Scottish IndepenDENce YES or NO?

YES or NO?, And What If DevoMax Was Offered?

  • Yes

    Votes: 20 39.2%
  • No

    Votes: 25 49.0%
  • DevoMax

    Votes: 8 15.7%
  • DGAF

    Votes: 5 9.8%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • Total voters
    51
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not fought and died for as nobody asked them to, just tighten the wallet a bit maybe but nobody said it would be easy.
One does wonder at what those who did fight and die would have made of this situation :?
 
The History Man":912uoypa said:
So what are they chanting?
You can stick your independence up your arse seems to be a favourite from what I've seen. Also Rule Britannia, GSTQ, Scotland voted no, no surrender etc etc.

What do you think they're chanting?
 
dyna-ti":3i17wot0 said:
One does wonder at what those who did fight and die would have made of this situation :?
Many, and probably most who died as a result of the Scottish wars of independence were not soldiers but ordinary people who starved to death due to the scorched earth policies practiced by all armies in retreat. And with the numerous failed English attempts at invasion that were responded to by Scottish incursions far into Northern England, border region life was extremely hard for ordinary people. Advancing friendly armies would requisition a farmers crops etc, enemy armies would steal them. Either way local populations starved.

Whatever you think of the outcome, democracy has many advantages.
 
democracy has many advantages
I agree with what youve said but theres many countries and peoples around the world that would disagree.



I thought this was done with. Who bumped it ? :lol:
 
GrahamJohnWallace":g0g1uulu said:
Whatever you think of the outcome, democracy has many advantages.

If you call democracy the unelected (by over 80%) interfering with a democratic process which was supposed to be left to the people of Scotland. Yet the same was not prepared to debate with the protagonist.

I don't.
 
Re:

Democracy is no guarantee of fairness and the rich and powerful will always try to manipulate it to their own advantage.

All I am saying is that as a means of dispute resolution, democracy is favorable to all forms of political violence.

Cameron is someone who, despite the rhetoric, puts party advantage above what is best for Britain as a whole. And having realised that he must lose power over Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, he is maneuvering to strengthen Conservative influence in England.

In other words, he is prepared to weaken the Union as long as that consolidates Conservative rule in England. And needs to get these changes through Parliament quickly in case he loses the general election.
 
Re: Re:

GrahamJohnWallace":3fwd9mxv said:
Democracy is no guarantee of fairness and the rich and powerful will always try to manipulate it to there own advantage.

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for everything else that has been tried. - Churchill

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the decision. - Ironically the origin is disputed (but wrongly attributed to Benjamin Franklin)
 
It was not democracy, that is my point.

Some joint debates, cards on table beforehand, etc.. would have been more democratic.

What happened was underhand and should result in a re-run. It was clear interference in the democratic process.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top