[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

So what happens the first time a Scottish government formed of a party you didn’t vote for, wins power and starts making decisions you disapprove of? Edinburgh is far-flung to those in Shetland or the Outer Hebrides, places that voted No in 2014 and have no great history of voting for SNP representation. What about them?

It’s still a government in Scotland acting in the interests of Scotland. If a party won a Scottish election that I didn’t vote for then that would be the results.

However in the current arrangement Scotland consistently gets governed by a party it didn’t vote for, and actually has so little representation or relevance that it has no incentive to change.

Your argument may be reduced to ever more atomised degrees of absurdity. In a democracy there are always people who live with decisions taken far away by people they didn’t vote for. The scenario you outlined only makes sense in the minds of those accustomed to talking about “Scotland” as a homogenous mass, and assuming that everyone else thinks the way they do, or would do if given the chance to shed their false consciousness - it’s a common foible of nationalists.

You may consider the argument absurd, however many, many people (yes and no voters) consider sovereignty as important and to that end that it’s for the people of Scotland to decide their future as and when they please.

Scotland is indeed far from a singular homogenous mass, which makes the SNP polling and electoral performance of 45-50% of the vote even more astonishing that they can capture so many within such a rich and diverse society.

---------- Post added at 16:15 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

There have been plenty of unelected UK H of L appointments under BoJo recently that are a bit iffy.

---------- Post added at 16:13 ---------- Previous post was at 16:12 ----------


OB is the Right Honourable Member for Streaming.

That reminds me I need to nip into the TV section for a laugh.