There have been some interesting developments in Scotland recently. All this has raised real questions about the future of the independence movement. So, do you think that Scotland has missed its moment to break away? Or is this a temporary problem and it still remains on course to become a separate state? Let me know your thoughts and comments below. Oh, and please check out my new book. If you’re interested in independence movements, this really is a great introductory guide. :-) Oxford University Press: global.oup.com/academic/product/secession-and-state-creation-9780190494049 Amazon: amzn.to/3ZOlVME Many thanks!
i think the trident nuclear weapons dispute would’ve been a worthy mention but i get that there’s only so much you can provide in a video and i think you summed up the updates in scotland well good video!
People are tired of divisions and grievance you dare not walk the streets up here and bring conversations involving Nationalism I remember many of them getting involved at the start were penniless now many of the worst nationalists are now extremely wealthy what does that tell too many career politician's and that's not including All there expenses the SNP are very good a claiming expenses. A culture of secrecy has been here for some time no independent auditors allowed. In Scotland long live the union.
The campaign for Scottish independence is failing for a very simple reason. The economic case simply hasn’t been made. When faced with real questions on the budget deficit, currency, taxation and the path for economic growth, the SNP have been evasive. They know that the transition to independence would lead to incredible turmoil and in probability a reset of the Scottish economy. A reset that wouldn’t be positive. In simple terms, assets and savings would be devalued and taxes would rise. The economy might eventually recover and could outperform the rest of the UK but that’s far from certain. That’s a hard message to deliver. Few people want to sign up to a proposition that offers a more or less certain decline in living standards followed by a possible slow recovery on a generational timescale.
We Scots didn't vote for independence which is a foreign concept encouraged by UK hating Irish Mel Gibson in the first place, he never gave Scotsmen the jobs of being extras, he filmed it in Ireland and had a bunch of Irish people impersonating us Scots to try and make us appear hateful of English people which i find rather offensive.
It's quite incredible that the Scottish first minister is a second-generation British Pakistani and will be negotiating with second-generation British Indian about the partition of Britain. If one attempted to utter that sentence in serious company twenty years ago, they'd be laughed out of the room.
@@faithful8271 Well, it's mostly self-inflicted. Brexit was extremely shortsighted and has to be seen as a catalyst for the break-up of the UK/Britain.
There have actually been 3 countries added to the UN as a result of independence movements since the turn of the millennium (so January 1st, 2001), the third one is East Timor or Timor-Leste which became a member on September 27th, 2002. Interesting, 17 prior to that Switzerland had become a member but it's been independent for centuries so I'm not including that here. My wife is Scottish, so this is a debate I'm following a lot. I'm Faroese myself but as Scotland is our nearest neighbour and despite our own independence movement being essentially dormant, it's also relevant to us, as it might start our movement up again if Scotland does become independent.
Thanks. East Timor did indeed join the UN. But, interestingly, and contrary to widespread views, it wasn't in fact a case of secession. It falls into a rather different (and small) category of colonial territories that had their right to self-determination thwarted by an outside actor. The same category as Western Sahara.
It must be remembered that Scots had no vote when Scotland joined England and were unable therefore to have any say in their countries desires. Now they should be given the opportunity to part as England has had the opportunity to leave the EU.
@@bluestingray8955 You are obviously unaware of our Scottish Constitution. It entitles us to have as _many_ referenda as wish, as _often_ as we want, on _any_ subject we like.
An independent Scotland will become a reality. This is a matter certain after the Brexit. England’s future is a Swiss model, a rich independent state with considerable migrant population and excluding Northern Ireland etc.
There's also tacit support for it amongst the younger English population. Irish Reunification isn't the vote loser that supporting Scottish Independence is.
I'd say Irish Reunification. I think the Scottish independence movement will turn out like the Quebecois independence movement, however Northern Ireland is a completely different case with completely different circumstances and I think it's a matter of when and not if Irish Reunification will happen.
I expected better from a professor. Spain has said it wil not stop Scotland joining EU. Why the UN would stop Scotland joining I don't know that wasn't explained either and if England was to treat Scotland like that it shows how they view Scotland. If Scotland is the burden the Westminster establishment and English journalists and politicians often claim them why stop it leaving ?
yeah i couldn't quite grasp either how the the uk would try to block scotland's un membership when the uk would no longer exist. of course the 'uk' also said they would veto scotland's eu membership if they voted yes in 2014. at least that can't happen next time. with friends like the english who needs enemies?
Why would Scotland rejoin the EU - they are only after your money and men./women to fight in their other members wars...Conscription? Where would Scotland get the money for equipment for military? As for the UN and its affiliates, all crooks - e.g. taking foreign aid from other countries and giving it knowingly to Hamas terrorists. AS for SNP, well that speaks for itself and not to be trusted either.
You mention Catalonia..why compare Scotland to Catalonia..2 completely different situations..Scotland is in a voluntary union, Scotland is a nation with a long history of independence..Catalonia is neither..so comparisons are utter rubbish..Saor Alba
Scotland is not like Catalonia as it was never a nation. Scotland was railroaded into a Union as a full partner. This was by means of avTreaty. If the UK can leave the Treaty of Europe then Scotland should have a route out of this rotten Union.
Love your videos professor. They are great in presenting the context. I was wondering for another video idea if you could do one on Columbia governments relations with the cartels and negotiations for ceasefires.
Quebec did. Twice. And New Caledonia has three times (although there were serious questions about who could vote). It does happen. But countries don’t often grant votes.
@@JamesKerLindsay thank you for the interesting response. I feel Scots hae been extremely short sighted in not taking the opportunity to become a sovereign nation.
Scotland were fed lies by both the LIEbour and CONServative parties, the biggest being vote _NO_ and we'd be given full Devo, Home Rule or Federalism. Check the records, which will bear me out. This promise, just like all the others, was never kept. The only insanity, which I view as gullibility, was that too many fell for the deliberate con. Post vote analysis, conducted by Edinburgh University, discovered that 37% of _NO_ voters did so in the belief Scotland would be given more powers! A full 10% had remained undecided.
You seem to have forgotten that a total of 65 countries have claimed their independence from British Empire or The United Kingdom and never asked to return.
@Ian Carpenter naa as an American were good with being independent but poor useless country's mite want to return but the question is does the UK want them back to?
Independence remains electorally in the balance for two main reasons. 1. The failure to explain the ridiculously simple currency situation and the related workings of a fiat currency issued by a monetarily sovereign state. (This really shouldn't be an issue. Historically, the finest works on the subject have been written by Scots and Scotland has a highly successful financial sector that is about 2.5 times that of England on a per capita basis.) 2. The intense fear felt by many NO voters of the wickedness and cruelty they expect from England upon independence. (Yes. England has made a huge impression on Scotland: not a good one.)
We Scots didn't vote for independence which is a foreign concept encouraged by UK hating Irish Mel Gibson in the first place, he never gave Scotsmen the jobs of being extras, he filmed it in Ireland and had a bunch of Irish people impersonating us Scots to try and make us appear hateful of English people which i find rather offensive.
Additional comment. Independence is not off the agenda. It is still a huge dividing factor within families, friend in Scotland. It is still a taboo subject in pubs, clubs and extremely divisive. The main points being. What will actually be better and by when and by what measures after separation. No one can answer that question. What will be our currency ? Will we rejoin the EU ? What of Independence is we leave the UK and Immidiately hand over our sovereign powers by joining the EU ? WHo will protect Scotland ? Army Navy Airforce ? Who will pay our Pensions. What happens to the debt to GDP built up in Scotland of 16% ( limit for joining EU is 3% ) What happens to Scotlands share of the UK debt ? Who will be Scotlands Bank of Reserve, where does the reserve come from.? How do we operate a border between Scotland and England when 65 % of our trade is with England and only 15% with the EU ? Do we have a hard border ? Neither the Scottish Government nor the SNP have answered any of these question either prior to the 2014 referendum or since. It seems that 45% of Scots wish to sever all links to UK Westminster without actually knowing what Scotland will be like after the break. All these questions must be answered before any further referendum so that we actually know what we are voting for. C'mon Holyrood ? what are you scared of ?
Thanks. These are all incredibly important points. It’s interesting that the Scottish government at least tried to provide a blueprint for independent before the 2014. Compare that with the Brexit referendum, when absolutely no plans, or even general details, were laid out before the vote. It’s shocking that such a major decision could be taken without any groundwork. And look at the mess the U.K. is in today as a result!
@@JamesKerLindsay Thanks for response. Do you really think that the UK is in the mess it is in because of the Brexit result ? What plans or details did you expect to be laid out prior to the Brexit vote. In my mind it was crystal clear. Take back control of all law making functions to the the UK inhouse. ? Remove all outside influence on our ability to make laws which relate to our nation. From then on we are solely responsible for good / bad decisions and how we allocate our tax collections. There was no need for a 'plan' or 'groundwork' . We simply wanted to control all internal matters. I personally do not know whether being 'out' has been good or bad for us because as soon as the date came along COVID hit across the planet and everything took a backward step globally. I think we need to judge something as big as this over 5 or 10 years or even a similar time that we were 'IN' the EU. This is not a topic for anyone to judge either way so soon after the cross over date and so soon after a 2 year global health and trade catastrophe. Lastly I would not expect a Prof. to be so judgemental after such a short time in history. Best wishes from someone with only life skills to draw upon. No 'letters' required.
PROTECT SCOTLAND FROM WHOLM ? WE HAVE NO ENEMIES !WE WILL HAVE ARMED FORCES FOR DUTY AT UN. LIKE IRELAND ! THE CURRENCY QUESTION HAS BEEN SPELLED OUT BY SNP !PENSIONS LIKE MY OWN IM 70.. CAN BE PAID OUT AT ALMOST ANY FOREIGN NATION AS YOU WELL KNOW 🤡65% OF OUR TRADE IS OBLIGED TO GO THRU ENGLAND TO LIVERPOOL ,FELIXSTOW ETC. BECAUSE THATCHER DESTROYED OU R PORTS ! AND A HARD BORDER WOULD ESSENTIAL ALL 194 KILOMETRES TO STOP THE FLOW OF DRUGS AND SCOTLAND BORROWS NO MONEY SO HAS NO DEBT! ALBA GU BRATH
We can also use scotgov elections as a plebiscite for indyref or westminister elections for independence. 50%+ rule. In which we then seek to enter negotiations. Then its really over to the uk gov in the catch 22 situation of ignore us and piss off more folk or enter it and give us independence. Thats if we voted 50%+ for independence
The Dream is real and it occurred starting in the 1770s in America. And it was won by people who immigrated from Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales as well as others.I’m American and know many people in England who would love for Scotland to do their own thing
MANY OF THE SCOTS WHO ARRIVED IN N. AMERICA WERE HIGHLANDERS WHO WERE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOMES BY RAPACIOUS LAIRDS/DUKES/CLAN CHIEFS/ ROYAL FAMILY ETC!. WHO TRIED TO KEEP SOME OF THEIR CULTURE ALIVE, ALBA GU BRATH
Sorry to give you bad news, Tom, but America ceased to exist, in 1913. I mean it *legallly* ceased to exist! Have look at official seals, including the presidential and you see they just say _United States_ with no mention of Americap, in order to comply with International Law
Losing support over time does not have to be inevitable. The SNP has had plenty of time to demonstrate to the Scottish people, that a Scotland fully Indendant from The UK would be run more for the benefit of the majority of The Scottish people. IMO The SNP has proved the exact opposite. It has proven itself to be every bit as divisive and endemically corrupt as every other Scottish administration since the 9th century. It is extremely difficult to see how the SNP could have possibly run Scotland worse than it has. So bad, that one could be forgiven for thinking that the SNP leadership never really wanted Scottish independence in the first place. That all the SNP leadership really wanted was the power to stay on the associated Gravy Trains for as long as possible. Indeed we now know that they did not. The SNP wanted a Scotland Dependant of the EU, so the SNP leadership could stay on the EUs various Gravy Trains as well. How many mobile homes does one need? It is far easier to make promises than to keep them. It is far easier to complain than it is to do better yourself. Having said that, it is still extremely difficult to see how the SNP could have run Scotland any worse than it has.
Given that Scotland has voted for it three times in three General Elections, I'm wondering what Scots have to do while England keeps shifting the goal posts. I personally suspect strongly ( based on evidence ) that the referendum was fixed by the Home Office . Mark my words this'll come out in about Forty years . Asking an English PM for "permission" is an utter nonsense. It's continuing Direct Rule. British Supreme Court? How can two separate Countries have a British Court ? More utter tosh .
Interesting thoughts but even Professor (for economics) Mark Blyth, a Scot himself, who previously was sceptical of an independent Scotland now advocates for it since he sees a clear benefit for Scotland's economy outside of the UK.
Thanks. I was not taking a personal position on the economic case for independence. (I strongly support EU membership and so can see how rejoining the Single Market would be hugely beneficial in the longer term.) I was pointing out the perceptions of people who need to be won over. This is always important to bear in mind. In fact, it is one of my three principles of policy analysis: "What people perceive to be real is real in its consequences." It doesn't matter what you *know* about a situation, it's all about how those you are looking at *perceive* the situation - even if they are mistaken.
Fully support this . Thank you so much for your kind consideration@@JamesKerLindsay💜. YORUBA NATION advocacy and the YORUBA people's current assertions on their right to self-determination is a just and noble cause. YORUBALAND is indeed "bigger than Africa!" (Courtesy: Netflix documentary) 💌🗺
Thanks. East Timor was an interesting case. It wasn't really secession. It came under a rather unusual category of territories that were denied the right of self-determination at the point of decolonisation. It is similar to Western Sahara and Palestine.
@@JamesKerLindsay While true, they were still able to gain independence from Indonesia after decades of being annexed into Indonesia-proper, unlike Palestine & W. Sahara, which never gained independence
This is a reminder that when getting married, always have a prenuptial agreement that says that if one partner goes nuts, the sane one is free to date other people.
You should understand that Britain is nothing more than a live, standing bi-lateral international treaty with Scotland's terms and conditions attached to it. Speaking of Pre-nuptial agreements, Scotland also had pre-conditions in place prior to signing its bi-lateral treaty with England. Yes, the "Treaty of Union" is in fact a conditional international treaty drawn up between two Sovereign states and that Scotland's sovereignty was never a part of that agreement. The "Treaty of Union" is nothing more than an economic treaty that was agreed on to be politically run from an agreed upon "Union" Parliament that was to sit in Westminster London. Scots Law and English Law were kept separate and distinct and were never an integrated part of the treaty itself and were kept apart for some very specific and important reasons. It was in order to keep the two nations incompatible and irreconcilable concepts on sovereignty contained in their respective Constitutional Laws apart for all time coming. Scotland never signed away its sovereignty, it was never a part of the treaty and pre-conditional to the treaty.
Historically, becoming an independent country required bravery from the people with strong movements forcing the issue. People fighting for their independence think of the end-goal, not about economic or other consequences. Sadly I don't think Scots have that fighting spirit or just don't care enough. Independence is never gained through political parties.
Have to disagree with some of the assertions, the fact that Labour and the Conservatives are battling over the Unionist vote means the SNP (even in its current weaked state) will most likely continue to hold a majority of seats in Scotland at both Westminster and Holyrood. The blanket refusal to even talk to the SNP by Labour as well as their position on Brexit mean they are effectively seen as Tory Light in Scotland, not a winning strategy. One thing I think that is clear is that many Scots are falling into the silent majority catagory now, as you said the soft yes voters as well genuine undecided, with most of the noise coming from the noisy extremes of Unionst or Nationalist, the next General Election will be very interesting for sure!
The Scots talk a lot. Talk, talk, talk. People who truly want independence from an oppressive government are willing to fight for it. Look around you, there are plenty of examples.
Some observations: 1. The Act of Union of was passed after Scottish financial interests failed in an attempt at colonization. The Scottish government was forced to recognize that England would always have the upper hand economically. This historical situation could return upon independence. 2. The SNP has been careful to avoid insulting the monarchy which, as explained in the video, is jointly Scottish and English. This is an indicator of the difficulty in forming an exclusively Scottish national identity. 3. Scottish Nationalists have repeatedly pointed to the left-leaning nature of their electorate and the repeated election of Conservative governments to Westminster. A Labour government being elected could dissolve some of these tensions. A proposal: There has been increasing public support for reforming the House of Lords. The UK has been operating more and more like a federation due to the devolution to Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. I propose reforming the House of Lords into a legislature more like the US Senate. I would propose 25 Lords from each of the 4 constituent regions elected by proportional representation. I would reserve non-voting seats for the Hereditary and Spiritual Lords to act on committees and to promote stability in the chamber. This would also help to resolve some of the consternation over former-PM Tony Blair's reforms to the Supreme Court and House of Lords. To promote national unity, I would also advise the King to appoint a member of the Royal Family as representative Royal for each of the regions.
The majority of Scots, according to recent polls, want to revoke the union and have no interest in a re-jigged English political landscape. They want out of this toxic relationship. You comment does not deal with why the Darian venture failed and the part England played in the deaths of the would-be colonists, or how English troops were garrisoned in every Scottish city and major town for eighteen months, following the unlawful signing of the bilateral fiscal and political treaty, in order to put down riots by the Sovereigns, who objected it's signing by those unauthorised to do so, against the wishes of the Sovereigns and who had done so for English gold or out fear. The Sovereigns had no wish to join in _any_ union with England and the majority of them still feel the same today and want out!
But not ratified in 1707,if it was 'can you find out who ?, I bet you can't,yes Scotland was bailed out because of finances then but,we have more than paid back over centuries.
@@solsunman383 I am old school British. I want to stay part of the UK. I don't want to be separated away from the rest of my country men. God, King, Country.
@Paul Johnson Thanks, Paul. The Shetlands are seemingly in a rather interesting position. I have seen talk that it is more unionist than other parts of the country - and, of course, they still have a LibDem MP - and that if Scotland chose to break away, it could ask to secede from Scotland - much to the ironic chagrin of the SNP! :-)
i've lived in shetland for more than 30 years, hope to see an independent scottish republic and wouldn't call myself british in a thousand years. local politicians like the status quo and would prefer to keep their oily crumbs from the british table all to themselves. the population know fine well their daily lifeline services come from the scottish mainland.
The 40 to 45% support for Scottish independence. Should that not actually be 45 to 51%? Let's call it 45 to 50. And do remember that in the earlier past the independence of Ireland, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Czechia, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, North Macedonia ... Scotland is the only country in the world that chooses not to govern itself. Wales - it depends on what status one thinks Wales has. I think it's only a matter of time ...
Scotland wasn't "dragged out of the EU". The choice to remain in the UK was explicitly a choice to participate in, and abide by, democracy at the UK level. There is no independent polity of Scotland to be "dragged out".
I will always vote for Scottish independence but the SNP have completely detached from the sentiment of the Scottish public who view Yousaf as an unlikable, arrogant bully. He is electoral poison for the SNP and I think they will lose over half their seats at Westminster in the next G.E.
Speaking as an Irishman who would quite like to see Scotland back in the EU, and an arc of smaller progressive hi-tech democracies all across the northern edge of Europe from Ireland to Finland, at this point I do suspect they've blown it and were even maybe full of hot air all along. If they've swallowed Brexit, BoJo, over a decade of atrocious Tory rule, being lied to and cheated by Westminster politicians and London courts on multiple occasions, and they *still* can't make up their minds then yeah. They'll grumble and talk about it for the next 100 years but at the end of the day I now doubt they'll ever actually *do* anything. I do think the idea the Spanish would veto Scotland's accession to the EU is a bit of a British media myth though. If London deliberately made it impossible to do it entirely "legally" by rigging the rules, and given the UK is now out of the EU (and out of friends in Europe), and multiple Spanish politicians have said they have no objection, and members like Ireland would be strongly pro Scottish membership, then one way or another the wheels would get greased.
Scotland and Ireland need to pipe down and stay as part of UK. There are no serious fundamental differences between Irish, Scotish and English people. Also, being so isolated it would be dumb to have conflicts with each other.
Interesting video ,a few points i would queery . 1)The EU is not a binary thing ,Scotland even if aplication for membership was rejected could easily get a far closer alignment with the EU without having to be a fully fledged member. 2) Its not entirely clear what the EUs stance on a Scottish membership actually would be and the oft cited "spain would block it" is a really questionable stance nowadays . The reality is that Scotland would be Quite a welcome EU partner as far as it has an awful lot to offer the body . 3)The demograhics of independence v the union are clearly on the side of the independence movement in the very near future ,Younger people are basicaly not becoming unionist as they get older. 4)like prety much every other political party there are divisions in the snp but the bulk of the membership are people like myself who was once a labour suporter but will simply never vote labour again (unless of course Slab splits of from the westminster party and gives up its project of unionism . 5) whilst we are grapeling with the turmoil over the police raid over the last few days the media foucus has beenon how this makes the SNP look with the assumption of a negative public reaction.I would in no way comment on the ongoing case ,however I think at least half the population are probably asking if a fewd west type forsensic tent and what was posibly an over kill presence by the police might have been a big mistake . varius unionist politicians( both labour and tory) have found it imposible to keep quiet until the investigation comes to a conclusion. 6) ties in with point 5 ! the caliber of both labour and tory msps is incredibly low . 7)the argument about frictionles border trade only really works if the rUK is a viable and roubust market for Scottish goods ,the wheels are comming of that bus pretty quikly and a labour goverment who refuses to tackle the core problems will keep dragging the uk down the path of the tory failed state issolationalism . In conclusion I would agree that acheiving independence is prety difficult in peace time in relativly stable western Europe. However it does happen in our part of the world ! evidenced by both Norway and Ireland (Scotland is sort of sitting between these two countries culturaly and often politicaly ) the projectory of asperation between the English and Scottish electorate has been of divergance since the 80s ,its getting more so over time . the most likely option for the independence movement in scotland is to allow more diversity in the pro independence vote .to some extent this has been naturaly hapening with the greens scottish socialists and alba parties but not really to the level thats needed ,If there is a split in the SNP over the next few months or years it might actually be to the benifit of the independence movement . the Scottish parliment is designed for multi party coalitions .
Thanks. Scotland certainly would have a lot to offer the EU. But this doesn't change the fundamental calculations. My research area is secession and recognition and so I have looked at these issues in considerable detail. Spain - and others - would certainly block EU membership if Scotland *unilaterally declared independence*. If it was done with Britain's permission, it would have absolutely no problems. As for closer alignment, Scotland could voluntarily choose to adopt EU legislation, but that would be a very weak form of convergence. It would not be involved in any decision-making within the EU. It would probably be blocked from participating in many programmes (Erasmus, Horizon, etc.). It wouldn't gain access to EU funds. And while I agree that Scotland could shift its exports to the EU in time, for the moment, it is far more linked to the rUK. For this to work, the Scottish government would need to start encouraging businesses to shift to the EU. But this is now difficult because the UK is out of the EU, which makes the rUK market even more important. It is a vicious circle.
Scotland must never become independent. Ever! Britian should not negotiate for a moment. If it comes to it Brittainia should fight to remain Great Britian and not just England and Northern Ireland.
It was not widely known as a “Once in a lifetime vote” That was a throwaway remark grabbed by Unionists but never accepted by Independent supporters. What is never mentioned is the threat that if you voted Yes, Scotland would be kicked out of the EU. That had a massive effect and ultimately the vote went to the No vote. Brexit clearly changed everything as the majority of Scottish voters who voted to remain. That alone should make another referendum allowed.
Thanks. The problem was the the term was actually first used by the Scottish Government. I think it was meant to persuade people that if they didn’t take the chance for independence in 2014 then it would be a long time before they got another opportunity. The trouble is that this was perfect for the Unionists, who have used it ever since. That’s why I put it in there. It’s actually an interesting factor in the whole debate. Personally, I think a new referendum was justified by Brexit. And I think the Northern Ireland model of seven years between votes makes sense. (Meaning it’s well past time for another vote.) But even then it’s really far from clear that people would take independence if offered the chance to vote on it now.
Westminster also told our pensioners that their pensions would be under threat, we wouldn’t be allowed to use sterling pro tem, we wouldn’t be able to join the EU as an Independent Nation, there’s no doubt about it the 2014 referendum was lost by Scotland based on lies !!! What the main problem was the SNP didn’t have all their ducks in a row. It was even quite difficult for the SNP to be invited onto the MSM for an evenly balanced debate, Westminster sent 100 Torrie MP’s up to Scotland to work the 4 corners of Scotland, you had 1 SNP, 2 Labour MSP’s and 3 Westminster MP in one debate, debates were never evenly balanced !!!! Scotland has its eyes opened over the past 8yrs and I think another Indi ref in a couple of years will see a completely different result !!!!
@@JamesKerLindsay With all due respect, this line has been used by many political parties for various different reasons. Boris Johnson used this exact same phrase in the run-up to the 2019 election regarding getting Brexit done.
Scottish Independence should have gone the way of Quebec……and died after 2014. Brexit saved the cause. In reality the idea of England & Scotland being separate Nations after 300 years has never made sense. Not only is there a shared history. Both are far more integrated with each other than the U.K. ever was with the EU But There are more people of Scottish Descent living in England than in Scotland. Realistically they are not really separate Nations anymore. Now that the tide of Brexit popularism is dying…..and that SNP has proven to be as corrupt as the ERG Tories I think it will die off…..not quickly but slowly
Excellent video Dr Ker-Lindsay. One thing you didn't note is that during the leadership campaign, both Yousaf and Forbes accepted that a) no stable majority for independence exists, and that b) until one exists, then the time is not right for a referendum, let alone independence. This is crucial, because (remarkably) it aligns the SNP with the UK government regarding the conditions for another referendum. The Secretary of State for Scotland, Alister Jack, has for some years said that sustained 60%+ support for independence would be viewed as a trigger for a second referendum. I think this is the real reason why independence is firmly on the backburner. The SNP has dropped Sturgeonite bluster and confrontation, and is now singing from the same hymn sheet as the UK government. I suspect the wager is that with patience, demographic change will deliver victory for independence. But that may well prove mistaken - unless permanent campaign energy is maintained (as Sturgeon successfully did, and planned to continue via her de facto referendum strategy), pro-independence opinion may continue to atrophy.
@@FOLIPE I agree! So many commentators thought the de facto referendum was dumb because it could never lead to independence (Westminster would reject it). But I think she was playing the much longer game of keeping pro-independence opinion consolidated and expanding.
@Edmund Flett Thanks so much for highlighting this. You are right. Yousaf seems to recognise that he will have to take a very different approach. There isn't a stable majority for independence. But he is - one way or another - now the figurehead for the independence movement. Even if he might have to take a rather more gradualist approach, he will be expected to keep the flame of independence burning and offer hope to the main bulk of the SNP membership that is still keen for it to happen sooner rather than later. It will be a very tricky balance to reach. And I think you are right about independence 'atrophy'. I kept thinking about Quebec as I was making it. But, then again, Brexit complicates things in all sorts of ways. It could play out in many different directions.
Another great video professor! As ever you take a measured and diplomatic look at what I can imagine is a polarizing topic. I wonder if this will in any way go similarly to Quebec, where there is a sustained period of popularity for independence, but where ultimately the independent streak ends up being exercised within the existing union with full independence coming to be seen as unwieldy or unwise. In any case thank you for another look at the situation. Separately, I wonder if you might be doing an video on the recent clashes in Amhara as well as the continuing Oromo insurgency, and the general continued instability in the Ethiopian federation even after victory in the Tigray War. Thanks as always professor!
Thank you, LocalLt. It’s interesting that you mention Quebec. It was really on my mind as I was making this video. I do often wonder if Scotland may go in that direction. I can see how things might shift again, but I do get the sense that we might have seen the high water mark for the independence movement. If Brexit could deliver a massive shift in support for statehood, I don’t know what will!? Maybe Irish unification. Anyway, I do hope all is well at your end. Keep an eye out for tonight’s video. With a big election coming up in Turkey, I’m taking a look at the Erdogan Era.
I wonder if the two are even comparable. How was the media perception within Quebec on independence? In Scotland the media is overwhelmingly hostile to independence so support being as high as it is, is remarkable. Demographics support a shift towards increasing support for independence. The high polls we saw during COVID came from the independence supporting Scottish government getting unbiased airtime (also during a period of serious upheaval). Once the polls showed increasing support, the coverage was heavily cut and changed showing a decreasing support after. I would be interested to see details on how media in Quebec covered the issue. Also Quebec was never an independent state prior so this also changes the dynamic.
@@SI-vb7hd Your points about the nuances of the two situations are well-taken. While I also acknowledge that Quebec has never been an independent state, its legacy derives from a separate colonial lineage from Ontario and the rest of Canada; it’s effectively the remnant of the French colony of New France, while Ontario is the remnant of British Upper Canada, so they emerged from separate, albeit colonial, entities.
I’m Faroese, and even though I don’t live there anymore, I understand why people are hesitant to vote for independence. The status quo is “mentally safe,” and becoming an independent country is difficult and you enter an uncertain future. It also most likely can’t be undone if things turn out badly. The Faroe Islands have been given permission to become an independent country by Denmark, but the support for independence is still only around 40% in the Faroe Islands. I know it’s a bit different between Scotland and the Faroes, in that there are 100 times more people in Scotland, and the Faroes are still dependent on Danish subsidies. Both Scotland and the Faroes would probably survive, but no one wants a reduction in their standard of living, if things turn out badly.
Thanks so much. The comparison is really great. I think you are right. There is a solid body of support for independence in Scotland, but it is not quite enough (or do it seems) to get over the line. The movement needs an extra boost from those who might accept independence, but still need to be convinced that it safer than the status quo.
Completely understand your point of view. Most Scots are not aware of the roughly 13 billion pounds we receive from Westminster, or to put it another way, we receive 5000 pounds per household. An Independent Scotland would we be financially significantly worse off.
@@Hrotiberhtaz I agree. The Americans are also very keen on setting up shop in Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. However, I would rather have the Americans there than the Russians and Chinese. The American government at least has some semblance of accountability to their people. The problem with Greenland and the Faroe Islands is that the relationship with Denmark is very lopsided. Denmark makes decisions in international matters and then goes to them and says "oh, btw, we decided that we all are doing this now", even when it's against Faroese and/or Greenlandic interests without consulting anyone from said territories. They leave sensitive matters to fester until it politically explodes, and then Danes, both the general public and politicians call them ungrateful and say something to the likes of "then why don't you just leave and say no to the subsidies" which does absolutely nothing to help the situation. Something has to change in the relationship with Denmark for the relationship to become more stable. It's actually really unstable at the moment. They are just now considering allowing Faroese and Greenlandic politicians to speak their native languages in the Danish parliament while having a translator present. This should have been done decades ago, since the Faroese and Greenlandic politicians are representing their respective peoples, and not Danes, who aren't native Danish speakers. It's especially important for Greenlandic politicians to be able to speak Greenlandic, because they have a pretty sizable monolingual population.
@@JamesKerLindsay Even with Brexit, in 2014, Scotland and Britain dodged a bullet. To my knowledge, there were no outright negotiations over where the UK would continue to house its nuclear fleet among literally every other aspect of how to "unpick 350 years of shared history" (can't remember source). Even with the SNP's recent fortunes, the Scottish independence movement is very much still alive and will survive the demise of the SNP as a dominant force in Scottish politics. For so many reasons, the next UK general election could be as epochal as the Tory win in 1979 was. As for 1997, it was epic, but when Blair lost his way in the sands of Iraq (as so many of us in America and our cousins in the UK did), the dream of New Labour died a slow death. As to 2014, the same recklessness Cameron handled that situation was used in handling the Brexit referendum. Usually, one does not get away with not having an exit strategy, and the UK with Brexit has been burned hard. From across the Pond, I would hope Scotland stays in the UK. It is better for all, and the devolution of powers that took place in 1997 was in retrospect a good thing, the 1998 Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland rightly making Tony Blair one of a number of living (and passed-away) legends.
The dire state of the UK economy post-brexit will result in the traditional emigration of many young Scottish people (and perhaps many English). The Union puts Scotland in a powerless political and economic situation in the best of times but now that the UK has shot itself in both feet over brexit our future in the UK looks even bleaker than usual.
If Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria, Sir Disraeli, Sir Churchill saw what Great Britain has become, they would all be turning on their graves! 🪦 I’m amazed to the lack of vision for Brexiters, Scottish nationalists. Totally beyong understanding
Great question. Interestingly, economic factors seem to play a huge part. In fact, I often contrast 2014 with 2016. The Scottish referendum showed how fears over the economic effects saw people vote to keep the status quo. However, with Brexit, people voted to leave despite knowing the economic effects. I now use this when thinking about other referendums elsewhere. Are voters Scottish or English? Will they vote for or against their own economic interest (head or heart) in any given situation.
The SNP could get a landslide for independence if they actually had a genuine financial case for independence, but they don't. We pay 42% i come tax with adjusted bands. If I still iced in Scotland it would cost me an an extra 3k a year to stay in the SNPs stasi run state.
Ok united kingdom, there will be a vote and when it happens no boohoos. Scotland and northern Ireland deserve there freedom if that is the result of the people, and that's the end of it shake hands and go home. Welcome 2 more NATO FAMILY MEMBERS. We will have 40 NATO STATES by the end of this decade.
@@craigevans6156 For the same reason Sussex isn't allowed to unilaterally declare independence, because we are a single sovereign country not a confederation.
@@craigevans6156 The decision was made by in the referendum of 2014 when the Scottish people freely voted to remain in the Union. The SNP who had previously said it was a "once in a generation decision" cannot immediately call for another simply because they did not like the result. What kind of "Nationalists" want to displace their native population and culture with alien immigrants and subsume Scotland to the EU?
@@abcdefksohfosuh9024 Sussex is a County I’m England ; Scotland is an ancient country in a supposedly voluntary union with England. That is the difference.
"Andrew Marr - And so, if it’s a no vote by a whisker again, is that it? Do you come back for another referendum in a few years time. I mean you’ve talked in the past as it’s for a generation, is that still your view. Alex Salmond- Yes it is. By that, what I mean is, if you remember- I know you do- constitutional referendum in Scotland in 1979, and the next one in 1997 - that’s what I mean by a political generation. In my opinion, and it’s just my opinion it’s a once in a generation opportunity for Scotland. So what he is saying that this is a political generation, not a rabbit or a rat generation, certainly not a human generation. Read James Hunter, Insurrection - Scotland's famine winter. Do it NOW! Get Angry, Lets deal with these Far Cars.
@@veraxiana9993 I understand, personally I think to put the Scottish people through so much uncertainty is quite frankly immoral but politics will politic
A more pressing question is the demographics, an ethnic Indian UK prime minister, an ethnic Indian Irish prime minister, an ethnic Pakistani Scots first minister. David Coleman professor of demographics said that the UK will become a minority ethnic British country by 2066 if not sooner. One can only look to Zimbabwe or South Africa to see what lies ahead…
I wonder which countries in europe have the lowest immigration numbers I would think Poland and Hungary excluding the Ukrainians that arrived Germany seems the most.
@davidbrims I read sometime ago that according to the ONS white british children will be outnumbered, by third world children ,in primary schools by 2030 . As the average age of a primary school kid is 8 yrs old it follows that by 2040 these children of third world immigrants will be 18 and block voting for whoever the immam tells them to . So sometime after 2040 they will acheive political power. One generation after that ( say 4 election cycles ) and i would think it will be all over for the white British of that future period . Your figure of 2066 should see a multi -tribal society driven by religious and ethnic strife , with third world living standards . All brought about by the voters of today.
In my opinion it's only a matter of time, considering that the once in a generation line has a built in shelf life, and eventually it will be a generation later, and given that younger people are more open to the idea and overwhelmingly older people who voted against it will not be around by the time there is another one.
Separating countries is difficult and rare outside of the break up of broad empires or after defeat in war. Separating the UK would make brexit look like a cake walk. Scotland is not ready to do it, despite what Marr says was a serious of events that looked designed to make people want it. Quebec separatists got within 0.5% of a Yes to separation vote on the 3rd attempt, but thankfully it is no longer an issue, as it would have cut Canada into 3 and lost 25% of the population, making the country possibly unviable. Their retreat from the brink shows nothing is inevitable.
@@JamesKerLindsay I know a lot of Newfoundlanders and their view was that if Quebec left, Canada would loosen up and provinces would get closer to U.S states, where they often trade more ( bigger market) than across Canada. Whether that meant merging with USA eventually, who knows, but most wanted to be separate and different now, e.g. Govt health insurance and stronger benefits.
@@elliotwilliams7421 An extra international border along the River Tweed, loss of easy main markets in England and Wales, loss of support of Treasury and Bank of England and Barnet formula of funding. What currency and what would it cost to back it?
@@ParcelOfRogue so what if there was a border? Why lose they markets? So what if we lose the Barnet formula? Currency? Pound to begin then onto our own currency, se as dozens of others countries have done. Back what?
Get it striaght once and for all. These guys in the SNP: do NOT WANT TO BE INDEPENDENT THEY WANT TO JOIN THE EU. How is that consistent with being an independent country,exactly?
It is perfectly consistent. In fact, the EU makes it far easier for small countries to exert global influence in this day and age. It allows them to operate in ways that they couldn't before, with the political and economic support and protection of many other countries. Look at Lithuania's battle with China. Or consider how small countries can ensure that key sectors of their economy are protected in trade deals. The idea that the EU somehow limits sovereignty is a myth cooked up by UK eurosceptics. It really doesn't reflect reality.
@@JamesKerLindsay You can convince the 'true believers' Prof,but like them you don't address the core of the point I made. No country has the ability to take 'independent' action in most areas as a member of the EU. You didn't dispute this in your reply. You Just introduce a Strawman argument concerning perceived 'influence'. Scotland would have very little influence in anything,certainly nowhere near the influence it has in UK affairs. As for 'economic support', I wouldn't shout that from the rooftops in downtown Athens. Influence is what the EU has ,not any country in it apart from the 'usual suspects', France and Germany for whose economies the EU is designed around. When you can't fully control who you allow into your country, have a court higher than your own highest court, have your primary legislation made anywhere but in your own national parliament,then by no meaningful definition can you claim your country to be soverign .That's not a myth.Its a fact Limited sovereignty is like limited virginity. #It doesn't exist.
2014 the Scottish people alone voted 55 to 45 % to remain in the UK Union. Thea arguments that in 2016 the EU referendum has Scotland vote to stay in EU is misplaced. All people in the UK voted as UK citizens in this vote not as citizens representing the wishes of England, N Ireland, Scoland, Wales. The vote was for a decision for the UK as a whole to stay or leave the EU. Individual parts whether countries, regions or even votes within cites preferencies were not asked for. Only a vote for the UK to stay or leave. Any assumption on the result for a country, region or any other segmented part of the vote to be seen as a vote for that part on its own segregated from the UK vote is invalid. The vote was on the UK leaving or remaining with the EU. Everyone votes as UK citizens on behalf of the UK as a whole.
Doesn’t change the fact that the people of Scotland, who just two years earlier had been given a right to choose their own future, felt that they were now dragged out of the EU against their wishes. It also makes a mockery of any idea that this is a union of equals.
@@JamesKerLindsay We are a union of equals. Equal across the UK as UK citizens. The vote was for UK people to vote on a UK issue , not given to Scots to vote on a solely Scottish issue as was the 2014 referendum. You completely miss or ignore the fact that the EU vote was on a UK in/out issue , not Scotland in/out, Wales in/out . London in/out , West of Scotland in/out. ???. We voted as UK citizens, not for our devolved countries . \if you follow your logic of disecting the vote by borders then where do we stop ? Glasgow out, Dundee out Edinburgh In, Inverness In .......we voted as UK citizens on a UK issue.
Good video, but I need to point out that it was not widely billed as a "once in a generation vote" at the time. It was only described as such two or three times during the entire campaign. However, this soundbite was adopted and promoted ad nauseum by opponents to independence after the 2016 Brexit vote which was widely seen as a betrayal in Scotland.
Moreover, define a generation. It’s loosely defined as 20-30 years. We’re almost halfway through and it would take a couple of years to run from inception to polling day. Even if the “once in a generation” aspect was real or in any way binding, it’s coming soon to the point where that condition will be met.
Voter who voted for Scottish independence in 2014 were voting to leave the EU. Some intellectual honesty on the matter would ultimately be good for Scottish nationalists.
@@aleph8888 This is a twisted fabrication. The prospective being voted on was for Scotland to be independent and in the EU:. There was heated debate as to whether Scotland would have to leave or reapply - but in reality there was no mechanism to take an independent Scotland out of the EU against its will. At the time the EU wasn't keen on encouraging the breakup to member states, and the "Catalonian Question" was well known. However, after Brexit attitudes in the EU changed markedly. Spain has stated - multiple times - that it will NOT block an independent Scotland's entry, and there is considerable empathy with Scotland in the wake of the rise of British nationalism which is seen across Europe as toxic and divisive - very similar to Trumpism.
@The Gaming Economist Thanks. This comes up occasionally. In fact, it was rather prominently stated by the Scottish Government itself at the time. I think it wanted to press the point that this might not be a chance that would come around again soon and so voters should take it. The problem is that it has gifted the argument to the other side, which I why I felt it was important to mention it. Personally, I have always argued that Brexit was a material change in circumstances that merits another vote.
@David Reynolds This is the problem. It is indeed very vague. In the case of Irish unification, a vote will be permitted seven years later. This seems reasonable. Not so soon as to have constant referendums, but soon enough to allow changes in opinions to be registered. Anyway, by that standard Scotland is now well and truly due another vote.
Would you say this could be affected by the new government, especially since they considered adding things like PR instead of FPTP (which might appease Scotland) but didn't outline this in their manifesto.
Looks like Scotland had a golden window of opportunity for indolence and yet, it has come and gone. While there is still an independence movement, it seems unlikely that Scotland will be independent any time soon. In fact, I think Irish Unification isn't even more likely, but will probably happen in a decade or two.
_"Looks like Scotland had a golden window of opportunity for indolence"_ Indolence? And let me guess... the joke is, they were too lazy to take it...? :D
Thanks. That seems to be my sense too. There was an opportunity to secure independence, but it is now looking less likely, for all the reasons I outlined. Interestingly, though, I think that if Ireland does unite, this could well shift the debate again in Scotland, especially if Brexit is still doing really badly (which I think will be the case).
@@JamesKerLindsay what about the lies told during Indy ref 1 .. The vow never happened so broken contract referendum 2 is coming we can go straight to the un
I have wondered since the 2014 referendum what the situation would be if the leader of one of the two main UK parties adopted a policy of never permitting another vote? What would the ramifications of that be?
History would indicate illegally held parliaments and eventual violence and international condemnation. Yes, Westminster has the power. But like Russia’s nukes, it’s not really a power it can use without terrible ramifications. It’s not really an option.
The new Prime Minister's dad is from Pakistan, and his mum is from Kenya. If I were him, my morality would stop me from being the one who wanted to break the whole that has welcomed my parents. But since we are in a world of hypocrites, everything is everything.
Excellent work, Professor, as always. Thank you for this intelligent and fair lecture and explanation of the situation in Scotland right now. I love Scotland, so I have thoughts and questions. I'd love to see an Independent Scotland after centuries of English domination and control. If I remember correctly, and I may be wrong so I am happy to be corrected, the union in the early eighteenth century was 'necessary' because of money but not wanted by a majority of Scots (after a failed colonization project in Panama and relentless English domination?). Fast forward: Since Thatcher, Scotland (and the north of England) has suffered cruelly under Tory austerity and anti-worker/anti-union and terrible housing policies. Third-way/Blarite Labour wasn't much better for Scotland, and Starmer has made Labour even more conservative than Blair and Brown did, so what good is UK/English rule for average, every day Scots, residents, immigrants, workers, and Scotland? Maintenance through exploitation (Trident, fishing, tourism, trade)? An underfunded and failing NHS? The so-called 'royal family'? Why should elites in and of the south rule the north and beyond? The SNP has demonstrated quite clearly in the last two months with its divisive election for a new First Minister that it is primarily a pretty conservative Nationalist party and not a progressive party of the left that would be any better than an English or UK Labour government; it might be more of the same socially and economically but simply with Scots and not English politicians and judges making final decisions. Has devolution allowed Scottish politics to be more left, progressive, and/or inclusive for all? If so, how so? Is devolution really enough (e.g. the six counties in the north of Ireland--but the histories are different, if entangled, I know)? Self-determination is necessary, without question, but is it possible economically and legally vis-a-vis dominant powers in the world? Scottish Independence is absolutely possible emotionally and intellectually, at least. The English/UK government--Labour or LibDem or Conservative-Unionist--will never again allow for an Independence referendum in Scotland. No UK/English PM or party will want to be the one who hammers one of the final nails into the coffin of the British Empire. If Scotland leaves of its own accord and volition, most if not all powerful governments, including the EU, will ostracize it, alas, and more economic devastation will occur for the average, everyday Scot and resident. If only Salmond and Sturgeon and the SNP could have kept it together, Independence might have become a reality through diligence and progressive political programs. Now that the SNP (or some in its leadership) has been revealed as corrupt as any other party and filled with right-wingers, what chance is there of a truly free, democratic, and independent nation of Scotland for all Scots and residents? I hope that Scotland can be free and independent and that recent problems are only a temporary setback--and that the plan for Scottish Independence can be realized, but I fear that, like Quebec in the mid-90s, the idea of Independence may fade away as a political reality--or that it will always be prevented by fiat from outside/without. I hope that I am wrong about that, to be sure. Thank you--from a concerned, if ignorant, American.
Thanks so much! You are right about the origins of Scottish independence. It was based on a failed colonial project. The problem is that under international law (at least as it now stands), even if a territory voluntarily joins a union with another state, it has no right to unilaterally secede. Most people don't realise this. This is why I often have Scots telling me that it doesn't need British permission to break away. Unfortunately, yes it does. And that's the whole problem now. There is a British Government that looks determined to stop a vote. The thing is that even if Labour win the next election, they are likely to resist granting a referendum - although it might be a little more likely to accept it if it does well in the next UK and Scottish elections. I am certainly open to Scottish independence and have long argued Scotland should have the right to another vote, I am not sure if will happen soon, or would be successful. On a separate note, even if Scotland did become independent, I don't think I would qualify for citizenship. Although my great-grandfather was Scottish, my Scottish-Australian grandfather was born in England (although his three siblings were all born in Scotland). If they do the Irish approach, I'd just miss out. (That said, I would qualify for Welsh citizenship on the other side, but that's another independence situation for another day!)
@@JamesKerLindsay The Darien project failed because Englnad made sure it happened, BUT it was not until the "Alien Act of 1705" that pushed the Scottish leaders to sign the "Act Of Union" and even then it was not a huge majority. Scottish government debt early 1700's 160K England's Government debt 20 Million understand the difference? I could go on and on about the nearly 100 years of military occupation the brainwashing etc etc over decades.
England cannot afford to let Scotland go, everybody looks to England because it is bigger and thinks it is economically viable, well just look at what has happened to the English economy over the last 40+ years, it is largely getting worse and worse and with Brexit it will accelerate, most of the "borrowing by the UK government goes to keeping the low wage economy going in England going, this is not sustainable in the long term. As of 2019 England now has 9 of the bottom 10 economically deprived area's in the EU. If Scotland wants to stop being a "Beggared" country independence is the only way. By the way England WILL throw Scotland to the wolves when it needs to.
@@JamesKerLindsay Be honest here if you can be. What Scotland gets from being tied to England. 1, Undemocratic, not just the first pass the post system, with 533 MP’s England votes for Scotland’s overall government, Scotland's representatives have little or no input to government or policies. 2, There are 26 tax/economic leavers Holyrood has 4 of these the rest are reserved, hence the 533 English MP’s give Scotland it’s economy. 3, Scotland MUST by law balance it’s budget, the 533 MP’s in Westminster assign Scottish debt with no input from Scotland. 4, Three of Scotland’s main political parties are financed and controlled by the English. 5, 37 of the 38 “papers” are anti-independence, along with all the visual media, again owned and controlled from England. 6, Scotland resources stolen and true value hidden from the Scot's, See the McCrone report. With someone of your supposed intelligence I should not need to detail the implications of the above. I could go on the Union has and always will be based on LIES by those that control England. So how long would Englnad accept these conditions if the shoe was on the other foot.
The SNP is a broad political grouping that is currently only held together by a shared desire for independence. Once that is delivered (should it ever be delivered), their infighting about staunchly opposed views on other matters would be worse than that of the Tories after Brexit. Perhaps both sides should meet in the middle and opt for more devolution, especially on economic affairs. The geopolitics of Scotland are somewhat unique, they are well-positioned to make money with exporting renewable energies given their land mass and comparatively small population. Demand for it in the EU will be insatiable and bargaining power will be with the exporting country. As a citizen of an EU member state, I do not entirely understand the need to replace the London overlord with a more distant Brussels overlord. It is both the Uk’s and Scotland’s interest to find an agreement.
A good but very non-Scottish interpretation of the situation. A couple of things spring to mind here. Catalonia is often used as a comparison but differs from Scotland due to the Treaty of Union which is an international treaty between Scotland and England. Catalonia as far as I’m aware is a part of Spain not bound by treaty. The border question come separation is something much touted by the mainly Unionist and externally owned media in Scotland and hyped to be something more concerning to Scot’s than I believe it actually is. ie Would trading cease between the 2 countries come independence? It’s hardly likely with arrangements being quickly made in the event of independence. Scotland and England are not the only countries in the world that share borders after all.
I believe the point was that Spain would likely oppose EU accession due to Catalan Sepratism, regardless of treaty law Spain would probably be hostile.
everyone in Scotland would move to London if that happened. Scotlands entire economy is based in London. that cannot be undone overnight. no one ever goes to Glasgow to bank or trade stocks they all go to London. even Ireland has a larger population than Scotland and even the Ireland is pretty irrelevant country when it comes to European mind Global politics. Everyone does however still talk about the UK on the global stage. Scotland benefits from the UK brand. Scotland would need its own currency establish its own financial markets and regulation. Scotland would take 20 years after independence to join the EU. it’s not a done deal and it require convergence criteria and signing multiple treaties with the EU. or Scotland could take the route of Canada and try to match its population to that of England’s like Canada is trying to match its population with the U.S and then join the EU and become a player on European and world stage.
If the UK were a truly 'voluntary' Union we'd probably be voting yes about now. As it is the UK will lurch along and Scotland will fall further behind its independent neighbours a while more- hardly in unity though. *PS don't forget the demographics- namely the huge support for independence among under 50s - and the anti-democratic UK (with its poverty and inequality) offers little that will change their minds* - I remain very optimistic
A Supreme Court that overrules Scot’s right to sovereignty within the claim of right means that Scotland is effectively a colony?. So Scotland can go for independence via self determination under UN GA Res. XV (14 Dec. 1960)? What I’d Scotlands democratic route to independence if Englands prime minster can just say ‘No’
Scotland will become indepenant, it is when not if. 95% of media is unionist, print and tv. Demographics say this. England needs Scotland, and do everything it can to hold onto it's energy, water, gas, tax, food, cash cow. The YES movement is much more than just SNP, and the current setbacks in the SNP will soon be reversed. Alba go Soar.
@@MrJoshyguyso Brexit is bad ? Yet Scotland and the people that want to escape the isolationist Brexit Empire is somehow worse? No we will escape this corrosive overbearing Brexit Empire.
The worst fear is that any demise of the SNP might give rise to an even more destructive virulent form of repression in the false promise for us people that opens the door to corruption. How is it possible for an imigrant from a heathen country
" Is Independence Still Possible? " The people here said NO in the referendum, our last prime minister said NO, our new prime minister said NO, the high court said NO, our biggest exporter (farmers) said NO, banks and big businesses said NO, academics in Scotish universities said NO What part of NO don't you understand ?
How about the voters in Scotland? When we were faced with the only way to guarantee to stay in the EU, was to vote to stay in the UK . Probably one of the biggest deceptions in Scottish history. The people in Scotland whatever nationality background they are if they vote in Scotland, they the people will decide! Not banks , Universities, business, Prime Minister, or academics say .
Thanks. I have already made a video on this. (In fact, it’s my most successful. It is coming up for half a million views!) ua-cam.com/video/tVHyO10y1v8/v-deo.html
There have been some interesting developments in Scotland recently. All this has raised real questions about the future of the independence movement. So, do you think that Scotland has missed its moment to break away? Or is this a temporary problem and it still remains on course to become a separate state? Let me know your thoughts and comments below.
Oh, and please check out my new book. If you’re interested in independence movements, this really is a great introductory guide. :-)
Oxford University Press: global.oup.com/academic/product/secession-and-state-creation-9780190494049
Amazon: amzn.to/3ZOlVME
Many thanks!
i think the trident nuclear weapons dispute would’ve been a worthy mention but i get that there’s only so much you can provide in a video and i think you summed up the updates in scotland well good video!
Looks like Scotland missed its opportunity. I think we'll see a united Republic of Ireland a good decade or two before we see an independent Scotland.
People are tired of divisions and grievance you dare not walk the streets up here and bring conversations involving Nationalism I remember many of them getting involved at the start were penniless now many of the worst nationalists are now extremely wealthy what does that tell too many career politician's and that's not including All there expenses the SNP are very good a claiming expenses. A culture of secrecy has been here for some time no independent auditors allowed. In Scotland long live the union.
The campaign for Scottish independence is failing for a very simple reason. The economic case simply hasn’t been made. When faced with real questions on the budget deficit, currency, taxation and the path for economic growth, the SNP have been evasive. They know that the transition to independence would lead to incredible turmoil and in probability a reset of the Scottish economy. A reset that wouldn’t be positive. In simple terms, assets and savings would be devalued and taxes would rise. The economy might eventually recover and could outperform the rest of the UK but that’s far from certain. That’s a hard message to deliver. Few people want to sign up to a proposition that offers a more or less certain decline in living standards followed by a possible slow recovery on a generational timescale.
We Scots didn't vote for independence which is a foreign concept encouraged by UK hating Irish Mel Gibson in the first place, he never gave Scotsmen the jobs of being extras, he filmed it in Ireland and had a bunch of Irish people impersonating us Scots to try and make us appear hateful of English people which i find rather offensive.
It's quite incredible that the Scottish first minister is a second-generation British Pakistani and will be negotiating with second-generation British Indian about the partition of Britain.
If one attempted to utter that sentence in serious company twenty years ago, they'd be laughed out of the room.
Sad state of affairs for Britain
@@faithful8271 Well, it's mostly self-inflicted. Brexit was extremely shortsighted and has to be seen as a catalyst for the break-up of the UK/Britain.
@Ricky_Baldy doubt that's what they meant
@@TheAlbinoskunk Ah, yes. That was probably quite naive, in retrospect.
@@julm7744 No they're not
There have actually been 3 countries added to the UN as a result of independence movements since the turn of the millennium (so January 1st, 2001), the third one is East Timor or Timor-Leste which became a member on September 27th, 2002. Interesting, 17 prior to that Switzerland had become a member but it's been independent for centuries so I'm not including that here.
My wife is Scottish, so this is a debate I'm following a lot. I'm Faroese myself but as Scotland is our nearest neighbour and despite our own independence movement being essentially dormant, it's also relevant to us, as it might start our movement up again if Scotland does become independent.
Thanks. East Timor did indeed join the UN. But, interestingly, and contrary to widespread views, it wasn't in fact a case of secession. It falls into a rather different (and small) category of colonial territories that had their right to self-determination thwarted by an outside actor. The same category as Western Sahara.
@@JamesKerLindsay Well, after I posted it I thought wait there must be some reason why it was left out. And that is indeed an excellent point.
It must be remembered that Scots had no vote when Scotland joined England and were unable therefore to have any say in their countries desires. Now they should be given the opportunity to part as England has had the opportunity to leave the EU.
They did in 2014, you’re side lost get over it
@@bluestingray8955
You are obviously unaware of our Scottish Constitution.
It entitles us to have as _many_ referenda as wish, as _often_ as we want, on _any_ subject we like.
@@billyandrew What Scottish constitution?
An independent Scotland will become a reality. This is a matter certain after the Brexit. England’s future is a Swiss model, a rich independent state with considerable migrant population and excluding Northern Ireland etc.
Which do you believe is more likely now: the reunification of Ireland or Scotland gaining independence?
What a great question. I'd say reunification, inevitable in the next 100 years as few brits are moving to N.I
There's also tacit support for it amongst the younger English population. Irish Reunification isn't the vote loser that supporting Scottish Independence is.
I'd say Irish Reunification. I think the Scottish independence movement will turn out like the Quebecois independence movement, however Northern Ireland is a completely different case with completely different circumstances and I think it's a matter of when and not if Irish Reunification will happen.
I don't see either happening, realistically.
Ideally? Porque los dos?
I expected better from a professor. Spain has said it wil not stop Scotland joining EU. Why the UN would stop Scotland joining I don't know that wasn't explained either and if England was to treat Scotland like that it shows how they view Scotland. If Scotland is the burden the Westminster establishment and English journalists and politicians often claim them why stop it leaving ?
yeah i couldn't quite grasp either how the the uk would try to block scotland's un membership when the uk would no longer exist. of course the 'uk' also said they would veto scotland's eu membership if they voted yes in 2014. at least that can't happen next time. with friends like the english who needs enemies?
Why would Scotland rejoin the EU - they are only after your money and men./women to fight in their other members wars...Conscription? Where would Scotland get the money for equipment for military? As for the UN and its affiliates, all crooks - e.g. taking foreign aid from other countries and giving it knowingly to Hamas terrorists. AS for SNP, well that speaks for itself and not to be trusted either.
Another Friday
Another amazing video from professor Ker-lindsay
Thanks so much! :-) Have a great weekend.
WE LOVE YOU PROFESSOR!!! KEEP IT UP!!!!!!
You mention Catalonia..why compare Scotland to Catalonia..2 completely different situations..Scotland is in a voluntary union, Scotland is a nation with a long history of independence..Catalonia is neither..so comparisons are utter rubbish..Saor Alba
Scotland is not like Catalonia as it was never a nation. Scotland was railroaded into a Union as a full partner. This was by means of avTreaty. If the UK can leave the Treaty of Europe then Scotland should have a route out of this rotten Union.
England happy to let n Ireland go but not Scotland. Mmmm. Resources my dear boy resources. . Labour is Tory lite and Scots know it
Love your videos professor. They are great in presenting the context. I was wondering for another video idea if you could do one on Columbia governments relations with the cartels and negotiations for ceasefires.
Thanks so much. Great suggestion! I have had Colombia on my list for a while now. Let me look into it.
Is there any other country in the world that has rejected its own independence? Scottish people really must be insane.
Quebec did. Twice. And New Caledonia has three times (although there were serious questions about who could vote). It does happen. But countries don’t often grant votes.
@@JamesKerLindsay thank you for the interesting response. I feel Scots hae been extremely short sighted in not taking the opportunity to become a sovereign nation.
Scotland were fed lies by both the LIEbour and CONServative parties, the biggest being vote _NO_ and we'd be given full Devo, Home Rule or Federalism.
Check the records, which will bear me out.
This promise, just like all the others, was never kept.
The only insanity, which I view as gullibility, was that too many fell for the deliberate con.
Post vote analysis, conducted by Edinburgh University, discovered that 37% of _NO_ voters did so in the belief Scotland would be given more powers!
A full 10% had remained undecided.
They do not have the cash to do so. Also I don't see anyone fit to lead it at present.@@davidorrell764
You seem to have forgotten that a total of 65 countries have claimed their independence from British Empire or The United Kingdom and never asked to return.
@Ian Carpenter naa as an American were good with being independent but poor useless country's mite want to return but the question is does the UK want them back to?
Independence remains electorally in the balance for two main reasons.
1. The failure to explain the ridiculously simple currency situation and the related workings of a fiat currency issued by a monetarily sovereign state. (This really shouldn't be an issue. Historically, the finest works on the subject have been written by Scots and Scotland has a highly successful financial sector that is about 2.5 times that of England on a per capita basis.)
2. The intense fear felt by many NO voters of the wickedness and cruelty they expect from England upon independence. (Yes. England has made a huge impression on Scotland: not a good one.)
We Scots didn't vote for independence which is a foreign concept encouraged by UK hating Irish Mel Gibson in the first place, he never gave Scotsmen the jobs of being extras, he filmed it in Ireland and had a bunch of Irish people impersonating us Scots to try and make us appear hateful of English people which i find rather offensive.
And yet 45% of the population did vote for it...
Additional comment. Independence is not off the agenda. It is still a huge dividing factor within families, friend in Scotland. It is still a taboo subject in pubs, clubs and extremely divisive. The main points being. What will actually be better and by when and by what measures after separation. No one can answer that question. What will be our currency ? Will we rejoin the EU ? What of Independence is we leave the UK and Immidiately hand over our sovereign powers by joining the EU ? WHo will protect Scotland ? Army Navy Airforce ? Who will pay our Pensions. What happens to the debt to GDP built up in Scotland of 16% ( limit for joining EU is 3% ) What happens to Scotlands share of the UK debt ? Who will be Scotlands Bank of Reserve, where does the reserve come from.? How do we operate a border between Scotland and England when 65 % of our trade is with England and only 15% with the EU ?
Do we have a hard border ? Neither the Scottish Government nor the SNP have answered any of these question either prior to the 2014 referendum or since. It seems that 45% of Scots wish to sever all links to UK Westminster without actually knowing what Scotland will be like after the break. All these questions must be answered before any further referendum so that we actually know what we are voting for. C'mon Holyrood ? what are you scared of ?
Thanks. These are all incredibly important points. It’s interesting that the Scottish government at least tried to provide a blueprint for independent before the 2014. Compare that with the Brexit referendum, when absolutely no plans, or even general details, were laid out before the vote. It’s shocking that such a major decision could be taken without any groundwork. And look at the mess the U.K. is in today as a result!
@@JamesKerLindsay Thanks for response. Do you really think that the UK is in the mess it is in because of the Brexit result ? What plans or details did you expect to be laid out prior to the Brexit vote. In my mind it was crystal clear. Take back control of all law making functions to the the UK inhouse. ? Remove all outside influence on our ability to make laws which relate to our nation. From then on we are solely responsible for good / bad decisions and how we allocate our tax collections. There was no need for a 'plan' or 'groundwork' . We simply wanted to control all internal matters. I personally do not know whether being 'out' has been good or bad for us because as soon as the date came along COVID hit across the planet and everything took a backward step globally. I think we need to judge something as big as this over 5 or 10 years or even a similar time that we were 'IN' the EU. This is not a topic for anyone to judge either way so soon after the cross over date and so soon after a 2 year global health and trade catastrophe. Lastly I would not expect a Prof. to be so judgemental after such a short time in history. Best wishes from someone with only life skills to draw upon. No 'letters' required.
PROTECT SCOTLAND FROM WHOLM ? WE HAVE NO ENEMIES !WE WILL HAVE ARMED FORCES FOR DUTY AT UN. LIKE IRELAND ! THE CURRENCY QUESTION HAS BEEN SPELLED OUT BY SNP !PENSIONS LIKE MY OWN IM 70.. CAN BE PAID OUT AT ALMOST ANY FOREIGN NATION AS YOU WELL KNOW 🤡65% OF OUR TRADE IS OBLIGED TO GO THRU ENGLAND TO LIVERPOOL ,FELIXSTOW ETC. BECAUSE THATCHER DESTROYED OU R PORTS ! AND A HARD BORDER WOULD ESSENTIAL ALL 194 KILOMETRES TO STOP THE FLOW OF DRUGS AND SCOTLAND BORROWS NO MONEY SO HAS NO DEBT! ALBA GU BRATH
We can also use scotgov elections as a plebiscite for indyref or westminister elections for independence. 50%+ rule. In which we then seek to enter negotiations. Then its really over to the uk gov in the catch 22 situation of ignore us and piss off more folk or enter it and give us independence.
Thats if we voted 50%+ for independence
The Dream is real and it occurred starting in the 1770s in America. And it was won by people who immigrated from Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales as well as others.I’m American and know many people in England who would love for Scotland to do their own thing
Naa bro were a different breed once we crossed that ocean our DNA changed 😂
MANY OF THE SCOTS WHO ARRIVED IN N. AMERICA WERE HIGHLANDERS WHO WERE KICKED OUT OF THEIR HOMES BY RAPACIOUS LAIRDS/DUKES/CLAN CHIEFS/ ROYAL FAMILY ETC!. WHO TRIED TO KEEP SOME OF THEIR CULTURE ALIVE, ALBA GU BRATH
Sorry to give you bad news, Tom, but America ceased to exist, in 1913.
I mean it *legallly* ceased to exist!
Have look at official seals, including the presidential and you see they just say _United States_ with no mention of Americap, in order to comply with International Law
"Dream"?
More like a hallucination
Free Scotland
Freedooooom!
Losing support over time does not have to be inevitable. The SNP has had plenty of time to demonstrate to the Scottish people, that a Scotland fully Indendant from The UK would be run more for the benefit of the majority of The Scottish people. IMO The SNP has proved the exact opposite. It has proven itself to be every bit as divisive and endemically corrupt as every other Scottish administration since the 9th century. It is extremely difficult to see how the SNP could have possibly run Scotland worse than it has. So bad, that one could be forgiven for thinking that the SNP leadership never really wanted Scottish independence in the first place. That all the SNP leadership really wanted was the power to stay on the associated Gravy Trains for as long as possible. Indeed we now know that they did not. The SNP wanted a Scotland Dependant of the EU, so the SNP leadership could stay on the EUs various Gravy Trains as well. How many mobile homes does one need?
It is far easier to make promises than to keep them. It is far easier to complain than it is to do better yourself. Having said that, it is still extremely difficult to see how the SNP could have run Scotland any worse than it has.
Given that Scotland has voted for it three times in three General Elections, I'm wondering what Scots have to do while England keeps shifting the goal posts.
I personally suspect strongly ( based on evidence ) that the referendum was fixed by the Home Office . Mark my words this'll come out in about Forty years . Asking an English PM for "permission" is an utter nonsense. It's continuing Direct Rule.
British Supreme Court?
How can two separate Countries have a British Court ?
More utter tosh .
England via Westminster will always cheat to get its own way.
I also think since they immediately switched to house hold registration then back to individual registration, that the election was riggedz
Yes, Scotland shall be free from Westminster domination. And the sooner the better
Interesting thoughts but even Professor (for economics) Mark Blyth, a Scot himself, who previously was sceptical of an independent Scotland now advocates for it since he sees a clear benefit for Scotland's economy outside of the UK.
Thanks. I was not taking a personal position on the economic case for independence. (I strongly support EU membership and so can see how rejoining the Single Market would be hugely beneficial in the longer term.) I was pointing out the perceptions of people who need to be won over. This is always important to bear in mind. In fact, it is one of my three principles of policy analysis: "What people perceive to be real is real in its consequences." It doesn't matter what you *know* about a situation, it's all about how those you are looking at *perceive* the situation - even if they are mistaken.
You should please 🙏 talk about the YÒRÙBÁ NATION movement going on now
Thanks so much for the great suggestion. This is certainly on my list of topics.
Fully support this . Thank you so much for your kind consideration@@JamesKerLindsay💜. YORUBA NATION advocacy and the YORUBA people's current assertions on their right to self-determination is a just and noble cause. YORUBALAND is indeed "bigger than Africa!" (Courtesy: Netflix documentary) 💌🗺
Also East Timor in the early 2000's
Thanks. East Timor was an interesting case. It wasn't really secession. It came under a rather unusual category of territories that were denied the right of self-determination at the point of decolonisation. It is similar to Western Sahara and Palestine.
@@JamesKerLindsay While true, they were still able to gain independence from Indonesia after decades of being annexed into Indonesia-proper, unlike Palestine & W. Sahara, which never gained independence
He did a video on East Timor.
@@JamesKerLindsay Another comment mentioned Montenegro. Isn't it also an example?
This is a reminder that when getting married, always have a prenuptial agreement that says that if one partner goes nuts, the sane one is free to date other people.
Haha! Never quite heard it put like that before. But it did make me laugh very hard! Thanks. :-)
But nobody wants to date Engerland !
You should understand that Britain is nothing more than a live, standing bi-lateral international treaty with Scotland's terms and conditions attached to it. Speaking of Pre-nuptial agreements, Scotland also had pre-conditions in place prior to signing its bi-lateral treaty with England. Yes, the "Treaty of Union" is in fact a conditional international treaty drawn up between two Sovereign states and that Scotland's sovereignty was never a part of that agreement.
The "Treaty of Union" is nothing more than an economic treaty that was agreed on to be politically run from an agreed upon "Union" Parliament that was to sit in Westminster London. Scots Law and English Law were kept separate and distinct and were never an integrated part of the treaty itself and were kept apart for some very specific and important reasons. It was in order to keep the two nations incompatible and irreconcilable concepts on sovereignty contained in their respective Constitutional Laws apart for all time coming. Scotland never signed away its sovereignty, it was never a part of the treaty and pre-conditional to the treaty.
Historically, becoming an independent country required bravery from the people with strong movements forcing the issue. People fighting for their independence think of the end-goal, not about economic or other consequences. Sadly I don't think Scots have that fighting spirit or just don't care enough. Independence is never gained through political parties.
Have to disagree with some of the assertions, the fact that Labour and the Conservatives are battling over the Unionist vote means the SNP (even in its current weaked state) will most likely continue to hold a majority of seats in Scotland at both Westminster and Holyrood. The blanket refusal to even talk to the SNP by Labour as well as their position on Brexit mean they are effectively seen as Tory Light in Scotland, not a winning strategy.
One thing I think that is clear is that many Scots are falling into the silent majority catagory now, as you said the soft yes voters as well genuine undecided, with most of the noise coming from the noisy extremes of Unionst or Nationalist, the next General Election will be very interesting for sure!
The Scots talk a lot. Talk, talk, talk. People who truly want independence from an oppressive government are willing to fight for it. Look around you, there are plenty of examples.
Oppressive?
Because Scotland isn't oppressed.
Either they're cowards, or it's not oppressive as is romantically portrayed
Are you really suggesting they should resort to bloodshed?
Some observations:
1. The Act of Union of was passed after Scottish financial interests failed in an attempt at colonization. The Scottish government was forced to recognize that England would always have the upper hand economically. This historical situation could return upon independence.
2. The SNP has been careful to avoid insulting the monarchy which, as explained in the video, is jointly Scottish and English. This is an indicator of the difficulty in forming an exclusively Scottish national identity.
3. Scottish Nationalists have repeatedly pointed to the left-leaning nature of their electorate and the repeated election of Conservative governments to Westminster. A Labour government being elected could dissolve some of these tensions.
A proposal:
There has been increasing public support for reforming the House of Lords. The UK has been operating more and more like a federation due to the devolution to Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. I propose reforming the House of Lords into a legislature more like the US Senate. I would propose 25 Lords from each of the 4 constituent regions elected by proportional representation. I would reserve non-voting seats for the Hereditary and Spiritual Lords to act on committees and to promote stability in the chamber. This would also help to resolve some of the consternation over former-PM Tony Blair's reforms to the Supreme Court and House of Lords. To promote national unity, I would also advise the King to appoint a member of the Royal Family as representative Royal for each of the regions.
The majority of Scots, according to recent polls, want to revoke the union and have no interest in a re-jigged English political landscape.
They want out of this toxic relationship.
You comment does not deal with why the Darian venture failed and the part England played in the deaths of the would-be colonists, or how English troops were garrisoned in every Scottish city and major town for eighteen months, following the unlawful signing of the bilateral fiscal and political treaty, in order to put down riots by the Sovereigns, who objected it's signing by those unauthorised to do so, against the wishes of the Sovereigns and who had done so for English gold or out fear.
The Sovereigns had no wish to join in _any_ union with England and the majority of them still feel the same today and want out!
But not ratified in 1707,if it was 'can you find out who ?, I bet you can't,yes Scotland was bailed out because of finances then but,we have more than paid back over centuries.
As a Shetlander I do not want Independence from the UK. I love being British.
Do the Shetlands like being part of Scotland, or would people there prefer to be more like the Isle of Mann?
@@solsunman383 I am old school British. I want to stay part of the UK. I don't want to be separated away from the rest of my country men. God, King, Country.
@Paul Johnson Thanks, Paul. The Shetlands are seemingly in a rather interesting position. I have seen talk that it is more unionist than other parts of the country - and, of course, they still have a LibDem MP - and that if Scotland chose to break away, it could ask to secede from Scotland - much to the ironic chagrin of the SNP! :-)
i've lived in shetland for more than 30 years, hope to see an independent scottish republic and wouldn't call myself british in a thousand years. local politicians like the status quo and would prefer to keep their oily crumbs from the british table all to themselves. the population know fine well their daily lifeline services come from the scottish mainland.
@@saaversteen Do you think this Scottish parasite can hear himself speak. The absolute hypocrisy of the SNP.
The 40 to 45% support for Scottish independence. Should that not actually be 45 to 51%? Let's call it 45 to 50.
And do remember that in the earlier past the independence of Ireland, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Czechia, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, North Macedonia ...
Scotland is the only country in the world that chooses not to govern itself. Wales - it depends on what status one thinks Wales has. I think it's only a matter of time ...
Scotland wasn't "dragged out of the EU". The choice to remain in the UK was explicitly a choice to participate in, and abide by, democracy at the UK level. There is no independent polity of Scotland to be "dragged out".
I will always vote for Scottish independence but the SNP have completely detached from the sentiment of the Scottish public who view Yousaf as an unlikable, arrogant bully. He is electoral poison for the SNP and I think they will lose over half their seats at Westminster in the next G.E.
Thank you for providing such a simple, yet intelligent and undramatised commentary on this highly controversial issue. 👍
Thanks so much! :-)
Speaking as an Irishman who would quite like to see Scotland back in the EU, and an arc of smaller progressive hi-tech democracies all across the northern edge of Europe from Ireland to Finland, at this point I do suspect they've blown it and were even maybe full of hot air all along. If they've swallowed Brexit, BoJo, over a decade of atrocious Tory rule, being lied to and cheated by Westminster politicians and London courts on multiple occasions, and they *still* can't make up their minds then yeah. They'll grumble and talk about it for the next 100 years but at the end of the day I now doubt they'll ever actually *do* anything.
I do think the idea the Spanish would veto Scotland's accession to the EU is a bit of a British media myth though. If London deliberately made it impossible to do it entirely "legally" by rigging the rules, and given the UK is now out of the EU (and out of friends in Europe), and multiple Spanish politicians have said they have no objection, and members like Ireland would be strongly pro Scottish membership, then one way or another the wheels would get greased.
*Every prime minister who wants independence from the British monarchy ends up resigning!*
Scotland and Ireland need to pipe down and stay as part of UK. There are no serious fundamental differences between Irish, Scotish and English people. Also, being so isolated it would be dumb to have conflicts with each other.
Interesting video ,a few points i would queery .
1)The EU is not a binary thing ,Scotland even if aplication for membership was rejected could easily get a far closer alignment with the EU without having to be a fully fledged member.
2) Its not entirely clear what the EUs stance on a Scottish membership actually would be and the oft cited "spain would block it" is a really questionable stance nowadays .
The reality is that Scotland would be Quite a welcome EU partner as far as it has an awful lot to offer the body .
3)The demograhics of independence v the union are clearly on the side of the independence movement in the very near future ,Younger people are basicaly not becoming unionist as they get older.
4)like prety much every other political party there are divisions in the snp but the bulk of the membership are people like myself who was once a labour suporter but will simply never vote labour again (unless of course Slab splits of from the westminster party and gives up its project of unionism .
5) whilst we are grapeling with the turmoil over the police raid over the last few days the media foucus has beenon how this makes the SNP look with the assumption of a negative public reaction.I would in no way comment on the ongoing case ,however I think at least half the population are probably asking if a fewd west type forsensic tent and what was posibly an over kill presence by the police might have been a big mistake .
varius unionist politicians( both labour and tory) have found it imposible to keep quiet until the investigation comes to a conclusion.
6) ties in with point 5 ! the caliber of both labour and tory msps is incredibly low .
7)the argument about frictionles border trade only really works if the rUK is a viable and roubust market for Scottish goods ,the wheels are comming of that bus pretty quikly and a labour goverment who refuses to tackle the core problems will keep dragging the uk down the path of the tory failed state issolationalism .
In conclusion I would agree that acheiving independence is prety difficult in peace time in relativly stable western Europe.
However it does happen in our part of the world ! evidenced by both Norway and Ireland (Scotland is sort of sitting between these two countries culturaly and often politicaly )
the projectory of asperation between the English and Scottish electorate has been of divergance since the 80s ,its getting more so over time .
the most likely option for the independence movement in scotland is to allow more diversity in the pro independence vote .to some extent this has been naturaly hapening with the greens scottish socialists and alba parties but not really to the level thats needed ,If there is a split in the SNP over the next few months or years it might actually be to the benifit of the independence movement .
the Scottish parliment is designed for multi party coalitions .
Thanks. Scotland certainly would have a lot to offer the EU. But this doesn't change the fundamental calculations. My research area is secession and recognition and so I have looked at these issues in considerable detail. Spain - and others - would certainly block EU membership if Scotland *unilaterally declared independence*. If it was done with Britain's permission, it would have absolutely no problems.
As for closer alignment, Scotland could voluntarily choose to adopt EU legislation, but that would be a very weak form of convergence. It would not be involved in any decision-making within the EU. It would probably be blocked from participating in many programmes (Erasmus, Horizon, etc.). It wouldn't gain access to EU funds.
And while I agree that Scotland could shift its exports to the EU in time, for the moment, it is far more linked to the rUK. For this to work, the Scottish government would need to start encouraging businesses to shift to the EU. But this is now difficult because the UK is out of the EU, which makes the rUK market even more important. It is a vicious circle.
💯 👍
Scotland must never become independent. Ever! Britian should not negotiate for a moment. If it comes to it Brittainia should fight to remain Great Britian and not just England and Northern Ireland.
It was not widely known as a “Once in a lifetime vote” That was a throwaway remark grabbed by Unionists but never accepted by Independent supporters. What is never mentioned is the threat that if you voted Yes, Scotland would be kicked out of the EU. That had a massive effect and ultimately the vote went to the No vote. Brexit clearly changed everything as the majority of Scottish voters who voted to remain. That alone should make another referendum allowed.
Thanks. The problem was the the term was actually first used by the Scottish Government. I think it was meant to persuade people that if they didn’t take the chance for independence in 2014 then it would be a long time before they got another opportunity. The trouble is that this was perfect for the Unionists, who have used it ever since. That’s why I put it in there. It’s actually an interesting factor in the whole debate. Personally, I think a new referendum was justified by Brexit. And I think the Northern Ireland model of seven years between votes makes sense. (Meaning it’s well past time for another vote.) But even then it’s really far from clear that people would take independence if offered the chance to vote on it now.
Westminster also told our pensioners that their pensions would be under threat, we wouldn’t be allowed to use sterling pro tem, we wouldn’t be able to join the EU as an Independent Nation, there’s no doubt about it the 2014 referendum was lost by Scotland based on lies !!!
What the main problem was the SNP didn’t have all their ducks in a row.
It was even quite difficult for the SNP to be invited onto the MSM for an evenly balanced debate, Westminster sent 100 Torrie MP’s up to Scotland to work the 4 corners of Scotland, you had 1 SNP, 2 Labour MSP’s and 3 Westminster MP in one debate, debates were never evenly balanced !!!!
Scotland has its eyes opened over the past 8yrs and I think another Indi ref in a couple of years will see a completely different result !!!!
@@JamesKerLindsay With all due respect, this line has been used by many political parties for various different reasons. Boris Johnson used this exact same phrase in the run-up to the 2019 election regarding getting Brexit done.
Scottish Independence should have gone the way of Quebec……and died after 2014.
Brexit saved the cause.
In reality the idea of England & Scotland being separate Nations after 300 years has never made sense.
Not only is there a shared history. Both are far more integrated with each other than the U.K. ever was with the EU
But
There are more people of Scottish Descent living in England than in Scotland.
Realistically they are not really separate Nations anymore.
Now that the tide of Brexit popularism is dying…..and that SNP has proven to be as corrupt as the ERG Tories
I think it will die off…..not quickly but slowly
Excellent video Dr Ker-Lindsay. One thing you didn't note is that during the leadership campaign, both Yousaf and Forbes accepted that a) no stable majority for independence exists, and that b) until one exists, then the time is not right for a referendum, let alone independence.
This is crucial, because (remarkably) it aligns the SNP with the UK government regarding the conditions for another referendum. The Secretary of State for Scotland, Alister Jack, has for some years said that sustained 60%+ support for independence would be viewed as a trigger for a second referendum.
I think this is the real reason why independence is firmly on the backburner. The SNP has dropped Sturgeonite bluster and confrontation, and is now singing from the same hymn sheet as the UK government.
I suspect the wager is that with patience, demographic change will deliver victory for independence.
But that may well prove mistaken - unless permanent campaign energy is maintained (as Sturgeon successfully did, and planned to continue via her de facto referendum strategy), pro-independence opinion may continue to atrophy.
I think the key was to do s Sturgeon, keep the campaign, keep pushing, otherwise you fall back.
@@FOLIPE I agree! So many commentators thought the de facto referendum was dumb because it could never lead to independence (Westminster would reject it). But I think she was playing the much longer game of keeping pro-independence opinion consolidated and expanding.
@Edmund Flett Thanks so much for highlighting this. You are right. Yousaf seems to recognise that he will have to take a very different approach. There isn't a stable majority for independence. But he is - one way or another - now the figurehead for the independence movement. Even if he might have to take a rather more gradualist approach, he will be expected to keep the flame of independence burning and offer hope to the main bulk of the SNP membership that is still keen for it to happen sooner rather than later. It will be a very tricky balance to reach. And I think you are right about independence 'atrophy'. I kept thinking about Quebec as I was making it. But, then again, Brexit complicates things in all sorts of ways. It could play out in many different directions.
Why were the SNP so desperate to have one in the Autumn of 2023?
Yousuf isn't bright enough.
It’s just corrupt politicians seeing change as an opportunity to make some money. How will it improves the lives of Scots?
It's entirely ironic that Scotland wants to break up the Union when they were the one's to propose it in the first place.
Humza Yousaf is going to push up the income tax to 43% in Scotland, just madness.
Can you do a video on South Tyrol please? 😍
It's Austrian 🇦🇹
Stupid idea yo break away from Scotland strength is unity not division
Another great video professor! As ever you take a measured and diplomatic look at what I can imagine is a polarizing topic.
I wonder if this will in any way go similarly to Quebec, where there is a sustained period of popularity for independence, but where ultimately the independent streak ends up being exercised within the existing union with full independence coming to be seen as unwieldy or unwise.
In any case thank you for another look at the situation.
Separately, I wonder if you might be doing an video on the recent clashes in Amhara as well as the continuing Oromo insurgency, and the general continued instability in the Ethiopian federation even after victory in the Tigray War.
Thanks as always professor!
Thank you, LocalLt. It’s interesting that you mention Quebec. It was really on my mind as I was making this video. I do often wonder if Scotland may go in that direction. I can see how things might shift again, but I do get the sense that we might have seen the high water mark for the independence movement. If Brexit could deliver a massive shift in support for statehood, I don’t know what will!? Maybe Irish unification.
Anyway, I do hope all is well at your end. Keep an eye out for tonight’s video. With a big election coming up in Turkey, I’m taking a look at the Erdogan Era.
I wonder if the two are even comparable. How was the media perception within Quebec on independence? In Scotland the media is overwhelmingly hostile to independence so support being as high as it is, is remarkable. Demographics support a shift towards increasing support for independence. The high polls we saw during COVID came from the independence supporting Scottish government getting unbiased airtime (also during a period of serious upheaval). Once the polls showed increasing support, the coverage was heavily cut and changed showing a decreasing support after.
I would be interested to see details on how media in Quebec covered the issue. Also Quebec was never an independent state prior so this also changes the dynamic.
@@SI-vb7hd Your points about the nuances of the two situations are well-taken. While I also acknowledge that Quebec has never been an independent state, its legacy derives from a separate colonial lineage from Ontario and the rest of Canada; it’s effectively the remnant of the French colony of New France, while Ontario is the remnant of British Upper Canada, so they emerged from separate, albeit colonial, entities.
if the scotts want independance let them have it look at the billions the uk would save not giving them there dole cheques.
I’m Faroese, and even though I don’t live there anymore, I understand why people are hesitant to vote for independence. The status quo is “mentally safe,” and becoming an independent country is difficult and you enter an uncertain future. It also most likely can’t be undone if things turn out badly.
The Faroe Islands have been given permission to become an independent country by Denmark, but the support for independence is still only around 40% in the Faroe Islands.
I know it’s a bit different between Scotland and the Faroes, in that there are 100 times more people in Scotland, and the Faroes are still dependent on Danish subsidies. Both Scotland and the Faroes would probably survive, but no one wants a reduction in their standard of living, if things turn out badly.
Thanks so much. The comparison is really great. I think you are right. There is a solid body of support for independence in Scotland, but it is not quite enough (or do it seems) to get over the line. The movement needs an extra boost from those who might accept independence, but still need to be convinced that it safer than the status quo.
Completely understand your point of view. Most Scots are not aware of the roughly 13 billion pounds we receive from Westminster, or to put it another way, we receive 5000 pounds per household. An Independent Scotland would we be financially significantly worse off.
@@Hrotiberhtaz I agree. The Americans are also very keen on setting up shop in Greenland, Iceland and the Faroe Islands. However, I would rather have the Americans there than the Russians and Chinese.
The American government at least has some semblance of accountability to their people.
The problem with Greenland and the Faroe Islands is that the relationship with Denmark is very lopsided. Denmark makes decisions in international matters and then goes to them and says "oh, btw, we decided that we all are doing this now", even when it's against Faroese and/or Greenlandic interests without consulting anyone from said territories.
They leave sensitive matters to fester until it politically explodes, and then Danes, both the general public and politicians call them ungrateful and say something to the likes of "then why don't you just leave and say no to the subsidies" which does absolutely nothing to help the situation.
Something has to change in the relationship with Denmark for the relationship to become more stable. It's actually really unstable at the moment.
They are just now considering allowing Faroese and Greenlandic politicians to speak their native languages in the Danish parliament while having a translator present. This should have been done decades ago, since the Faroese and Greenlandic politicians are representing their respective peoples, and not Danes, who aren't native Danish speakers. It's especially important for Greenlandic politicians to be able to speak Greenlandic, because they have a pretty sizable monolingual population.
@@JamesKerLindsay Even with Brexit, in 2014, Scotland and Britain dodged a bullet. To my knowledge, there were no outright negotiations over where the UK would continue to house its nuclear fleet among literally every other aspect of how to "unpick 350 years of shared history" (can't remember source).
Even with the SNP's recent fortunes, the Scottish independence movement is very much still alive and will survive the demise of the SNP as a dominant force in Scottish politics. For so many reasons, the next UK general election could be as epochal as the Tory win in 1979 was.
As for 1997, it was epic, but when Blair lost his way in the sands of Iraq (as so many of us in America and our cousins in the UK did), the dream of New Labour died a slow death.
As to 2014, the same recklessness Cameron handled that situation was used in handling the Brexit referendum. Usually, one does not get away with not having an exit strategy, and the UK with Brexit has been burned hard.
From across the Pond, I would hope Scotland stays in the UK. It is better for all, and the devolution of powers that took place in 1997 was in retrospect a good thing, the 1998 Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland rightly making Tony Blair one of a number of living (and passed-away) legends.
The dire state of the UK economy post-brexit will result in the traditional emigration of many young Scottish people (and perhaps many English). The Union puts Scotland in a powerless political and economic situation in the best of times but now that the UK has shot itself in both feet over brexit our future in the UK looks even bleaker than usual.
I hope that Scotland gains independence.
Even after the corrupt, twisted goings on that the snp have overseen?
If Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria, Sir Disraeli, Sir Churchill saw what Great Britain has become, they would all be turning on their graves! 🪦
I’m amazed to the lack of vision for Brexiters, Scottish nationalists. Totally beyong understanding
What is the biggest reason for those who want to stay with the UK? Do we have polls on that?
Great question. Interestingly, economic factors seem to play a huge part. In fact, I often contrast 2014 with 2016. The Scottish referendum showed how fears over the economic effects saw people vote to keep the status quo. However, with Brexit, people voted to leave despite knowing the economic effects. I now use this when thinking about other referendums elsewhere. Are voters Scottish or English? Will they vote for or against their own economic interest (head or heart) in any given situation.
The SNP could get a landslide for independence if they actually had a genuine financial case for independence, but they don't.
We pay 42% i come tax with adjusted bands.
If I still iced in Scotland it would cost me an an extra 3k a year to stay in the SNPs stasi run state.
Ok united kingdom, there will be a vote and when it happens no boohoos. Scotland and northern Ireland deserve there freedom if that is the result of the people, and that's the end of it shake hands and go home. Welcome 2 more NATO FAMILY MEMBERS. We will have 40 NATO STATES by the end of this decade.
SLAVA UKRAINI, SUKA RUSKI VOTNIC'S
"Indepenence" is not the issue since Scotland is neither a colony nor a depencency but an integral and equal part of the United Kingdom.
If we are an equal partner, why are we not allowed to decide if we want to leave the union?
@@craigevans6156 For the same reason Sussex isn't allowed to unilaterally declare independence, because we are a single sovereign country not a confederation.
@@craigevans6156 The decision was made by in the referendum of 2014 when the Scottish people freely voted to remain in the Union.
The SNP who had previously said it was a "once in a generation decision" cannot immediately call for another simply because they did not like the result.
What kind of "Nationalists" want to displace their native population and culture with alien immigrants and subsume Scotland to the EU?
@@freeman8128 bollocks; we were lied to, none of the promises made by the Better together campaign were kept. Then we had Brexit.
@@abcdefksohfosuh9024 Sussex is a County I’m England ; Scotland is an ancient country in a supposedly voluntary union with England. That is the difference.
Hope so l am British and against any party trying to destroy my country
"Independence Day" YES! :)
"Andrew Marr - And so, if it’s a no vote by a whisker again, is that it?
Do you come back for another referendum in a few years time. I mean you’ve talked in the past as it’s for a generation, is that still your view.
Alex Salmond- Yes it is. By that, what I mean is, if you remember- I know you do- constitutional referendum in Scotland in 1979, and the next one in 1997 - that’s what I mean by a political generation. In my opinion, and it’s just my opinion it’s a once in a generation opportunity for Scotland.
So what he is saying that this is a political generation, not a rabbit or a rat generation, certainly not a human generation. Read James Hunter, Insurrection - Scotland's famine winter. Do it NOW! Get Angry, Lets deal with these Far Cars.
Oof tough news to hear, I'd love for Scotland to overcome the odds but the pessimist in me doubts I'll ever see good news coming from the UK
Overcome the odds to what end? If doesn't look very appealing
@Cameron Coleman overcome the odds to rejoin the EU, a tall task to overcome & unfortunately not a likely one
@@veraxiana9993 I understand, personally I think to put the Scottish people through so much uncertainty is quite frankly immoral but politics will politic
@@MrCameroncee fair enough
It would be ridiculous if the EU consented to 40% of the UK being in the EU. You can’t pick and choose!
THEIR WONT BE NO CORRUPT ROYALS AND NO UK .ONLY THE NATION OF SCOTLAND ! ALBA GU BRATH
A more pressing question is the demographics, an ethnic Indian UK prime minister, an ethnic Indian Irish prime minister, an ethnic Pakistani Scots first minister. David Coleman professor of demographics said that the UK will become a minority ethnic British country by 2066 if not sooner. One can only look to Zimbabwe or South Africa to see what lies ahead…
I wonder which countries in europe have the lowest immigration numbers I would think Poland and Hungary excluding the Ukrainians that arrived Germany seems the most.
Why stress? It's already been agreed via the UN. Too white, too entitled , too lazy. No use to business as consumer or worker. Enjoy your retirement 😢
There is also an ethnic Pakistani mayor of London.
@davidbrims I read sometime ago that according to the ONS white british children will be outnumbered, by third world children ,in primary schools by 2030 . As the average age of a primary school kid is 8 yrs old it follows that by 2040 these children of third world immigrants will be 18 and block voting for whoever the immam tells them to . So sometime after 2040 they will acheive political power. One generation after that ( say 4 election cycles ) and i would think it will be all over for the white British of that future period . Your figure of 2066 should see a multi -tribal society driven by religious and ethnic strife , with third world living standards . All brought about by the voters of today.
Scotland will be free and independent.
In my opinion it's only a matter of time, considering that the once in a generation line has a built in shelf life, and eventually it will be a generation later, and given that younger people are more open to the idea and overwhelmingly older people who voted against it will not be around by the time there is another one.
It will never die this is not about the Snp it's about the Yes movement and Independence
Nothing is immortal, everything dies at some point.
Separating countries is difficult and rare outside of the break up of broad empires or after defeat in war. Separating the UK would make brexit look like a cake walk. Scotland is not ready to do it, despite what Marr says was a serious of events that looked designed to make people want it. Quebec separatists got within 0.5% of a Yes to separation vote on the 3rd attempt, but thankfully it is no longer an issue, as it would have cut Canada into 3 and lost 25% of the population, making the country possibly unviable. Their retreat from the brink shows nothing is inevitable.
Thanks. The situation in Quebec is really instructive. I kept thinking about that as I was making this video.
@@JamesKerLindsay I know a lot of Newfoundlanders and their view was that if Quebec left, Canada would loosen up and provinces would get closer to U.S states, where they often trade more ( bigger market) than across Canada. Whether that meant merging with USA eventually, who knows, but most wanted to be separate and different now, e.g. Govt health insurance and stronger benefits.
Why is Scotland not ready to do it?
@@elliotwilliams7421 An extra international border along the River Tweed, loss of easy main markets in England and Wales, loss of support of Treasury and Bank of England and Barnet formula of funding. What currency and what would it cost to back it?
@@ParcelOfRogue so what if there was a border?
Why lose they markets?
So what if we lose the Barnet formula?
Currency? Pound to begin then onto our own currency, se as dozens of others countries have done.
Back what?
Get it striaght once and for all. These guys in the SNP: do
NOT WANT TO BE INDEPENDENT THEY WANT TO JOIN THE EU.
How is that consistent with being an independent country,exactly?
It is perfectly consistent. In fact, the EU makes it far easier for small countries to exert global influence in this day and age. It allows them to operate in ways that they couldn't before, with the political and economic support and protection of many other countries. Look at Lithuania's battle with China. Or consider how small countries can ensure that key sectors of their economy are protected in trade deals. The idea that the EU somehow limits sovereignty is a myth cooked up by UK eurosceptics. It really doesn't reflect reality.
@@JamesKerLindsay You can convince the 'true believers' Prof,but like them you don't address the core of the point I made.
No country has the ability to take 'independent' action in most areas as a member of the EU. You didn't dispute this in your reply.
You Just introduce a Strawman argument concerning perceived 'influence'. Scotland would have very little influence in anything,certainly nowhere near the influence it has in UK affairs.
As for 'economic support', I wouldn't shout that from the rooftops in downtown Athens.
Influence is what the EU has ,not any country in it apart from the 'usual suspects', France and Germany for whose economies the EU is designed around.
When you can't fully control who you allow into your country, have a court higher than your own highest court, have your primary legislation made anywhere but in your own national parliament,then by no meaningful definition can you claim your country to be soverign .That's not a myth.Its a fact
Limited sovereignty is like limited virginity.
#It doesn't exist.
2014 the Scottish people alone voted 55 to 45 % to remain in the UK Union. Thea arguments that in 2016 the EU referendum has Scotland vote to stay in EU is misplaced. All people in the UK voted as UK citizens in this vote not as citizens representing the wishes of England, N Ireland, Scoland, Wales. The vote was for a decision for the UK as a whole to stay or leave the EU. Individual parts whether countries, regions or even votes within cites preferencies were not asked for. Only a vote for the UK to stay or leave. Any assumption on the result for a country, region or any other segmented part of the vote to be seen as a vote for that part on its own segregated from the UK vote is invalid. The vote was on the UK leaving or remaining with the EU. Everyone votes as UK citizens on behalf of the UK as a whole.
Doesn’t change the fact that the people of Scotland, who just two years earlier had been given a right to choose their own future, felt that they were now dragged out of the EU against their wishes. It also makes a mockery of any idea that this is a union of equals.
@@JamesKerLindsay We are a union of equals. Equal across the UK as UK citizens. The vote was for UK people to vote on a UK issue , not given to Scots to vote on a solely Scottish issue as was the 2014 referendum. You completely miss or ignore the fact that the EU vote was on a UK in/out issue , not Scotland in/out, Wales in/out . London in/out , West of Scotland in/out. ???. We voted as UK citizens, not for our devolved countries . \if you follow your logic of disecting the vote by borders then where do we stop ? Glasgow out, Dundee out Edinburgh In, Inverness In .......we voted as UK citizens on a UK issue.
Well done, yet again Prof.!!!
Thank you! :-)
I think it's better for Scotland to be part of Great Britain than an irrelevant independent nation.
You thinking is an oxymoron
Good video, but I need to point out that it was not widely billed as a "once in a generation vote" at the time. It was only described as such two or three times during the entire campaign. However, this soundbite was adopted and promoted ad nauseum by opponents to independence after the 2016 Brexit vote which was widely seen as a betrayal in Scotland.
Moreover, define a generation. It’s loosely defined as 20-30 years. We’re almost halfway through and it would take a couple of years to run from inception to polling day. Even if the “once in a generation” aspect was real or in any way binding, it’s coming soon to the point where that condition will be met.
Voter who voted for Scottish independence in 2014 were voting to leave the EU. Some intellectual honesty on the matter would ultimately be good for Scottish nationalists.
@@aleph8888 This is a twisted fabrication. The prospective being voted on was for Scotland to be independent and in the EU:. There was heated debate as to whether Scotland would have to leave or reapply - but in reality there was no mechanism to take an independent Scotland out of the EU against its will.
At the time the EU wasn't keen on encouraging the breakup to member states, and the "Catalonian Question" was well known. However, after Brexit attitudes in the EU changed markedly. Spain has stated - multiple times - that it will NOT block an independent Scotland's entry, and there is considerable empathy with Scotland in the wake of the rise of British nationalism which is seen across Europe as toxic and divisive - very similar to Trumpism.
@The Gaming Economist Thanks. This comes up occasionally. In fact, it was rather prominently stated by the Scottish Government itself at the time. I think it wanted to press the point that this might not be a chance that would come around again soon and so voters should take it. The problem is that it has gifted the argument to the other side, which I why I felt it was important to mention it. Personally, I have always argued that Brexit was a material change in circumstances that merits another vote.
@David Reynolds This is the problem. It is indeed very vague. In the case of Irish unification, a vote will be permitted seven years later. This seems reasonable. Not so soon as to have constant referendums, but soon enough to allow changes in opinions to be registered. Anyway, by that standard Scotland is now well and truly due another vote.
Would you say this could be affected by the new government, especially since they considered adding things like PR instead of FPTP (which might appease Scotland) but didn't outline this in their manifesto.
Another fabulous video! Thank you sir!
Thank you very much indeed! :-)
😂😂😂😂😂 The latest joke on Scotland.😂😂😂😂
I couldn't care about who leads the snp as long as we get independence .FREEDOM
I doubt you will get much freedom with these leaders.
Hilarious, freedom from England just to be replaced by asians, well, the same is happening to England so...
Scotland can declare independence same way Kosovo did. UK recognizes Kosovo so presedan has been set. England made big mistake by recognizing Kosovo.
I’m not the person to argue with about this. I raised the problems about Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence.
@@JamesKerLindsay I am not arguing, I just think England made mistake by supporting it, not considering it has similar issues
Looks like Scotland had a golden window of opportunity for indolence and yet, it has come and gone. While there is still an independence movement, it seems unlikely that Scotland will be independent any time soon. In fact, I think Irish Unification isn't even more likely, but will probably happen in a decade or two.
_"Looks like Scotland had a golden window of opportunity for indolence"_ Indolence? And let me guess... the joke is, they were too lazy to take it...? :D
Thanks. That seems to be my sense too. There was an opportunity to secure independence, but it is now looking less likely, for all the reasons I outlined. Interestingly, though, I think that if Ireland does unite, this could well shift the debate again in Scotland, especially if Brexit is still doing really badly (which I think will be the case).
Haha! Yes, a rather unfortunate mistake. :-) That said, indolence is not a trait anyone would ever associate with the Scots.
@@JamesKerLindsay what about the lies told during Indy ref 1 ..
The vow never happened so broken contract referendum 2 is coming we can go straight to the un
@@JamesKerLindsay Today, I learned a valuable lesson: always proof read before posting a comment.
Suck it, Aesop!
The SN P couldn't find a Scottish PM?
Sure, but as a caliphate as things are going
I have wondered since the 2014 referendum what the situation would be if the leader of one of the two main UK parties adopted a policy of never permitting another vote? What would the ramifications of that be?
History would indicate illegally held parliaments and eventual violence and international condemnation. Yes, Westminster has the power. But like Russia’s nukes, it’s not really a power it can use without terrible ramifications. It’s not really an option.
@@Dreyno You're probably right. I can't see even the most right-wing Tory PM resorting to that.
Civil war. Scotland declares UDI after an unofficial vote. The English government calls up troops into Scotland to try and stop it. Things go badly.
Not met one person saying there gonna vote Labour again most saying there done voting at all for anybody
The new Prime Minister's dad is from Pakistan, and his mum is from Kenya. If I were him, my morality would stop me from being the one who wanted to break the whole that has welcomed my parents. But since we are in a world of hypocrites, everything is everything.
May be like Pakistan 😆
Excellent work, Professor, as always. Thank you for this intelligent and fair lecture and explanation of the situation in Scotland right now.
I love Scotland, so I have thoughts and questions.
I'd love to see an Independent Scotland after centuries of English domination and control. If I remember correctly, and I may be wrong so I am happy to be corrected, the union in the early eighteenth century was 'necessary' because of money but not wanted by a majority of Scots (after a failed colonization project in Panama and relentless English domination?).
Fast forward: Since Thatcher, Scotland (and the north of England) has suffered cruelly under Tory austerity and anti-worker/anti-union and terrible housing policies. Third-way/Blarite Labour wasn't much better for Scotland, and Starmer has made Labour even more conservative than Blair and Brown did, so what good is UK/English rule for average, every day Scots, residents, immigrants, workers, and Scotland? Maintenance through exploitation (Trident, fishing, tourism, trade)? An underfunded and failing NHS? The so-called 'royal family'? Why should elites in and of the south rule the north and beyond?
The SNP has demonstrated quite clearly in the last two months with its divisive election for a new First Minister that it is primarily a pretty conservative Nationalist party and not a progressive party of the left that would be any better than an English or UK Labour government; it might be more of the same socially and economically but simply with Scots and not English politicians and judges making final decisions. Has devolution allowed Scottish politics to be more left, progressive, and/or inclusive for all? If so, how so? Is devolution really enough (e.g. the six counties in the north of Ireland--but the histories are different, if entangled, I know)?
Self-determination is necessary, without question, but is it possible economically and legally vis-a-vis dominant powers in the world? Scottish Independence is absolutely possible emotionally and intellectually, at least.
The English/UK government--Labour or LibDem or Conservative-Unionist--will never again allow for an Independence referendum in Scotland. No UK/English PM or party will want to be the one who hammers one of the final nails into the coffin of the British Empire.
If Scotland leaves of its own accord and volition, most if not all powerful governments, including the EU, will ostracize it, alas, and more economic devastation will occur for the average, everyday Scot and resident.
If only Salmond and Sturgeon and the SNP could have kept it together, Independence might have become a reality through diligence and progressive political programs. Now that the SNP (or some in its leadership) has been revealed as corrupt as any other party and filled with right-wingers, what chance is there of a truly free, democratic, and independent nation of Scotland for all Scots and residents?
I hope that Scotland can be free and independent and that recent problems are only a temporary setback--and that the plan for Scottish Independence can be realized, but I fear that, like Quebec in the mid-90s, the idea of Independence may fade away as a political reality--or that it will always be prevented by fiat from outside/without. I hope that I am wrong about that, to be sure.
Thank you--from a concerned, if ignorant, American.
Thanks so much! You are right about the origins of Scottish independence. It was based on a failed colonial project. The problem is that under international law (at least as it now stands), even if a territory voluntarily joins a union with another state, it has no right to unilaterally secede. Most people don't realise this. This is why I often have Scots telling me that it doesn't need British permission to break away. Unfortunately, yes it does. And that's the whole problem now. There is a British Government that looks determined to stop a vote. The thing is that even if Labour win the next election, they are likely to resist granting a referendum - although it might be a little more likely to accept it if it does well in the next UK and Scottish elections. I am certainly open to Scottish independence and have long argued Scotland should have the right to another vote, I am not sure if will happen soon, or would be successful.
On a separate note, even if Scotland did become independent, I don't think I would qualify for citizenship. Although my great-grandfather was Scottish, my Scottish-Australian grandfather was born in England (although his three siblings were all born in Scotland). If they do the Irish approach, I'd just miss out. (That said, I would qualify for Welsh citizenship on the other side, but that's another independence situation for another day!)
@@JamesKerLindsay Excellent! Thank you!
@@JamesKerLindsay The Darien project failed because Englnad made sure it happened, BUT it was not until the "Alien Act of 1705" that pushed the Scottish leaders to sign the "Act Of Union" and even then it was not a huge majority. Scottish government debt early 1700's 160K England's Government debt 20 Million understand the difference? I could go on and on about the nearly 100 years of military occupation the brainwashing etc etc over decades.
England cannot afford to let Scotland go, everybody looks to England because it is bigger and thinks it is economically viable, well just look at what has happened to the English economy over the last 40+ years, it is largely getting worse and worse and with Brexit it will accelerate, most of the "borrowing by the UK government goes to keeping the low wage economy going in England going, this is not sustainable in the long term. As of 2019 England now has 9 of the bottom 10 economically deprived area's in the EU. If Scotland wants to stop being a "Beggared" country independence is the only way. By the way England WILL throw Scotland to the wolves when it needs to.
@@JamesKerLindsay Be honest here if you can be. What Scotland gets from being tied to England.
1, Undemocratic, not just the first pass the post system, with 533 MP’s England votes for Scotland’s overall government, Scotland's representatives have little or no input to government or policies.
2, There are 26 tax/economic leavers Holyrood has 4 of these the rest are reserved, hence the 533 English MP’s give Scotland it’s economy.
3, Scotland MUST by law balance it’s budget, the 533 MP’s in Westminster assign Scottish debt with no input from Scotland.
4, Three of Scotland’s main political parties are financed and controlled by the English.
5, 37 of the 38 “papers” are anti-independence, along with all the visual media, again owned and controlled from England.
6, Scotland resources stolen and true value hidden from the Scot's, See the McCrone report.
With someone of your supposed intelligence I should not need to detail the implications of the above.
I could go on the Union has and always will be based on LIES by those that control England. So how long would Englnad accept these conditions if the shoe was on the other foot.
The SNP is a broad political grouping that is currently only held together by a shared desire for independence. Once that is delivered (should it ever be delivered), their infighting about staunchly opposed views on other matters would be worse than that of the Tories after Brexit.
Perhaps both sides should meet in the middle and opt for more devolution, especially on economic affairs. The geopolitics of Scotland are somewhat unique, they are well-positioned to make money with exporting renewable energies given their land mass and comparatively small population. Demand for it in the EU will be insatiable and bargaining power will be with the exporting country.
As a citizen of an EU member state, I do not entirely understand the need to replace the London overlord with a more distant Brussels overlord. It is both the Uk’s and Scotland’s interest to find an agreement.
Love from PAKISTAN 🇵🇰❤️
Sukran my friend😊
A good but very non-Scottish interpretation of the situation. A couple of things spring to mind here. Catalonia is often used as a comparison but differs from Scotland due to the Treaty of Union which is an international treaty between Scotland and England. Catalonia as far as I’m aware is a part of Spain not bound by treaty. The border question come separation is something much touted by the mainly Unionist and externally owned media in Scotland and hyped to be something more concerning to Scot’s than I believe it actually is. ie Would trading cease between the 2 countries come independence? It’s hardly likely with arrangements being quickly made in the event of independence. Scotland and England are not the only countries in the world that share borders after all.
I believe the point was that Spain would likely oppose EU accession due to Catalan Sepratism, regardless of treaty law Spain would probably be hostile.
everyone in Scotland would move to London if that happened. Scotlands entire economy is based in London. that cannot be undone overnight. no one ever goes to Glasgow to bank or trade stocks they all go to London. even Ireland has a larger population than Scotland and even the Ireland is pretty irrelevant country when it comes to European mind Global politics. Everyone does however still talk about the UK on the global stage. Scotland benefits from the UK brand. Scotland would need its own currency establish its own financial markets and regulation. Scotland would take 20 years after independence to join the EU. it’s not a done deal and it require convergence criteria and signing multiple treaties with the EU. or Scotland could take the route of Canada and try to match its population to that of England’s like Canada is trying to match its population with the U.S and then join the EU and become a player on European and world stage.
If the UK were a truly 'voluntary' Union we'd probably be voting yes about now. As it is the UK will lurch along and Scotland will fall further behind its independent neighbours a while more- hardly in unity though. *PS don't forget the demographics- namely the huge support for independence among under 50s - and the anti-democratic UK (with its poverty and inequality) offers little that will change their minds* - I remain very optimistic
The uk is a state not an union.Of course it is not voluntary lmfao
A Supreme Court that overrules Scot’s right to sovereignty within the claim of right means that Scotland is effectively a colony?. So Scotland can go for independence via self determination under UN GA Res. XV (14 Dec. 1960)? What I’d Scotlands democratic route to independence if Englands prime minster can just say ‘No’
Scotland will become indepenant, it is when not if. 95% of media is unionist, print and tv. Demographics say this. England needs Scotland, and do everything it can to hold onto it's energy, water, gas, tax, food, cash cow. The YES movement is much more than just SNP, and the current setbacks in the SNP will soon be reversed. Alba go Soar.
Many said the same things about Quebec in the 90s.
If we thought Brexit was a bad idea, Scottish independence is like that on steroids...
@GogledholDin That was very much my thinking as I made this video.
@@gogledhol they held there second indy ref to soon, Scotland and others must learn from that. From memory was it not 49.9% - 50.1%?
@@MrJoshyguyso Brexit is bad ? Yet Scotland and the people that want to escape the isolationist Brexit Empire is somehow worse? No we will escape this corrosive overbearing Brexit Empire.
The worst fear is that any demise of the SNP might give rise to an even more destructive virulent form of repression in the false promise for us people that opens the door to corruption.
How is it possible for an imigrant from a heathen country
" Is Independence Still Possible? " The people here said NO in the referendum, our last prime minister said NO, our new prime minister said NO, the high court said NO, our biggest exporter (farmers) said NO, banks and big businesses said NO, academics in Scotish universities said NO What part of NO don't you understand ?
Did you actually watch the video?
Idiot 🙄
How about the voters in Scotland? When we were faced with the only way to guarantee to stay in the EU, was to vote to stay in the UK . Probably one of the biggest deceptions in Scottish history.
The people in Scotland whatever nationality background they are if they vote in Scotland, they the people will decide! Not banks , Universities, business, Prime Minister, or academics say .
@@robduncan599 well said 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏✊👏
Please talk about Rumania - Moldavia. Thanks 🙏🛐
Thanks. I have already made a video on this. (In fact, it’s my most successful. It is coming up for half a million views!) ua-cam.com/video/tVHyO10y1v8/v-deo.html
I loved the fact that in the ceremony Hamza wore a traditional Muslim dress.😅😅
Scotland must become its own country once more!
Free Scotland🌹🏴
Scotland is very free.
long live irish -turkish - scottish brotherhoods
🇮🇪🤝🏻🇹🇷🤝🏻🏴🤝🏻🏴