• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scotland myths debunked (1 Viewer)



Top 10 anti-Scottish myths debunked


As much as i enjoyed that, numbers one and two have a degree of truth to them. Scotland would need every single member of the EU to consent to its joining the union, and this would leave a significant period between leaving the UK and joining the EU. Furthermore Spain would probably veto their membership so as not to give the green light to Catalonia. This has an implication as far as border controls are concerned given that membership would also be made conditional on joining the Schengen Area* which the UK is not a part of, thus border controls would be imposed by the EU, not the UK.

Saying that I think Scotland is better off outside off the EU. Instead of paying for tax evasion in Greece and austerity policies that don't they could forge closer links with Iceland and Norway that actually have a viable economic model. They might even get their fishing waters back while they are at it.

* Schengen Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
As much as i enjoyed that, numbers one and two have a degree of truth to them. Scotland would need every single member of the EU to consent to its joining the union, and this would leave a significant period between leaving the UK and joining the EU. Furthermore Spain would probably veto their membership so as not to give the green light to Catalonia. This has an implication as far as border controls are concerned given that membership would also be made conditional on joining the Schengen Area* which the UK is not a part of, thus border controls would be imposed by the EU, not the UK.

Saying that I think Scotland is better off outside off the EU. Instead of paying for tax evasion in Greece and austerity policies that don't they could forge closer links with Iceland and Norway that actually have a viable economic model. They might even get their fishing waters back while they are at it.

* Schengen Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One in 20 people in Scotland is on Jobseekers' Allowance.

However, the Scottish unemployment rate, at 8%, remains above the UK level, at 7.9%.
 
Top 10 anti-Scottish myths debunked
Hardly. Picks up on some of the stupid arguments made by some "No" campaigners but ignores (and propagates) some of the equally stupid arguments make by some other "Yes" campaigners and doesn't really get in to the depths of the actual important questions. Basically the usual "politics" you should expect from an unattributed YouTube video.
 
As much as i enjoyed that, numbers one and two have a degree of truth to them. Scotland would need every single member of the EU to consent to its joining the union, and this would leave a significant period between leaving the UK and joining the EU. Furthermore Spain would probably veto their membership so as not to give the green light to Catalonia. This has an implication as far as border controls are concerned given that membership would also be made conditional on joining the Schengen Area* which the UK is not a part of, thus border controls would be imposed by the EU, not the UK.

Saying that I think Scotland is better off outside off the EU. Instead of paying for tax evasion in Greece and austerity policies that don't they could forge closer links with Iceland and Norway that actually have a viable economic model. They might even get their fishing waters back while they are at it.

* Schengen Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree with most of that bar copying Iceland which has had mixed results after it's major economic crisis.
I do however commend the people of Iceland for their recent peaceful revolution.

Norway & Sweden are good countries to follow, although I wouldn't want a Scottish form of currency that's stronger than the pound should the Yes vote go down that line. But that's for personal reasons.

Although I imagine a lot of the Scottish economic infastructure would not need to change radically in an independent nation.

The mistakes that Ireland made with it's banksters and -bank-industry-political cliques should be looked at as an important lesson of what all little nations should it be Iceland or Ireland need to gaurd against.
 
I was hoping that debunking Scottish myths would answer the underwear under kilts question once and for all, not to mention the proposition that if it's not Scottish, it's crap.
 
One in 20 people in Scotland is on Jobseekers' Allowance.

However, the Scottish unemployment rate, at 8%, remains above the UK level, at 7.9%.

What particular part of my post was that in reference to?
 
Too many soul-less redheads in Scotland. One shouldn't trust their apologists.
 
I was hoping that debunking Scottish myths would answer the underwear under kilts question once and for all, not to mention the proposition that if it's not Scottish, it's crap.

There's nothing worn under the kilt, it's all in working order, and it's a truism that there are only Scots, and wannabe's.
 
Hardly. Picks up on some of the stupid arguments made by some "No" campaigners

Actually I've been following the debate and those are some of the better ones (like i say numbers 9 and 10 were quite accurate) what better arguments do you feel were missed out?
 
Last edited:
I was hoping that debunking Scottish myths would answer the underwear under kilts question once and for all, not to mention the proposition that if it's not Scottish, it's crap.

Its only a skirt if ye wear soomting oonder it... :wink:

Alba gu bragh!
 
Actually I've been following the debate and those are some of the better ones (like i say numbers one and two were quite accurate) what better arguments do you feel were missed out?
I never said they had any. I don't think either of the campaigns have made any strong arguments. To be fair, the main reason for that is that there are so many unknowns to make many definitive statements about what the consequences of Scottish independence will actually be.

I personally don't think it would make a huge practical difference to anyone, though I expert the transition to be expensive and not without problems. The whole issue is all about grabbing or keeping political power, not about what is good for the people, either side of the border.
 
I was hoping that debunking Scottish myths would answer the underwear under kilts question once and for all, not to mention the proposition that if it's not Scottish, it's crap.

I really thought it was going to be about Nessie the Loch Ness Monster. :shrug:
 
Scotland's economy is very much dependent on the oil industry, a dirty fuel which is in my view about to go the same way the coal industry did. Whilst SNP claims that they will eventually replace the oil industry with renewable energy don't really add up, as lots of countries have renewable resources, and they are not unique to Scotland.

Then again rather ironically given the OP, amongst the biggest losers should the Scottish decide on Independence, would be the US, with the UK currently being a major ally of the US. A weakened England would certainly be less willing to become involved in overseas military operations or have the resources to do so, whilst the Scots would most likely become a country similar to Southern Ireland with a small standing army with very little remit beyond it's borders, with an extremely left wing socialist Government in Edinburgh. The release of Pan Am Flight 103 Lockerbie Bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi being a case in point.

In terms of the video, it's factually wrong in a whole host of areas, indeed last time I visited Northern Ireland, I did need to carry identity documents, whilst SNP claims that Royal Navy ships would still be built in Scotland or that England could be charged for basing troops in Scotland are laughable. I am also sure the SNP would still leave NATO in the long term, as it has always been critical of the US and it's policies, whilst also being very Pro-European.

There's also the fact that we live on a small island and the main importer of Scottish goods and services are the English, who also account for the vast majority of tourism to Scotland, and this amounts to a far greater amount financially than that generated by the Oil industry.
 
Then again rather ironically given the OP, amongst the biggest losers should the Scottish decide on Independence, would be the US, with the UK currently being a major ally of the US. A weakened England would certainly be less willing to become involved in overseas military operations or have the resources to do so, whilst the Scots would most likely become a country similar to Southern Ireland with a small standing army with very little remit beyond it's borders, with an extremely left wing socialist Government in Edinburgh. The release of Pan Am Flight 103 Lockerbie Bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi being a case in point.

How do overseas military operations help the average scot? Also RE tourism I doubt independence will mean closing the border.
 
Last edited:
I thought this was going to be a thread about Nessie :(

Edit: Hrm, seems I'm not the only one. Maybe we should make a thread about it, there certainly seems to be enough interest in the subject :D
 
How do overseas military operations help the average scot? Also RE tourism I doubt independence will mean closing the border.

I was simply pointing out some facts, and in terms of the average Scot, Defence Contracts and other UK Government contracts do help the average Scot a lot or have you overlooked the fact that the biggest single employer in Scotland is the Clydeside Naval Base, whilst thousands of Scots are currently employed building aircraft carriers at Rosyth ship yards.

The border may not be closed, but there would certainly be a very different relationship with the Scots, and this may be reflected in terms of currency arrangements and where companies decide to locate to or even how the English perceive the Scots, in terms of being a foreign nation. It's also been made clear that a Scotland which is heavily dependent on the state sector, with a far older and ageing population than England and which relies on the UK for over one in three of it's exports (it's only 5% in terms of exports the other way), will not hold the rest of the UK and it's 58 million people to ransom. The 5 million Scots would in effect have to join the Euro on Europe's terms, join the English pound on the Bank of England's terms or set up their own currency, which would be fraught with problems. At the moment Scotland has a very good economic deal, but harder times are ahead, especially in relation to North Sea Oil, which is becoming ever more expensive and difficult to extract at the same time as new energy sources are emerging. Even US President Barack Obama sail last year in a speech that "oil is the fuel of the past".

'No guarantee' that independent Scotland could reach currency deal, Osborne warns - UK Politics - UK - The Independent

Economy Statistics
 
Too many soul-less redheads in Scotland. One shouldn't trust their apologists.

I think you're confusing Scotland with Eire (Ireland). Gingers are plentiful in Ireland :)
 
Myth #11 debunked - the sheep actually like it. :mrgreen:
 
Well yes, there are many redhead scots, belgiums, dutch, welsh and others.
And Irish. A lot of Irish redheads. It is my undertanding that Ireland is known for its redheaded population while Scotland for its hairy men.

Okay, that got me laughing.... hairy men? I'm sure they have their dose of hirsute men, but likely your thinking mostly of the Picts...... supposed ancestors of the Scots, along with the Nords.

The kilt, please, the kilt!
 
Okay, that got me laughing.... hairy men? I'm sure they have their dose of hirsute men, but likely your thinking mostly of the Picts...... supposed ancestors of the Scots, along with the Nords.

The kilt, please, the kilt!

The scots are as anglo saxon as the English. The Saxons invaded scotland too you know.
 
The scots are as anglo saxon as the English. The Saxons invaded scotland too you know.

The mixed heritage is why you have 'Black Scots' (dark hair, dark eyes) and 'Red' Scots (Red hair, blue or green eyes) and everything in between.....

I do know a bit about Scotland's heritage. :)
 
The scots are as anglo saxon as the English. The Saxons invaded scotland too you know.

Was Edward I a Saxon?
Norwegian Vikings settled in Scotland- some Highland clans trace their ancestry to Viking rather than Scots forebearers.
The people originally called 'Scots' were Gaels from Northern Ireland. They came across in historical times, while the Romans were in England. Scots Gaelic is nearly the same as Irish Gaelic.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom