NationStates Jolt Archive

Should Scotland (Alba), Wales (Cymru) and Isle of Man (Manx) be free republics or stay as a commonwealth?


In YOUR oppinion that is...


Keep posts peaceful....It's just a question.

Yes or No will do.

I think you shouldn't toy with what works. The United Kingdoms in a state of harmony, lets keep it that way.

To be honest I don't see why we need Northern Ireland but... We get on well with our neighbors nowadays... let's not start this dispute again, as we don't want more IRA attacks...

You know what? I'm Australian, and I think we should become a Republic - so if Scotland and Wales and any other country in the Commonwealth want to break free, and the people of those countries support it in a referendum, then why not tinker with something that works in the search for a better solution?

I think you shouldn't toy with what works. The United Kingdoms in a state of harmony, lets keep it that way.

To be honest I don't see why we need Northern Ireland but... We get on well with our neighbors nowadays... let's not start this dispute again, as we don't want more IRA attacks...

I am just asking peoples oppinions on this matter. No need for harsh words.

I am just asking peoples oppinions on this matter. No need for harsh words.

Well to put it in otherways its about the same as asking if denmark should let greenland become a nation. The United Kingdom is a nation, and scotland wales and north ireland are part of the nation.

Commonwealth = Republic

The two terms are the same.... The term Commonwealth, aka "Common Wealth", from "the common weal", a calque translation of the latin term "res publica" from which the word Republic is derived. Commonwealth is a synonym of Republic.

I am just asking peoples oppinions on this matter. No need for harsh words.
I wasn't harsh... I thought that was quite polite.

Well to put it in otherways its about the same as asking if denmark should let greenland become a nation. The United Kingdom is a nation, and scotland wales and north ireland are part of the nation.

Well, I am from The Republic of Iceland and we where once under the danish crown and to tell you the truth we could not be more happy.
Our neighbors in Greenland and in the Farao Islands are pushing for independance and have the support of the people.

And what is wrong with asking if the danes should let them have their freedom?

Well, I am from The Republic of Iceland and we where once under the danish crown and to tell you the truth we could not be more happy.
Our neighbors in Greenland and in the Farao Islands are fighting for independance and have the support of the people.

And what is wrong with asking if the danes should let them have their freedom?

Fighting from what ? Can the people in Greenland actually survive the year without danish, icelandic or Canadian (Baffin) ties ? I think Canada should annex greenland....and turks and cacos islands

I wasn't harsh... I thought that was quite polite.

Sorry, just don't like it when people are talking about this issue and then start saying something about the IRA.
That is a nother issue.

To All...
A simple yes or no would be ok

Fighting from what ? Can the people in Greenland actually survive the year without danish, icelandic or Canadian (Baffin) ties ? I think Canada should annex greenland....and turks and cacos islands

I do not mean a fight with weapons, Its a political fight a peacefull fight but a hard one because of the strict laws there.

And yes they can, many still live in the old manner of the Inuit people and Iceland will allways be there if they need help.
And Canada what? Why cant they just live the way they want?

Great Britain is an island lying off the western coast of Europe, comprising the main territory of the United Kingdom. Also used as a political term describing the combination of England, Scotland, and Wales (with outlying islands), the three nations which together include all the island's territory.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a country in western Europe. Also under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom, though not part of the United Kingdom itself, are the Crown dependencies of the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man and a number of overseas territories.

The British Isles is a traditional term used to identify the group of islands off the northwest coast of Europe consisting of Great Britain, Ireland and the many smaller adjacent islands. These islands form an archipelago of more than 6,000 islands off the west coast of Europe – totalling 315,134 km2 (121,674 square miles) of land – consisting of:

Great Britain
Ireland
The Isle of Man
The Isle of Wight
The Northern Isles, including Orkney, Shetland and Fair Isle
The Hebrides, including the Inner Hebrides, Outer Hebrides and Small Isles
Rockall
The islands of the lower Firth of Clyde, including Arran and Bute
Anglesey
The Isles of Scilly
Lindisfarne
Lundy
The Channel Islands
and many other smaller islands surrounding the islands of Great Britain and Ireland

While one would expect a "British Isle" to be British, the inclusion of (the whole of) Ireland in the term has become a political anachronism: the archipelago is divided between two sovereign states, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and three British crown dependencies: the Isle of Man, the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Bailiwick of Jersey.

A Commonwealth Realm is any one of the 16 sovereign states that recognize Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom as their Queen and head of state. In each state she acts as the monarch of that state and is titled accordingly. For example, in Australia she is known as "Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia" or simply, the Queen of Australia.

Fourteen of the realms are former British self-governing colonies (including the Dominions) that became independent countries either after the ratification of the Statute of Westminster in 1931, the collapse of the Federation of the West Indies in 1961, or at later dates, the latest being Saint Kitts and Nevis in 1983. The two exceptions are Papua New Guinea which was administered by Australia as an international trusteeship before independence in 1975 and the United Kingdom itself.



I personally do not think we should meddle any further with a delicate balance. If anything, we should take power away from that slap-happy fool of a man Tony Blair and give some back to the Queen.

Commonwealth = Republic

The two terms are the same.... The term Commonwealth, aka "Common Wealth", from "the common weal", a calque translation of the latin term "res publica" from which the word Republic is derived. Commonwealth is a synonym of Republic.

You know what I am talking about.

I consider myself British rather than just plain old English, having family in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. I for one think Scottish or Welsh nationalists are deluded if they really think independence would bring many benefits to their regions. I was all for the government's introduction of devolution to give more democratic control to the people of Wales and Scotland - and on the whole I think it's been a success (especially in Wales, the building of the new Scottish Parliament has obviously been a disaster).

So what I'm basically saying is devolved power is good, but full independence is bad. We're all happy-clappy members of the European Union now anyway and petty "patriotic" hatred of the English is just so tiresome.

I do not mean a fight with weapons, Its a political fight a peacefull fight but a hard one because of the strict laws there.

And yes they can, many still live in the old manner of the Inuit people and Iceland will allways be there if they need help.
And Canada what? Why cant they just live the way they want?

Well we own the other islands up ther...just not the biggest. That is mistake we need to rectify.

[QUOTE=Aligned Planets If anything, we should take power away from that slap-happy fool of a man Tony Blair and give some back to the Queen.[/QUOTE]

Yeah...who cares about democracy...I'm sure Elizabeth Windsor has an excellent understanding of political complexities.

Well we own the other islands up ther...just not the biggest. That is mistake we need to rectify.


You will be faceing the Danish military and strong political opposition from Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland.

I would like to see both Scotland and Wales throw off the English yolk and become independent. This is not to say that I hate the English or anything as it is possible to be a Celtic nationalist without hating the English.

I would like to see both Scotland and Wales throw off the English yolk and become independent. This is not to say that I hate the English or anything as it is possible to be a Celtic nationalist without hating the English.

What you talking about?? Do you know how many members of the Cabinet are from Scotland? Have you really not noticed? And some whingeing Tories already complain the Scots and Welsh are over-represented in Parliament with more MPs than they really should have. As well as this money raised from the wealthy in the South of England is redistridbuted by the state to Wales and Scotland since they are poorer. English yolk my ass....

I don't consider myself British or (shudder) European...I'm English through and through.

Yeah...who cares about democracy...I'm sure Elizabeth Windsor has an excellent understanding of political complexities.

The British monarch or Sovereign is the head of state of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories, and is the source of all executive, judicial and (as the Queen-in-Parliament) legislative power. The monarch is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England as well as Head of the Commonwealth and head of state of 15 other Commonwealth Realms. In theory, the Sovereign is the "fount of justice"; all prosecutions are made on his or her behalf, and judges make decisions in his or her name. He or she cannot be brought to trial in any court (except in civil cases where permitted by Act of Parliament).

The monarch continues to hold a variety of political powers, including making and declaring war, making treaties, vetoing bills passed by Parliament, appointing and removing Ministers (including the Prime Minister), pardoning prisoners, authorizing currency and commanding the Armed Forces. In theory, practically the entire institution of British government exists solely at the monarch's pleasure. For the most part, however, the monarch's powers are "reserve powers," nominally used in emergency situations.

The Chief appointments officer (aka The Queen) appoints all the key officials in the state, including members of the cabinet, the prime minister (if there is one), key judicial figures and all major office holders. The last time a United Kingdom monarch actually had a choice over who to pick to be prime minister occurred in 1963, when Queen Elizabeth II chose Alec Douglas-Home to succeed Harold Macmillan.


She's done it before...she can do it again. This time, she just chooses herself though ;)

There is more to becoming an independent state than just "throwing off" another states rule. The main being international recognition that you are a state in your own right. As for Commonwealth states, they are all independent in the sense that they have their own government, but the head of government is a representative of the British Queen in the 14 core states while the other 39 countries have their own elected presidents. Or is someone going to tell me that Malaysia is under direct British rule.

As for Celtic independent states... when about 90% of the economy of the UK is based in Greater London (by which I mean most of the south east of England) it would be a very short lived state, probably collapsing after a few months of economic strife.

The last time a United Kingdom monarch actually had a choice over who to pick to be prime minister occurred in 1963, when Queen Elizabeth II chose Alec Douglas-Home to succeed Harold Macmillan.


She's done it before...she can do it again. This time, she just chooses herself though ;)

I wish she would...because there would be such uproar that a Republic would soon be declared and we Brits could finally rid ourselves of that out-dated relic of feudalism; the monarchy....

What you talking about?? Do you know how many members of the Cabinet are from Scotland? Have you really not noticed? And some whingeing Tories already complain the Scots and Welsh are over-represented in Parliament with more MPs than they really should have. As well as this money raised from the wealthy in the South of England is redistridbuted by the state to Wales and Scotland since they are poorer. English yolk my ass....

So the annexation of Scotland and Wales is not a yolk?

Whats the point of having parliamentary representation when England will/always dominate proceedings?

Scotland and Wales has no power in Westminster.

So the annexation of Scotland and Wales is not a yolk?

Whats the point of having parliamentary representation when England will/always dominate proceedings?

Scotland and Wales has no power in Westminster.

Au contraire...Westminster now has little power in Scotland and Wales. That was the point of devolved power. But Scottish and Welsh MPs in Westminster can still vote on issues that no longer effect their constituents but effect England only.

I wish she would...because there would be such uproar that a Republic would soon be declared and we Brits could finally rid ourselves of that out-dated relic of feudalism; the monarchy....

Jako matey - you know I'm only jesting? Yes, I am a supporter of the monarchy, but I know that it is totally unrealistic and unfeasible to advocate a return to power for them!

I like them how they are!

Au contraire...Westminster now has little power in Scotland and Wales. That was the point of devolved power. But Scottish and Welsh MPs in Westminster can still vote on issues that no longer effect their constituents but effect England only.

Prehaps England should have it's own assembly then.

Westminster still holds a great deal of power in Wales, but not so much in Scotland.

I reckon the Isle of Man would be crazy to scap a system that’s worked for 1000 years. The others – I’ve no idea. The locals should decide. (Ditto the Isle, of course, they have the right to be crazy, if they so wish).
You know what? I'm Australian, and I think we should become a Republic -

I’d have a lot more time for Australian republicanism if republicans actually did some research. Consider Iceland; immigrant nation, population hugs the coast – and a peaceful Republic. The Isle of Man: another island, complicated relationship with England – Peaceful Duchy. Switzerland – multicultural, multireligious nation with a fine military heritage – again a peaceful republic. All logical places for OZ to learn from.
But no, republicans in Oz must are determined to pretend to be American – or French – because that’s what the Irish do. As long as that’s the case, Monarchy’s the only way to go.

Answer 1: Erm, no...
Answer 2: Erm, why the hell is the Isle of Man included?

A question: why does everyone think scotland isn't a nation? We, actually, are a nation. Also - the definition of a republic, as I recall, is a government where everyone votes for rich people (the poor are not allowed to run for government, you have to part of the aristocracy). It would be kina strange for Scotland to become a republic since scotland is one of the most left-wing countries in the British Isles

Speaking for the US, any nation can petition the US Congress to became a State of the Union. That's right we'll just add another star on the flag. Come on don't be shy your half way there already.

:D

Speaking for the US, any nation can petition the US Congress to became a State of the Union. That's right we'll just add another star on the flag. Come on don't be shy your half way there already.

:D

No because if you ever want to leave you get invaded and attakced vis a vi Virginia! don't do it!

You will be faceing the Danish military and strong political opposition from Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland.

- Hah! In any such conflict Norway would most likely side with Canada out of pure spite, since Denmark cheated us out of our rightful Dependancy of Greenland back in the thirties. A few weeks in the cold without vital supplies of gas and oil from Norway, and i think the danes would gladly give up Greenland, The Faeroe Islands or even Jylland for that matter. All we need do is close the taps, and Greater-Norway will soon be restored :D

Answer 1: Erm, no...
Answer 2: Erm, why the hell is the Isle of Man included?

2: Isle of Man is a commonwealth.

- Hah! In any such conflict Norway would most likely side with Canada out of pure spite, since Denmark cheated us out of our rightful Dependancy of Greenland back in the thirties. A few weeks in the cold without vital supplies of gas and oil from Norway, and i think the danes would gladly give up Greenland, The Faeroe Islands or even Jylland for that matter. All we need do is close the taps, and Greater-Norway will soon be restored :D

You really think Norway would side with Canada?
We here in Iceland still have a grudge against Denmark but in a conflict like this we (Iceland), Norway and the rest of the Nordic nations would stand together.
What you said is wrong.

2: Isle of Man is a commonwealth.

No it isn't. Really, it isn't. I have no idea what you think a commonwealth is but the Isle of Man isn't one.

A question: why does everyone think scotland isn't a nation? We, actually, are a nation. Also - the definition of a republic, as I recall, is a government where everyone votes for rich people (the poor are not allowed to run for government, you have to part of the aristocracy). It would be kina strange for Scotland to become a republic since scotland is one of the most left-wing countries in the British Isles
a) Scotland is a nation, but it is not a state [see links]State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State) nation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation)
b) Republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

I didnt think they were even part of the Commonwealth - they are part of the United Kingdom which is a totally different kettle of fish

a) Scotland is a nation, but it is not a state [see links]State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State) nation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation)
b) Republic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

Actually, the Scottish people are a nation, Scotland is a country. A geographical area cannot be a nation, though it can be a nation-state.

No it isn't. Really, it isn't. I have no idea what you think a commonwealth is but the Isle of Man isn't one.

Well, it is under the english crown and it is a nation just like Scotland and Wales.
I appoligize for the misstake if there was one.

Nations are:
A self-identifying people who share a common history, often language, a common culture and a homeland. A nation is the most persistent and resistant organization of people-culture- territory.

I have question for the people of Scotland, Wales and England.
Why is it The United Kingdom and not The United Kingdoms, all above countrys where Kingdoms once.

I have question for the people of Scotland, Wales and England.
Why is it The United Kingdom and not The United Kingdoms, all above countrys where Kingdoms once.

Well it's quite simple; it does exactly what it says on the tin! The official head of state of Scotland, Wales, England, and Northern Ireland, is the British monarch; Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore we are a United Kingdom.

In theory, practically the entire institution of British government exists solely at the monarch's pleasure...

...The last time a United Kingdom monarch actually had a choice over who to pick to be prime minister occurred in 1963, when Queen Elizabeth II chose Alec Douglas-Home to succeed Harold Macmillan.

She's done it before...she can do it again. This time, she just chooses herself though ;)

Erm, no. She can't choose herself. The Queen is required to choose a member of parliament. That could be a member of the house of Lords though (which has happened a few times.)

As for Celtic independent states... when about 90% of the economy of the UK is based in Greater London (by which I mean most of the south east of England) it would be a very short lived state, probably collapsing after a few months of economic strife.

Piffle! Don't know about Wales, but Scotland could certainly survive alone. Scotland is the only country in the UK running a trade surplus, as Greater London doesn't make enough to balance the North of England.

Don't know where you got that figure of 90% from, but I can assure you it's (can't think of a sufficiently powerful word that won't offend). I'm going to try and find some real figures in a minute, then I'll post them in this thread.

Well it's quite simple; it does exactly what it says on the tin! The official head of state of Scotland, Wales, England, and Northern Ireland, is the British monarch; Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore we are a United Kingdom.

Yes I know that but to be correct it should be the United Kingdoms not Kingdom they are all Kingdoms.

Kingdom of Scotland
Kingdom of Wales
Kingdom of England

And if they are united under one ruler it should be named the United Kingdoms

Prehaps England should have it's own assembly then.
I agree wholeheartedly. What I can't decide is this:

England, Scotland, Wales and Norther Ireland each has its own assembly, with roughly equal powers, similar to the current Scottish parliament. There is a seperate parliament of Westminster to govern the UK. Political power is balanced between the legislatures & executives of each region, and with Westminster.

England, Scotland, Wales and Norther Ireland each has its own assembly, with roughly equal powers, similar to the current Scottish parliament. These parliaments meet together regularly to legislate on reserved matters. While there are operational implications, this is far cheaper than paying two sets of politicians.

As requested: Yes

Also: Originally Posted by imported_Jako:-
'Well it's quite simple; it does exactly what it says on the tin! The official head of state of Scotland, Wales, England, and Northern Ireland, is the British monarch; Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore we are a United Kingdom.'

Was Elizabeth I 'British' then? No, she was English. So where did this 'Elizabeth II' come from?

Yes I know that but to be correct it should be the United Kingdoms not Kingdom they are all Kingdoms.

Kingdom of Scotland
Kingdom of Wales
Kingdom of England

And if they are united under one ruler it should be named the United Kingdoms

You are mistaken. There is only one Kingdom, the Kingdom of Great Britain, declared in 1603 at the Union of Crowns. They remained seperate countries and nations, but formed a single Kingdom.

Prior to that was two kingdoms, the Kingdom of England and Wales and the Kingdom of Scotland. There remained three countries and three nations, but only two Kingdoms.

The United Kingdom consists of only one Kingdom, but three countries and another strange little bit called Northern Ireland whose status remains undefined.

To answer the first question: I think they should achieve greater autonomy from Britain, as should England. They should maintain their historic status, as either Kingdoms, Principalities, Duchies. Not sure about Northern Ireland, as it doesn't have a historic status. Rebublic perhaps?

Was Elizabeth I 'British' then? No, she was English. So where did this 'Elizabeth II' come from?

Because she is Elizabeth II of England and Wales, and Elizabeth I of Scotland. The first King of Great Britain was called James VI & I. So okay, in fullness the Queen should be referred to as Elizabeth I & II, but she is never given her full title as that takes over a minute to say.

As requested: Yes

Also: Originally Posted by imported_Jako:-
'Well it's quite simple; it does exactly what it says on the tin! The official head of state of Scotland, Wales, England, and Northern Ireland, is the British monarch; Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore we are a United Kingdom.'

Was Elizabeth I 'British' then? No, she was English. So where did this 'Elizabeth II' come from?
Yes she is English, but she is a decendant of the Scottish Monarchy as the English Monarchy disappeared after the end of the Tudor period due to Elizabeth I not having any children.

Yes she is English, but she is a decendant of the Scottish Monarchy as the English Monarchy disappeared after the end of the Tudor period due to Elizabeth I not having any children.


Well, as the Scots never had an Elizabeth 1st, nor did a United Kingdom have an Elizabeth 1st, or a Great Britain have an Elizabeth 1st, it seems odd that Elizabeth 2nd has popped-up from nowhere! No wonder some Scots think the Queen is English rather than British...same with the so-called National Anthem, God Save The Queen. One of the verses says "...rebellious Scots to crush!". Racist as well!

Yes I know that but to be correct it should be the United Kingdoms not Kingdom they are all Kingdoms.

Kingdom of Scotland
Kingdom of Wales
Kingdom of England

And if they are united under one ruler it should be named the United Kingdoms

Actually Wales is a principality. But, yes, England and Scotland are still separate kingdoms, with separate monarchs (who happen to be the same person), but they are also united under the monarch of the United Kingdom. So it's one kingdom, comprising of two kingdoms, a principality and Northern Ireland which as others have mentioned is a bit weird. Though the whole setup is a bit weird, really.

Well, it is under the english crown and it is a nation just like Scotland and Wales.
I appoligize for the misstake if there was one.

No problem, it's a complex situation. Most British aren't even clear on exactly how the UK works.

The Isle of Man is a crown dependency. This means that it has many of the attributes an independent state (it has its own parliament, makes its own laws, prints its own money (although it's in Pound Sterling)) but is not recognised as one in international law and is protected by the British military. The Queen is not, in fact, Queen of the Isle of Man, she is the Lord of Man.

Incidentally the Channel Islands have a similar arrangement, though there the Queen is the Duchess of Normandy.

I must say that, on the whole Queen Elizabeth the II thing, that, as has been afore-mentioned, she is two monarchs - that of england AND of Scotland. If we think back in history this has happend many times, and since James the I of England is James the VI of Scotland, and since England is (let's face it people, it is) the main member of the UK, we can say that if we had another King James, he would be refered to as James III, not James the I. We can now apply this to Elizabeth and say she is Queen Elizabeth the I of the United Kingdom and Queen Elizabeth the I of Scotland.

(afterthought: My grammer in there looks like Rimmers! :P)
+
(another afterthought: I'm not sure if this makes sence on paper, it made sence in my head... of course, thats [I]my head!)

Many centurys ago Wales was a Kingdom and they had many Kings, Scotland also.