3 ms·

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 ch

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
        I take your point that it's not that simple, please excuse my not-entirely sober summary. It is true that "Scottish Nationalism" via means such as a referendum, is the primary policy of the SNP - the "Scottish National party"; it's in the name. They are always in favour of it, it's just the tactics and timing that changes. it's true that the SNP is the most popular party in Scotland, holds the most seats and has the most influence. But does not have a free hand to call and win a referendum in Scotland at will. If that was true, it would have happened already. It's true that the 2014 Scotland independence referendum was billed as "once in a generation" event. And yet, 2014 looks increasingly like a time from a different generation: before Brexit, when the campaign to keep Scotland in the Union was also pitched as the way to keep Scotland in the EU. The irony is palpable. The SNP say that "Scots are being dragged out of the EU against their will". And this is somewhat true. I do not think that it will be easy to avoid another Scottish independence referendum indefinitely. The SNP will wait until the time is right for them, and then press the point.
        hardlianotion 5y ago
        I tend to agree with that! The main thing I wish to convey is that this is not a slamdunk for either side. But there are issues of timing and pressures to make the wrong decision whether you support the union or independence. And a small flavour of that is what i was trying to convey.

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
      I take your point that it's not that simple, please excuse my not-entirely sober summary. It is true that "Scottish Nationalism" via means such as a referendum, is the primary policy of the SNP - the "Scottish National party"; it's in the name. They are always in favour of it, it's just the tactics and timing that changes. it's true that the SNP is the most popular party in Scotland, holds the most seats and has the most influence. But does not have a free hand to call and win a referendum in Scotland at will. If that was true, it would have happened already. It's true that the 2014 Scotland independence referendum was billed as "once in a generation" event. And yet, 2014 looks increasingly like a time from a different generation: before Brexit, when the campaign to keep Scotland in the Union was also pitched as the way to keep Scotland in the EU. The irony is palpable. The SNP say that "Scots are being dragged out of the EU against their will". And this is somewhat true. I do not think that it will be easy to avoid another Scottish independence referendum indefinitely. The SNP will wait until the time is right for them, and then press the point.
      - hardlianotion 5y ago
        I tend to agree with that! The main thing I wish to convey is that this is not a slamdunk for either side. But there are issues of timing and pressures to make the wrong decision whether you support the union or independence. And a small flavour of that is what i was trying to convey.