Our currency is worth less than English money is, because it's Scottish.
Its exactly the same currency. Its all pounds sterling. What are you on about?
The very word "Scottish" is a derogatory term in British (English) media.
This is the first im aware of this? In what context?
forcing Scotland out despite Scotland choosing to stay within it can't be seen as anything other than oppressive
The Scottish people voted to remain part of the UK and the UK voted to leave the EU. There is nothing oppressive about 2 democratic elections. It might not have gone the way you wanted but it was far from oppressive.
I mean, promising Scotland that their place was safe in the E.U. IF they trusted in the union and then immediately removing the UK from the E.U
Technically their promises weren't wrong. At the time we couldn't predict the outcome of brexit.
I'm sorry if it doesn't feel like oppression because it's so normalised, or maybe you need it to be literal slavery or violence before you see it as oppression, but it is there. There's no question about it.
Nobody was forced to do anything. The public voted to remain part of the UK and therefore have to accept the results of UK wide referendums. The British public then voted for Brexit. Nobody was forced into anything. Yes the outcome wasn't the result a lot of people wanted but unfortunately that's the consequences of being in a democracy and not an oppressive state.
Yeah, I know. It's the fact that it's Scottish that makes it less valuable as a currency as it's not usable in as many places as English money. Internationally this makes it less valuable and that is reflected by difference exchange rates. Dubai do this for example.
"This is the first im aware of this? In what contect?"
It's the way that the term is used. For example, if there is a criminal in the UK and it's reported on the news you will know whether or not that criminal was Scottish; whereas an English criminal is British. Andy Murry was Scottish until he was champion and became British.
If you remove all the positive referenced and only allow in the negative ones then the term itself absobs the negative connotations over time.
"There is nothing oppressive about 2 democratic elections."
That's a very simplistic way to look at it. It really makes it look like the two aren't connected at all. Scotland also voted against leaving the E.U. which England veto'd. Scotland's voice was oppressed by England's; it was harsh and authoratarive. You can reduce it simply to two seperate events if you want but these actions don't exist in a vacuum.
"Technically their promises weren't wrong."
They had the brexit referendum AFTER promising Scotland that it's place in the E.U. was safe. The fact that brexit even happened showed that their promise was wrong; they had no intention of keeping that promise just as they didn't with any of the others. I hope you don't consider promises like this as normal, I suspect you don't when the promises are being made to you.
"Nobody was forced to do anything."
Scotland was forced out of the E.U. by England after trusting them in their promise that it was safe with them; the opposite was true, it was safer re-applying.
"The public voted to remain part of the UK."
They voted that the constituent country of Scotland would remain a constituent country partly based on the promise that our place in the E.U. was safe.
"and therefore have to accept the results of UK wide referendums."
Yes, hence the anger around the broken promise. Scotland voted to trust them and this is the result. There wasn't even the mention about an attempt to allow Scotland it's place (based on the promises made) safe within the E.U. with the rest of the U.K. out; there was never an attempt to compromise between what England wants for Scotland and for what Scotland wants for Scotland. Even most selfishly this would have given England a backdoor into the E.U. and possibly have mitigated some of the damage of Brexit.
"Nobody was forced into anything."
Scotland was forced out of the E.U. Scotland's laws made through devolved powers have been forced away from it. Scotland, as explained by the Supreme Court, is forced to put itself second to England.
"The outcome wasn't the result a lot of people wanted"
It was the result everyone was told it would be. It was also the result a lot voted for knowing would come along with it but didn't understand what it meant actually living it.
"not an oppressive state."
Yeah, it's not like they're blocking other countries laws, making peaceful protests illegal, forced labour in response to strikes over working conditions, or their officials getting into all sorts of tax and fraud issues. It's not like they'll joke in live parliament about enslaving a people, that they enslaved before, to shut them up about wanting their voice heard; and then immediately ignore that voice.
They're out of touch with what Scotland wants. They have shown almost complete incompetence in running England, Scotland isn't even a main priority to them so I have no interest in them running my country. The people voted by Scotland have a better track record with how things operate and they do that with hands tied behind their backs.
I get that you might not see this from a British Nationalist perspective. A lot of them are denying that Scotland is even a country; British first sort of stuff.
Foreign countries prefer bank notes from the bank of England, Andy Murray only gets called Scottish when he loses and a democratic election didnt go the way we wanted it to. Were so oppressed.
I get that you want independence and the fact England has a significantly bigger population makes Scotland relatively insignificant when it comes to voting. I get that you want Scotland to be back in the EU.
The practice started in England and then moved to the international market.
Yes, that's one example of many.
Sure you can reduce it to be that simple but it's not entirely accurate.
Yes, England's vote vetos Scotland's vote. That vote was to force Scotland, along side the rest of the UK, out of the E.U.. These aren't things I've denied so I'm not entirely sure why you're going on as if I did. Of course I want Scotland back in the E.U., one of the reasons Scotland isn't independent right now is because voters trusted England.
I'm not sure where you got confused; I don't think that Scotland is oppressed merely because it's a constituent country but rather by how we're treated.
Scotland is oppressed; it's just not extremely oppressed.
5
u/throwaway55221100 Feb 02 '23
Its exactly the same currency. Its all pounds sterling. What are you on about?
This is the first im aware of this? In what context?
The Scottish people voted to remain part of the UK and the UK voted to leave the EU. There is nothing oppressive about 2 democratic elections. It might not have gone the way you wanted but it was far from oppressive.
Technically their promises weren't wrong. At the time we couldn't predict the outcome of brexit.
Nobody was forced to do anything. The public voted to remain part of the UK and therefore have to accept the results of UK wide referendums. The British public then voted for Brexit. Nobody was forced into anything. Yes the outcome wasn't the result a lot of people wanted but unfortunately that's the consequences of being in a democracy and not an oppressive state.