Thanks to 1820 for pointing out this brilliant You Tube:
Showing posts with label Unionism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Unionism. Show all posts
15/06/2009
08/01/2009
Unionist desperation
A quite enjoy the blog A pint of Unionist Lite. As I said in my last post - to be important, issues need to be discussed! O'Neill is one of the few Unionists who discuses the Unionist v Nationalist argument with a passion and with a smidgen of intelligence from the Union's side.
Unfortunately the lad let himself down with this anti Welsh post. O'Neill seems to think that this quote is proof of the dark side of devolution to Wales:
Despite the fact that I can trace my family back to Gomer I find the statement My own father can trace his Welsh heritage farther than many a nationalist quite offensive. I love family history, but I don't believe that my antecedents give any authority to my political opinion! My opinion is my opinion, and I don't give a bugger whether my own dad agrees with me or not, never mind what my ancestors with a Welsh heritage farther than many a nationalist may or may not have opined.
No example of why Scotland or Wales are more unfriendly now than they were before devolution is given to support the dark argument. Probably because no real examples exist.
I was an unfriendly old git before devolution, I am an unfriendly old git now, and I will still be an unfriendly old git when Wales becomes independent. The friendly element of Welsh society will remain as welcoming as ever, whatever the constitutional arrangement.
The truth is that all nations contain nice people and all nations contain nasty people, constitutional changes don't make the nasty nice or the nice nasty. So as a defence of the Union O'Neill's post on this occasion is A Load of Unionist Shite
Unfortunately the lad let himself down with this anti Welsh post. O'Neill seems to think that this quote is proof of the dark side of devolution to Wales:
Yet, to others, post-devolution Wales and Scotland seem less friendly places. My own father can trace his Welsh heritage farther than many a nationalist. Since devolution (which he devoutly opposed) he has commented that for the first time in his life he feels unwelcome in Wales. He has even contemplated moving over the border. It seems ludicrous to me that people with so much in common, so much shared history and culture, should be in such a position.
Despite the fact that I can trace my family back to Gomer I find the statement My own father can trace his Welsh heritage farther than many a nationalist quite offensive. I love family history, but I don't believe that my antecedents give any authority to my political opinion! My opinion is my opinion, and I don't give a bugger whether my own dad agrees with me or not, never mind what my ancestors with a Welsh heritage farther than many a nationalist may or may not have opined.
No example of why Scotland or Wales are more unfriendly now than they were before devolution is given to support the dark argument. Probably because no real examples exist.
I was an unfriendly old git before devolution, I am an unfriendly old git now, and I will still be an unfriendly old git when Wales becomes independent. The friendly element of Welsh society will remain as welcoming as ever, whatever the constitutional arrangement.
The truth is that all nations contain nice people and all nations contain nasty people, constitutional changes don't make the nasty nice or the nice nasty. So as a defence of the Union O'Neill's post on this occasion is A Load of Unionist Shite
04/09/2007
Offensive Unionists
The kids go back to school today, to most this signals the end of the summer period!
Peter Hain announced, some time back, that he was going to co-ordinate a Summer Offensive in support of the Union!
What happened?
Did Peter Hain come to understand that Wales isn't part of the famous Union?
Or did he discover that there is nothing in the Union worth defending?
Peter Hain announced, some time back, that he was going to co-ordinate a Summer Offensive in support of the Union!
What happened?
Did Peter Hain come to understand that Wales isn't part of the famous Union?
Or did he discover that there is nothing in the Union worth defending?
20/08/2007
Unionist argument is Too Poor
The publication of the Scottish White Paper on independence has resulted in a little bit of discussion in Wales. Not much, and not of the highest standard, I must admit, but a little bit is better than nothing.
The interesting thing is that the Unionist response in both Scotland and Wales hasn't really been one that defends the Union; it has been one that attacks Scotland and Wales. A case in point is the comment by Mal Humphreys (Mumph) in yesterday's Wales on Sunday "we don't have the calibre of politicians in Wales".
The most common argument aimed at putting Wales down is the economic argument. Wales is too poor to go it alone; Wales is too dependent on English money. This is factually incorrect, degrades Wales and is actually an argument that undermines the Union.
It is factually incorrect, because although Wales is the poorest of the four constituent countries of the UK, the UK is a very, very rich country so even its poorer areas are relatively rich. As Penddu pointed out on the Welsh Independence blog last week, even if Wales GDP remained at its current level of 80% of the current UK average then Wales would still be the 12th richest country in Europe and the 26th richest in the World. The fact that Wales is continuously the poorest country in the Union is in itself proof that the economic argument is a fallacy. The Union has made us poorer than the rest of the UK and will keep us poorer than the rest of UK. The only way for Wales to become richer is by us taking control of our own economy for our own benefit.
The economic argument degrades Wales by saying that our role in the Union is to milk it. Any decent union involves give and take, but this Unionist argument claims that Wales should take all and give nothing, an argument that I find morally offensive. If the best vision for the future of Wales that Unionist politicians can offer us is for us to continue as the jolly beggers of Britain, then perhaps Mumph is right in his assessment of the calibre of our politicians. But if that is their vision of Wales' future in the Union I want no part in it.
The economic argument that Wales is dependent on English handouts is actually harmful to the future of the Union. It may appeal to the ignorant and fearful in Wales, but it isn't going to appeal to the people of England, who are themselves now asking what has the Union got to offer England? And they are finding the answer Sod all except scrounging Celts! Because that is what the Unionists in Scotland and Wales have been telling us is the Union Dividend for years.
As the Scottish process continues, the debate in Wales and England is also going to intensify. Unionists are going to have to find much more persuasive arguments than they have offered thus far. The problem is, of course, that when they try to think of them they are always at a loss to find any, because the only conclusion that anybody who thinks about the amalgamation of Wales and England can really come up with is that Wales was joined to England in medieval times for medieval reasons. Those reasons no longer exist in the 21st centaury, so the best way forward is for our two countries to agree to an amicable separation.
SEE ALSO:
Wales on Sunday adds to independence debate
Welsh Independence
Alan in Dyfed
The interesting thing is that the Unionist response in both Scotland and Wales hasn't really been one that defends the Union; it has been one that attacks Scotland and Wales. A case in point is the comment by Mal Humphreys (Mumph) in yesterday's Wales on Sunday "we don't have the calibre of politicians in Wales".
The most common argument aimed at putting Wales down is the economic argument. Wales is too poor to go it alone; Wales is too dependent on English money. This is factually incorrect, degrades Wales and is actually an argument that undermines the Union.
It is factually incorrect, because although Wales is the poorest of the four constituent countries of the UK, the UK is a very, very rich country so even its poorer areas are relatively rich. As Penddu pointed out on the Welsh Independence blog last week, even if Wales GDP remained at its current level of 80% of the current UK average then Wales would still be the 12th richest country in Europe and the 26th richest in the World. The fact that Wales is continuously the poorest country in the Union is in itself proof that the economic argument is a fallacy. The Union has made us poorer than the rest of the UK and will keep us poorer than the rest of UK. The only way for Wales to become richer is by us taking control of our own economy for our own benefit.
The economic argument degrades Wales by saying that our role in the Union is to milk it. Any decent union involves give and take, but this Unionist argument claims that Wales should take all and give nothing, an argument that I find morally offensive. If the best vision for the future of Wales that Unionist politicians can offer us is for us to continue as the jolly beggers of Britain, then perhaps Mumph is right in his assessment of the calibre of our politicians. But if that is their vision of Wales' future in the Union I want no part in it.
The economic argument that Wales is dependent on English handouts is actually harmful to the future of the Union. It may appeal to the ignorant and fearful in Wales, but it isn't going to appeal to the people of England, who are themselves now asking what has the Union got to offer England? And they are finding the answer Sod all except scrounging Celts! Because that is what the Unionists in Scotland and Wales have been telling us is the Union Dividend for years.
As the Scottish process continues, the debate in Wales and England is also going to intensify. Unionists are going to have to find much more persuasive arguments than they have offered thus far. The problem is, of course, that when they try to think of them they are always at a loss to find any, because the only conclusion that anybody who thinks about the amalgamation of Wales and England can really come up with is that Wales was joined to England in medieval times for medieval reasons. Those reasons no longer exist in the 21st centaury, so the best way forward is for our two countries to agree to an amicable separation.
SEE ALSO:
Wales on Sunday adds to independence debate
Welsh Independence
Alan in Dyfed
04/08/2007
The Unreasonable Union
The argument for independence is so simple and so straightforward that I often wonder why so many Welsh people can't accept it.
Everybody, even the most ardent unionists, accept that Wales is a nation. The natural status of nations is independence; therefore Wales should be independent - what is there to argue about?
The Scottish Nationalist Mike Mackenzie answers this question on Ian Hamilton QC's blog
An interesting essay, worth reading and worth discussing!
Everybody, even the most ardent unionists, accept that Wales is a nation. The natural status of nations is independence; therefore Wales should be independent - what is there to argue about?
The Scottish Nationalist Mike Mackenzie answers this question on Ian Hamilton QC's blog
This business of maintaining the Union may therefore not be an area in which we are really capable of thinking rationally. Rather our attitudes may stem more from custom and belief than from reason. Those seeking to justify the continuance of the Union are therefore at a loss to find reasoned arguments.
An interesting essay, worth reading and worth discussing!
29/07/2007
Wales ain't part of the Union!
Peter Hain and Huw Iranca Davies, pissed off with Cardiff Labour going into coalition with Plaid, against London Labour's wishes, are about to embark on a Summer Offensive to extol the advantages of the Union.
Chware teg, it's something to do during this rain swept summer and it beats swimming in the sea off Barmouth with the threat of killer sharks basking in Welsh waters!
Huw and Pete have a basic problem to address before they start their campaign, however:
Wales is not part of The Union.
The Union is a union of the Kingdom of England, the Kingdom of Scotland and what's left of the Kingdom of Ireland. Wales doesn’t come into the equation. Wales isn't on the Union Jack, or the Royal Standard because Wales isn't part of the Union. Wales is in the Union because it is included in the term Englandandwales. For Wales - see England, is Wales' status in the Union
Before offending us all summer with the benefits of the Union perhaps Pete & Huw should begin by explaining why Wales should be part of Englandandwales, rather than a full member of their Beloved Union that excludes Wales!
Chware teg, it's something to do during this rain swept summer and it beats swimming in the sea off Barmouth with the threat of killer sharks basking in Welsh waters!
Huw and Pete have a basic problem to address before they start their campaign, however:
Wales is not part of The Union.
The Union is a union of the Kingdom of England, the Kingdom of Scotland and what's left of the Kingdom of Ireland. Wales doesn’t come into the equation. Wales isn't on the Union Jack, or the Royal Standard because Wales isn't part of the Union. Wales is in the Union because it is included in the term Englandandwales. For Wales - see England, is Wales' status in the Union
Before offending us all summer with the benefits of the Union perhaps Pete & Huw should begin by explaining why Wales should be part of Englandandwales, rather than a full member of their Beloved Union that excludes Wales!
11/04/2007
Iain Dale's Diary: Quiz Question: Who Said This Today?
Sanddef Rhyferys' favourite Tory Iain Dale tantalises his regular blog readers with the following quiz question:
As seventeen responses to the question have already given the correct answer I won't be spoiling anything by reveling that it was none other than David Cameron, the Conservative party leader. It is part of a comment by him in today's Telegraph.
Lest you think that Cameron is about to defect to the SNP, it should be noted that the article is a defence of the Union by the Tory leader in which he says
Despite disagreeing with Mr Cameron it is good to see that he, at least accepts, that there is nothing in the Union that is relevant to the People of Wales. Or is it just that to him and his unionist cronies Gordon Brown and Ming Cambell Wales is an seen as an irrelevant part of the Union? Whatever the answer there is no doubt in my mind that the sooner Wales becomes independent of this Union the better. Then we can join the likes of the small, independent and thriving economies across Europe such as Finland, Switzerland and Norway
Who Said This Today?
Supporters of independence will always be able to cite examples of small,independent and thriving economies across Europe such as Finland, Switzerland and Norway. It would be wrong to suggest that Scotland could not be another such successful, independent country.
As seventeen responses to the question have already given the correct answer I won't be spoiling anything by reveling that it was none other than David Cameron, the Conservative party leader. It is part of a comment by him in today's Telegraph.
Lest you think that Cameron is about to defect to the SNP, it should be noted that the article is a defence of the Union by the Tory leader in which he says
we need to continue to make the positive case for a united Britain by ensuring that the Union remains relevant to all English and Scottish people.
Despite disagreeing with Mr Cameron it is good to see that he, at least accepts, that there is nothing in the Union that is relevant to the People of Wales. Or is it just that to him and his unionist cronies Gordon Brown and Ming Cambell Wales is an seen as an irrelevant part of the Union? Whatever the answer there is no doubt in my mind that the sooner Wales becomes independent of this Union the better. Then we can join the likes of the small, independent and thriving economies across Europe such as Finland, Switzerland and Norway
23/02/2007
The Land of my Mothers
Like many Welsh Nationalists I am not Pure Welsh. My family tree contains many non-Welsh names such as Purcell, Smallman, Crump etc. From a genealogical point of view I am probably as much an Englishman as I am a Welshman. My place as a little cog in the World's mechanism is, however, undoubtedly a Welsh one.
Because of the family tree and other connections I am very fond of England, and feel more miserable than usual when I hear some Welsh Nationalists slagging of the Land of my Mothers.
I support independence for England; I support the right of England to play its part as one of the free nations of the world without being shackled to Wales and Scotland.
The argument that Welsh Nationalists are anti-English should be nailed on the head. The anti-English are the same people who are anti-Welsh they are the Unionists who oppose freedom for both Wales and England
Cymraeg:
Hen Rech Flin: Hen Wlad Fy Mamau
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)