3 ms·

I think you're really underestimating how tenuously the UK's claim on Scotland really is. A Scottish king took over the English throne in 1603. Blame him. I s

I think you're really underestimating how tenuously the UK's claim on Scotland really is. A Scottish king took over the English throne in 1603. Blame him. I see no reason that should a sustained majority (so 3 million plus Scots or 4 million plus Catalonians) be in favour of independence, that independence shouldn't happen (In an orderly structured fashion ensuring the rights of citizens on both sides are kept)

mrec 8y ago
That didn't create the UK - it was a personal union, with two independent countries who happened to have the same monarch. Great Britain as a combined state didn't appear for another century, via the 1707 Act of Union.
- isostatic 8y ago
  Which was agreed by the Scottish parliament. Either way, nobody involved in those decisions is alive now, so it's all ancient history, as is the French invasion of the island in 1066. I'm not sure how (the op) can complain that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland's claim on Scotland is "tenuous", and more than "it's claim" on Norfolk, Kent, or Birmingham. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Scotland really want to be a separate country, that's fine. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Norfolk really want to be a separate country, that's fine. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Hull really want to be a separate country, that's fine. There's no "claim" other than we agree as a democracy to band together to govern us, and protect us, and enable us to live our lives. If that doesn't work out for a given region, that's fine. * edit -- corrected who it's aimed at
  - mrec 8y ago
    > I'm not sure how you can complain that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland's claim on Scotland is "tenuous" I'm not "complaining" anything of the sort. I think you have me mixed up with another commenter.

mrec 8y ago

That didn't create the UK - it was a personal union, with two independent countries who happened to have the same monarch. Great Britain as a combined state didn't appear for another century, via the 1707 Act of Union.

isostatic 8y ago
Which was agreed by the Scottish parliament. Either way, nobody involved in those decisions is alive now, so it's all ancient history, as is the French invasion of the island in 1066. I'm not sure how (the op) can complain that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland's claim on Scotland is "tenuous", and more than "it's claim" on Norfolk, Kent, or Birmingham. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Scotland really want to be a separate country, that's fine. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Norfolk really want to be a separate country, that's fine. If a clear and sustained majority of the people living in Hull really want to be a separate country, that's fine. There's no "claim" other than we agree as a democracy to band together to govern us, and protect us, and enable us to live our lives. If that doesn't work out for a given region, that's fine. * edit -- corrected who it's aimed at
- mrec 8y ago
  > I'm not sure how you can complain that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland's claim on Scotland is "tenuous" I'm not "complaining" anything of the sort. I think you have me mixed up with another commenter.