2007 August 19 Sunday
Immigration Driving Scottish Separatism?
David Pryce-Jones observes how devolution of power in Britain to the Scottish Parliament is helping to fuel a push for independence of Scotland from Britain. Is immigration driving Scots into stronger support for Scottish national independence?
Opinion polls suggest that almost two-thirds approve of Salmondís administration so far, and also that independence one day is inevitable although under a quarter of the respondents actually were in favour of it. I have just spent some time in Scotland, and pretty well everyone I spoke to there confirmed the broad outlines of these polls. However unenthusiastic they might be at the prospect, almost everyone considered that independence was the virtually certain outcome of devolution. And that would be Blairís irreversible legacy.
One Scottish grandee, a Unionist, had an interesting angle. The Scots, he said to me, have a very strong sense of their own identity, and do not take kindly to others coming to live among them, or telling them what to do. This is tribalism, with its plusses and minuses, and it means that when they look at Britain they see that immigration is out of control, and there is a diminishing sense of identity, and even less national pride. The Scots hope to avoid such a fate. In a nutshell, then, repudiation of multi-culturalism is the motor driving Scottish independence and the ultimate break-up of Britain.
They wouldn't need to worry about medical doctors trying to blow up one of their airports if they had a controlled border with England and did not allow Muslims in to work. As things now stand multiculturalism is becoming a growing imposition on Scots living in Scotland. For another example of how Muslim immigration is an imposition on Scots see my post Eating At Desk During Ramadan Banned At Scottish Hospitals.
Actually 95% Scots and Welsh MPs are members of the Labour party in the British parliament who are responsible for the multi-cultural chaos, England had always been more Conservative. Scots also have noticeably more MP's per head than England.
Devolution has created a nationalistic movement in England that didn't previously exist in any numbers worth mentioning.
They also seek greater immigration control and power back from the EU.
I agree though, immmigration has ruined the notion of Britain being English+Scottish+Welsh+to some extent Irish, so people are starting to revert to old identities. Also it is also largely to do with the attempt to create a European superstate, Scots don't want to be ruled by Britain if Britain itself doesn't even have any power, they might as well be ruled directly from the EU they think.
Strangely, the Scottish 'Nationalists' are very pro-EU which wants to take sovereignty away from them..
Plently of foreigners in Scotland though, and the SNP are in favour of immigration and recently called for more. Their leader Alex Salmond is an economist and will probably put cheap labour are the forefront.
Dave said: "Plenty of foreigners in Scotland though..."
"foreigners" includes highlanders if you're a lowlander, or lowlanders if you're a highlander.
Will some Stuart descendent return and claim the throne? A Jacobite rebellion is long overdue.
erm yes maybe although thats not as much so as it was before modern transport, but when I said foreigners I was obviously talking about non-Scots. I was just making the point that although most of Britains extremely high levels of immigration over the last 15 years has gone to England, Scotland is far from unchanged itself, and they have plently of Muslim issues.
A year or two ago Scottish police were ordered not to react after a gang of Muslims was throwing bottles of urine at them, instead they had to just stand there with their helmets and riot shields as they got soaked. hahah unbelievable.
The truth is that Scotland, generally, has been little damaged by the mass immigration that afflicts England (the Pakistanis of glasgow are an exception).
Basically the regions of the uK worst afflicted are the conurbations of London and Birmingham which have both been transformed into horrible, crime infested pest-holes, with nary a White face in sight.
Despite claims to the contrary both conurbations are economically unproductive with mass unemployment and welfare dependancy.Since the combined populations of London and Birmingham are double that of the whole of Scotland, from a very basic 'gut-feeling' kind of intuitive economics, it would make good sense for the Scots to cut loose from England and leave this dead-weight behind.
Not true Kenelm,
has the figures from HM Treasury, England only gets £5,400 per head, Scotland gets £6,570, and no Scotland doesn't generate that extra wealth, they were given more support years ago because of the loss of some big manufacturing and it has continued since then because the government was afraid of provoking nationalists.
What about North Sea oil and gas?
The fields lie entirely within Scotland's territorial waters, and if the the substantial tax revenues due were divvied-up amongst Scotland's 5 million population, the boost per capita would be enormous - just think of Norway a nation of similar size and oil reserves.
However, I still think the best reason for Scottish separation is to put the maximum possible distance between themselves and England's teeming dark millions - who will in a very Powellite way constitute a grave threat to the existence of the English people later this century.
Better to be out of the fray and disown all responsibility I say.
Well thats the major hole in the SNP's arguement #1 the North Sea oil and gas are not entirely within Scotlands waters, #2 they have nearly run out anyway in terms of large scale production.
But yes I do think it would be better for both the English and the Scottish if the division happened, #1 it would force the Scots to stop being so unaffordably socialist, Scots have one of the lowest birth-rate in Europe it has supposedly recovered a little recently but thats after a lot of immigration so who has caused this recovery I don't know.. #2 it would substantially move the center ground in England to the right without the leftist Scots.
I sill maintain in the long run that the only predictor of a nation's future success is the talents of its people.
Here I believe the Scots being a resourceful and inventive race will thrive under independance, for example, what a stroke of marketing genius to promote Scotch Whisky as something special and unique ('it's all to do with the Burn water'), when it's straight foward distilled alcohol that ca be produced anywhere.
Scotland's small population size, educated work-force and inventiveness will keep it going.
The same cannot be said for England however.Yes it's population is burgeoning BUT in thirty years time (I am certain about this by the way)the MAJORITY of births in England will be non-White, chiefly low IQ, violent African/Carribeans together with a divise and increasingly assertive Pakistani muslims.With such stock in abundance a 'growing population' can hardly be called a bonus - coupled with the fact that these groups have very high welfare dependance.
As for the Scots going down the socialist road, aren't the high IQ, highly educated efficent, wealthy Scandinavian nations of Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland countries to be emulated and admired - and won't they fit into a 'naturalquartet' with Scotland?
Think of Nokia, Ericsson etc.