Scottish Independence

[Scribbly]

I mean really.

We know that the primary purpose of the modern Nation State is to maintain favorable and stable economic conditions. This is why devolution has been a long and torturous process and why Westminster wants to avoid Scotland seceding. The results may not be that destabilizing anyway in the long term, so they might just let it happen anyway. Same goes for Wales, the poorest part of the UK incidentally.

But do you really contest that if random cities and smaller units started to secede, radically shaking up the status quo and causing massive amounts of logistical, regulatory and practical confusion, action wouldn't be taken to stop that?

Throw in things like the military, nuclear power stations, nuclear missile silos and so forth, and you've got all of that to deal with as well as the question of taxation.

Really? You think that this sort of thing would be received with better grace than the Middle East has shown? Really?

[Cain]

I think the EU and the UK as a former colonial power probably have a greater body of expertise to draw upon than most nations when it comes to this sort of thing.

However, it would still be a tortorously long, painful and difficult process which would be rendered mostly pointless by the virtue of all of us still being in the EU anyway.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I fail to see how a seceding city is going to cause more turmoil than a seceding principality or a seceding kingdom.

Also i dont think that because the civil war happened over a hundred years ago makes the example any less valid especially where you brought it up. I gave an example of a split that could have been peaceful.

But heres some splits that were peaceful. Singapore-malaysia austria-hungary norway-sweden czechoslovakia and the ussr.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I think the EU and the UK as a former colonial power probably have a greater body of expertise to draw upon than most nations when it comes to this sort of thing.

However, it would still be a tortorously long, painful and difficult process which would be rendered mostly pointless by the virtue of all of us still being in the EU anyway.

Agreed. Britain has claimed quite a bit of the planet over the years. It doesn't hold them any longer... their claim over Scotland or Wales is no more or less legit than their claims over other areas like India and Hong Kong.

At best, they might claim Wales based on welsh support for the rise of the Tudors and the alliances made then. Though that was mostly a minority and mostly because the welsh had been so poorly treated that having a welsh blood line on the throne was a chance to finally become something other than second-class citizens.

Personally, I believe that any UNION of states should have an option for secession.

[Scribbly]

I think the EU and the UK as a former colonial power probably have a greater body of expertise to draw upon than most nations when it comes to this sort of thing.

However, it would still be a tortorously long, painful and difficult process which would be rendered mostly pointless by the virtue of all of us still being in the EU anyway.

Agreed. Britain has claimed quite a bit of the planet over the years. It doesn't hold them any longer... their claim over Scotland or Wales is no more or less legit than their claims over other areas like India and Hong Kong.

At best, they might claim Wales based on welsh support for the rise of the Tudors and the alliances made then. Though that was mostly a minority and mostly because the welsh had been so poorly treated that having a welsh blood line on the throne was a chance to finally become something other than second-class citizens.

Personally, I believe that any UNION of states should have an option for secession.

Well you're wrong there for a start. England and Scotland merged in an act (I can't remember which act) whereby scottish parliament and British parliament became one. It wasn't conquered or enslaved or colonized like other parts of the empire.

I'm less certain on the Welsh history, but to say England dominated Scotland in the same way it dominated Hong Kong and India is just factually incorrect.

[Cain]

Acts of Union, 1707

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Britain and ireland had a similar act passed in 1801. Just saying. So it was both conquered militarily and annexed legislatively.

[Cain]

Britain and ireland had a similar act passed in 1801. Just saying. So it was both conquered militarily and annexed legislatively.

Apart from the whole "having had the same king for 100 years previously" which, incidentally, started with a Scottish King inheriting an English crown, sure.

Apart from that, the two situations are almost exactly the same.

[East Coast Hustle]

I fail to see how a seceding city is going to cause more turmoil than a seceding principality or a seceding kingdom.

Also i dont think that because the civil war happened over a hundred years ago makes the example any less valid especially where you brought it up. I gave an example of a split that could have been peaceful.

But heres some splits that were peaceful. Singapore-malaysia austria-hungary norway-sweden czechoslovakia and the ussr.

wait, you really don't think the civil war example is invalid because it happened 150 years ago in a world RADICALLY different from the one we live in now?

OK.

Also, Czechoslovakia was never part of the USSR.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Its an example of secession in the modern period. Also it was supposed to be read as czechoslovakia, and the ussr.

[Scribbly]

Singapore-malaysia austria-hungary norway-sweden czechoslovakia and the ussr.

As I swing through on the way to my game tonight I am informed that Singapore was expelled from Malaysia.

I'm not sure on Austria Hungary. Do you mean the eleven nation split following world war one? Because I daresay WW1 had something to do with that.

Its an example of secession in the modern period. Also it was supposed to be read as czechoslovakia, and the ussr.

Really don't see it as 'the modern period'. We've gone through two world wars (one world cup), nuclear weapons, the cold war and post-9/11 paradigms of international relations, all of which have altered the relations nation states have with their populations.

Anyway. Just thought I'd swing back to post the 1707 Acts of Union... but Cain beat me to it!

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Alright im willing to concede that the world that birthed the csa was a different one. But you did ask what would happen if texas seceded. Since there was historical precedent for that particular state (which also seceded from mexico) i could say with reasonable certainty what might happen if someone didnt get trigger happy.

[East Coast Hustle]

There is literally ZERO chance that the USA would allow Texas to secede from the union, even if they had to kill every living motherfucker in Texas to keep it.

[Elder Iptuous]

it is my understanding that the pentagon has military plans for every conceivable contingency that might arise.  i'd be curious what their plans for a TX secession would look like...  (as ridiculously unlikely as that eventuality might be)

[East Coast Hustle]

I think the only state that could ever successfully secede from the union would be Washington. I mean, yeah, it's one of a few states that could survive as a first-world economy on its own but more importantly as soon as US forces tried to mobilize to stop the secession all of their computer systems would mysteriously stop working.