Richard

I disagree, England created the Union and has been very proud of it since. I've never come accross anyone in England who want's the dissolution of the Union.

It's a democracy, if the SNP want to be independant of the UK then so be it. There election results show how little backing they have. It'll be good for UKIP to be a voice for the Union in Scotland. What people have to remember is the Crown of the UK does not belong to England or Scotland or Wales of Northern Ireland. It belongs to us all.

The Union is not dead, it's alive and well.

Independence Now!

Here, here! I agree wholeheatedly with keeping the United Kingdom. If ever there was a good reason to get out of the EU it is the constant pressure we have had since joining to break-apart the UK. The ONLY people that would benefit from the UK dissolving would be the EU and the many Britain-haters that there are in the world with many of them being on the Continent. There is a letter in the BNP's party newspaper this month from an Irishman living in Dublin who says that a not inconsiderable number of Irish people wish to rejoin the UK! I say bravo to that! :P

nyorks-patriot

If the Scottish National Party opposed membership of the European Union you wuld see the break up of the United Kingdom very quickly.
Back in the 1970's when the SNP was a much more Right Wing party that voted against EEC membership it gained one third of the vote in Scotland compared to the 20% in gets now.

Britannist

Independence Now - I agree with your comments (above).

I would also like to see the area of the island of Ireland presently known as the Irish Republic back in the UK. Then they can have their united Ireland INSIDE the UK. They aren’t going to get it outside it because Ulster folk have been part of our Union for centuries and rightly won’t leave the UK. The UK is their country as well as ours.

The UK belongs to all four nations of these islands (Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England). My loyalty is to the UK above all else.

Waving of the Scottish and English flags is fine after football matches – but our nationality is British and the Union clearly benefits all.

I asked a new poster to this forum called 'Hereward' what effect an independent England would have on the future of our security. Hereward is a campaigner for an English Parliament – probably one separate from the UK Parliament (Commons) although he won’t admit it.

I told him we could end up with a pro-EU, leftist, Republican and nationalist Scottish government taking over the UK – if England left it.

I further suggested to Hereward that a UK under the control of such a pro-EU and obviously anti-English government might let troops from the EU military force open bases in Wales and Scotland. We would therefore have continental troops stationed on the island of Great Britain for the first time since the Romans.

And what did Hereward say? Nothing. I’ve put this scenario to him/her three times (in the thread entitled “Should UKIP support an English Parliament” in the British Politics section of this forum) and he didn't address the points at all.

Some of these people campaigning for an English Parliament and/or an England outside the UK have not thought ahead to what the consequences of such a turn of events could be.

I also asked Hereward if it is true that anti-UK people such as him/her would rather have an England outside the UK but within the EU – rather than a united UK outside the EU. S/he didn’t answer that question properly either.

There is only one future that defends the national interests of Scottish, Northern Irish, Welsh and English – part of a United Kingdom free of the EU.

(By the way, there are two Herewards posting to this forum – Hereward (who is new) and Hereward the Wake. I refer above to the poster known simply as 'Hereward')

Thank you for reproducing my article in your posting to this thread.

Britannist

Reply to NYorks Patriot (who posted today at 7.24 pm - above):

It is true that during the time the Scottish National Party opposed EEC/EU membership it got more votes. All the more reason, in that case, to 'raise the game' in anti-EU campaigning in Scotland. UKIP and the Conservative Party should try to get those anti-EU votes.

The SNP are not going to revert back to an anti-EU stance because europhiles control the party and would rather see it split and break up than become EU-hostile. Rather the same situation that exists with the Labour Party and Kennedy's Laboural Democrats.

I would point out that the Scottish National Party gaining control of the Scottish Parliament does not necesarily mean that Scotland ends up leaving the UK. The SNP would have no power to take Scotland out of the UK. It should also be remembered that many people who vote for the SNP would not vote for Scotland to quit the UK in a referendum. Indeed, some SNP supporters are very anti-EU (an opinion poll found that 50% were against the euro) but vote for the SNP as a protest.

Nationalists have previously controlled the state parliament of Quebec. The nationalists (French speakers) want Quebec out of Canada. They stated two referendums on the issue - and lost both.

nyorks-patriot

Vlamms Blok in Belgium is a good example of a real Nationalist party.
They want Flanders to leave Belgium and the EU plus they want to end all immigration.
If the SNP and Plaid Cymru cant or wont copy this then new Nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales should be formed that will.
British Nationalism is a dead duck it will never have more than a minority appeal in Scotland or Wales indeed an appeal thats growing less day by day.
As for the Republic or Ireland joining the United Kingdom you have more chance of seeing a Reggae band at a Klan rally.

Britannist

It may be unlikely that the Irish Republic joins the UK - but its re-entry INTO phpbb_the Commonwealth (it left it in 1948) is now a serious proposition favoured by many who sit in Dail n'Eirann (the parliament of the Irish Republic). Re-entry INTO phpbb_the Commonwealth has the tacit support of some leading figures in Irish (Republic) politics.

I am in favour of close relations between the Irish Republic and United Kingdom - the EU serves the long-term interests of neither.

As for Vlaamse Bloc (now re-named - effectively formed INTO phpbb_a new party called Vlaamse Belang by the way) - I have a great admiration and respect for the majority Flemish (Dutch-speaking) population in Belgium and am glad that they have reclaimed control of Greater Flanders from Belgium's French-speaking minority. But I do not favour the dissolution of Belgium as a nation state any more than I back the abolition of the UK.

The UK (through the good work of Lord Palmerston) invented the state of Belgium (although some Belgians would not wish to admit this). British strategists saw Belgium as an important 'buffer state' to stop both French and German expansionism. Many French-speakers in Belgium fully understand that their 'marriage' with the Flemish has established a Belgian state capable of standing up to the French secret wish to gobble up Wallonia (the French-speaking sector of Belgium).

Just as the Belgian state has served the two distinct people's of that nation in preserving their respective cultures from military encroachement from outside - so the UK serves the four nations of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Nationalist and separatist elements in the four nations of the UK will not succeed in activating the splintering of the UK.

If ever put to referendum votes - the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish will be British in the ballot box, whatever they say when outside it.

nyorks-patriot

Belgium wasn’t much of a buffer state in 1940 was it?
It actually weakened our defences against the oncoming Germans.
If Flanders where United with the Netherlands and France with Waloonia it would have presented the Germans with a much greater problem.

Infact a Strong Greater France that included Waloonia, Western Switzerland and Luxembourg may have meant that the French where able to defend themselves and feel more confident as a strong nation state then they might have decided not to form the EEC/EU in the first place.

nyorks-patriot

many of the Celts in the United Kingdom are becoming the enemy within.

Britannist

NYorks patriot said (in postings above/on previous page):
1.

If Flanders were United with the Netherlands and France with Wallonia it would have presented the Germans with a much greater problem.

2.

In fact a strong Greater France that included Wallonia, Western Switzerland and Luxemburg may have meant that the French were able to defend themselves and feel more confident as a strong nation state then they might have decided not to form the EEC/EU in the first place.

3.

Many of the Celts in the United Kingdom are becoming the enemy within.

My replies to Nyorks Patriot’s three main points are:

1.

Having the French-speaking part of Belgium in France would not have made much difference because half of France was on the side of the Germans anyway (through its support for the Vichy Republic). Flemish (Dutch-speaking Belgian) people I have spoken to say there is no question of their sector of Belgium becoming part of Holland. Their rightful view is that the Flemish are not Dutch.

2.

The idea of a ‘Greater France’ taking in all the adjacent French-speaking areas (not part of France) is an appalling one. There is no question of French-speaking western Switzerland or French-speaking Belgium (Walloon region) ever supporting such a move. French-speaking Belgians do not see themselves as French. Western Switzerland is dominated by the French-speaking city of Geneva – which is the newest part of Switzerland. Geneva quit France the very moment it had the chance. Napoleon entered the city and was seen off by the locals. The city then left French jurisdiction and is now a leading city/regional centre in the 700 year old Swiss Confederation. They are not going to revert back to being just a provincial French border town.

You say a ‘Greater France’ (taking in half of Belgium and part of Switzerland) would not have created the EEC/EU because it would not have needed it. What they (an enlarged France) would have done instead is – having absorbed the linguistically similar bordering nations (just as Hitler did) – is launch full-scale military invasions INTO phpbb_other european nations (just as Hitler did). Just because there would not have been an EEC/EU does not mean that a ‘Greater France’ would have sat idly by with no aggressive intent. France has had two tools it has turned to in order to extend its control across europe – the EEC/EU and Napoleon. A ‘Greater France’ could quite easily have ended up invading Germany and not the other way around. They could have launched a military onslaught on the UK (instead of Germany attacking us - as she did).

Fortunately for us English, France has seen its present plan to dominate western europe fall apart. The end of the Warsaw Pact (fall of the Berlin Wall) has resulted in Germany becoming a third larger than France (in population terms) and – with the ex-Warsaw Pact nations joining the EU/NATO – the sphere of influence in europe rightfully move eastwards and away from France.

Luxemburg could not, and would not, be part of France. It is an independent, sovereign Grand Duchy outside the French sphere of influence. You may think it could slot INTO phpbb_France because you assume that French is the language of Luxemburg (deliberately spelt the anglo and not the French way). Luxemburg is a country where French is spoken for the convenience of outsiders (25% of its population). But its official languages include a German dialect which is in much greater use. Some Luxemburgers even use the version of German as spoken in neighbouring Germany. Saying that Luxemburg could be part of France is like suggesting that Malta could be part of Greece.

3.

I could argue that a tiny minority of English might also be the enemy within. There are certain English members of ‘Tony’ B-liar’s cabinet who are actively pursuing an agenda to deny the English nation its right of parity within the UK (i.e. keeping about 70 Labour/LD MP’s from Wales and Scotland coming to Westminster to vote on English-only legislation when English MP’s can’t vote on domestic Scottish and Welsh affairs).

By the way, I saw a programme last year on the issue of just who is Celtic and who is not. The programme makers took DNA samples from Welsh people and gave them to experts (and geneologists) for study. They concluded that the Welsh are not actually Celtic at all – but come, instead, from similar ancestry to us English.

I don’t know so much about the Scottish claim to Celtic origins – but I do know that any attempt to formally take Scotland out of the UK would be soundly rejected by its voters in a referendum (and the same for Northern Ireland and Wales). The separatists make a lot of noise – but they will not be able to deliver on the day.