Tuesday, 1 December 2009

AFTER INDEPENDENCE-WHO WOULD BE ENTITLED TO BE A SCOT?


H/T to EDGAR for the idea

OK, so we've had the vote for independence.  Would everybody entitled to vote now, be allowed to vote, regardless of their Nationality?  So presuming they could.  Scotland has voted 60/40 to instruct the SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT to negotiate our departure from the UNITED KINGDOM and that is achieved.
WHO THEN WOULD BE ENTITLED TO CALL THEMSELVES A SCOT AND CARRY A SCOTTISH PASSPORT?

Obviously someone born in Scotland.  What about someone resident here for say 10 years?  Would people be allowed dual-nationality with for instance England?  What about someone with a Scottish parent but born outside of Scotland?  Would that mean we would have Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians claiming Scottish Nationality?  Or for that matter, anyone from the Scottish Diaspora whose great, great granny had a fling with a big, hairy Scotsman and a wee, baldy Scots baby appeared?

As far as I know, it's never been discussed.  WHAT DO YOU THINK?

24 comments:

Polaris said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Polaris said...

Typo - sorry...

Any European citizen resident in Scotland is entitled to vote in national and European elections including a possible independence referendum. How could nationality qualification preclude somebody who voted for it in a referendum - to be fair it would have to be the same, wouldn't it?

Anonymous said...

have a trawl through old Scottish laws there is a nationality law

scunnert said...

Length of residency, integration into Scots life, and the primacy of Scots identity I think would be fundamental in claiming the privilege of being called a Scot. Simply being a resident is hardly a claim to identity. Living in a stable doesn't make one a horse.

The English diaspora in Scotland makes up a sizable minority in many regions of Scotland. However, their influence exceeds their numbers exponentially. White flight English refugees come north to Region 9 seeking respite from the onslaught, and who can blame them, but they bring with them a desire to control. This is understandable when one considers their circumstances - but that is hardly an excuse. They seek temporary relief, but are convinced of the inevitable. They seek not to build a nation, but to perpetuate the notion that there will always be an England - even if its geographic locus has shifted north.

Then there are those amongst us who would contract their allegiance to the Scots identity if ... here follows a series of demands punctuated by the occasional atrocity to demonstrate the seriousness of the situation.

This is in the nature of pluralistic societies manufactured to remove the rights of man to control his space and not surrender it to some transnational agglomeration.

Therefore, the right to claim Scots identity should be narrowly defined to include only those with a familial history of contribution to the growth in the culture and the nation. Cosmopolites need not apply.

English "White Flight" and uncontrolled immigration has led to the Balkanization of Scotland. In order to know who we are we have to gain control over our borders - Ahm no kiddin. Let us as a nation end immigration completely. Let us from now on accept only refugees from distant lands in dire circumstances. Let us embrace them and call them brother.

Let Scots decide.

subrosa said...

How about following the international football team's rules? You know, produce a paper saying yer granny wis born in a but 'n' ben on the side of Loch Lomond and yer in.

This is a difficult one and an adminstrative nightmare if we started to include the diaspora (although many would possibly vote for independence), but we would have to put a generation limit on it. Two generations?

For those born to Scottish parents outside of Scotland for umpteen reasons, they need to be included. After all it's not their problem their mum couldn't make it to the nearest hospital this side of the border is it?

It'll be interesting to hear more opinions. Good post DL.

Edgar said...

If I understand correctly the point made by Polaris, she is saying that anyone legally entitled to vote in the independence referendum should, logically, be entitled to Scottish nationality. I'm not sure about the validity of this argument. Suppose that women did not have the vote in Scotland and there was a referendum on whether women should have the vote. Clearly, at the time of the referendum, only men can vote, so it is only men who decide whether women can vote. Does a Scotsman now have the logical claim to womanhood?

There is a distinction between the creator and that which is created.

Anonymous said there are nationality laws. Indeed there were but they are superseded by the Act of Union. A decision still must be made whether to re-enact them in some sense, or come up with something new.

Scunnert makes many valid points but begs the question when he says 'Let Scots decide'. There is no-one in the world who has 'Scots' nationality. That's the problem at hand.

Edgar said...

Subrosa must have been typing as I was and she's absolutley right. It's something that seems to need a lot more thought than has been given it so far. Get it wrong and there will be an administrative nightmare probably lasting decades.

As it is, if the claim for nationality would depend on a person proving some connection, that in itself is going to generate problems and possible injustices. Orphans, children sent for adoption, or abandoned, etc., etc., the list of potential case types is nearly endless.

Ireland has a set of rules whereby people who can show a direct ancestor, but no further back than grandparent, can apply for Irish nationality. In practical terms, limiting the genetic tie to 2 generations, as Subrosa suggested, would probably be the cleanest way to do it. Tough luck on the third and subsequent generations born outside of Scotland, though.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Polaris, I am not sure that Europeans resident here can vote in National elections but they can in the European one. I think that we would have as well have, to have, some sort of residency qualification to vote in the referendum, possibly 10m years UNLESS they were either born in Scotland and resident or from two generation back of Scots and also resident. I would not put it past the Unionist parties to move a lot of punters up from England to vote in the referendum and then move them back down again or give them postal votes! This is the land of dirty politics!

Dark Lochnagar said...

Anonymous, I'm not sure that any old law that is 4-500 years old would have any relevency today. However I may be completely wrong, but it definately deserves more research than I am able to do at this time of night. (1pm)

Dark Lochnagar said...

Scunnert, I have some sympathy for your position. I think many English have settled here and tried to take over, perhaps if they want to stay here and contribute to Scottish life we should insist that they take out Scottish or very possibly dual nationality. It is also true that they have to take control sometimes because the locals couldn't give a fuck and I know this is prevelent often in the Highlands where the Gael tends to be more laid back. There are also many English people who are settled here who have not tried to take over but have merely enjoyed living amongst us who would be chuffed to bits to be able to call themselves Scots. I think particularly of a friend of mine who is now unfortunately dead.

I think that initially there would have to be a narrower qualification for the vote for independence. Could a Scot who has lived in England for 20 years be entitled to vote. Probably not, but he might say that he wants to return one day to Scotland, so he is entitled to a vote on what sort of country it is. It is a very difficult one and I can see it causing problems. The last referendum was voted on by everyone that was here. But, with so many English people living in Scotland, presuming they would in general vote against, was that the reason it didn't pass the 40% of the population threshold?

sad nation said...

I think residents who had paid 10 years of tax and national insurance into our coffers should be eligible.
And anyone born here. Apart from folk who nip in to give birth and claim citizenship.
Sad to see that AMW has joined a long list and shut down his blog.
We are indeed a pathetic race.
Totally gutless and not worthy of our own independent parliament.
So I couldn't give a monkeys to tell you the truth.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Rosie, I think in general your rule is good and these people should be offered passports if they want them. However it does worry me if they live firth of Scotland, hold Scottish nationality but don't contribute anything to the country's wealth or society. In saying that there are probably a lot of people who would want to move here if we Scots didn't go down the socialist road and instead projected a modern, go-ahead country who looked after our citizens as we have done for centuries.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Edgar, you could be in trouble bring up that gender analogy. There are some fierce women read this blog, (meant in the nicest way girls).

Could we re-enact old nationality laws? It is worth looking into. You say there is no such thing as a Scot. I would have to disagree. I was born in Scotland and my antecedents going back at least 4 generations were Scots. So I consider myself a Scot and I have taken one line back as far as Culloden, so that's nearly 300 years. Don't belive all this shit that was on Questiontime when Griffin was on, about your antecedents going back to the ice age. A load of bollox. Griffin should have told that American Woman to stop talking shite.

On Subrosa's point of being born here or resident for 20 years, I don't think that if we want to build a new, forward looking nation we could expect a residency qualification of 20 years, 10 would be my preferred time.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Sadders. Keep your chin up! On AMW's blog shutting down. I am as sad as you, it was one I looked at daily and the amount is diminishing. He was very eloquent even if his grammar was shite! It does take a hell of a long time to run a blog properly. Trawl for articles, copy some and write other bits and answer the commenters. I've been an hour going through the comments on this post alone, although I'm not the quickest at typing, but not the slowest either.

I agree with your 10 years and if they continued to be resident in Scotland they could then vote in Scottish national elections.

Why don't you start a blog, if you don't already have one?

sad nation said...

DL
Yes his grammar and spelling were very poor but he was young and ambitious.
I started a blog but deleted it. I've got dependents. People who rely on me. If someone in their twenties like AMW has no bollocks for the fight then folk like myself certainly won't have confidence to step into the breach.
But fair dos to you. I enjoy reading your blogs and hope that you aren't shut down.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Sadders, yes they were very poor and it crossed my mind more than once that this was a product of presumably a four year university course and obviously a bright guy. Is this a failing in our education system? AMW, I am sure still has the bollox, he proably doesn't have the time.
I post my blog because it amuses me and I enjoy answering and communicating with the people I get commenting. If it ever starts to bore me, I'll stop it. I do like to post every day at least once and sometimes that can be a pain.

banned said...

Greetings from district 4, not my problem but why not go the Israeli rout, once a Jew, always a Jew, even if you are black ?
Meanwhile you are welcome to have back all those Scottish cunts who currently infest Westminster ( no offence ).

banned said...

Allow me to rephrase that last point. You are welcome to have back all those Scottish people, who happen to be cunts, that currently infest Westminster.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Banned, your contribution is welcomed and your rephrasing is apt. Of course if Scotland acheived independence all those "Scotch Fuckers" would come back to Scotland apart of course from the Anglophiles who could not tear themselves away from better weather and the multi-ethnic lifestyle. They have of course at the moment evry right to be in Westminster as we are allowed 64 MPs under the union of the Parliaments in 1707. There is however no doubt of the last 300 years or so that the "Scotch Cunts" have punched above their weight in the Union which has been to England's advantage as most of the significant advances in Medicine, Engineering and Technology have been Scottish. We have also served in distinction in all the wars that Britain has been involved in losing well above our quota of soldiers due to their bravery on the battlefield. I won't bring into it the Scottish Oil money which has kept the economy afloat since the mid seventies. I totally agree though that the "Scotch Cunts" shouldn't vote on purely English matters in Parliament and indeed the SNP MPs don't. Anyway I hope you find yourself suitably adminished and I apologise for the rant, but sometimes I go all "Brigadoon"! (:-)> p.s. did you know that Blair was born in Scotland?

Dark Lochnagar said...

Banned, sorry about my above respnse, it was OTT. I'm not sure that the Jewish type solution would be suitable. There would have to be some sort of rule. We don't want Somalians or even worse Belgiums turning up in a kilt and claiming diplomatic affinity!

Edgar said...

I didn't try to say you weren't a Scot, DL! But you're nationality is British ... for the time-being, at any rate.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Edgar, it might say British on my passport, although it may say European shortly but I am always, always a Scot first.

banned said...

DL "p.s. did you know that Blair was born in Scotland?" I knew he had a Scottish link and you can have him back too. btw, nobody denies the enormous contribution from the Scots to all manner of British stuff but, if you go your seperate, way how will your guys get to be in the top league again ?

Dark Lochnagar said...

Banned. You can keep the cunt. He supports the English football team so he won't be welcomed back here the traitorous scum.
There would be absolutely no reason, apart from the fact that we would probably be a socialist country for 15 years why Scotland with a hold of it's own natural resources wouldn't prosper in much the same way as Norway has, outside as I would hope Scotland might be, of the EU.