Scottish politics

Status
Not open for further replies.

salmo76

Well-known member
Messages
485
Reaction score
334
Salmo, calling one side full of spins and lies really doesn't help anybody. Further to that, we already know that Neil Oliver is a fraud, but perhaps this says it better than I can...


If you want a real historians take on Scotland then should read Prof. Tom Devine's book - The Scottish Clearances: A History of the Dispossessed.
Neil Oliver is a smart guy , speaks a lot of sense and no hit job by that SNP propaganda rag called the National will change that fact. He accepts he has become a lightening rod for all the hatred and bile coming from many SNP supporters , following his stance against independence in 2014 , however , he believes countering the spin and deceit coming from the SNP is worth the sacrifice. Here is an article from the Daily Mail giving his views on the matter :-

 

long Preston

Well-known member
Messages
1,936
Reaction score
178
1. None of those countries went through the Industrial revolution in the same way as the U.K. None of those countries have large, urban populations, a legacy of de industrialisation.

2. Norway especially skipped straight from largely agrarian society to post industrial, via huge influx of cash from oil.

3. Ireland stood still for 70 years as an agrarian nation, until they hit on the genius Idea of becoming a tax haven. Good on them, if the game is globalisation, they are playing a blinder, as long as it lasts.

4. Denmark is and always has been tightly integrated to the German economy.

5. These countries consume less and save more

6. These countries have very different social, cultural and geographic histories over handreds, in some cases thousands of years.

Be honest, Independent Scotland won’t be starting at the same place those nations did.

Independent Scotland won’t turn into a tartan facsimile of any of those nations either. Not in any short timeframe. There isn’t a hope in hell.

Of course being independent isn’t just about economics and there are other (more important) considerations.

Why not just admit the likely risks and be honest about it, instead of pretending everything is going to be rosey?

It’s a bit like the EU situation.

The U.K. is experiencing the inevitable frictions caused by separation of the U.K. from the Single Market. Scotland is integrated into the U.K. in a way that the Eurocrats could only dream of, yet we are supposed to believe that separation from the U.K. is going to be frictionless?

🤣🤣😂🤣🤞🤣
-can't ague with that line of reasoning either-so which view is correct-yours or Fruins?-confused:eek:
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,401
Reaction score
373
Location
East Dunbartonshire
I see the ‘talking up Scotland’ writer would tear down all the historic castles and houses as they are an affront to contemporary society when viewed through the magic ‘judge history based on today’s view of the world hindsightometer’. Whilst I recognise terrible things happened through history - it would seem a shame to destroy your tourist industry.
Yeah, I did notice that in the text. I certainly do not agree with that part of it, much as I don't agree with tearing down statues of slave traders.
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,401
Reaction score
373
Location
East Dunbartonshire
Neil Oliver is a smart guy , speaks a lot of sense and no hit job by that SNP propaganda rag called the National will change that fact. He accepts he has become a lightening rod for all the hatred and bile coming from many SNP supporters , following his stance against independence in 2014 , however , he believes countering the spin and deceit coming from the SNP is worth the sacrifice. Here is an article from the Daily Mail giving his views on the matter :-

Come on Salmo - calling the National a propaganda rag in the same post that you post a link to the Daily Mail. surely you've got to at least see the irony in your post?
 

salmo76

Well-known member
Messages
485
Reaction score
334
Come on Salmo - calling the National a propaganda rag in the same post that you post a link to the Daily Mail. surely you've got to at least see the irony in your post?
Having compared the two , I would have to say : not at all.
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,401
Reaction score
373
Location
East Dunbartonshire
1. None of those countries went through the Industrial revolution in the same way as the U.K. None of those countries have large, urban populations, a legacy of de industrialisation.

2. Norway especially skipped straight from largely agrarian society to post industrial, via huge influx of cash from oil.

3. Ireland stood still for 70 years as an agrarian nation, until they hit on the genius Idea of becoming a tax haven. Good on them, if the game is globalisation, they are playing a blinder, as long as it lasts.

4. Denmark is and always has been tightly integrated to the German economy.

5. These countries consume less and save more

6. These countries have very different social, cultural and geographic histories over handreds, in some cases thousands of years.

Be honest, Independent Scotland won’t be starting at the same place those nations did.

Independent Scotland won’t turn into a tartan facsimile of any of those nations either. Not in any short timeframe. There isn’t a hope in hell.

Of course being independent isn’t just about economics and there are other (more important) considerations.

Why not just admit the likely risks and be honest about it, instead of pretending everything is going to be rosey?

It’s a bit like the EU situation.

The U.K. is experiencing the inevitable frictions caused by separation of the U.K. from the Single Market. Scotland is integrated into the U.K. in a way that the Eurocrats could only dream of, yet we are supposed to believe that separation from the U.K. is going to be frictionless?

🤣🤣😂🤣🤞🤣
Grassy,

On point one of yours - Copenhagen has a larger population than either Glasgow or Edinburgh, with Dublin being broadly similar. Only the Norwegian cities have lesser populations.

Agreed on point two, but as you can see from the other countries, industrial revolution or not, it really makes little difference to the future. Scotland has a great worldwide reputation and skill set in modern technology such as space technology, life sciences, digital sciences, as well as more traditional industries like finance and engineering.

I also agree that Ireland has not been a continuous good news story, but, they are far better for being in the EU and stand to make huge gains now that the UK has left the EU.

If Denmark is tightly integrated into the German economy but is independent, why is it a bad thing that Scotland is tightly integrated into the UK economy and seeks independence?

These countries consume less and save more. Is there evidence of that, or, better still evidence that an independent Scotland is incapable of doing the same? Also, if you follow anything in the independence debate, you will see that one of the driving factors is that people are keen for a change of culture. Many want to retain a national identity that is not simply aligning with whatever Britain does. Surely, the whole point of independence is to make changes that better suit the Scottish people, the Scottish economy and our place in the world.

I absolutely agree that we will not be a "tartan facsimile" of these countries and that we will not be starting from the same position as them. Remember, Norway never started from a position of being a rich nation when they separated from Sweden. We will start form a different place and no doubt take a different direction because we are a different nation.

As much as yourself and some others keep insinuating, I am not ignorant to the fact that there may be sacrifices, many of which may be invisible to individuals, but the country as a whole will have a period of instability. I just don't believe for a second that it will be as bad as those that want to protect the Union would have us believe. Yes, it would be naïve to think that everything will go smoothly but there is no reason to believe that it would always be the worst case scenario. Especially when you look at well established industries, products, and expertise, combined with recognition by other countries and institutions that Scotland as an independent country would have a healthy credit rating on a par with most successful countries, large and small.
 

speers

Well-known member
Messages
1,681
Reaction score
28
Salmo, calling one side full of spins and lies really doesn't help anybody. Further to that, we already know that Neil Oliver is a fraud, but perhaps this says it better than I can...
 

speers

Well-known member
Messages
1,681
Reaction score
28
Agreed on point two, but as you can see from the other countries, industrial revolution or not, it really makes little difference to the future. Scotland has a great worldwide reputation and skill set in modern technology such as space technology, life sciences, digital sciences, as well as more traditional industries like finance and engineering.

Train spotting, !!! up on the hill,,, when they all catch the train, Aghhh fu-- it lets all go home , after " Ewin's character !!!
 

Ypres

Well-known member
Messages
481
Reaction score
717
Location
Scotland
I write as someone with a First Class Honours degree in History and many years teaching History.
Many Scots were forcibly evicted from their highland homes.
Many Scots voluntarily left their highland homes.
It’s normal in historical circles to talk of both push and pull factors. The landlord’s men burning your house down was undoubtedly as nasty a push factor as you could get. The promise of land in Canada or Australia was a strong pull factor.
History like life is complicated. Anyone pushing a simple narrative is wrong.
 

Bonito

Well-known member
Messages
627
Reaction score
652
Location
Uddingston
Come on Salmo - calling the National a propaganda rag in the same post that you post a link to the Daily Mail. surely you've got to at least see the irony in your post?
Local shop always keeps me a copy of the national. Almost always a large picture of crankie so it all gets positioned below the parrot cage in known "bomb" areas. On a good day crankie can get the sh!t back that she normally spouts
 

Auldghillie

Well-known member
Messages
362
Reaction score
265
I write as someone with a First Class Honours degree in History and many years teaching History.
Many Scots were forcibly evicted from their highland homes.
Many Scots voluntarily left their highland homes.
It’s normal in historical circles to talk of both push and pull factors. The landlord’s men burning your house down was undoubtedly as nasty a push factor as you could get. The promise of land in Canada or Australia was a strong pull factor.
History like life is complicated. Anyone pushing a simple narrative is wrong.
Correct, my ancestors being an example. Presumably this occurred as revenge for the rebellions ?

I think there’s still signs of abandoned Crofts between Loch Broom and Dundonell/ Gruinard. AG
 
Last edited:

Ypres

Well-known member
Messages
481
Reaction score
717
Location
Scotland
Correct, my ancestors being an example. Presumably this occurred as revenge for the rebellions ?
Most of The Clearances were for economic reasons. Sheep and then later deer made more money for the landlord than subsistence crofting ever could.
There is a belief/debate that many of the crofters who left voluntarily were marginally better off than most, saw the writing on the wall and left. Crofting was no idyl. There was famine in the highlands although often overlooked compared to the Irish famine. If I had had a few bob in my pocket I too would have got out.
 

Auldghillie

Well-known member
Messages
362
Reaction score
265
Most of The Clearances were for economic reasons. Sheep and then later deer made more money for the landlord than subsistence crofting ever could.
There is a belief/debate that many of the crofters who left voluntarily were marginally better off than most, saw the writing on the wall and left. Crofting was no idyl. There was famine in the highlands although often overlooked compared to the Irish famine. If I had had a few bob in my pocket I too would have got out.
Yes but didn’t the land only go to supporters of the Crown after Culloden - this was my point. AG
 

Ypres

Well-known member
Messages
481
Reaction score
717
Location
Scotland
Yes but didn’t the land only go to supporters of the Crown after Culloden - this was my point. AG
It’s down to semantics. Generally speaking when referring to The Clearances most historians would be referring to the nineteenth century clearances often at their worst around say 1840. The confiscation of Jacobite estates after the failed rebellion of 45/46 is a different matter all together.
 

Auldghillie

Well-known member
Messages
362
Reaction score
265
It’s down to semantics. Generally speaking when referring to The Clearances most historians would be referring to the nineteenth century clearances often at their worst around say 1840. The confiscation of Jacobite estates after the failed rebellion of 45/46 is a different matter all together.
Yes But my point being without Culloden the land ownership would not have passed out of traditional owners’ hands. Do you agree ?
 

Ypres

Well-known member
Messages
481
Reaction score
717
Location
Scotland
Yes But my point being without Culloden the land ownership would not have passed out of traditional owners’ hands. Do you agree ?
Some estates changed hands, some did not. The highland way of life was not sustainable in the long run. Massive change was coming. The ’45 simply speeded up the process.
Although it is sometime since I studied the nitty gritty of land holdings and rental agreements I seem to remember that many ‘traditional’ clan chiefs were leaders in the clearances. Put simply before Culloden having many small crofters on your land gave you a pool of fighting men. After Culloden the days of having your own private army were over and Scottish landlords/ clan chiefs were rapidly becoming indistinguishable from landlords anywhere and wanted to maximise income to pay for their increasingly anglicised lifestyle.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,318
Reaction score
939
Location
Isle of Lewis
This appeared on a Hebridean Facebook page earlier - (posted by Craig Mac Rae)

"Today is not just an usual day. Today we mark one of the of the saddest events in Scottish history, we mark 275th anniversary of the battle of Culloden. Our forefathers fought for Scotland and for the king against the British empire. We opposed their imperialism but we lost. The aftermath were massacres, rape and pillage. British soldiers marched with heads of our forefathers put on stakes on the High Street of Inverness..... Clearances, famine, mass emigration and assimilation to follow. They tried to wipe us and our culture out. They believed that free Scotland died after Culloden, but they were wrong. Free Scotland lives in our hearts, free Scotland is a dream and desire. They can take our tartan, our pipes, our language, our freedom, but they can't take our dreams and desires. They can't take our souls, and our souls are free, free like an ocean storm, like an eagle in the sky. Alba gu bràth, brothers the change is in our hands, our ancestors are watching. Vote on the 6th of May !! Scotland is alive!!"

Then in the comments -
"
Ruaraidh Ferguson
At least 25% were Scottish Units, the Jacobite rebellion was about religion and a desire by a Frenchman with an eye on a big prize. History would tell us that Scotland, as it is today, has never ever been a united nation and the biggest atrocities carried out in Scotland were either carried out by ourselves our with our help. The case for independence has nothing to do with a distorted view of history.
1


  • Like

  • ·
    Reply
  • · 37 m
  • Craig MacRae
    Author
    Ruaraidh Ferguson
    those Scots who fought for the Brits can't be called Scots, they are traitors.

  • There are a LOT of Scots who view history the same as Craig MacRae.
 

Gannochy

New member
Messages
24
Reaction score
23
Just shows, history can twist the facts to suit an audience or reflect the authors bias. Just ask the Russians or the Americans for that matter if they think Winston Churchill leading the British won WW2 and that the French capitulated to save Paris. That is what I was taught 60 years ago, mind you my history teacher was a balloon.
 

Auldghillie

Well-known member
Messages
362
Reaction score
265
I have long since come to the conclusion that people believe what they want to believe.
I have long since come to the conclusion that people believe what they want to believe.
Going back to land, do you know how the Sutherland family came to own such a huge tract including many salmon rivers ? How did the dukedom/ countessdom originate ?

The cash came from Manchester mines and maybe canals I saw. AG
 

Ypres

Well-known member
Messages
481
Reaction score
717
Location
Scotland
Going back to land, do you know how the Sutherland family came to own such a huge tract including many salmon rivers ? How did the dukedom/ countessdom originate ?

The cash came from Manchester mines and maybe canals I saw. AG
All I can say in a short note is that the Duke of Sutherland that you are referring to was one of the richest men in Britain and I dare say he simply bought the estate.
As you will know land in Scotland is still bought and sold like any other commodity. Whether this is a ‘good’ thing or not is beyond me. All I know is that some of the most unspoiled land in Scotland was/ is owned by private persons. God help us if the government got its hands on them.
 

SOS

Well-known member
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
1,193

Nigel Passmore

Well-known member
Messages
541
Reaction score
865

I think the bit where she says she knows nothing about the LSE study and them immediately says it is flawed (which given she had just said she knew nothing about it) is just classic Nicola Sturgeon.

Regards

NHP
 

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
8,032
Reaction score
3,586
Location
Stirling
I write as someone with a First Class Honours degree in History and many years teaching History.
Many Scots were forcibly evicted from their highland homes.
Many Scots voluntarily left their highland homes.
It’s normal in historical circles to talk of both push and pull factors. The landlord’s men burning your house down was undoubtedly as nasty a push factor as you could get. The promise of land in Canada or Australia was a strong pull factor.
History like life is complicated. Anyone pushing a simple narrative is wrong.
Totally agree with that summary Ypres.
Undoubtedly there were atrocities like the ones centred around Croik church and the clearance of Glencalvie and Strathnaver.
But let's not forget, as has been stated, that many of those who ended up going to Canada did so quite willingly in the hope of a better life
than that experienced in those remote inland Highland settlements which was no more than a painful existence to them.
Life in those times and settings was not by a very long chalk, the romantic Brigadoon life painted by some authors.
Even the simple resettlements in coastal communities like Bettyhill provided a much better lifestyle for many.
The notion that it was all brutally enforced by Patrick Sellar et all is just plain bo**ocks but it suits the s.n.p. narrative to develop that theme for their own twisted propaganda machine. And to beat Neil Oliver because he is anti nationalist and does not hide it.
Lets not forget the role of the church and the clan chiefs in the clearances either.
They don't come out of it lily white and guess what?
Pretty much all Scots earning an easy buck at the expense of their own country men and women.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top