This is interesting and possibly big news for the area.


In a race that is now considered too close to call, Scotland will soon decide whether to remain part of the U.K. or become the world's 196th country. What would that mean for the Scots and the rest of the U.K.? Here are a few charts to help break it down.

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-content/photos/000/836/cache/83604_990x742-cb1410467886.png

- Scotland's Vote for Independence: By the Numbers (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140911-scotland-independance-voting-cultures-uk-europe-england-graphic/?rptregcta=reg_free_np&rptregcampaign=20140905_t1_rw_membership_r2p_us_sm _c1#)

Scotland's independence uncertainty hurts British currency | News OK (http://newsok.com/scotlands-independence-uncertainty-hurts-british-currency/article/5341720)

the blue in uk flag represents scotland... i wonder if it will be altered if the referendum passes? -M

http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/images/uk.jpg

If they do vote to leave I think it will harm them a great deal, a case of becareful of what you ask for.

I think the yes vote is likely to pass. I would be surprised if it didn't

I wonder if we will ever get that kind of freedom in the USA?

I'm not sure it really applies...

I'm not sure it really applies...

How so or how not? It's really about people that believe local governing is more apropos that an entity miles away. It's about the right of self determination.

I wonder if we will ever get that kind of freedom in the USA?

You're free to leave aren't you?

I think the yes vote is likely to pass. I would be surprised if it didn't

See, I've been guessing the opposite. I guess we'll find out soon though.

How so or how not? It's really about people that believe local governing is more apropos that an entity miles away. It's about the right of self determination.

Are you advocating that local governments break away from the state or the feds? Form their own autonomous country?

Part of me wants them to be free, but then I'm kind of under the sense they may end up being worse off. I do think that if they adopt the Euro and join the EU, (stay in the EU?, I know there is some question on what it would be), that they have a chance, more so than say 100 years ago. On the other side of the table, this could really hurt what's left of the UK (England pretty much), especially if they take the majority of the oil.

Personally I think it's going to barely fail.

You're free to leave aren't you?

The topic and my post is not about the freedom of migration, immigration or emigration.

Are you advocating that local governments break away from the state or the feds? Form their own autonomous country?

What I'm advocating is that people in this country should be able to determine what is best for them in the present, not what was good for the populace 100-200 years ago. I am advocating that a mechanism should be in place for a state to be able to peacefully withdraw from the union and either align with an existing country or become an independent entity on its own or with other like minded states. As far as local governments I believe in the "home rule" system where local governments can enact their own policies on minimum wage and the such without the hand of the state house restricting what a local government can do in the way of minimum wages, stricter smoking regs, etc.

The topic and my post is not about the freedom of migration, immigration or emigration.

Sorry for coming off snarky on that one

What I'm advocating is that people in this country should be able to determine what is best for them in the present, not what was good for the populace 100-200 years ago. I am advocating that a mechanism should be in place for a state to be able to peacefully withdraw from the union and either align with an existing country or become an independent entity on its own or with other like minded states. As far as local governments I believe in the "home rule" system where local governments can enact their own policies on minimum wage and the such without the hand of the state house restricting what a local government can do in the way of minimum wages, stricter smoking regs, etc.

If a state did that what country would you align with? Do you think the US would allow a state to align with Russia, China or N Korea? England may be looking for some new land soon. Would this newly independent state(s) be ably to support it's self and infrastructure without the help of the feds?

Here is the "yes" 2:40 spot mandated to be run free X number of times (both sides equally, of course) by Scottish media leading up to Thursday's referendum.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJL0z5O67_M

If a state did that what country would you align with? Do you think the US would allow a state to align with Russia, China or N Korea? England may be looking for some new land soon. Would this newly independent state(s) be ably to support it's self and infrastructure without the help of the feds?

Question1- I am not currently shopping. Question 2- Do you think a US state would be in favor of aligning with Russia, China, or N. Korea? Especially if it was leaving due to policies not compatible with the values of the populace. I am guessing their might be a state or two that would favor alignment with another country but more likely would be in favor of alignment with a regional state. Question 3- It depends on the state. But then again with the global economy, what country is able to support itself w/o the help of trade? No country is totally independent of world trade.

How so or how not? It's really about people that believe local governing is more apropos that an entity miles away. It's about the right of self determination.

Because Scotland was an organized country for centuries before it became part of the UK. No part of the US was an organized country until the 1700s and every state that has joined the union is experiencing their first time under organized government control.

Here is the "yes" 2:40 spot mandated to be run free X number of times (both sides equally, of course) by Scottish media leading up to Thursday's referendum.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJL0z5O67_M

Bet she's got at least 1 American parent…amazing how non-Scottish she sounds.

Bet she's got at least 1 American parent…amazing how non-Scottish she sounds.

I think the site linked below might explain that. There is no single "Scottish dialect," there are four, each with sub-dialects. I would imagine the campaign for independence would get the dialect right as to what would be accepted by the Scots themselves nationwide.
Scots Language - The Main Dialects of Scots (http://www.scotslanguage.com/Scots_Dialects_uid117/The_Main_Dialects_of_Scots)

The important question is will Scotch still be exported.

http://youtu.be/W6vDzf-wSbk

I think the site linked below might explain that. There is no single "Scottish dialect," there are four, each with sub-dialects. I would imagine the campaign for independence would get the dialect right as to what would be accepted by the Scots themselves nationwide.
Scots Language - The Main Dialects of Scots (http://www.scotslanguage.com/Scots_Dialects_uid117/The_Main_Dialects_of_Scots)

No no…she's not particularly close... Her schwas and non rolled-rs are the biggest give aways, But she speaks super closed and most of her vowels lean toward or are entirely on the left side of the pond. Go through and listen to those links on that website. There are good few of those that sound like a foreign language.

Don't get me wrong, you can tell she's scottish, but you would only have to modify 20% or less of what she says to get it sound 100% American.

Because Scotland was an organized country for centuries before it became part of the UK. No part of the US was an organized country until the 1700s and every state that has joined the union is experiencing their first time under organized government control.

You might want to read up on Hawaii. I also think the Republic of Texas had an organized government exerting control prior to statehood.

…The point at large still stands…comparing any state in the Union and its argument for autonomous government (with the exception of maybe Hawaii) to Scotland is just silly: Millennia of history vs. at most a century or two.

Here's another one:

Q&A On Catalan Independence - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/qa-on-catalan-independence-2014-9?utm_content=buffer25639&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer)

…The point at large still stands…comparing any state in the Union and its argument for autonomous government (with the exception of maybe Hawaii) to Scotland is just silly: Millennia of history vs. at most a century or two.

So your argument in the case against states having a mechanism to withdraw from the Union is no state has a history of being able to govern w/o the guiding hand of the federal government? No maybe about it on Hawaii or Texas. I fail to see anything "silly" about it. What is "silly" is no procedure in place for those who wish to exit. While you compare Scotland having existed for many more years than the states, so to was England existing for much longer than the USA itself. It's all relative.

So your argument in the case against states having a mechanism to withdraw from the Union is no state has a history of being able to govern w/o the guiding hand of the federal government? No maybe about it on Hawaii or Texas. I fail to see anything "silly" about it. What is "silly" is no procedure in place for those who wish to exit. While you compare Scotland having existed for many more years than the states, so to was England existing for much longer than the USA itself. It's all relative.

I didn't make an argument against states having a mechanism to withdraw from the Union. I said comparing States in the Union to Scotland is silly. Scotland is not a state/province. It's a country. It always has been and it always will be.

How so or how not? It's really about people that believe local governing is more apropos that an entity miles away. It's about the right of self determination.

Didn't we fight a civil war over that? I never did understand the constitutional justification.

…The point at large still stands…comparing any state in the Union and its argument for autonomous government (with the exception of maybe Hawaii) to Scotland is just silly: Millennia of history vs. at most a century or two.
I agree they are different. I can't fathom why it makes a difference given how the world/culture has changed and that the people with experience in leading the independent nations during that time are long dead, as are any alliances with other nations.

Didn't we fight a civil war over that? I never did understand the constitutional justification.

Yes we did fight a war over that, but we have evolved quite a bit politically since then. Again I am not advocating this for Oklahoma or any other state. If the attitudes on marriage and divorce have changed since the mid 1800's, surly those on having the right to withdraw from a union that was entered into voluntarily should have the right to withdraw from that same union.

…The point at large still stands…comparing any state in the Union and its argument for autonomous government (with the exception of maybe Hawaii) to Scotland is just silly: Millennia of history vs. at most a century or two.

As PennyQuilts said, the people in Scotland who had experience running a country have been dead for centuries. It's not like they're going to lead a new Scotland via seance.

As PennyQuilts said, the people in Scotland who had experience running a country have been dead for centuries. It's not like they're going to lead a new Scotland via seance.

You never know

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/images/ouija-board.jpg

We need a superimposed image of William Wallace over that ouiji board.

As PennyQuilts said, the people in Scotland who had experience running a country have been dead for centuries. It's not like they're going to lead a new Scotland via seance.

I'm not exactly sure what PennyQuilts point was when she said "given how the world/culture has changed". That's a big reason why Scotland is so different than England/Ireland. The historic culture, which still very much exists in these places in the world (see Kosovo, Catalunya, Bayern), differentiates these places and creates a long standing precedent and desire of independence and autonomy. At any moments notice, these "countries'" cultures/beliefs and general well-being could be threatened at the hands of the majority in the over-arching conglomerate that couldn't care less about x, y, or z.


Those things exist, but on a much smaller and diminishing scale in the States. The difference between these countries and the States, is that the States did not develop their individual cultures apart from the influence and partaking of the Federal government. Additionally, those individual cultures have never taken root on anywhere the same level as these other countries. We don't tend to identify so strongly with our State. Almost every American I've met traveling says they're from the United States (Unless they're from New York).

All that being said, when I'm traveling, I tell people I'm from Oklahoma. And I don't disagree with those saying that the States should have a mechanism for secession (or at least leaving with a group of surrounding states). I only began my vein of comments because it appeared to me that some were comparing the position of individual states with the position of Scotland, when they're really not that close.

This is from a television show on the BBC called "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Scottish Independence" and when you have 15 minutes, it's pretty funny and my friend from London says very true.
C. T.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YkLPxQp_y0

Everything John Oliver does is perfect. One of my favorite shows.

Everything John Oliver does is perfect. One of my favorite shows.

He's great. Makes me wish I had HBO.

Here is a nice page to keep up with the vote: Scottish independence referendum - Results - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/events/scotland-decides/results)

Here is a nice page to keep up with the vote: Scottish independence referendum - Results - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/events/scotland-decides/results)

I've been watching live BBC coverage on CSPAN 3 (128 on Cox)...they have been scrolling that coverage will continue beginning now on regular CSPAN ( 126 on Cox).

Only 1/2% of the vote has been counted, but the two small areas that have announced their count have voted NO and were expected to vote YES. But, it's such a small percentage of the vote, they are voicing caution to jump to an early conclusion. The big cities are still out, most everything is still out.

I wonder where Billy Connolly stands on this issue. I just watched a rerun of his trip down Route 66. He was very kind to OKC. If I were a Scotsman, I reckon I'd have to lean in the direction he would point.

I wonder where Billy Connolly stands on this issue. I just watched a rerun of his trip down Route 66. He was very kind to OKC. If I were a Scotsman, I reckon I'd have to lean in the direction he would point.

Interesting you mentioned that. He's obviously one that people look up to in Scotland and he indicated a few months back they he didn't want to split apart. However, within the past several weeks he has said he has struggled and has chosen to take no public position. In fact, he has planned on he and his wife to be out of the country on vacation and plans to pass on the referendum all together.
8 questions about Scottish independence you were too embarrassed to ask - Vox (http://www.vox.com/2014/9/9/6119079/what-you-need-to-know-about-scottish-independence-scotland-referendum)
(See #6 at that link)

He is one that worried early on about the 16 and 17 year old vote voting "Yes" in huge numbers without fully understanding the long history with the United Kingdom. But several have noted that a 16 or 17 year old in Scotland is light years ahead in critical thinking and knowledge of politics and history, than like aged citizens in most other countries. In fact, many of the polls leading up to the vote showed a larger "No" vote from the 16/17's than anyone expected.

Alex Salmond, organizer of the YES referendum, at one point said something along the lines that with the split vote among 18+, the future of Scotland may very well lie in its future - the 16 and 17's.

It appears that the no's are starting to pull away. With about half of the votes in "no" is up by about 150,000 votes.

It appears that the no's are starting to pull away. With about half of the votes in "no" is up by about 150,000 votes.

Yes, you're right. The margin for YES wasn't nearly as large as expected in Glasgow. Barring something really strange, it's really over.

Scotland has voted against independence and to stay with the UK

Scotland: The independence referendum vote result - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/scotland-independence-referendum-vote-result-2014-9)

Let me edit this to say this is a call from BI, I believe votes are still being tallied, so it isn't 'official' yet.

Well, 55 percent "No" and 45 percent "Yes", so it's official, Scotland remains a member of the UK/GB. How did they convince 85 percent of the voters to go to the polls? That's almost as good as North Korea! It would be nice to see more than 50 percent here in Oklahoma.
C. T.

And considering their voting base included 16 and 17 year olds, it's even more impressive.

Well, 55 percent "No" and 45 percent "Yes", so it's official, Scotland remains a member of the UK/GB. How did they convince 85 percent of the voters to go to the polls? That's almost as good as North Korea! It would be nice to see more than 50 percent here in Oklahoma.
C. T.

I think if any state were voting on whether or not it was going to secede from the Union, there would be about an 75%+ turnout.

I get the feeling most people feel that things will maintain a certain status quo regardless of who the President/Governor/Mayor is, let alone one member of a multi-seat political entity (Congress/Council). Many vote feeling their vote doesn't actually matter but out of a sense of duty to "democracy". But if the entire structure of how you are governed were going to change, I'm pretty sure not only would you vote, but you would make sure to inform yourself of what the potential ramifications of your decision might be.

It's one thing for another person to take office, it's another thing for that office to change completely.

Scottish Native Reacts To Historic Vote In United Kingdom - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/26580979/scottish-native-reacts-to-historic-vote-in-united-kingdom)

I could see with the sharp political division forming in this country that it could split if the left continues to push for more and more government control and regulation. I could see most of the south and central along with the Rocky Mountain states split away some day.

I wonder where Billy Connolly stands on this issue. I just watched a rerun of his trip down Route 66. He was very kind to OKC. If I were a Scotsman, I reckon I'd have to lean in the direction he would point.

I would just about give anything to have a head of hair like his. He really rocks the Ol' Dude Freak Flag thingy. The best I will ever be able to manage is a half mast flag. I wouldn't mind having a trike like his also. Nice back seat for Momma.