English GN's referendeum

Perhaps the historic examples of anti-Scots offensiveness in my link have something to do with it? And the inclusion in the British national anthem of that verse about rebellious Scots?

Scotland was the last of the four previously autonomous countries to be merged. It was still "furrin parts" up to the union of the parliaments (despite King James going south to be monarch of both kingdoms.)

Wales and the other old kingdoms had had time to adjust. Ireland was geographically separated and has always been uneasy. Scotland is also geographically separated (even deliveries to some areas are more expensive that most places south of the border - there is a geographical reason for that).

When you are considered a rather backward race on the edge of civilisation, with some amusingly quaint customs to caricature, would you not be a bit resentful? How do you feel if American tourists visiting your town exclaim over the little oldfashioned homes - "A fireplace in every house!"

We can all scrape the bottom of the barrel of offensivness to try and justify our own perceived prejudices, I'm sure, but sadly low-life exists everywhere. However, there does seem to be a widespread and long-established level of anti-English sentiment amongst many elements of Scottish society. Why? It would be interesting to know.

Really? I've seen a lot of offensive stuff about the Scots. Mean, drunken, violent layabouts etc etc. Here are a few old ones and there has been much in readers comments on Feferendum news items recently.

Yes, iam64, it is a puzzle why it seems to be acceptable to be offensive about the English but not so when the boot is on the other foot. The reasons? Hard to say if you are English. Envy, spite, grievance? Perhaps some of our non-English members could enlighten us. I think it was either Oscar Wilde or Noel Coward who said something about the English not having to demonstrate their superiority because it is inbred in them, and this irritates other people. I, though being English, find that I can be just as critical of my fellow English compatriots, but that's just me.

Good morning. I'm catching up and would like to cast my vote please. NO. I sympathise with Scots who would like less Westminster and definitely less tory government. I'd like that as well.
I dislike, and fear, nationalism. I don't like the tone of much of the Yes campaign.
Genuine question folks, why is it ok to be offensive about the English, but not about anyone else?

Night, night Ana. I'm giving up now.

No point in saying any more then, Gracesgran. That you can say that you have read the Spirit Level, yet not believe its research and contents says it all.

Where did I say that I did or did not agree with its contents durhamjen? That is not the point.

Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett have written an extremely interesting book and backed it up with what appears to be sound evidence. I am sure that someone could write an equally interesting book backed by apparently equally sound stats, etc., from the opposite point of view. The Spirit Level is not some holy book given from above that I, and presumably everyone else, have to "believe" as you put it. It can be praised and criticised like any other book.

What I believe or don't believe is nothing to do with what I was originally trying to say and that is that it is your view that the societies you mentioned are "fairer" others is a view and not a truth.

So what gives you the right to say that you are reasonable and I am not?
That you are right and I am not?

Sigh...I meant 'respond in a reasonable way'.

You are convinced you are right, all the time, and lecturing and hectoring doesn't persuade people that you are.

I've just responded to you, Ana. I have the same problem, people who will not listen to reason.

I said that you are hard work, durhamjen. It's very difficult to engage with someone who has such a set attitude and will only actually respond to those whose views correspond with their own.

I do not understand, Ana. It does not seem hard work to me. It seems very obvious.
I have the advantage of knowing people who live in these more equal societies. They may grumble about taxes, but they pay them, because they know that if they fall on hard times they will be cared for by the state, as will their families.

No point in saying any more then, Gracesgran. That you can say that you have read the Spirit Level, yet not believe its research and contents says it all.

Blimey, durhamjen, you're certainly hard work...

The cry always has been for social change, papaoscar. The problem is, who's listening?
The cry is for a more equal society, when it has got much worse over our lifetime. Enough is Enough means that we should be happy with enough and not always want more than the next person. It means looking at the long-term wellbeing of all people, not just looking out for ourselves and our families.
Here endeth a short lesson. Otherwise I'll get depressed, and I've got a whisky in front of me.

I have The Spirit Level durhamjen. It is a fascinating book so I don't need to be directed to a short synopsis of the contents.

You seem unable to step back and look at things in a dispassionate way. You have one view of a fair society, I may have another (if you read what I said I have not said what that is) and others may have completely the opposite to yours or mine. These are views. I do see that you believe that you and only you are right but we live in a democracy so, sooner or later, other people's views have to be taken into account if you want to achieve anything.

So the cry is for social change, dj. In the meantime best not rock the boat too much lest you sink it.

ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A7x9UnM0tBRUtWoAzjl3Bwx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBzZWZmdXZoBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTIEY29sbwNpcjIEdnRpZAM-/RV=2/RE=1410671796/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.timeshighereducation.co.uk%2f406567.article/RK=0/RS=2Gydcxg9n.cAkAxx48RRK.tIXK8-

Not just me thinking it, Gracesgran.
Do you not believe this research?

No durhamjen I am neither being silly nor am I looking for something on which to disagree with you, either now or at any other time.

You do not "know" they are more equal societies, you believe they are. There are probably just as many people in this country who believe that a more equal society would be one where there was low tax, small government and social services only caring for the destitute. They would say they worked for their money and a fairer society would be one where they would be able to keep it. Some of them too would believe they knew what a more equal comprised and they would be just as sure as you are. That is a belief.

The prospect of being spared the bagpipes and men in skirts is a glittering one, but NO.

It's a bit like a teenager feeling ready to leave home, isn't it. I worry for them but think, maybe they can stand on their own two feet. Likewise Wales and NI. But it doesn't mean we still can't unite against a common enemy if necessary.

But what would make me REALLY cross would be if they changed the design of the union jack!

No. I fervently hope the United Kingdom stays intact.

Anniebach are you aware that there is a commitment from the SNP MPs to never vote on matters which affect England/Wales only, although sometimes they do vote when a matter that appears to be England and Wales only is liable to have a knock on effect on Scottish Legislation or finance.

Mishap I think you underestimate the voting population in Scotland who, in the main, having been listening to and taking part in debates around the issues of self-determination and the democratic deficit for months if not years. This vote is not about getting rid of the current Conservative Government but rather about ensuring that citizens of Scotland always get the Government they vote for, using a PR system so that minority opinion is also heard.

The comedian Kevin Bridges put it in a nutshell when he said that 'if the entire population of Glasgow sat the Higher Modern Studies exam they would all pass with flying colours'.

I would argue, Gracegran, that the principal reasons for the sucess of the Scandinavian countries are their racial and cultural homogenity, relative isolation, partial neutrality and low populations, not all of which would apply to Scotland. And don't forget that they have always had to exist, bravely, in the shadow of Russia, whereas Scotland has enjoyed the protection of the UK.

I think you are being a bit silly there, gracesgran. Are you implying that the Scandinavian countries are not more equal than the UK?
Or are you just looking for something to disagree with me about again?

I do not feel they are more equal societies. I know they are.