Jim Jefferies wins the gun control debate.

[Len Cnut]

I think he finds your cold blooded pragmatism kinda unnerving. He's all heart is our Mags, you know what these philosophy types are like 'who are we, what are we, how are we?'. Whereas you're more like 'if the numbers tally up then fuck 'we' '

I object to a policy partly meant to protect the stupid being referred to as "cold blooded". What on earth is cold blooded about not allowing the food industry to put whetever they fancy in our food?

I guess the concept of restrictive practises being the solution every time gets on peoples tits, certainly does with mine. With the greatest respect i too wouldnt want to live in a Soulie world. Not cuz you're not lovely or anything but cuz it just seems like everything would be so restricted. Like the yanks i like...guns and greasy food and...high tar cigarettes and good measures of whiskey and big fuckin' petrol guzzling cars and all that stuff. Or rather to at least have the choice of those things. It appears a Soulie world would be very restrictive and enforce things that are about personal choice by way of legislation.

Better a slightly fucked up world that we've made that way through the freedom to do so than a good world where you aint got no choice one way or the other. I'm making you sound like Stalin arent i? That wasnt deliberate, you know what I mean

Mags said a thing i really really really agree with the other day about the importance of a general mistrust of systems of control and centralised government having too much input in how society is run, thats kind of a yank idea isnt it? I really really agree with it though. It seems like a Soulie world would be more kinda like...state having a kind of controlling influence in tons and tons of different aspects of society.

Edited July 27, 2015 by Len B'stard

[SoulMonster]

Quite a digression there, Dies. Norway has oil, so that's one explanation for you. The other would be that our socialist system actually works.

[Len Cnut]

Quite a digression there, Dies. Norway has oil, so that's one explanation for you. The other would be that our socialist system actually works.

If two world wars have taught us anything its beware of Europeans that love their state too much

[DieselDaisy]

You seem to see no contradiction between socialism and being rich whereas most other countries see these as binary opposites as part of some, antagonistic class conflict, a war between the haves and the have nots. Scandinavian socialism does not seem to function like that: everyone buys into the system and can get rich. Your political system also reflects this, consisting as it does of coalition governments. Also, you never see a Scandinavian country invading Iraq or somewhere else. Scandinavia is largely unobtrusive, successful functioning in the background, neither interfering like German, invading like Britain-America or jarring in the bowels a la France.

[Len Cnut]

You seem to see no contradiction between socialism and being rich whereas most other countries see these as binary opposites as part of some, antagonistic class conflict, a war between the haves and the have nots. Scandinavian socialism does not seem to function like that: everyone buys into the system and can get rich. Your political system also reflects this, consisting as it does of coalition governments. Also, you never see a Scandinavian country invading Iraq or somewhere else. Scandinavia is largely unobtrusive, successful functioning in the background, neither interfering like German, invading like Britain-America or jarring in the bowels a la France.

So...they do it better than us basically?

[SoulMonster]

I think he finds your cold blooded pragmatism kinda unnerving. He's all heart is our Mags, you know what these philosophy types are like 'who are we, what are we, how are we?'. Whereas you're more like 'if the numbers tally up then fuck 'we' '

I object to a policy partly meant to protect the stupid being referred to as "cold blooded". What on earth is cold blooded about not allowing the food industry to put whetever they fancy in our food?

I guess the concept of restrictive practises being the solution every time gets on peoples tits, certainly does with mine. With the greatest respect i too wouldnt want to live in a Soulie world. Not cuz you're not lovely or anything but cuz it just seems like everything would be so restricted. Like the yanks i like...guns and greasy food and...high tar cigarettes and good measures of whiskey and big fuckin' petrol guzzling cars and all that stuff. Or rather to at least have the choice of those things. It appears a Soulie world would be very restrictive and enforce things that are about personal choice by way of legislation.

Better a slightly fucked up world that we've made that way through the freedom to do so than a good world where you aint got no choice one way or the other. I'm making you sound like Stalin arent i? That wasnt deliberate, you know what I mean

Mags said a thing i really really really agree with the other day about the importance of a general mistrust of systems of control and centralised government having too much input in how society is run, thats kind of a yank idea isnt it? I really really agree with it though. It seems like a Soulie world would be more kinda like...state having a kind of controlling influence in tons and tons of different aspects of society.

I think you got me wrong. Just because I approve of strict gun control as well as and the general systems we already have in place for keeping the food industry in control, doesn't mean I am for all kinds of regulations. I am pretty content by how it is in Norway. I would like a little less state interfering, but all in all it seems to really work well. So I guess you can say that "Soulie world" is Norway. And I don't think it is such a bad place which you make it out to be. Suggesting that it is place where "you aint got no choice one way or the other" is awfully imprecise and doesn't at all reflect my opinions. It's actually, and it is such a weird thing to be affected by what anyone writes, a bit sad that you would think that of me.

As for mistrusting the government. Yeah, sure. I would be very mistrustful if I lived in the States, too. But there is a big difference betwen how democracy works over there and here, and I think the control organs and check points, valves, whatever, are much more working here. The transparency is much better. It's a small ciuntry with shorter distance to people in power. It just works verty differently. That doesn't mean there arenæt bad guys here, too, I think people are the same everywhere, just that we seem to have a rather functioning system. But yeah, we need to be mistrustful, still.

[Len Cnut]

I think he finds your cold blooded pragmatism kinda unnerving. He's all heart is our Mags, you know what these philosophy types are like 'who are we, what are we, how are we?'. Whereas you're more like 'if the numbers tally up then fuck 'we' '

I object to a policy partly meant to protect the stupid being referred to as "cold blooded". What on earth is cold blooded about not allowing the food industry to put whetever they fancy in our food?

I guess the concept of restrictive practises being the solution every time gets on peoples tits, certainly does with mine. With the greatest respect i too wouldnt want to live in a Soulie world. Not cuz you're not lovely or anything but cuz it just seems like everything would be so restricted. Like the yanks i like...guns and greasy food and...high tar cigarettes and good measures of whiskey and big fuckin' petrol guzzling cars and all that stuff. Or rather to at least have the choice of those things. It appears a Soulie world would be very restrictive and enforce things that are about personal choice by way of legislation.

Better a slightly fucked up world that we've made that way through the freedom to do so than a good world where you aint got no choice one way or the other. I'm making you sound like Stalin arent i? That wasnt deliberate, you know what I mean

Mags said a thing i really really really agree with the other day about the importance of a general mistrust of systems of control and centralised government having too much input in how society is run, thats kind of a yank idea isnt it? I really really agree with it though. It seems like a Soulie world would be more kinda like...state having a kind of controlling influence in tons and tons of different aspects of society.

I think you got me wrong. Just because I approve of strict gun control as well as and the general systems we already have in place for keeping the food industry in control, doesn't mean I am for all kinds of regulations. I am pretty content by how it is in Norway. I would like a little less state interfering, but all in all it seems to really work well. So I guess you can say that "Soulie world" is Norway. And I don't think it is such a bad place which you make it out to be. Suggesting that it is place where "you aint got no choice one way or the other" is awfully imprecise and doesn't at all reflect my opinions. It's actually, and it is such a weird thing to be affected by what anyone writes, a bit sad that you would think that of me.

As for mistrusting the government. Yeah, sure. I would be very mistrustful if I lived in the States, too. But there is a big difference betwen how democracy works over there and here, and I think the control organs and check points, valves, whatever, are much more working here. The transparency is much better. It's a small ciuntry with shorter distance to people in power. It just works verty differently. That doesn't mean there arenæt bad guys here, too, I think people are the same everywhere, just that we seem to have a rather functioning system. But yeah, we need to be mistrustful, still.

I wasn't talking about Norway i just meant that in regards to most of the discussions we have on here, as far as my awful memory serves me, you seem to always kinda lean towards state restriction(s) as the solution to issues.

[SoulMonster]

I think he finds your cold blooded pragmatism kinda unnerving. He's all heart is our Mags, you know what these philosophy types are like 'who are we, what are we, how are we?'. Whereas you're more like 'if the numbers tally up then fuck 'we' '

I object to a policy partly meant to protect the stupid being referred to as "cold blooded". What on earth is cold blooded about not allowing the food industry to put whetever they fancy in our food?

I guess the concept of restrictive practises being the solution every time gets on peoples tits, certainly does with mine. With the greatest respect i too wouldnt want to live in a Soulie world. Not cuz you're not lovely or anything but cuz it just seems like everything would be so restricted. Like the yanks i like...guns and greasy food and...high tar cigarettes and good measures of whiskey and big fuckin' petrol guzzling cars and all that stuff. Or rather to at least have the choice of those things. It appears a Soulie world would be very restrictive and enforce things that are about personal choice by way of legislation.

Better a slightly fucked up world that we've made that way through the freedom to do so than a good world where you aint got no choice one way or the other. I'm making you sound like Stalin arent i? That wasnt deliberate, you know what I mean

Mags said a thing i really really really agree with the other day about the importance of a general mistrust of systems of control and centralised government having too much input in how society is run, thats kind of a yank idea isnt it? I really really agree with it though. It seems like a Soulie world would be more kinda like...state having a kind of controlling influence in tons and tons of different aspects of society.

I think you got me wrong. Just because I approve of strict gun control as well as and the general systems we already have in place for keeping the food industry in control, doesn't mean I am for all kinds of regulations. I am pretty content by how it is in Norway. I would like a little less state interfering, but all in all it seems to really work well. So I guess you can say that "Soulie world" is Norway. And I don't think it is such a bad place which you make it out to be. Suggesting that it is place where "you aint got no choice one way or the other" is awfully imprecise and doesn't at all reflect my opinions. It's actually, and it is such a weird thing to be affected by what anyone writes, a bit sad that you would think that of me.

As for mistrusting the government. Yeah, sure. I would be very mistrustful if I lived in the States, too. But there is a big difference betwen how democracy works over there and here, and I think the control organs and check points, valves, whatever, are much more working here. The transparency is much better. It's a small ciuntry with shorter distance to people in power. It just works verty differently. That doesn't mean there arenæt bad guys here, too, I think people are the same everywhere, just that we seem to have a rather functioning system. But yeah, we need to be mistrustful, still.

I wasn't talking about Norway i just meant that in regards to most of the discussions we have on here, as far as my awful memory serves me, you seem to always kinda lean towards state restriction(s) as the solution to issues.

Nah, you got me wrong. How bizzarre. I am for stricter gun laws (like, what was it, 49% of Americans?), I am for laws making certain food additives illegal to add to our food (like probably 95% of the population). I do remember that I was adamantly against blasphemy laws and against laws prohibiting religious clothing and symbols. I am also in favour of allowing recreational drug use (of certain drugs). So that counts in my favour, I guess . I can't remember any other discussions we've had, but my memory is bad as well. Still, to cut it short, I am pretty content with how western societies deal with the balance between personal freedom and restrictive laws. I understand that some laws must be in place, and I think we got it pretty well figured out now. And sure, like everyone else, there will always be small things I would like to change, in one direction or the other, but just like everyone else, that doesn't make me a radical at all.

Edited July 27, 2015 by SoulMonster

[Graeme]

You seem to see no contradiction between socialism and being rich whereas most other countries see these as binary opposites as part of some, antagonistic class conflict, a war between the haves and the have nots. Scandinavian socialism does not seem to function like that: everyone buys into the system and can get rich. Your political system also reflects this, consisting as it does of coalition governments. Also, you never see a Scandinavian country invading Iraq or somewhere else. Scandinavia is largely unobtrusive, successful functioning in the background, neither interfering like German, invading like Britain-America or jarring in the bowels a la France.

So...they do it better than us basically?

They do it better than fucking EVERYONE. It's the entire basis of the argument for Scottish Independence, to get the Thatcherite low-tax-low-spend model to fuck and turn our social-democratic leanings into an actual Nordic economy.

[DieselDaisy]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

[Dazey]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

Actually that's not quite the case. There's a definite link between Scots and Vikings.

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

At least they've got Pakis.

[DieselDaisy]

Is this an issue about Abba and the Bay City Rollers.

[Graeme]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

No, YOUR NHS has gone tits up and YOUR class system is too embedded, stop doing that typical English assimilationist thing of projecting your culture and your values onto other parts of the UK. OUR NHS is still in the shape most Scots would like it to be, thanks to not electing Tories... If you'll notice, more than 50% of the English electorate voted for continued austerity, more than 50% of the Scottish electorate voted for increases in public spending. From your Anglified perspective, that seems crazy. From our perspective, your decision seems crazy. It's not impossible either (the Nordic countries prove that), it just requires a change in priorities and the more the Scottish political discourse is separated from the UK one, the more Nordic it becomes. You lack imagination to see beyond the Thatcherite paradigm (which will one day be forced to an end by the collapse of the carbon economy anyway, we're just ahead of the curve) the problem is that Labour share your paucity of vision.

Bottom line is people (most importantly kids who have the misfortune to be born into low-income families) are suffering because of the slash and burn policies of this government which is enacting the economic equivalent of starving one's kids to pay one's mortgage. So while you clearly have the luxury to imagine that a government which actually acts to prevent this stuff would be "boring" (very fucking compassionate of you) a lot of us North of the border take a different view.

Edited July 28, 2015 by Graeme

[DieselDaisy]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

No, YOUR NHS has gone tits up and YOUR class system is too embedded, stop doing that typical English assimilationist thing of projecting your culture and your values onto other parts of the UK. OUR NHS is still in the shape most Scots would like it to be, thanks to not electing Tories... If you'll notice, more than 50% of the English electorate voted for continued austerity, more than 50% of the Scottish electorate voted for increases in public spending. From your Anglified perspective, that seems crazy. From our perspective, your decision seems crazy. It's not impossible either (the Nordic countries prove that), it just requires a change in priorities and the more the Scottish political discourse is separated from the UK one, the more Nordic it becomes. You lack imagination to see beyond the Thatcherite paradigm (which will one day be forced to an end by the collapse of the carbon economy anyway, we're just ahead of the curve) the problem is that Labour share your paucity of vision.

Bottom line is people (most importantly kids who have the misfortune to be born into low-income families) are suffering because of the slash and burn policies of this government which is enacting the economic equivalent of starving one's kids to pay one's mortgage. So while you clearly have the luxury to imagine that a government which actually acts to prevent this stuff would be "boring" (very fucking compassionate of you) a lot of us North of the border take a different view.

What are you shouting at me for? I didn't even vote in the last election, Tory, ''Thatcherite paradigms'' or otherwise. And regarding Scotland, you had your referendum and decided to stay in the Union so that is that really.

[SoulMonster]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

I wish I knew enough about these things to be part of this discussion, but I don't. I just want to say that there is plenty of moaning and dissense here, too

As for Scots being derived from the Norse invaders during the Viking age, here is an interesting article: http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/heritage/scale-of-viking-ancestry-uncovered-1-3334618

I also don't think there are so many cultural divisions between the people of Britain/Ireland and the Scandinavians.

[DieselDaisy]

You are not Nordic though! God in his infinite wisdom did not make Scots from Swedes. I'm under no allusions that Britain or any of the British home nations could implement a Nordic style of government, the class and cultural divisions are too embedded. We would fuck it up just like we fuck up everything. Heck, even the NHS has gone tits up. Also, what would we moan about? It is an Englishman's (sorry!) right to despise his government. It must be boring living in Sweden and not having a government to rant and rave about.

I wish I knew enough about these things to be part of this discussion, but I don't. I just want to say that there is plenty of moaning and dissense here, too

As for Scots being derived from the Norse invaders during the Viking age, here is an interesting article: http://www.scotsman.com/lifestyle/heritage/scale-of-viking-ancestry-uncovered-1-3334618

I also don't think there are so many cultural divisions between the people of Britain/Ireland and the Scandinavians.

I have an anecdote concerning the 'Thatcher' thing which highlights the tribal politics of Britain. A foreign colleague of my mother who had just moved here was so shocked at the childlike 'schadenfreude ' surrounding her death by some quarters that he asked the question, ''just what has this woman done?''. He had never seen such vitriol before. It took a foreigner observer to highlight the weirdness of it. The British are really quite stupid people: their voting patterns and prejudices are defined by centuries old class conflict. Half of the country basically hate the other half. You might be inclined to assign this to the Celtic nationalities as Graeme does but this, I feel, is an error as if you were going to split Great Britain along its mutual antagonisms, the entire North East of England (where I live) would be actually joined with Scotland. People also forget easily. They forget that before Thatcher (and Thatcherite economics you could say) the country was crippled by class dissent: union action; bins uncollected; the 'three day working week'. The Germans were howling in laughter at Britain, 'the sick man of Europe'. This is how the British do socialism. It just is a product of the ancient mutual antagonisms. It does not have the consensual spirit of Scandinavian socialism. It is also somewhat shambolic as the British would fuck up an argument. A lot of this is to do with maladministration. It is similar to when an England footballer scores an own goal or passes to the opposing team and gets raped for it. We do this in this country. This is what we do well, fuck things up (often from an initial good position). You just know that increased socialism here would entail increased bureaucratic maladministration and widespread corruption - Britain is probably more corrupt than Italy.

[SoulMonster]

Regarding schadenfreude and class conflicts. I remember when that British school class visited Svalbard a few years ago and one of the poor pupils got mauled to death by a polar bear. He happened to have a very posh name, I can't remember what it was, but some Brits just revelled in hearing how this presumed upper class boy was agonizingly killed. I could hardly believe ut. That people would applaud some a tragedy just bcause he happened to be born into a wealthy and upper class family.

To my defense, we don't have such class conflict in Norway. Aristocracy was abolished - successfully - quite some time ago. Of course we have rich and poor people, but you can't really tell by our names and rarely by behaviour/conduct. So to me, this ingrained hostility and unchecked joy of something I felt only horrible, surprised me.

Here is more on that incident: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Svalbard_polar_bear_attack

His name was Horatio Chapple. Even I feel inclined to punch a kid with that name, but feeling enjoyment when he is killed by a bear? No, not at all.

[Graeme]

What Dies' doesn't recognise in his analysis of Scotland's anti-Thatcherite empathy with Northern England (and much of Wales) is the distinction between Nationalism and Nationhood. Nationalism (and indeed passionate English regional identities) can be found in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland but what sets Scotland apart are its institutions of Nationhood. Wales was conquered by England and legally assimilated in the 12th Century, but since the treaty of Union was a mutually binding agreement between two equal parties (the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England), Scotland retained a unique legal system, education system and state religion. These withstood the centralisation of the British state and meant when Thatcher's government began to implement their neo-liberal reforms that Scotland had a much greater arsenal with which to make their dissent known because the reforms could be construed as 'foreign'.

The end of the Thatcher/Major era saw calls for limited self-government from those regions/nations which did not vote for Conservative policies to provide a buffer that would prevent such a degree of grievance manifesting again. In Dies' claim that we're a homogeneous blinkered British working-class mass, this would lead to similar results across the board. Let's examine that assertion.

Mandate for the establishment of a devolved Welsh administration: 51% in favour. Welsh Assembly established.

Mandate for the establishment of a devolved Northern Irish administration: 51% in favour. Northern Irish Assembly established. Subsequently suspended on multiple occasions.

Mandate for the establishment of a devolved Scottish administration: 74% in favour. Scottish Parliament with tax-varying powers established.

Mandate for the establishment of a devolved North Eastern English administration: 78% NOT in favour. Movement for English Regional Assemblies abandoned.

Here we have quantitative evidence of the impact Scotland's Nationhood has on the formation of a distinct Scottish political discourse driven by desire for Social Democracy of a very non-British variety. The "New Labour" project abandoned Social Democracy to the extent that Margaret Thatcher claimed her greatest achievement was Tony Blair, and so the Scots gradually abandoned Labour (barring the 2010 General Election when they were seen as the best hope for keeping David Cameron out of Downing Street) for the Scottish National Party who stepped into the Social Democratic void that Labour had vacated.

The election of David Cameron's 2010 government led to the mandate for the 2014 independence referendum. Nowhere else was so opposed to Conservative economic policy that they were considering leaving, again "Nationhood". Although Yes lost the referendum, mainly due to threats of macroeconomic risk, over the course of the two year campaign, support for independence rose from about 25% of the Scottish population to 45% through the Social Democratic arguments put forward, and its popularity has only (if slightly) increased since the referendum. I'd argue (particularly with the 2015 General Election result) that the referendum represents only the beginning of Scotland's real quest for social democracy.

Here's an article published today on Scotland and Nordic Social Democracy:

https://commonspace.scot/articles/1998/david-carr-our-friends-in-the-north-will-scotland-really-be-joining-scandinavia

CommonSpace columnist David Carr explores Scotland's connection to the Nordic model

ONE theme of the Scottish independence debate is whether Scotland might model itself on the Nordic nations. To address the desirability, feasibility and likelihood of this, let’s analyse what it means.

(Authorial Note: Scandinavia is Norway, Sweden, Denmark. Add Iceland and Finland and you get Nordic.).

Some are sceptical. Many have little understanding of Nordic society, economics and politics beyond what they see on BBC Four - if that. Others have more nuanced objections based on whether the Nordic model is, indeed, an attractive one - and if so, whether Scotland can aspire to it.

Many have little understanding of Nordic society, economics and politics beyond what they see on BBC Four - if that.

One common objection is that the Nordics have been abandoning their 'Nordic model'. This is gleefully cited by those who wish to rubbish the very idea of social democracy.

It is true that Scandinavia and Finland have drifted rightwards from full-blooded social democracy. The picture is complicated by the Scandinavian way of doing politics - here messy, multi-party deals are the norm (think Borgen).

In Denmark, the blues recently replaced the reds - but in a minority government. Sweden has a precarious red/green coalition, under fire from the (far right) Sweden Democrats. Norway’s red/greens have foundered, but Labour remains the largest party.

In Finland, the True Finns (Ukip plus nasty) are in coalition. There is also only one of eight parties led by a woman, the feeling being, 'We let the women have their chance, now let’s get the men back in'.

Iceland is a special case. After their travails, they now have a left-progressive government.

It is hard to argue that the region has spiralled into anything approaching Cameronism. With a few caveats (eg. Denmark is kicking its refugees), and allowing for dialectic, even if governments have adopted versions of austerity-lite, the Nordic model basically holds.

I must be honest, however, and admit that - as everywhere - grassroots anti-immigration sentiment is to be feared.

The Nordic nations are no utopia. But even if they are no longer solidly red/green, they are doing pretty well compared to many others. The traditions of the social democratic model run deep in their psyche.

Scandinavians don’t do stupid. They understand that healthy, well educated, secure people work well. That is why their industry prospers and their products are recognised for their quality.

While Sweden, for example, undertook some reckless market reforms in healthcare, and embarked upon its disastrous experiment with free schools - an idea taken up by Michael Gove even as Swedes were abandoning it - their underlying belief in the importance of properly funded societal infrastructure is still, basically, understood.

Scandinavians don’t do stupid. They understand that healthy, well educated, secure people work well. That is why their industry prospers and their products are recognised for their quality.

In the Nordic model, society and economy support one another. Build strong industry to pay for society. Build strong human infrastructure to support industry.

This contrasts with the unstated assumption in the UK that education, health, social security, social care and social work are drains to be squeezed when budgets are tight. No. By supporting these we build our economy. The evidence is abundant.

And the evidence is not just in economists’ tomes. Sticking solely to shipping and maritime technology - the area I know best - I could reel off a whole list of top-end Scandinavian companies, products and services.

So can Scotland do it? Is there a will?

Clearly the SNP has social democratic tendencies. But is a desire enough? Can we become Scandinavian simply by wishing it? Just look where we’re starting from, after all.

Well - in fact, it’s simply going to happen. It’s a matter of trade, of geography.

There was a trick by Neil Oliver in his BBC series The Vikings: rotate a map of Northern Europe 45 degrees clockwise, now you can see the major trading route down the side of Norway, across Shetland, the Scottish coast and down to Ireland.

Scandinavia is our natural trading partner, and has been for a thousand years. Scotland is not an island nation. Large parts were administratively part of Norway until 1263.

What would we trade? Scotland has the richest renewables resources in Europe, We would be building infrastructure in cooperation with Scandinavians (Denmark already produces 140 per cent of their needs) and selling it via interconnectors to the mainland - and to England.

We’d need a whole swathe of infrastructure to go with this - service vessels, ferries linking us to Scandinavia (maybe Ferguson’s will be building more green ferries?).

We would need people infrastructure - there would be jobs.

In the Nordic model, society and economy support one another. Build strong industry to pay for society. Build strong human infrastructure to support industry.

A small stumbling block is that this is all achieved easiest with Scottish independence. We need to be keep control so that all of this benefits our communities. Currently there are protocol difficulties in Scotland talking to Scandinavian governments over things like sub-sea interconnectors.

The whole of Europe is about to undergo seismic change. Under old arrangements it was doubtful (we were told) that the EU would admit Scotland. The Scandinavians - especially Denmark - were our greatest allies here.

Will that change? After Greece’s punishment beating, many of us are suddenly unconvinced by Europe. But we need to cooperate. So EFTA, EEA. That would work admirably - and we’d be a shoe-in.

Our future really is going to be Scandinavian. Follow the money. And let’s get used to the idea that they have had a lot of experience in running a decent society. Not utopia. But something we can get to.

[DieselDaisy]

Basically, 55.3% nay is the only statistic worth quoting. You may as well accept the fact that an ole' Etonian will be rogering you up the backside for the foreseeable future and take your defeat like a gentleman.

[Facekicker]

Yee-haw I'm a PATRIOT on a mission to defend liberty, justice and freedom (fries)

[Graeme]

Basically, 55.3% nay is the only statistic worth quoting. You may as well accept the fact that an ole' Etonian will be rogering you up the backside for the foreseeable future and take your defeat like a gentleman.

If you want to stick your head in the sand then be my guest. The referendum was a single event, democracy is a process and things change, support for Independence increased by at least 15 percentage points over the 2 years of the campaign and opinion polls indicate it's increased in popularity subsequently. I can't imagine a majority Conservative government is going to do much that will make Scots think "Hey, being governed from Westminster's really great"... If you think you've heard the last of it then fair enough, but you're doing a hell of a job of ignoring the way the wind is blowing.

[DieselDaisy]

Basically, 55.3% nay is the only statistic worth quoting. You may as well accept the fact that an ole' Etonian will be rogering you up the backside for the foreseeable future and take your defeat like a gentleman.

If you want to stick your head in the sand then be my guest. The referendum was a single event, democracy is a process and things change, support for Independence increased by at least 15 percentage points over the 2 years of the campaign and opinion polls indicate it's increased in popularity subsequently. I can't imagine a majority Conservative government is going to do much that will make Scots think "Hey, being governed from Westminster's really great"... If you think you've heard the last of it then fair enough, but you're doing a hell of a job of ignoring the way the wind is blowing.

For being a 'single event' it was certainly publicized as an ultimate, once in an opportunity, Robert the Bruce shitting his pants, vote. 'Destiny' was a word used by fatty Salmond. You had the publicity. You had the cavalcade of tedious Whiskey faced sweating like an alcoholic Scots boring us all senseless with their economic statistics and boring left wing whiney voices, forcing us to pull out our dictionaries - it was all or nothing. I half expected to wake up in the morning only to my todger was battered. Now I hear 'democracy' is an ongoing process'. Metamorphic? Like the T1000? Keep on rollicking?

Bollocks

55.3%

That is the only stat.

[Graeme]

Keep telling yourself that. Let's see what happens at the Holyrood elections next year...

[Facekicker]

Scotland bottled it.

[AxlisOld]

Yee-haw I'm a PATRIOT on a mission to defend liberty, justice and freedom (fries)

I've seen that guy before.