armed conflict and border raids.
For that statement to be true, English and Scots would have to have never been involved in fights with each other outside of warfare. I can tell you that is incorrect even if I base it solely on my last trip abroad to a popular tourist resort which resulted in a small riot between Scots and English holidaymakers


Millions of Scots & English co-exist on a peaceful basis across the British Isles.
The joys of multiculturalism ;)


To assume otherwise is just a fantasy existing in the heads of partisan Irish Americans or Scottish Americans or whatever, wallowing in self-righteousness. Just an unhealthy self-identity which exists in a perpetual cycle of victimhood and rabble-rousing, topped off with cheesy cultural icons (Guinness / leprechauns / itchy jumpers etc etc etc).
I couldn't honestly tell you what goes on in the heads of Irish-Americans or Scottish Americans. I'm not sure what the patronising remarks about Irish culture is either. Is this the same affection you mentioned above about the Welsh? Perhaps as an Englishman you don't realise it, but Welsh, Scots and Irish are almost daily subjected to such gently mocking & patronising tones masquerading under the titles of "affection".
Most don't appreciate it either


Genuinely, the last thing these Americans (fortunately a minority of the great Americans) want is for Scotland & Ireland to exist as normal nations with no outstanding issues, because then these plastic nationalists would have nothing to whinge about.
Let's give the Americans a break for a moment, and instead talk about the people involved in this whole "British" farce instead.

Tabitha
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:29 PM
Milesian,


Perhaps I should have been more succint in my post - it was one of my first on Skadi - however what I don't understand is the venom and violence that goes along with the anti-English sentiment.



I don't understand your point here


Maybe she doesn't appreciate macho rivalry, but I give her enough credit to assume she can understand why a Scottish person might choose not to support the English national team, unless she's been living in isolation her entire life. I don't seriously believe anyone could go through life in Scotland failing to understand that, regardless of whether they agree with it or not.


Hmmm....


For that statement to be true, English and Scots would have to have never been involved in fights with each other outside of warfare. I can tell you that is incorrect even if I base it solely on my last trip abroad to a popular tourist resort which resulted in a small riot between Scots and English holidaymakers


The joys of multiculturalism ;)


I couldn't honestly tell you what goes on in the heads of Irish-Americans or Scottish Americans. I'm not sure what the patronising remarks about Irish culture is either. Is this the same affection you mentioned above about the Welsh? Perhaps as an Englishman you don't realise it, but Welsh, Scots and Irish are almost daily subjected to such gently mocking & patronising tones masquerading under the titles of "affection".
Most don't appreciate it either


Let's give the Americans a break for a moment, and instead talk about the people involved in this whole "British" farce instead.

Thruthheim
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:36 PM
It's silly bickering like this, it makes me think we need to create and emphasise a great feeling of Native British Identity, similiar to that of Austria-Germany or Scandinavia. Afterall, We share the same Island.

Milesian
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:37 PM
Not at all Milesian but the casualty department of our biggest hospital that night was full of Englishmen who had been attacked by Scots,
That's really is something indeed. Mine wasn't, I'm pretty sure, but if you want me to confirm that then I can easily do so (my friend's wife is a nurse there)


we are known for our violent subculture
Scotland doesn't have a problem with casuals or football hooligans anywhere near to the same extent as England does. Scottish football fans don't get banned by UEFA from travelling abroad.


and I do think that the First Minister should lead by example.
Why? Was he out assaulting English people too?


I respect & admire those Scots who favour independence, they have strong arguments and good hearts but it's just not an opinion which I share.
That's fine. But let's not try and insinuate there is something wrong with them in that case.

Milesian
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:42 PM
I am with Tabitha and One Fake Saxon.

There are some Scottish Nationalists who I respect. However the sort of nonsense we are debating here is morons who are really just anti-British without realising why.

So being opposed to the concept of Britain makes one a moron?



British Nationalists are also opposed to the British State. The enemy is the City of London generally and the Bank of England in particular.
The history of Britain begins with Jewish bankers in Amsterdam being allowed to set up the Bank of England and the City of London corporation in support for King William's army usurping the throne.
You can't dissacoiate the two.



The Conservatives have always encouraged Scots to be patriotic and maintain their own national institutions.
Yes, so long as it's all done safely within the context of the Union


Many of the memorials to William Wallace and other figures were put up around Scotland's cities by Unionists. Scottish people have been free to be patriotic within the context of the Union.
See above


I believe that the union is important for strategic reasons.
Agreed, but we are probably thinking along different lines here


I am ostensibly 'English' with Scottish, English and Austrian ancestry ......

One of the things which has kept Scotland distinct from England is Scottish Freemasonry which is separate from English Freemasonry.

Yes, I suspected as much. you're remarks here have confirmed my suspicions, thank you.



The SNP, who want independence believe that the solution to Scotland's falling birthrate is to encourage more immigration.The SNP are as Nationaist as the BNP - ie. they aren't

Nordgau
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:44 PM
It's silly bickering like this, it makes me think we need to create and emphasise a great feeling of Native British Identity, similiar to that of Austria-Germany or Scandinavia.

Austria is a politically detached part of Germany with the FRG-Austrian state border being no ethnic border at all. That is not really equal to the overarching super-national Scandinavian identity the Northern Germanics have.

Tabitha
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 03:44 PM
Well, I really hadn't intended to do that.

And I'm quite sure that you can work out what I meant by wishing that our First Minister lead by example in a week full of attacks on the English by Scots.




Why? Was he out assaulting English people too?


That's fine. But let's not try and insinuate there is something wrong with them in that case.

OneEnglishNorman
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 04:13 PM
I can tell you that is incorrect even if I base it solely on my last trip abroad to a popular tourist resort which resulted in a small riot between Scots and English holidaymakers

So it's incorrect based on one anecdote in a boozed-up holiday resort. In day to day life the English and Scots are not at each other's throats.


Perhaps as an Englishman you don't realise it, but Welsh, Scots and Irish are almost daily subjected to such gently mocking & patronising tones masquerading under the titles of "affection".
Most don't appreciate it eitherThey should put up with it. If they are offended, then that is good, they could grow tougher skins.


Let's give the Americans a break for a moment, and instead talk about the people involved in this whole "British" farce instead.Not a farce, just a political arrangement. The Scottish nationalists I've heard dismiss the UK then immediately throw their hats in the EU ring. Nothing is sacrosanct about political ties.

Personally I am sceptical about a "United Kingdom". I think separation for each constituent nation is better on a number of grounds. This definitely includes independence for Ulster Protestants if they want it, and the Cornish also.

Ĉmeric
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 05:15 PM
A promising start!

Firstly who is the "we" if you are American. Secondly, the Scottish are of the same stock as the English. Some Scottish support a political relationship with England, some do not.

I would remind you that the biggest instigators behind English-Scottish union have been the Scottish ruling classes. And in England today, all 3 major political leaders are born in Scotland or of Scottish descent, the PM & Chancellor both born in Scotland, Speaker of the House of Commons, Lord Chancellor and so on and so on.

If you are going to insult the British Isles try spelling it correctly. Of course Scotland is recognised as a nation. Scotland has a devolved parliament which is recognised and possesses many delegated powers. This is what the Scottish voted for. If the Scottish vote for full independence that is what they will get. The English are holding nothing back.

That's because you are a humourless cretin who cannot take a good-natured ribbing.

The Scottish do not need your help and they are not oppressed; they are not mono-toothed village idiots, sat on haystacks, chomping haggis and sipping Irn Bru.

Got the Braveheart DVD as a Christmas present?

Bhreac mentioned being born in Scotland in another thread. I checked his public profile were under autobiography it says "born in Scotland" so I guess Bhreac is entitled to be opinionated on matters concerning Scotland as he is not just a Scots-American who has never set foot in Scotland but an actual native of Scotland with firsthand knowledge of the situation there. Of course that does'nt mean I agree with him.

Thruthheim
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 05:26 PM
Alot on this thread, seems just like an excuse to bash the English. IMO.

Oswiu
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 05:28 PM
Not a farce, just a political arrangement.
:-O
A holy of holies, more like!
Ynys Gadarn, Albion, Britannia! The Bonny Bunch O Roses - O! The Isles of the West. Hesperides, where Kronos reigned last. Numenor!

If two bunches of knights and nobles decide where an imaginary line is drawn across a randomly chosen stretch of heather and bracken in the Cheviots, sooner or later you get a few idiots on one side thinking it's the be all and end all of existence. The poor fools don't realise that half of them are more closely related by language, culture, blood and history with those on the immediate other side of this imaginary line than the other half of their 'countrymen'. Educated people should be doing their best to spread awareness of these ethnic ties, not stirring up trouble in support of irresponsible simplifications of history.

Fortis_in_Arduis
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 05:42 PM
So being opposed to the concept of Britain makes one a moron?

Why would you suggest that? :P Who even said that? :P


The history of Britain begins with Jewish bankers in Amsterdam being allowed to set up the Bank of England and the City of London corporation in support for King William's army usurping the throne.
You can't dissacoiate the two.

Yes, but the Orange-Jew banker connection is a tired old story.

I am more interested in discussing realistic solutions such as credit unions, co-operatives, co-operative homeschooling and co-housing schemes.

Nationalist ecomomics. That is the solution.

We are not going to defeat the BOE by complaining about William of Orange and 'the Jews' are we?

It is possible that 'the English' who are more numerous than any other ethnic group in the UK may generate the will to rectify the problem.

Economic secession is vital if Scotland is going to remain Scottish, but people seem to be ever so quiet about that. I think that it would be possible to create some sort of national economy.


Yes, so long as it's all done safely within the context of the Union

Would you prefer civil war? Scotland's population is tiny compared to that of England. Give me a break...

Incidentally, I do not agree with what they did nor why they did it. I am not an Orange/Cromwell/Queenie/Churchill/Rothschild etc. fan either.

Also, you know what the problem is, but still you moan about 'the English' instead of encouraging them (the English) to form a resistance, which is maybe Scotland's only hope.

So weak.


Agreed, but we are probably thinking along different lines here

Are you so sure of that? Oh yeah, I worship the Queen and Churchill and Cromwell and the Union Flag every day - I don't think.


Yes, I suspected as much. you're remarks here have confirmed my suspicions, thank you.

Well, so it would seem, 'suspicions' have been raised about Tabitha's provenance too... Shocking! :)


The SNP are as Nationaist as the BNP - ie. they aren't

Ok so what is the solution?

I shall not be holding my breath... :P

Hey, I have another idea Milesian. Why not start a discussion about something else.

Like, why did Sinn Fein turn Marxist? Hahahahahaha....

Ĉmeric
Saturday, November 11th, 2006, 06:18 PM
I have a couple of questions about Scotland. I know the Shetland Islands are part of Scotland but they were originally a crown dependency of Norway along with the Faroe Islands & the Orkneys. The people were Norse. Are the people of the Shetlands in favor of Scottish indepedence or do they favor remaining with the United Kingdom? Do the Shetlanders consider themselves to be Scottish? The reason I ask is because one of the arguments in favor of Scottish indepedence is that Westminster is receiving oil & gas royalties that rightfully belong to Scotland. But a very large part of those Oilfields are in the territorial waters of the Shetlands. If the Shetlands were independent it would be one of the wealthiest countries in the world on a percapital basis.

Kaiser
Sunday, November 12th, 2006, 12:17 PM
:-O
Educated people should be doing their best to spread awareness of these ethnic ties, not stirring up trouble in support of irresponsible simplifications of history.

Amen Bruder!

I don't know what happened to one of my posts? But I talked about this especially. Maybe it is good that it didn't show up for all to see for who knows how many typing erors there may have been. I was a bit inebriated, >burp< having thrown an intense party with some marine friends of mine, and one Scottish sailor, after the Veteran's Day parade. You should have seen the local mexican illegal alien populace upon seeing drunk men in kilts and camoflage walking brazingly down the street. In the liquor store the mexicans all herded over away from us to one side of the store and were dumbfounded at the sight. We must have looked like aliens from another planet to these lowly beasts. Ha!

Anyway, it is O.K. to celebrate and appreciate different cultures, customs, lands, national idiosyncrasies, languages, and religions to an extent. I love doing this! The liberal mantra of "celebrating cultural diversity" should not mean celebrating racial diversity at the expense of Whites. We should not have our children placing negroidal, mexican, arabic, or other foreign racial cultures ahead of our own racial Family. We should instead be enjoying Viking, Nordic, Euro, Irish, Scottish, British, Greek, Italian, American, German Oktoberfest, Scandinavian, Sons of Norway, Russian, Sons of the Confederacy Fests. As long as we are not so divisive racially amongst ourselves that we illuminate our own racial demise through ignorance. We are differnet branches from the same racial tree. The branch that hangs over the wall is from the same tree as old as the branch which hangs over the garden.

Bhreac
Sunday, November 12th, 2006, 10:16 PM
As far as the oil question between scotland and the shetlands ...I believe that despite being scottish myself,nevertheless whatever shore line it is closer to would be my choice of whom is the owner, that is as long as the profits do no go to england! This is what i was refering to the last post when I discussed there tyranny. The fact that the oil or natural gas profits never see any part of scotland nor the isles! it all goes to support the @#$#@^% queen! or some other part of englands bueracracy that I as a scott have never nor ever intend to support morally ethically nor any other way!this is why I disagree with the statement that there is any argument as to our need to succed from england when ewe as a people to my knowledge have never once agreed that we were part of england!As to onefakesaxxon well I must agree that at least youve done your homework as well as have had the brightness to question but not belittle my heritage ...as for your question as to my lineage or place of birth,I was born of the clan Buchanan in the highlands of lomand "Benlomand, Lochlomand" to be exact! There fore I am indeed aware of much of my countrys history but no it does not make me an authority, so there!Keep in mind also that despite my reaction in anger,I still have not and hope never to have cause, to hold the english people responsible for the governments tyranny! I only rect personnally to those who take it upon themselves to support such misguided beliefs that scotland should be part of britain at all. It is and always will be my belief that we are or should be not only FREE but recognized as a seperate nation! This no matter any moaning or whining fron the brits( which is usually over lost monies any how! and once and for all I will never recognize myself as an X patriot! I love my homeland and will always fight for her! To the comment that we are a fighting people or warrior like people...I say simply Thank You.
but please not that we have not however invaded any one unless in reaction to bieng invaded first! We fight because it has been ingrained in us to do so and i believe no excuses are necessary !

Oswiu
Sunday, November 12th, 2006, 11:17 PM
we as a people to my knowledge have never once agreed that we were part of england!
Edinburgh is not called 'Dunedin' by its inhabitants, precisely because it was named by Englishmen, and is still inhabited mostly by their descendants. You don't appreciate how intertwined the very ethnic make up of your country is with England. You don't just suddenly walk over the border into a completely different world, you know! Our peoples are intimately related. Englishmen conquered Dyn Eitin which they renamed Edinburgh from Welsh speakers, long before a Scottish King's power had penetrated into the Lowlands from the heartland of Argyle [where the Scots first landed from their earlier home of Ulster in the 5th Century]. All modern Scotland south of the Clyde-Forth isthmus was an integral part of the Anglian Kingdom of Northumbria [extending all the way down to Manchester and Hull], from around 600 to 900 AD. That's why you speak English rather than Gaelic or Welsh.

I was born of the clan Buchanan in the highlands of lomand "Benlomand, Lochlomand" to be exact!
Rather odd that you don't spell it LomOnd, then. :shrug

I still have not and hope never to have cause, to hold the english people responsible for the governments tyranny!
:thumbup

I only rect personnally to those who take it upon themselves to support such misguided beliefs that scotland should be part of britain at all.
Britain is an island. You can't stop being a part of it until you dig a canal through it. Whether or not you ought to be in one state with us is another matter, but one which hasn't mass support north or south of the border. The English probably suffer most anyway, from the West Lothian Question - your MPs vote on purely English matters, whereas English MPs are now unable to dictate purely Scottish internal affairs. :(

It is and always will be my belief that we are or should be not only FREE but recognized as a seperate nation!
You are a separate nation. You never were nor could have been swallowed up in our nation, so long as you preserved the Scottish identity.

please not that we have not however invaded any one unless in reaction to bieng invaded first! We fight because it has been ingrained in us to do so and i believe no excuses are necessary !
Aedan Mac Gabran came over to kick the English out of Lothian, where the latter had established themselves first. An entirely unprovoked attack, which got him his arse kicked at the Battle of Degsastan in the early 600s.
And later,


The territory of Lothian (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lothian) (that is, what is today south east Scotland (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Scotland) between the Tweed (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Tweed) and the Forth (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Firth%20of%20Forth) had been part of the northern kingdom of Northumbria (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Northumbria) from the mid seventh century until that fateful year of 867, when the Danes (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Dane) conquered York (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=York) and established their own kingdom of Jorvik (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Jorvik). By the early ninth century, in northern Northumbria (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Northumbria) former Bernicia (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Bernicia), the dynasty of the Lords of Bamburgh (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lordship%20of%20Bamburgh) maintained a dignified semi-independence. But cut off from their fellow English (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=English) they were unable to resist pressure from the north where the kings of the Scots (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=king%20of%20the%20Scots) pursued their own territorial ambitions southwards. By 962 the Scots (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Scots) had captured Edinburgh (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Edinburgh) and much of Lothian (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lothian) had fallen under the sway of these new kings of the north; with the loss of Lothian the Lords of Bamburgh (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lordship%20of%20Bamburgh) were keen to retain the southern half of their domain, the Scots (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Scots) were equally keen to extand their territories southwards.
The Battle of Carham occured in the year 1018.
On one side was Malcolm II (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Malcolm%20II) king of the Scots, with the support of Eoghain the Bald (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Eoghain%20the%20Bald) the king of Strathclyde (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=king%20of%20Strathclyde), talking advantage of the absence of the reigning Cnut (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Cnut) who was in Denmark, to press his claims for sovereignty over the Lordship of Bamburgh (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lordship%20of%20Bamburgh). On the other side were the Northumbrians (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Northumbrian) were under the leadership of Eadulf Cudel (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Eadulf%20Cudel) the reigning Lord of Bamburgh who is said to have levied all Northumbrian (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Northumbrian) men north of the Tees (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Tees) in order to resist the invasion. (And probably hoping that victory might being with it an opportunity to recover Lothian (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Lothian).)
No details regarding the actual battle itself appear to have survived, but despite the death of Eoghain the Bald (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Eoghain%20the%20Bald), the Scots (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Scots) won and the English (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=English) lost. So devastating was the defeat that It is said the Aldhun (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Aldhun), the Bishop of Durham (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Bishop%20of%20Durham), died heartbroken on hearing the news.

RedJack
Monday, November 13th, 2006, 12:52 AM
So the whole of Scotland has to return the favour?
People will support who they want. Some Scottish people do support England's football team, more don't. It's entirely upto the individual.

I sense a persecution complex here.

And I sense a load of blarney. I'm out of line to wonder about the attitude of my fellow Britishers but an Irishman has every right to be opinionated on the subject? :thumbdown

Fortis_in_Arduis
Tuesday, November 14th, 2006, 12:59 PM
I have a couple of questions about Scotland. I know the Shetland Islands are part of Scotland but they were originally a crown dependency of Norway along with the Faroe Islands & the Orkneys. The people were Norse. Are the people of the Shetlands in favor of Scottish indepedence or do they favor remaining with the United Kingdom? Do the Shetlanders consider themselves to be Scottish?

People from the Orkneys and the Shetland Islands are different. They have a slight Norwegian accent, and a more Troender appearance. The best way to manage this difference in culture is to allow more regional autonomy, encourage local economy. They are not that much different from folk in the rest of North-East Scotland, but their culture is unique. I have liked everyone I have ever met from Faroes, Shetlands and Orkney.



The SSP (the Scottish Socialist Party) has become popular up there, which is quite worrying, but then, bear in mind that the further people are from the cities the more innocent and unknowing they tend to become.


The reason I ask is because one of the arguments in favor of Scottish indepedence is that Westminster is receiving oil & gas royalties that rightfully belong to Scotland. But a very large part of those Oilfields are in the territorial waters of the Shetlands. If the Shetlands were independent it would be one of the wealthiest countries in the world on a percapital basis.

The European Union is developing a European defence force. I do not want this. I believe that the Union could be militarily and strategically useful for all British people if the political economy of Britain could be nationalised.

However, it is true that if Scotland's oil wealth were to be kept within Scotland there would be a lot of money floating around. However, the current batch of Scot Nats would not nationalise Scotland's oil industry or even bring it under closer regulation.

I'll think a bit more on ths one... I am in favour of more localised economies, so I am favourable to economic secession for Scotland, but it needs careful thought.

Carl
Wednesday, November 15th, 2006, 06:09 PM
Edinburgh is not called 'Dunedin' by its inhabitants, precisely because it was named by Englishmen, and is still inhabited mostly by their descendants. You don't appreciate how intertwined the very ethnic make up of your country is with England. You don't just suddenly walk over the border into a completely different world, you know! Our peoples are intimately related. Englishmen conquered Dyn Eitin which they renamed Edinburgh from Welsh speakers, long before a Scottish King's power had penetrated into the Lowlands from the heartland of Argyle [where the Scots first landed from their earlier home of Ulster in the 5th Century]. All modern Scotland south of the Clyde-Forth isthmus was an integral part of the Anglian Kingdom of Northumbria [extending all the way down to Manchester and Hull], from around 600 to 900 AD. That's why you speak English rather than Gaelic or Welsh.


That makes sense! But I'd still like to see it clarified a bit "for the record" ;) . The Angles first settled in the northeast. They presumably encountered the native "Britons" there and treated with them variously. When they all settled down, they also spoke the Britons' language ( the Angles called it Welsh too???) And They even invited "Celtic" Saints from the West to the East Coast!

I know that the west lowland remained Britonic - and wasn't (Southern) StrathClyde the true land of the ancients? But did the borders in the east (below Edinburgh ) also remain mixed in speech / folc ?


NOW OSweee - I'm looking for a cool sort of reply - not one of your OTT jobs which so betrays the non-Angle element in your make-up! :2XPray

Oswiu
Thursday, November 16th, 2006, 12:32 AM
That makes sense! But I'd still like to see it clarified a bit "for the record" ;) . The Angles first settled in the northeast. They presumably encountered the native "Britons" there and treated with them variously.
Double yep.

When they all settled down, they also spoke the Britons' language ( the Angles called it Welsh too???)
Nope.

And They even invited "Celtic" Saints from the West to the East Coast!
Irish Saints, not Welsh. There seems to have been a lot of unsurprising ill feeling between the immediate neighbours. Bede mentions this, when he says the Welsh refused to proselytise to the invaders.

I know that the west lowland remained Britonic - and wasn't (Southern) StrathClyde the true land of the ancients?
Don't pay any attention to modern boundaries of absurd 'regions' like 'Strathclyde'. The original never stretched so far north. Your 'south Strathclyde' IS Strathclyde!

The Clyde Valley itself remained Welsh well into the Middle Ages, but look at the placenames elsewhere in the west, and you'll see more a fusion of Welsh and English - Kirkcudbright, for instance; a Germanic noun [hardened by later Norse use] and a Germanic name, arranged in a Celtic word order. Just over the border, see Birdoswald [the Roman fort on Hadrian's Wall formerly known as Camboglanna, and possibly the prototype for Arthurian Camlann]; Welsh Buarth [hut, enclosure] with a Germanic name, in Celtic order. Also in Cumberland, look at the stress patterns in Carlisle and Penrith; despite the obvious Welshness of the names, the locals give them initial stress [or at least they did when the old books I read were written!] as in Germanic.

But did the borders in the east (below Edinburgh ) also remain mixed in speech / folc ?
In blood, of course, but the upper hand linguistically and politically was clearly English, being so near the centre of Bernician Kingly power [Yeavering Bell, Bamburgh, Lindisfarne].

Look at the poet Caedmon - his name seems to be Br. Catumanos > MW. Cadfan, and a name shared with the King of Gwynedd who looked after the young Eadwine of Deira. He seems to be a representative of a heavily Anglicised Welsh substrate population. His English was so good, he is still remembered for his poetry, which stuck to heathen Germanic forms, to preach a Christian message.

NOW OSweee - I'm looking for a cool sort of reply - not one of your OTT jobs which so betrays the non-Angle element in your make-up! :2XPray
:D :roll
Tis true, but I cite the precedents of Oswald, Oswiu, and Aldfrith, for my occasional Hibernicisms in a Germanic context! ;)

Carl
Thursday, November 16th, 2006, 06:36 PM
OK. thanks indeed. :)

when I wrote:

"(When) they all settled down, they also spoke the Britons' language ( the Angles called it Welsh too???) "

--------I guess I was leading from an earlier message that the Kings were bilingual. (?) But not then the folk in the east since that wasn't necessary (??) Ok - but what about the west - were the people there (and note how I cunningly drop the word folk at that point ) bilingual ... or ?? what happened over time in the earlier west. I guess I am thinking of the Saxons slowly moving west into 'Celtic' Devon (Dunmonia) - though perhaps a very different process.

I understand that the Western Britons spoke "welsh" ---an A.S word for "foreign" ( surely a touch of irony here!); you also speak of the Welsh in Strathclyde. I assume this means the broad continuity of Britonic tribes (prior to the coming of the light of the East - ;) .)

Yes of course, I know the Saints called to Northhumbria from Iona were Irish - that is Scots - and not British. The pushing out of the original Celtic Church by you know who was something of a misfortune in some respects. (( Anyway, Rome didn't save the Saxons...))....only in unity did the glorious English eventually re-emege into history!

------------------ :smilies


C

Oswiu
Thursday, November 16th, 2006, 07:07 PM
--------I guess I was leading from an earlier message that the Kings were bilingual. (?)
Which Kings? Who what why and where?!?!? :)

I imagine the first lot over were bilingual, much in the way that any expat picks up a bit to get by. You might then have got a bilingual generation in places where the incomers married in. Ida seems to have married a Welshwoman, Bebba, and his great grandson Oswiu married a Rheged heiress, Riemmelth. But once solid communities were established, the emphasis shifted to English. These Germanics would most likely have had a knowledge of Welsh like mine, in so far as I recognise a lot of words, but can't hold a conversation. From these lot, and the Germanised Britons absorbed into the English states, would have come the numerous calques in placenames, where the original Welsh term was coupled with an English explanation, Alt Hill, for example. Vis;

Ok - but what about the west - were the people there (and note how I cunningly drop the word folk at that point ) bilingual ... or ?? what happened over time in the earlier west.


I understand that the Western Britons spoke "welsh" ---an A.S word for "foreign" ( surely a touch of irony here!);
I think it means more "Roman Imperial foreigner", and is used in that sense still by the Slavs of the Carpathians, where among the Hutsuls, Rumanians are called Volosky. Slavs were known as Wends, not Welsh, and their other significant Other was the Finns.

you also speak of the Welsh in Strathclyde. I assume this means the broad continuity of Britonic tribes (prior to the coming of the light of the East - ;) .)
Naturally. DId you ever hear of anything else?

Yes of course, I know the Saints called to Nhumbia from Iona were Irish - that is Scots - and not British. The pushing out of the original Celtic Church by you know who was something of a misfortune in some respects.
Why? The Irish were of the same rite as the Britons anyway.

Carl
Thursday, November 16th, 2006, 11:21 PM
Yes of course, I know the Saints called to Northhumbria from Iona were Irish - that is Scots - and not British. The pushing out of the original Celtic Church by you know who was something of a misfortune.....

yes. I meant , by pushing out of the Celtic church, the turning to Rome in 664 (Whitby) ..... sorry my history jumps around a bit! There was something rather earthy about the Celtic original....
Hmm .Really, the Angles should have stayed Pagan like the Saxons didn't !!! :(

ĉŝeling
Saturday, November 25th, 2006, 10:56 PM
Whether the union dissolves, or not, is a secondary issue at present. The main focus of anyone interested in the future of all the peoples of the British Isles is the continuing colonisation of our islands by aliens and the government that supports this. Unless these two issues are resolved the union question will be irrelevant.

If/when it is then the people of the United Kingdom should decide its future. I for one will shake the hands of our Scottish and Welsh cousins and wish them all the best in their endeavour to form vibrant, successful, and sovereign nations. And I hope that they will wish the same for us English.

Carl
Tuesday, November 28th, 2006, 09:00 PM
Whether the union dissolves, or not, is a secondary issue at present. The main focus of anyone interested in the future of all the peoples of the British Isles is the continuing colonisation of our islands by aliens and the government that supports this. Unless these two issues are resolved the union question will be irrelevant.

It is a matter of tactics though. If it looked as though a nationalist upswing could occur on the back of a surge of English Nationalism , I think people would use it. We are not there yet - but this could happen. I am not sure how the BNP view this hypothetical possibility -- but do check out the new thread on recent opinion findings and offer your thoughts:

http://forums.skadi.net/now_many_english_scots_wish_break_up_uk_ and_become_independent_nation-t83833.html?nojs=1#

also of note currently:

http://forums.skadi.net/britain_best_non_whites-t83959.html?p=699261

Fortis_in_Arduis
Wednesday, November 29th, 2006, 04:46 PM
The history of Britain begins with Jewish bankers in Amsterdam being allowed to set up the Bank of England and the City of London corporation in support for King William's army usurping the throne.


Which Jews set up the Bank of England / City of London corporation?

I have never seen any proof of this.

Jews allowed to set up banks, yes, but no Bank of England connection as far as I know.

Do you have some facts for me? Some of the historians I know say otherwise and if I could prove them wrong I would be delighted.


The SNP are as Nationalist as the BNP - ie. they aren't

Ah yes, I had forgot that Sinn Fein was a real nationalist movement. How silly of me. :P

Carl
Wednesday, November 29th, 2006, 06:25 PM
The SNP are as Nationaist as the BNP - ie. they aren't

I am not sure I understand that bit. The SNP are leftwing types who will use nationalism to separte 'out' their State.OK ? In what sense aren't the BNP nationalist?

ĉŝeling
Saturday, December 2nd, 2006, 11:05 PM
The SNP are what is termed civic nationalists i.e. race and ethnicity do not form the basis of their nationalism, anyone can be Scottish as long as they are born in Scotland, or migrate to Scotland and adopt its culture.

Basically a load of nonsense driven by ideological stupidity and/or market state politics.

Carl
Saturday, December 2nd, 2006, 11:35 PM
The SNP are what is termed civic nationalists i.e. race and ethnicity do not form the basis of their nationalism, anyone can be Scottish as long as they are born in Scotland, or migrate to Scotland and adopt its culture.


Nevertheless, as you concede, they are nationalists -& in their terms , if not ours, they are quite successful. Indeed, they stand a better chance of unseating the labour party in Scotland than does the tory party. And that is quite important. We need to see some progress there.

As for Race & Nation, even the BNP have 'trimmed' somewhat. They are not so strict about these things as others would be. That's a judgement - they could be right to soften the line somewhat.

Here is a our discussion on trimming from a previous thread:

http://forums.skadi.net/future_british_nationalism-t82317.html?nojs=1#