5 ms·

> there is a good chance that when the dust settles the UK itself will no longer exist I've heard this proposed as a possibility, but is this generally accepte

> there is a good chance that when the dust settles the UK itself will no longer exist I've heard this proposed as a possibility, but is this generally accepted as an actual, probable outcome? By both sides? From my perspective (American with no ties to the UK who thought Brexit sounded like a terrible idea), it sounded like it might have been a scare tactic from remainers.

jacquesm 5y ago
Well, that all depends on what the SNP does, they hold the cards at the moment. If they go for a referendum then all bets are quite literally off. > From my perspective (American with no ties to the UK who thought Brexit sounded like a terrible idea), it sounded like it might have been a scare tactic from remainers. Not really. The Scots held a referendum on staying in the UK prior to Brexit and the general feeling seems to be that if the UK had been clear on wanting to exit the EU that Scotland may well have seceded the union prior to that. So now the question is whether or not the SNP will hold a new referendum given that the situation has materially changed, and the outcome of that referendum (which, if the vote leans to 'leave' will be heavily contested) will cause a large amount of headache. Even just threatening with a referendum could have major impact on the future of the UK.
- hardlianotion 5y ago
  SNP even just threatening. Haha - you really need to pay more attention to the SNP. You think they been coy on the subject? Perhaps keeping their powder dry?
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    We'll see. For now no referendum or the intention to hold one has been announced, though that could change rapidly.
    - hardlianotion 5y ago
      I think you misunderstood me. The SNP has been going on about a referendum almost continually. Whatever might change by “just threatening” a referendum has changed and lost its impact by repetition.
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        Ok, but it starts to get serious once a date has been set. Until then it is just posturing, and the UK has already announced their intention to block such a referendum from happening.
        hardlianotion 5y ago
        They are unlikely to move from this position.
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        London blocking Scotland from doing a democratic act would not go over well there. It would harden nationalistic sentiment. What happens if Scotland insists on going ahead anyway? It would be messy. London's leverage is limited there.
        jacquesm 5y ago
        Precisely, and I don't think the UK would like to really be seen flexing its muscle to stop a democratically reached decision, that would open up an entirely different can of worms. They'll either have to give extreme economic incentives or let Scotland go if that is what Scotland decides it wants.
        hardlianotion 5y ago
        There are not two entities called "London" and "Scotland" playing a referendum and will game. If the SNP government, for example, goes ahead with a referendum that is not sanctioned, there is a strong risk that people who don't think it is justified, or are unionists, will not take part, which would be a bad result. So leverage on that side is limited also.
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
Other replies mention Scotland and the SNP, and lest we forget, Scotland is more pro-EU than England, and the last Scottish independence referendum was won on a promise of "stay in the UK and stay in the EU" - yes, really, the threat that an independent Scotland would not be an EU member on day one. (1) But it's not just about Scotland. Do not forget the question of Northern Ireland, which is now increasingly aligned with the Republic of Ireland. When UK and ROI were both in the EU it was less of a hard choice, but that has changed. Brexit, while also honouring the integrity of the UK and also the Good Friday agreement is basically about squaring the circle - something has to give. Right now NI is aligned with the Republic of Ireland, not with England, and the Brexiters are not happy about it because NI gets a better Brexit deal by having less Brexit, which doesn't make them look good. But they need to face up to the fact that due to brexit, there has to be a border somewhere between Dublin and London and every position has serious drawbacks. (2) if NI gets to like the current dispensation well then they might feel like re-joining the republic. Two fault-lines, not one. It means that the UK needs not one but two wins on throws of the dice in order to remain intact. And a break at one fault-line would trigger restlessness at the other. So the odds of the UK remaining intact go down. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Scottish_independence_referendum#European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Scottish_independence_ref... 2) https://ukandeu.ac.uk/irish-border-four-acts/ https://ukandeu.ac.uk/irish-border-four-acts/
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Exactly. The degree to which the Scottish and the Northern Irish situation challenge the integrity of the UK has not been seen since the Good Friday Agreement. Risking the stability of the UK to such a degree was highly irresponsible.
- 123pie123 5y ago
  not to mention the secondary effects of areas like cornwall and possibly the north of england wanting independance
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  I forgot to mention, the way that a) having a Brexit, b) honouring the Good Friday agreement and c) territorial integrity of the UK (no border between NI and GB) all at once is called the "Brexit Trilemma" As in, pick any 2, we can't have all 3 at once as that's logically inconsistent - these are not compatible things. The decision to add "brexit" to the mix was _not_ a responsible act by rational actors. See https://twitter.com/rdanielkelemen/status/1367137477060939781/photo/1 https://twitter.com/rdanielkelemen/status/136713747706093978... or google "Brexit Trilemma". https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=brexit+trilemma https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=brexit+trilemma

jacquesm 5y ago

Well, that all depends on what the SNP does, they hold the cards at the moment. If they go for a referendum then all bets are quite literally off. > From my perspective (American with no ties to the UK who thought Brexit sounded like a terrible idea), it sounded like it might have been a scare tactic from remainers. Not really. The Scots held a referendum on staying in the UK prior to Brexit and the general feeling seems to be that if the UK had been clear on wanting to exit the EU that Scotland may well have seceded the union prior to that. So now the question is whether or not the SNP will hold a new referendum given that the situation has materially changed, and the outcome of that referendum (which, if the vote leans to 'leave' will be heavily contested) will cause a large amount of headache. Even just threatening with a referendum could have major impact on the future of the UK.

hardlianotion 5y ago
SNP even just threatening. Haha - you really need to pay more attention to the SNP. You think they been coy on the subject? Perhaps keeping their powder dry?
- jacquesm 5y ago
  We'll see. For now no referendum or the intention to hold one has been announced, though that could change rapidly.
  - hardlianotion 5y ago
    I think you misunderstood me. The SNP has been going on about a referendum almost continually. Whatever might change by “just threatening” a referendum has changed and lost its impact by repetition.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Ok, but it starts to get serious once a date has been set. Until then it is just posturing, and the UK has already announced their intention to block such a referendum from happening.
      - hardlianotion 5y ago
        They are unlikely to move from this position.
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        London blocking Scotland from doing a democratic act would not go over well there. It would harden nationalistic sentiment. What happens if Scotland insists on going ahead anyway? It would be messy. London's leverage is limited there.
        jacquesm 5y ago
        Precisely, and I don't think the UK would like to really be seen flexing its muscle to stop a democratically reached decision, that would open up an entirely different can of worms. They'll either have to give extreme economic incentives or let Scotland go if that is what Scotland decides it wants.
        hardlianotion 5y ago
        There are not two entities called "London" and "Scotland" playing a referendum and will game. If the SNP government, for example, goes ahead with a referendum that is not sanctioned, there is a strong risk that people who don't think it is justified, or are unionists, will not take part, which would be a bad result. So leverage on that side is limited also.

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago

Other replies mention Scotland and the SNP, and lest we forget, Scotland is more pro-EU than England, and the last Scottish independence referendum was won on a promise of "stay in the UK and stay in the EU" - yes, really, the threat that an independent Scotland would not be an EU member on day one. (1) But it's not just about Scotland. Do not forget the question of Northern Ireland, which is now increasingly aligned with the Republic of Ireland. When UK and ROI were both in the EU it was less of a hard choice, but that has changed. Brexit, while also honouring the integrity of the UK and also the Good Friday agreement is basically about squaring the circle - something has to give. Right now NI is aligned with the Republic of Ireland, not with England, and the Brexiters are not happy about it because NI gets a better Brexit deal by having less Brexit, which doesn't make them look good. But they need to face up to the fact that due to brexit, there has to be a border somewhere between Dublin and London and every position has serious drawbacks. (2) if NI gets to like the current dispensation well then they might feel like re-joining the republic. Two fault-lines, not one. It means that the UK needs not one but two wins on throws of the dice in order to remain intact. And a break at one fault-line would trigger restlessness at the other. So the odds of the UK remaining intact go down. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Scottish_independence_referendum#European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Scottish_independence_ref... 2) https://ukandeu.ac.uk/irish-border-four-acts/ https://ukandeu.ac.uk/irish-border-four-acts/

jacquesm 5y ago
Exactly. The degree to which the Scottish and the Northern Irish situation challenge the integrity of the UK has not been seen since the Good Friday Agreement. Risking the stability of the UK to such a degree was highly irresponsible.
123pie123 5y ago
not to mention the secondary effects of areas like cornwall and possibly the north of england wanting independance
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
I forgot to mention, the way that a) having a Brexit, b) honouring the Good Friday agreement and c) territorial integrity of the UK (no border between NI and GB) all at once is called the "Brexit Trilemma" As in, pick any 2, we can't have all 3 at once as that's logically inconsistent - these are not compatible things. The decision to add "brexit" to the mix was _not_ a responsible act by rational actors. See https://twitter.com/rdanielkelemen/status/1367137477060939781/photo/1 https://twitter.com/rdanielkelemen/status/136713747706093978... or google "Brexit Trilemma". https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=brexit+trilemma https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=brexit+trilemma