Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 25 Apr '14 18:48 / 1 edit
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-yes-bowie-no-independence

    "Scottish referendum: why Chomsky's yes is more interesting than Bowie's no"
    --Fraser MacDonald (25 April 2014)

    "My intuition favours (Scotland's) independence."
    --Noam Chomsky (quoted by RIA Novosti, a Russian news agency)
  2. 25 Apr '14 18:51
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-says-yes-bowie-no-independence

    "Scottish referendum: why Chomsky's yes is more interesting than Bowie's no"
    --Fraser MacDonald (25 April 2014)

    "My intuition favours (Scotland's) independence."
    --Noam Chomsky (quoted by RIA Novosti, a Russian news agency)
    Link is broken.
  3. 25 Apr '14 18:58
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Link is broken.
    this worked for me:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-yes-bowie-no-independence

    It doesn't have the word "says" in it.

    Found by google search on chomsky scotland.
  4. 25 Apr '14 18:59
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Link is broken.
    Fixed.
  5. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    25 Apr '14 19:01
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Link is broken.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-yes-bowie-no-independence

    Works for me. Just go to the Guardian site then search for Chomsky. But be prepared to be underwhelmed:
    "My intuition favours independence," Chomsky told the Russian news agency RIA Novosti, adding that he had "been following the debate with interest". But that, apparently, was the limit of his contribution. Voters looking for further nuance might have been left a little underwhelmed, not least by the expectation that world-famous analytic philosophers tend not to rely on anything as touchy feely as intuition....
  6. 25 Apr '14 19:07
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-yes-bowie-no-independence

    "Scottish referendum: why Chomsky's yes is more interesting than Bowie's no"
    --Fraser MacDonald (25 April 2014)

    "My intuition favours (Scotland's) independence."
    --Noam Chomsky (quoted by RIA Novosti, a Russian news agency)
    Sudden thought:

    Breakup of Soviet Union
    Breakup of United Kingdom
    Breakup of Unites States?

    Each following a period of empire or empire-like dominance?
  7. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    25 Apr '14 19:17
    .....But the article has some interesting comments, especially pointing out that the referendum is not the sole property of nationalists. He points out that Chomsky is opposed to nationalism and certainly I am too, but like myself Chomsky thinks the Scots might do well to vote yes - (Maybe he reads my work on this forum?) - in order to preserve in their own area those achievements of the British nation that are now under threat from politics in England.
    I can see no plausible redress other than through a smaller independent state, differently organised, that preserves the best of British healthcare, education and welfare.

    Remember that the question before voters is not about nationalism but about independence, and you don't have to be the founder of modern linguistics to see that these political phenomena, though invariably conflated, are not the same.

    It's remarkable given the high stakes involved that such a basic distinction is so seldom made. In short, nationalism is the belief – held by Alex Salmond and David Cameron alike – in nationhood as the appropriate foundation for territorial sovereignty; independence is about the territorial enactment of self-determination. In Scotland's case, admittedly, self-determination and nationhood will likely be coterminous, but they needn't be so in principle.

    The literary theorist Terry Eagleton once remarked that the Enlightenment gave birth to two doctrines distinguished only by the letter "s". The first was that the people had the right to self-determination; the second was that peoples had such a right. "The former belief," said Eagleton, "is the keystone of modern democracy, and indeed of socialism; the second is a piece of romantic mystification."
    Can the Scots achieve independence without, like the Irish after 1922, becoming trapped in the drab parochialism of nationalism?
  8. 25 Apr '14 19:20 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by JS357
    this worked for me:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/scottish-referendum-noam-chomsky-yes-bowie-no-independence

    It doesn't have the word "says" in it.

    Found by google search on chomsky scotland.
    Ok a distinction is being drawn between independence and nationalism, which is fine. Today the labour party essentially accused Salmond of polarising the issue between Scotland and England, which they would for the consequences of an independent Scotland could be devastating to the Labour party because key Labour strongholds may not be enough in future to swing the vote in their favour. Scotland is essentially a socialist nation, the reasons for this are hard to elucidate, but we have a kind of eternal distrust of Toryism. One must not forget that we are a tiny nation, only five or six million people. This is significant because if we have recourse to our national mineral wealth we could become quite a rich nation, the example of Norway of course is salient.

    People i think are simply fed up being governed by a party that we did not vote for and from a capital that is in another country. Its always annoying to hear Manchester being described as the North and someone when they are interviewed in Scotland no matter where always seems to have an English accent. Where are the Scots one wonders? Is this parochialism or simply a yearning to hear Scottish voices without some controlling influence from some another culture. People feel absolutely marginalised and its this that may prove to be a motivating force like no other.
  9. 25 Apr '14 19:26
    Originally posted by finnegan
    .....But the article has some interesting comments, especially pointing out that the referendum is not the sole property of nationalists. He points out that Chomsky is opposed to nationalism and certainly I am too, but like myself Chomsky thinks the Scots might do well to vote yes - (Maybe he reads my work on this forum?) - in order to preserve in their o ...[text shortened]... ce without, like the Irish after 1922, becoming trapped in the drab parochialism of nationalism?
    Can the Scots achieve independence without, like the Irish after 1922, becoming trapped in the drab parochialism of nationalism?

    given that or the Tories, i think we would take parochialism every time.
  10. 25 Apr '14 19:37
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie to JS357
    Ok a distinction is being drawn between independence and nationalism, which is fine. Today the labour party essentially accused Salmond of polarising the issue between Scotland and England, which they would for the consequences of an independent Scotland could be devastating to the Labour party because key Labour strongholds may not be enou ...[text shortened]... feel absolutely marginalised and its this that may prove to be a motivating force like no other.
    "This is significant because if we have recourse to our national mineral wealth
    we could become quite a rich nation, the example of Norway of course is salient."
    --Robbie Carrobie

    It's unclear to me what proportion of the UK's current North Sea oil
    resources would be granted to an independent Scotland.

    http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Scotland's_oil
  11. 25 Apr '14 19:52
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    "This is significant because if we have recourse to our national mineral wealth
    we could become quite a rich nation, the example of Norway of course is salient."
    --Robbie Carrobie

    It's unclear to me what proportion of the UK's current North Sea oil
    resources would be granted to an independent Scotland.

    http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Scotland's_oil
    fine it can be contested, but even at that I suspect we will be much better deal than we have at present, after all, Norway got to keep the oil that was in their territorial waters, did they not.
  12. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    25 Apr '14 20:19
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Can the Scots achieve independence without, like the Irish after 1922, becoming trapped in the drab parochialism of nationalism?

    given that or the Tories, i think we would take parochialism every time.
    You misunderstand my point. A history of Ireland by Joseph Lee (for example) concluded that on becoming independent from Britain, the Irish suffered by retaining a much more restricted band of opinion than they had experienced when part of the larger unit. That is the danger to be averted and I see no reason why the Scots cannot achieve a far more enlightened culture, rather than a narrow, inward looking and nationalist one.

    The codology that promoted an "Irish" or "Oirish" or "Scottish" or "Welsh" or "Celtic" identity was largely an invention of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. The pseudo mystical nationalism of the last few centuries has had a baleful influence and I for one have no patience with it. See for an example this review:
    http://www.socialismtoday.org/41/celts41.html
    but the theme will probably ring bells once you glance at it.

    The alternative to English Tories is not parochialism. So don't let the nationalist trick you into thinking it has to be so.

    But I can see very well that while Labour is so deep in the neo liberal mud, then the progressive role has had to fall to Scots and Welsh nationalists, who can at times seem far more socialist. The alternative to English Tories in England is sadly not Labour at the moment. When we lose the Scots this country is stuffed.
  13. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    25 Apr '14 20:46
    Originally posted by JS357
    Sudden thought:

    Breakup of Soviet Union
    Breakup of United Kingdom
    Breakup of Unites States?

    Each following a period of empire or empire-like dominance?
    Different thought - breakup of multi national states, like Yugoslavia - and resurgence of nationalism with attendant dangers. Nasty politics likes to wrap itself in a flag.
  14. 25 Apr '14 21:38 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by finnegan
    You misunderstand my point. A history of Ireland by Joseph Lee (for example) concluded that on becoming independent from Britain, the Irish suffered by retaining a much more restricted band of opinion than they had experienced when part of the larger unit. That is the danger to be averted and I see no reason why the Scots cannot achieve a far more enlighten ...[text shortened]... es in England is sadly not Labour at the moment. When we lose the Scots this country is stuffed.
    In the West and particularly Glasgow we have a much more greater affinity with Ireland than one would expect, infact for some it supersedes their affinity with Scotland and certainly any kind of allegiance to the Uk. We were a divided city because of the issues that were facing Ireland, Orange bands still parade the street here. Buses still come from Northern Ireland for the football. If I go to Girvan and its a clear day Ireland is only twelve miles across the water. I suspect it looks much the same down that part of the coast as it does on the east coast of Ireland. So this is one aspect, our Irishness and I relate it because we have essentially the same mentality as the Irish, at least in the west.

    saying that I do think that we may be saved from the parochialism that engulfed Ireland because Europe is a much stronger identity to aspire to than as probably apparent in 1922. I am always aggrieved that citizen of Germany is a citizen whereas we are subjects, so if we can forge a European identity, to have European money, not to have to change your Scottish sterling every time you cross the border for fear of ignorance on the part of shopkeepers then it will be a good thing for us. We would much rather aspire to be European.
  15. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    25 Apr '14 22:04
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    In the West and particularly Glasgow we have a much more greater affinity with Ireland than one would expect, infact for some it supersedes their affinity with Scotland and certainly any kind of allegiance to the Uk. We were a divided city because of the issues that were facing Ireland, Orange bands still parade the street here. Buses still come fr ...[text shortened]... of shopkeepers then it will be a good thing for us. We would much rather aspire to be European.
    Yes sections of Ulster have long been part of Scotland. At one time, when Dissenters were unable to worship as they chose in Ireland (not only Catholics were oppressed) they would sail across to Scotland on a Sunday and worship there before returning that evening. The Scots were not identical with the planters either. This is one reason why the Irish nationalist arguments over Northern Ireland lack coherence in my view. Their vision of a homogenous island in which only the catholics are legitimate is not good enough as history.

    Liverpool also has a history of protestant / Catholic rivalry, reflected in the two football teams Liverpool and Everton. It amuses me that my own son became an Everton supporter and I approve. I have known the orange order to march in my own area and it is strange to watch.

    I like the way progressive elements in both Ireland and Scotland look to the European Union as a relief from the undue influence of the English but also as a way to remove the tiresome dominance of narrow nationalists at home. It contrasts so strongly with the English hatred of all things European, to the extent that they appear to want to sink their human rights in the English Channel. I like the principle of a Europe without borders and of seeking some democratic institutions to counter the continent wide power of everything from corporations to criminals and develop common policies for mutual benefit. However, it is sadly the case that much of Europe is entirely dominated by the interests of business and the democratic challenges are huge. From UKIP to Le Pen and more, there is a real risk of the EU being subverted by the politics of nationalist ignorance and the only winners will be the corporations (and the criminal gangs). It is all about perception. What they represent as being "ruled from Brussels" I perceive as a movement to bring democratic oversight to those matters such as the activities of business which can only be dealt with on a European scale or else they are not dealt with at all and we sacrifice all control to the anti social greed of the corporations.