In 1999, British PM Tony Blair was the leading the calls for NATO bombing of Serbia and the subsequent occupation of its province of Kosovo. In 2008, the terrorists running Kosovo under NATO protection declared it an independent state, and were soon recognized by London. The British ambassador in Belgrade has a status of a proconsul, right after his American counterpart, routinely giving orders to the "democratic" (and unelected) government.
Now the word comes from Scotland that a pro-independence party has won the election there.
Well, sauce for the goose ought to be sauce for the gander, says I. Perhaps Belgrade ought to reciprocate London's steadfast friendship over the past two decades by recognizing Scotland as an independent state. Hey, it would help the oppressed English finally get their own country! Not to mention be a hilariously ironic application of historical justice, such as it may be.
Won't happen, sadly - not because the Scots and the English are undeserving, but because the pack of spineless quislings in Belgrade is too craven. Then again, they won't be in power forever...
6 comments:
In 1979 Scotland held a devolution referendum which would have given the Scots some independence from England.
The English added a condition to the vote that made victory for the Scots very unlikely; the Scottish referendum had to be supported by at least 40% of the electorate.
In 1979, Scots voted 51.6% in favour of devolution, but because the turnout was only 63.8% it meant that only 32% of the electorate supported the change and so it failed.
In last week’s election only 50% of Scots turned out to vote.
If the English are allowed to impose impossible conditions on their referendum, then the Scots will never get their independence.
I would advise the Scots to use the EU-model of independence referenda as was used in Montenegro.
In Montenegro 50% of voters plus 1 extra vote was enough.
If Scotland is allowed to use this model, then they will soon be free of English rule.
as william wallace once said : FREEDOM
Actually the local independence factions in "Britain" are quite persistent and strong, not only in Scotland, but also in Wales. On the other hand, by some sort of gentleman's agreement they are never reported about in the mainstream media if there is the slightest possibility of them being ignored. And even then they are generally mocked. Thus "The Economist" was quite surprised that the Scot Nationalists were doing so well in the polls before the election and are probably still too apoplectic at their victory to respond.
There and in other venues locals kept commenting to the effect--"Obviously you have never been here or don't listen", but to no avail.
In Wales one has been in the back country with an Englishman trying to see the sights.
Often the locals refuse to understand English and actively refuse the Englanders food and lodging, no matter how much money they are prepared to pay.
An American, on the other hand, will be tolerated, even knowing no Welsh, once the accent is understood as not English.
It is all very much like Quebec during the language wars, with exploding mailboxes and all that.
For an American a little French went a long way.
Falcon is on the right wavelength and that includes more than Swift.
An independent Scotland expects to obtain what is after all their oil.
And doubtless they will be warmly welcomed into OPEC as well.
Will it get to the British military shooting down peaceful civilians in the street and requiring humanitarian intervention by the U.N.? Who knows, but the British have had a long practice in such places as Northern Ireland.
Wales has no oil to speak of, so the row is harder to hoe. They have to an extent rescued their language and culture but the cities are still graveyards of English exploitation.
When they do manage independence the English will owe them trillions upon trillions in reparations.
If what Falcon says about the politicians in Belgrade is accurate, they are suffering a singular lack of not only imagination but history.
If they really want to see what the US and British and NATO Finance Capitalists are offering them, they could do worse than reading an economic history of Britain.
If there are any Serbian country people left,for example, they should be especially worried, for they will not be left for long.
If you need a bibliography I commend E. M. Wood's short, elegant, and brilliant essay, The Origin of Capitalism, which she locates as British.
If you can get through to the middle you will immediately understand what John Locke really meant not only by "free" but by "improvement."
Maybe the Serbs should form a Serbian Independence Party and order a trainload of kilts.
Kosovo starts preparations to sue Serbia.
http://setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/newsbriefs/2011/05/02/nb-03
Speaking of independence, looks like Republika Srpska's formal steps to move away from the Federation has ruffled some feathers in the U.N.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=38313&Cr=Bosnia&Cr1=
I doubt Scotland will vote for independence anytime soon, in the future perhaps. The SNP were actually quite supportive of Kosovo 'independence' but critical of NATO in 1999, they have no plans to leave NATO or the EU, so an independent Scotland would be as about as independent as Kosovo is now.
Post a Comment