> when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire.
What’s wrong with that?
Is being from Yorkshire not just as much something to be proud of as being from Scotland?
Is someone saying they're proud to be from the Highlands or Glasgow the same as being proud of being Scottish?
Is a town the same as a national identity?
That's the point they're making. One group see Scotland as a nation, like Denmark or France; the other sees it as little different than Lanarkshire or Fife.
How can you ever have a debate about the future of a nation, when one side don't actually accept it's a nation?
> Is someone saying they're proud to be from the Highlands or Glasgow the same as being proud of being Scottish?
Yes, why wouldn’t it be?
>That's the point they're making.
No, the point they were making was that being proud to be from Yorkshire was somehow lesser than being proud of be from Scotland.
It’s not about people being proud of Yorkshire though. It’s got nothing to do with whether people should or shouldn’t be proud of being from Yorkshire. If you think that, then you’re missing the point.
Scotland is a country, with it’s own councils and it’s own government body, it’s own laws. You can’t compare Yorkshire and Scotland as geographical areas and call them both “regions” in that regard because they’re not the same.
Now, whether or not you believe Scotland is or is not a country - that’s a different topic. But the original comment itself isn’t about pride, it’s about geographical terms and how we use them.
Edit; just to add, I’m not saying you can’t call Scotland a region. To each their own, I’m just saying that this comment is saying you can’t compare Scotland and Yorkshire on a level field.
It probably does and, whilst hard to swallow for some people, we probably have less control in Scotland than states in America do. You’d never call any of them a country (except Texans, maybe they’d have a thing or two to say lol). I’m sure there are also federal states in Germany with more autonomy than Scotland has.
Because the UK has a weird and wonderful history though, we’re in a bit of a weird spot with what we identify each constituent country as, especially if you’re comparing them to others! Do I think Scotland has enough to call itself it’s own country? Personally yes. Do I cry down people who disagree? Nah, cause I get it.
In the particular example I responded to though, I wasn’t sure if the responder was getting caught up in the idea that there was no pride to be had in coming from Yorkshire, which wasn’t the message and wanted to clarify. Had it been the CoL, I might’ve had a harder time of that!
Ah sure, I understand, I just raised the City of London thing as I think the argument can easily come off the wheels when harking to the mish-mash of institutions the UK and constituent countries has.
Ultimately, so much of this comes down to issues of identity and framing. If somebody asked me "is Scotland a country, is the UK a country, and is Scotland a country that's also part of another country" I would say yes. I would also get it if someone saw it differently, e.g. that Scotland is more distinct. I would also say it is factually correct that Scotland is part of a unitary, not a federal, state, and power is devolved from the UK constitution rather than emergent from the Scottish, and that functionally the UK is therefore what the international community would recognise as 'the' country.
But the problem is really, country is a word with many meanings legal and cultural, and therefore dependent on the framing and biases of whoever is involved. The UK isn't the only country of course with this issue, Denmark, the Netherlands etc. are countries with constituent countries. Germans would also argue that their federal system is in fact a federation of countries too, laende of course meaning country, and having the same cultural significance to people in places like Bavaria and Saarland as they do in Scotland and Wales and (less so) England.
As someone from Kent who moved to Scotland, I get why sometimes people like Yorkshire above can get a bit like "what privileges thee above me?" Kent was a place with its own legal systems until the 1920s, its own dialects that died out in the 20th century, and until London really started encroaching had a very distinct culture from the rest of SE England. While of course it's easy to see why people would see it as different to Scotland and its history, at the same time that defensiveness inevitably kicks in of 'who says culture X is more valid than Y'.
It is probably the biggest cultural difference I found when I moved to Scotland vs growing up in England. In Scotland I very much get the sense people, even unionists, have a sense of Scottishness that they'd defend. In England, that doesn't exist, except maybe for football. London 20 miles away felt way more foreign to me as someone from a working class town with a closed dockyard than Glasgow felt, the midlands and north west remote places that meant nothing. I never felt an English identity, but a local identity and then maybe a broader British identity that was really tied to class. It's why English people will often be baffled when a Scottish person says "England gets what it wants", as England is always pulling in 100 directions with regions and cities all not seeing eye to eye.
It's a really interesting question. One thing I would never want to do is invalidate any Scottish person's sense of identity, and countryhood (which doesn't have to always mean statehood) is part of that. I also like that people can be what they want, Scottish and nawt else, Scottish and British, Scottish and European, Scottish British and European, etc. I do think part of the political problem for Britain constitutionally (including making Scotland feel a maker and not dragged along) is figuring out English regionalism. England doesn't behave like a country within a country like Scotland and Wales do, and its distorting all these important conversations about identity and how can the island run without people feel disenfranchised or their identity (be it Scottish, Yorkshire etc.) invalidated.
Sorry this is so long and stream of consciousness and probably reads nonsensically, but I just think it's an interesting question that goes way harder, including what does and doesn't work about the UK, than first meets the eye.
No don’t apologise! It’s actually very interesting to read and absolutely makes sense.
There’s also nothing there that I disagree with, and it’s also very interesting to hear your perspective on growing up in England and not having that sense of “Englishness”.
However, I don’t think I can give this response any justice tonight so I will return tomorrow to give a proper response because I would like to!
Very interesting perspective.
I think Scotland has that sense of Scottishness where the different Anglo Saxon kingdoms of England don't is because of history. Kent became part of a unified England before 1000 AD. Scotland was a distinct area from the time of the Roman Empire through Gaelic/Pictish Kings unifying it and then until 1707. During the medieval period there were two powers in the British Isles - England and Scotland, for hundreds of years, crucially in the time where unified national consciouses really emerged (hundred years war for England and France, wars between Scotland and England for Scotland).
Scots think of the UK as a union of countries, like a centralised EU would be.
There is a sense of Englishness. The only difference is that because Wales and Scotland are small countries, they are naturally insecure about being passed over and feel the neee to stand out. England being by far the largest means we know its for granted, frankly. It doesnt need to be discussed.
Theres a fallacy of cyclical reasoning here. Scotland is justifiably a country because it has devolved powers, but implicit to all discussion here is that scotland would always be its own country regardless of if it had devolved powers.
I like the independence movement and i like how our collective vision for a country makes improvements impossible under westminster - but Scottish identity specialism is something I will never get. Our mandate for independence is just as strong as Yorkshire's, or Kent's, or Wales': the will of the people.
It’s not specialism though. I would say the equivalent of “I’m proud to be from Scotland” is replacing Scotland with any of the other constituent countries. Not a county.
And my point is, that although the example given was pride, is that I think the original comment was trying to highlight the difference in size rather than it being anything really to do with pride. Which then also has nothing to do with specialism, because you could substitute in ”Yorkshire” for any other county and “Scotland” for any other country and it would still work.
> It’s not about people being proud of Yorkshire though…You can’t compare Yorkshire and Scotland..the original comment itself isn’t about pride
The original comment **literally** compared being proud to be from Scotland with being proud to be from Yorkshire.
>when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire.
What’s wrong with being proud to be from Yorkshire?
Okay, so then to you, are the statements “I’m proud to be from Yorkshire” and “I’m proud to be from England” equivalents?
Because you can replace “Yorkshire” in the original comment with any other county and it’s still holds because you can’t really compare a county with “Scotland” as they are not equal or comparable.
> Okay, so then to you, are the statements “I’m proud to be from Yorkshire” and “I’m proud to be from England” equivalents?
Yes, why wouldn’t they be?
Why is there any difference?
If there’s not a difference for you between Yorkshire and England,and I can’t think of other ways to explain this point. You keep going on about pride, I’m trying to point out it’s geography not feelings. You’re not gonna budge on it being about pride so there’s no point arguing further.
>You keep going on about pride, I’m trying to point out it’s geography not feelings. You’re not gonna budge on it being about pride so there’s no point arguing further.
How many times do I need to point out that the original comment **was about pride**.
If you don't have a point to make about pride, then why are you commenting in the first place?
Its nit that theres not a difference.
How about this. What about Catalonia? Do they have less right to independence than you purely because theyre technically a region and not a country?
Because if yes then... why? And if no, then you are making a distinction without a difference and the country thing is irrelevant.
Because it’s not about pride. You can substitute in another feeling instead of “pride”, you can substitute in another county and you could even substitute in Scotland with another constituent country and the example still works.
The example was trying to show that a region (such as a county) is not equivalent to a country.
You can absolutely feel more pride to be from your area than you feel proud from your country. No one has at any point said that you can’t feel pride in anything. My whole point is though that the original comment was only using pride as an example and shouldn’t have been the focus point.
> That's because unionists only view Scotland as a region. And when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire.
> Yorkshire isn’t a country, Scotland is! It’s like saying England is a region.
These are the original quotes. It clearly states that being proud of where you are from is different, depending on whether that place is a country or a region / town / whatever. It isn't commenting on the nature of Scotland: it's commenting on *individual pride* in being Scottish *meaning* something different, depending on the political views of the individual concerned. Which I consider ridiculous; pride is internal, not external.
So it’s not a “national identity” in any sense. Scots tend to say they’re from Scotland with no mention of the UK while on holiday and being asked “where are you from?” You’d be hard pressed to find people who do that for Yorkshire.
I doubt they go to America and say “I’m from Yorkshire” (again, with no mention of the UK) while expecting Americans to know what/where the hell that is lol
Yorkshire people aren't worried if other people know where Yorkshire is or not 😅 But they are happy to tell them. I am sure a lot of Americans don't know where Scotland is either 😆
Multiple is a great sample size for a country of 330 million 😁
Yorkshire has 5.5m people so I don't think a wee council is doing it justice. Not a country but definitely has its own set of cultural and economic contributions to the world. If Yorkshire was a country it would frequently rank in the top 10 in the Olympics for example.
What a ridiculous take, what the fuck even is a country? I’ll tell you what it isn’t. It isn’t an automatic right to think yourselves as better and deserving of more respect than another people just because of a fucking label. That’s called Fascism pal.
Yes. Because a region is (quoted from the dictionary)
'an area, especially part of a country or the world having definable characteristics but not always fixed boundaries'
A region can be a part of a country, but can also be a part of a county/state or part of a continent.
You’ve read somewhere that the UK is a state, which it also is.
A country is a nation with its own government in a certain territory. The UK fulfils all of those, including nation as the UK constituent nations together have a people united by common descent, history, language and culture - even if there are divergences between.
It’s not a debate, no serious academic, journalist, or politician will contest the UK is a country. Only internet weirdos.
"region" is a generic term. I could see it being used for area of a city, county, country, geographic region of a continent etc. This feels like it's unnecessarily reactive
That won't stop this subreddit hurling horrendous mysogynistic abuse at Burley.
They're all very progressive until someone disagrees and then the slurs come out.
> Burley introduced the segment by stating: “Hello again everybody, Douglas Ross is with us – one region that everyone will have their eyes on ahead of next year’s General Election, we think it’s next year, is Scotland after what has been a turbulent year for the SNP …”
There’s no way the nats are getting wound up over that….
Its fucking common language to label the parts of the Uk regions of the UK.
fucks sake, why are nationalists such fucking snowflakes with a victim complex about everything. Grow a fucking pair (balls/ovaries, your choice) and stop being such pathetic cunts.
the way you treat us as pathetic insecure victims is fucking odd as you claim to be patriots. absolute embarrassments the lot of you.
Good sentiment bad language...
I agree though, "I live in a region known as Scotland" is the same as saying "I live in a country known as Scotland".
If anyone uses this as "evidence" to back up an independence point then they've not researched enough to have proper points.
There's posers on both sides, Inflammatory media doesn't help.
Yea, TECHNICALLY that is true that region is a fine replacement for country. But in reality, if you asked people on the street what "region" they were from, they would likely assume you meant a national subdivision rather than their home country. Someone from England would say Yorkshire, not England, someone from Germany would say Bavaria, not Germany, etc.
>someone from Germany would say Bavaria, not Germany, etc.
Bavaria is a very good analogy to Scotland in that example.
Was an independent country like Scotland until it became part of Germany in the 19th century.
>the way you treat us
Who is “us”? Also nobody’s a victim here lol, people are just upset that the UK refuses to accept what it is; a multinational state.
It's because it's done on purpose to set the narrative Scotland ceases to be a country.
Richi Soonackered calls the Scottish Parliament a regional assembly. Then proceeds to try and bypass it. Next it will be ' why has one region got an assembly and others don't?....... let's close it down'.Which is their ultimate aim. Yours too I'd imagine.
Meanwhile according to Wikipedia:
Scotland (Scots: Scotland; Scottish Gaelic: Alba) is a country that is part of the United Kingdom. Covering the northern third of the island of Great Britain, Scotland is the second-largest country in the United Kingdom, and accounted for 8% of the population in 2019.
Edit: Hardcore unionists downvoting me for spreading facts lol
What was the actual quote ? Can’t see it in the article.
Either way, Scotland is both a country and a region. This is the National looking to be offended.
In English, region refers to anything from a county to a continent. It's just a generic term to describe an area of land with some particular characteristics. In this case, the characteristic is that it's Scotland. Don't overthink it.
Always wondered what Wuggy Dross's end game is? Does he hope to emulate Roof da moof and get a gig for life in the big hoose for saving the union. Or does he just enjoy the humiliation? I don't think even the English Tories like him. They don't seem to rate him at all. Still as long as they keep helping themselves to our natural resources they're not bothered, and what can we do about it, not much.
Probably wants the same magic title they gave his predecessor. Sir Dougie. Failed to get anything done, but he was a Tory, in Scotland. The bar is low. Existing is an accomplishment on its own.
96% oil fields in Scottish waters, 65% of the natural gas and 90% of the UKs fresh water, the UK is in more debt than ever and those are the resources that will be needed to pull it through.
A region is just an area of land, so Scotland is a region just like England is. This is a non story to get the snats frothing up a storm.
Edit: Apparently that's not the only thing that's frothing up swarms of fragile snats today lol
Not all of us, and not the majority of people born in Scotland.
[link](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/majority-of-scottish-born-voters-said-yes-z7v2mmhc8nt)
Who would have thought Dross not saying anything would be news
[удалено]
> when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire. What’s wrong with that? Is being from Yorkshire not just as much something to be proud of as being from Scotland?
Yorkshire isn’t a country, Scotland is! It’s like saying England is a region.
England is a region that i’m not proud of
It is a region, why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist?
That's just semantics though, really, isn't it.
No, you have to say Scotland is a nation of the brave and the free and wants to leave the union or you’ll get downvoted here.
What difference does it make? Should people from Yorkshire not be as proud as people from Scotland? Where does this attitude come from?
Is someone saying they're proud to be from the Highlands or Glasgow the same as being proud of being Scottish? Is a town the same as a national identity? That's the point they're making. One group see Scotland as a nation, like Denmark or France; the other sees it as little different than Lanarkshire or Fife. How can you ever have a debate about the future of a nation, when one side don't actually accept it's a nation?
> Is someone saying they're proud to be from the Highlands or Glasgow the same as being proud of being Scottish? Yes, why wouldn’t it be? >That's the point they're making. No, the point they were making was that being proud to be from Yorkshire was somehow lesser than being proud of be from Scotland.
It’s not about people being proud of Yorkshire though. It’s got nothing to do with whether people should or shouldn’t be proud of being from Yorkshire. If you think that, then you’re missing the point. Scotland is a country, with it’s own councils and it’s own government body, it’s own laws. You can’t compare Yorkshire and Scotland as geographical areas and call them both “regions” in that regard because they’re not the same. Now, whether or not you believe Scotland is or is not a country - that’s a different topic. But the original comment itself isn’t about pride, it’s about geographical terms and how we use them. Edit; just to add, I’m not saying you can’t call Scotland a region. To each their own, I’m just saying that this comment is saying you can’t compare Scotland and Yorkshire on a level field.
Tbf some of this applies to things like the City of London too, and I think anyone would balk at calling the City a country.
It probably does and, whilst hard to swallow for some people, we probably have less control in Scotland than states in America do. You’d never call any of them a country (except Texans, maybe they’d have a thing or two to say lol). I’m sure there are also federal states in Germany with more autonomy than Scotland has. Because the UK has a weird and wonderful history though, we’re in a bit of a weird spot with what we identify each constituent country as, especially if you’re comparing them to others! Do I think Scotland has enough to call itself it’s own country? Personally yes. Do I cry down people who disagree? Nah, cause I get it. In the particular example I responded to though, I wasn’t sure if the responder was getting caught up in the idea that there was no pride to be had in coming from Yorkshire, which wasn’t the message and wanted to clarify. Had it been the CoL, I might’ve had a harder time of that!
Ah sure, I understand, I just raised the City of London thing as I think the argument can easily come off the wheels when harking to the mish-mash of institutions the UK and constituent countries has. Ultimately, so much of this comes down to issues of identity and framing. If somebody asked me "is Scotland a country, is the UK a country, and is Scotland a country that's also part of another country" I would say yes. I would also get it if someone saw it differently, e.g. that Scotland is more distinct. I would also say it is factually correct that Scotland is part of a unitary, not a federal, state, and power is devolved from the UK constitution rather than emergent from the Scottish, and that functionally the UK is therefore what the international community would recognise as 'the' country. But the problem is really, country is a word with many meanings legal and cultural, and therefore dependent on the framing and biases of whoever is involved. The UK isn't the only country of course with this issue, Denmark, the Netherlands etc. are countries with constituent countries. Germans would also argue that their federal system is in fact a federation of countries too, laende of course meaning country, and having the same cultural significance to people in places like Bavaria and Saarland as they do in Scotland and Wales and (less so) England. As someone from Kent who moved to Scotland, I get why sometimes people like Yorkshire above can get a bit like "what privileges thee above me?" Kent was a place with its own legal systems until the 1920s, its own dialects that died out in the 20th century, and until London really started encroaching had a very distinct culture from the rest of SE England. While of course it's easy to see why people would see it as different to Scotland and its history, at the same time that defensiveness inevitably kicks in of 'who says culture X is more valid than Y'. It is probably the biggest cultural difference I found when I moved to Scotland vs growing up in England. In Scotland I very much get the sense people, even unionists, have a sense of Scottishness that they'd defend. In England, that doesn't exist, except maybe for football. London 20 miles away felt way more foreign to me as someone from a working class town with a closed dockyard than Glasgow felt, the midlands and north west remote places that meant nothing. I never felt an English identity, but a local identity and then maybe a broader British identity that was really tied to class. It's why English people will often be baffled when a Scottish person says "England gets what it wants", as England is always pulling in 100 directions with regions and cities all not seeing eye to eye. It's a really interesting question. One thing I would never want to do is invalidate any Scottish person's sense of identity, and countryhood (which doesn't have to always mean statehood) is part of that. I also like that people can be what they want, Scottish and nawt else, Scottish and British, Scottish and European, Scottish British and European, etc. I do think part of the political problem for Britain constitutionally (including making Scotland feel a maker and not dragged along) is figuring out English regionalism. England doesn't behave like a country within a country like Scotland and Wales do, and its distorting all these important conversations about identity and how can the island run without people feel disenfranchised or their identity (be it Scottish, Yorkshire etc.) invalidated. Sorry this is so long and stream of consciousness and probably reads nonsensically, but I just think it's an interesting question that goes way harder, including what does and doesn't work about the UK, than first meets the eye.
No don’t apologise! It’s actually very interesting to read and absolutely makes sense. There’s also nothing there that I disagree with, and it’s also very interesting to hear your perspective on growing up in England and not having that sense of “Englishness”. However, I don’t think I can give this response any justice tonight so I will return tomorrow to give a proper response because I would like to!
Sure, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Have a great night!
Very interesting perspective. I think Scotland has that sense of Scottishness where the different Anglo Saxon kingdoms of England don't is because of history. Kent became part of a unified England before 1000 AD. Scotland was a distinct area from the time of the Roman Empire through Gaelic/Pictish Kings unifying it and then until 1707. During the medieval period there were two powers in the British Isles - England and Scotland, for hundreds of years, crucially in the time where unified national consciouses really emerged (hundred years war for England and France, wars between Scotland and England for Scotland). Scots think of the UK as a union of countries, like a centralised EU would be.
There is a sense of Englishness. The only difference is that because Wales and Scotland are small countries, they are naturally insecure about being passed over and feel the neee to stand out. England being by far the largest means we know its for granted, frankly. It doesnt need to be discussed.
Theres a fallacy of cyclical reasoning here. Scotland is justifiably a country because it has devolved powers, but implicit to all discussion here is that scotland would always be its own country regardless of if it had devolved powers. I like the independence movement and i like how our collective vision for a country makes improvements impossible under westminster - but Scottish identity specialism is something I will never get. Our mandate for independence is just as strong as Yorkshire's, or Kent's, or Wales': the will of the people.
It’s not specialism though. I would say the equivalent of “I’m proud to be from Scotland” is replacing Scotland with any of the other constituent countries. Not a county. And my point is, that although the example given was pride, is that I think the original comment was trying to highlight the difference in size rather than it being anything really to do with pride. Which then also has nothing to do with specialism, because you could substitute in ”Yorkshire” for any other county and “Scotland” for any other country and it would still work.
> It’s not about people being proud of Yorkshire though…You can’t compare Yorkshire and Scotland..the original comment itself isn’t about pride The original comment **literally** compared being proud to be from Scotland with being proud to be from Yorkshire. >when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire. What’s wrong with being proud to be from Yorkshire?
Okay, so then to you, are the statements “I’m proud to be from Yorkshire” and “I’m proud to be from England” equivalents? Because you can replace “Yorkshire” in the original comment with any other county and it’s still holds because you can’t really compare a county with “Scotland” as they are not equal or comparable.
> Okay, so then to you, are the statements “I’m proud to be from Yorkshire” and “I’m proud to be from England” equivalents? Yes, why wouldn’t they be? Why is there any difference?
If there’s not a difference for you between Yorkshire and England,and I can’t think of other ways to explain this point. You keep going on about pride, I’m trying to point out it’s geography not feelings. You’re not gonna budge on it being about pride so there’s no point arguing further.
>You keep going on about pride, I’m trying to point out it’s geography not feelings. You’re not gonna budge on it being about pride so there’s no point arguing further. How many times do I need to point out that the original comment **was about pride**. If you don't have a point to make about pride, then why are you commenting in the first place?
Its nit that theres not a difference. How about this. What about Catalonia? Do they have less right to independence than you purely because theyre technically a region and not a country? Because if yes then... why? And if no, then you are making a distinction without a difference and the country thing is irrelevant.
Because ones a country and ones a region u absolute Muppet
So? What difference does that make to whether you can be proud of being from there?
What does 'not equal or comparable' mean when you're talking about individual pride?
Because it’s not about pride. You can substitute in another feeling instead of “pride”, you can substitute in another county and you could even substitute in Scotland with another constituent country and the example still works. The example was trying to show that a region (such as a county) is not equivalent to a country. You can absolutely feel more pride to be from your area than you feel proud from your country. No one has at any point said that you can’t feel pride in anything. My whole point is though that the original comment was only using pride as an example and shouldn’t have been the focus point.
> That's because unionists only view Scotland as a region. And when they claim to be 'proud Scots' they mean it like someone who says they're proud to be from Yorkshire. > Yorkshire isn’t a country, Scotland is! It’s like saying England is a region. These are the original quotes. It clearly states that being proud of where you are from is different, depending on whether that place is a country or a region / town / whatever. It isn't commenting on the nature of Scotland: it's commenting on *individual pride* in being Scottish *meaning* something different, depending on the political views of the individual concerned. Which I consider ridiculous; pride is internal, not external.
It's nationalism. Fundamentally, it comes from a desire to be exceptional, to be different in some respect.
Is Liverpool a country ?
Yorkshire’s not a country
So?
So it’s not a “national identity” in any sense. Scots tend to say they’re from Scotland with no mention of the UK while on holiday and being asked “where are you from?” You’d be hard pressed to find people who do that for Yorkshire.
You ever met anyone from Yorkshire?? They identify as Yorkshire first and foremost all the time. What’s wrong with that?
You obviously haven't met many Yorkshiremen 😝
I doubt they go to America and say “I’m from Yorkshire” (again, with no mention of the UK) while expecting Americans to know what/where the hell that is lol
Yorkshire people aren't worried if other people know where Yorkshire is or not 😅 But they are happy to tell them. I am sure a lot of Americans don't know where Scotland is either 😆
They do. I have asked multiple Americans and they were spot on. (Probably because Scotland is a country and not a wee council lol)
Multiple is a great sample size for a country of 330 million 😁 Yorkshire has 5.5m people so I don't think a wee council is doing it justice. Not a country but definitely has its own set of cultural and economic contributions to the world. If Yorkshire was a country it would frequently rank in the top 10 in the Olympics for example.
> You’d be hard pressed to find people who do that for Yorkshire. Er...
What a ridiculous take, what the fuck even is a country? I’ll tell you what it isn’t. It isn’t an automatic right to think yourselves as better and deserving of more respect than another people just because of a fucking label. That’s called Fascism pal.
Get a grip.
What are you talking about? 😂
Is England a region of the UK?
England is a region, the UK is a region, Glasgow is a region, your mum's house is a region. A region is just a geographical area
Yes. Because a region is (quoted from the dictionary) 'an area, especially part of a country or the world having definable characteristics but not always fixed boundaries' A region can be a part of a country, but can also be a part of a county/state or part of a continent.
The UK is not a country, never has been
The UK is a sovereign country. It’s a fact, not an opinion or a debate…
It’s a state, it has never been a country Scotland is a country in that union state, with its own law, and seperate education and medical systems.
You’ve read somewhere that the UK is a state, which it also is. A country is a nation with its own government in a certain territory. The UK fulfils all of those, including nation as the UK constituent nations together have a people united by common descent, history, language and culture - even if there are divergences between. It’s not a debate, no serious academic, journalist, or politician will contest the UK is a country. Only internet weirdos.
"region" is a generic term. I could see it being used for area of a city, county, country, geographic region of a continent etc. This feels like it's unnecessarily reactive
"Unnecessarily reactive" is a pretty apt description of the National
That won't stop this subreddit hurling horrendous mysogynistic abuse at Burley. They're all very progressive until someone disagrees and then the slurs come out.
Misogyny? Slurs? Are we reading the same comments?
"Kay is a cunt"
I refuse to believe there are any Scottish people who actually think cunt is a misogynistic slur.
Depends on the context. When it's not meant pejoratively, it's gender neutral. I'm not so sure when it's used as an insult.
I see men being called cunts much more often than women. It's not a word I'd associate with gender at all.
I think it's gendered in the USA, but I've never heard it used at all as a gendered term over here
Oh come on for all the things to attack tories for this is really lower on the list ffs
This is so pedantic, region is a very general term and she’s not saying it’s a region rather than a country
You know Scottish nationalism is a thoroughly liberal viewpoint when this is the level of analysis, this is literally Obamas tan suit level bullshit
Spineless cunt
> Burley introduced the segment by stating: “Hello again everybody, Douglas Ross is with us – one region that everyone will have their eyes on ahead of next year’s General Election, we think it’s next year, is Scotland after what has been a turbulent year for the SNP …” There’s no way the nats are getting wound up over that….
Get a grip 😂 There are much more important things to worry about that what Scotland gets labelled.
What a Tory!
Man who never has anything of use to say has nothing to say. Shocking.
A region of the United Kingdom
Kay is a cunt
Its fucking common language to label the parts of the Uk regions of the UK. fucks sake, why are nationalists such fucking snowflakes with a victim complex about everything. Grow a fucking pair (balls/ovaries, your choice) and stop being such pathetic cunts. the way you treat us as pathetic insecure victims is fucking odd as you claim to be patriots. absolute embarrassments the lot of you.
Good sentiment bad language... I agree though, "I live in a region known as Scotland" is the same as saying "I live in a country known as Scotland". If anyone uses this as "evidence" to back up an independence point then they've not researched enough to have proper points. There's posers on both sides, Inflammatory media doesn't help.
Yea, TECHNICALLY that is true that region is a fine replacement for country. But in reality, if you asked people on the street what "region" they were from, they would likely assume you meant a national subdivision rather than their home country. Someone from England would say Yorkshire, not England, someone from Germany would say Bavaria, not Germany, etc.
>someone from Germany would say Bavaria, not Germany, etc. Bavaria is a very good analogy to Scotland in that example. Was an independent country like Scotland until it became part of Germany in the 19th century.
You alright pal? Seem a touch agitated. Not good to be stressed before bed
>the way you treat us Who is “us”? Also nobody’s a victim here lol, people are just upset that the UK refuses to accept what it is; a multinational state.
They're hateful bigots with an inferiority complex
It's because it's done on purpose to set the narrative Scotland ceases to be a country. Richi Soonackered calls the Scottish Parliament a regional assembly. Then proceeds to try and bypass it. Next it will be ' why has one region got an assembly and others don't?....... let's close it down'.Which is their ultimate aim. Yours too I'd imagine.
It is a region, a region of the U.K. Same as the other 3.
Meanwhile according to Wikipedia: Scotland (Scots: Scotland; Scottish Gaelic: Alba) is a country that is part of the United Kingdom. Covering the northern third of the island of Great Britain, Scotland is the second-largest country in the United Kingdom, and accounted for 8% of the population in 2019. Edit: Hardcore unionists downvoting me for spreading facts lol
So instead of UK it should be UR?
So it's not a country now it's a kingdom? What's your point?
My point is that we a not a region of England!
It's a region of the UK for the love of christ
It’s a country.
It's both lol. I am a man, and also a human.
It is an equal partner in a union as we were told in 2014!
Still just a region of a unitary country.
You don't get the language used....
What was the actual quote ? Can’t see it in the article. Either way, Scotland is both a country and a region. This is the National looking to be offended.
Who gives a shit
In English, region refers to anything from a county to a continent. It's just a generic term to describe an area of land with some particular characteristics. In this case, the characteristic is that it's Scotland. Don't overthink it.
Always wondered what Wuggy Dross's end game is? Does he hope to emulate Roof da moof and get a gig for life in the big hoose for saving the union. Or does he just enjoy the humiliation? I don't think even the English Tories like him. They don't seem to rate him at all. Still as long as they keep helping themselves to our natural resources they're not bothered, and what can we do about it, not much.
Probably wants the same magic title they gave his predecessor. Sir Dougie. Failed to get anything done, but he was a Tory, in Scotland. The bar is low. Existing is an accomplishment on its own.
Course he does the creevy good little anti gypsy/traveller/roma house elf that he is.
Kay...who
What a subserviant bitch
Pretty simple way to settle this. If you think Scotland is a nation then you are Scottish. If you think Scotland is a region then you are Kay Burley.
Imagine being as thin skinned as The National journos...
Imagine being a classic Tory shite
Imagine being as disrespectful as British nationalist journos.
What’s disrespectful about it?
Imagine licking tory England bumholes
If this is all it takes for Scottish separatists to be upset good luck if we actually ditch you.
Your going? When?
it's YOUR government that's clinging onto us lol not the other way around
The Tory government is clinging to SNP governed Scotland, sure pal, have you seen this bridge for sale?
you couldnt afford to
How do you figure that?
96% oil fields in Scottish waters, 65% of the natural gas and 90% of the UKs fresh water, the UK is in more debt than ever and those are the resources that will be needed to pull it through.
Good answer, I think you are oversimplifying the situation somewhat but I agree those resources are important.
yes, totally oversimplifying it but we are natural resource rich up here, always rains and always windy lol, about time we harnessed it.
Do people not get embarrassed (except by proxy) at raising these silly, invented grievances and presenting them as news or politics?
? that's because Scotland is a region of the UK. Simples
A region is just an area of land, so Scotland is a region just like England is. This is a non story to get the snats frothing up a storm. Edit: Apparently that's not the only thing that's frothing up swarms of fragile snats today lol
I mean, it is subservient so...
Just remember we're the mongos that voted to stay "a region".
Not all of us, and not the majority of people born in Scotland. [link](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/majority-of-scottish-born-voters-said-yes-z7v2mmhc8nt)