Wings Over Scotland

Yes. We are showing it in cinema in Dunoon on 6th September

the Brexiters are being truthful to a point. They want the best for themselves. To hell with everybody else and this country- Scotland.

Scotland first or last- Independence or Brexit?

@abulhaq
What evidence do you have that “we are not Scandinavian in our collective mindset” ?

Orkney and Shetland belonged to Denmark until the 15th century. We have a long and ancient connection to Scandinavian countries still evidenced in our language. Words like bairn, midden, muckle all derive from Scandinavia. You only have to watch The Bridge or any other Swedish drama to recognise how often they say ‘braw’ meaning fine or good.
I would suggest, with no evidence other than my meagre faculties, that our divergence from the rest of the UK in our attitude to social justice, welfare, immigration etc etc suggests we indeed have a Scandinavian mindset that is robustly healthy.
You are right that our circumstances are unique, every country’s is, but that does not mean we have nothing to learn from Iceland or any other successful nation state.

Highland Wifie – You are so right. I grew up around Doric and ladt year I went to Denmark for the first time in my life. Completed the Duolingo Danish course with relative ease and could speak and understand it well enough to get by for the few days I was there. Even got given free cakes and larger coffee because I’d made the effort! Lots of Denmark felt to me like lots of Scotland – specifically like the islands and Sutherland.
Later in in the year I had my first trip to Sweden and was not prepared for folk speaking in inbreaths like they do up Huntly way…

Sorry for the OT here.

Remember the faux outrage of the SG signing a MOU with the Chinese? Well it seems it’s okay to have one now as long as you’re a unionist political party.

link to falkirkherald.co.uk

Falkirk Council were at the centre of the SG MOU, how times have changed.

Can I just say to X sticks, Dave and anyone else planning to go to a public viewing this film you will not be disappointed.

And there you have it. Another country with that ‘can do’ attitude which I know is gaining in strength in Scotland.

Or be like some who see no problem with telling their children that they ‘cannot do’… hahaha I’d have my head in my hands if that’s how I talked to my feisty, independent daughter!!

So tell your children ‘you can’, tell your friends ‘youse can’, tell your community ‘you all can’.

And stop being so damned defeatist all the time.:D

I see one of the figureheads of British Nationalistic Unionism, a quick look BLT will see the type it pandering is to, has done a character assassination piece on Stuart Campbell. I wonder why that may be, the venom runs deep at that publication.

The bad news for the Herald is no matter what the outcome I will still take his writing as being more factually accurate than most things I read in the Herald.

@abulhaq

In the same way that one swallow does not make a summer, one dark period of a country’s history does not consign the rest of that country’s model to the dustbin. But I think you know that. Eugenics was considered in the UK too but fortunately was successfully defeated.

The success of the Nordic model is explained in some way by the history of their farming system. A collective mentality has formed from people having to face similar challenges such that the solutions will usually benefit all. Thus the government generally looks for win win policies. A fairer society results in more trust in government. People are prepared to pay higher taxes for well funded services.

The Nordic model is under pressure of course from the same stresses all Western European countries are under, aging populations and high immigration. Fortunately, greater equality and high trust in government means they are more likely to put political differences aside to find solutions to these challenging issues. That may not be enough to stave off the threats to their systems but looking at the alternatives eg the American model, I know which I prefer.

Scotland is a unique country with a unique set of challenges. We will find our own solutions but only if we take our destiny into our own hands. Independence first and then we can get to work shaping our country the way WE want it. It’s not a lot to ask.

In French the word for team équipe comes from norse [skipa] a ship’s crew, harbour-havre from the norse [hafn].
Again the compass points nord, sud, est, ouest and their forms in other Romance languages are all linguistically ‘Nordic’. Languages reflect invasions, influences etc. Nothing else.
You use the term ‘philologist’ a term as venerable as your understanding of contemporary linguistics.
Check out the following as a general example.from an etymological dictionary.
BAIRN (n.)
“child” (of either gender or any age), “son or daughter,” Old English bearn “child, son, descendant,” from Proto-Germanic *barnam- (source also of Old Saxon barn, Old Frisian barn, Old High German barn; lost in modern German and Dutch), from PIE root *bher- (1) “to carry,” also “to bear children.”

Originally a general English word, in modern English restricted to northern England and Scottish from c. 1700. This was the English form of the original Germanic word for “child” (see child). Dutch, Old High German kind, German Kind are from a prehistoric *gen-to-m “born,” from the same root as Latin gignere (see genus and compare kind (n.)). Middle English had bairn-team “brood of children.”
I read somewhere that the DNA of the Southern English was essentially little different from the Scots.
I dont not set much store by the ancestry DNA fad but it may be tell you nothing is ever so black and white in any field.
On the DNA ‘scam’ read the following.
link to foxnews.com

@Abulhaq says: 11 July, 2018 at 11:50 am:

” … Interesting but do not see the relevance to Scotland’s case.

You are both right and wrong, Abulhaq.

” … Iceland’s independence is enviable … “

That is the relevance.

Scotland is not independent and the point is to illustrate that if Scotland took back her independence we would, due to our abundant natural resources and relatively small population, have been a very rich nation.

Let’s start with Roman Britain – The Romans came to Britain to exploit Britain but never managed to subdue large areas of the British Isles. The Roman’s came mainly for Britain’s mineral resources like lead, gold, silver and also the people, for the romans also dealt in slaves.

Yet, in spite of northern Britain being mineral rich, north Britain, but mainly what became Scotland, has been kept artificially poor by Londinium and the true history has been lied about.

If you doubt this let me show you an example from before the United Kingdom, or even the Union of the Crowns, came about.

The English Crown, that had annexed Wales in 1284 and annexed Ireland in 1542, had always failed to annex Scotland but the English Crown passed laws that they applied to any country or kingdom not ruled by Westminster. These laws are known as, “The English Navigation Acts”.

“The first navigation act, passed in 1381, remained virtually a dead letter because of a shortage of ships. In the 16th century various Tudor measures had to be repealed because they provoked retaliation from other countries. The system came into its own at the beginning of the colonial era, in the 17th century. The great Navigation Act passed by the Commonwealth government in 1651 was aimed at the Dutch, then England’s greatest commercial rivals.

It distinguished between goods imported from European countries, which could be brought in either English ships or ships of the country of origin, and goods brought from Asia, Africa, or America, which could travel to England, Ireland, or any English colony only in ships from England or the particular colony. Various fish imports and exports were entirely reserved to English shipping, as was the English coastal trade. The law was re-enacted in 1660, and the practice was introduced of “enumerating” certain colonial products, which could be shipped directly only to England, Ireland, or another English colony. These included sugar (until 1739), indigo, and tobacco; rice and molasses were added during the 18th century.

Non-enumerated goods could go in English ships from English colonies directly to foreign ports. From 1664 English colonies could receive European goods only via England. Scotland was treated as a foreign country until the Act of Union (1707) gave it equal privileges with England; Ireland was excluded from the benefits of the laws between 1670 and 1779.“

(Bolded bits by me).

Which brings up the wee question that even before we were forced to agree to unite with the Kingdom of England Scotland was not rich due to Westminster actions.

So the question is why was Scotland not abundantly rich with a small population and abundant natural resources?

Well, for starters, the Romans ran their Empire, including South Britain, as a customs & Excise system where Rome taxed every import and every export and Londinium was their main port in Roman Britain.

Roman Britain did not include north of Hadrian’s Wall, which was built because the Romans could not successfully govern the bit between Hadrian’s Wall and The Gask Ridge & Road.

It wasn’t built to keep the northern tribes out but to prevent the losses of customs and excise payments. Why would a resources rich small population need to attack the Roman Empire when the resources rich territory could easily support their own populations?

Which is why, what became Scotland, has never had a desire to colonise anyone except for example Nova Scotia that was colonised because Scots were being driven from their homelands and the disastrous Darien Scheme that was engineered by Westminster in order to force the Treaty of Union?

South Britain, on the other hand, had tried to colonise the entire World after it did manage to take over Scotland under the pretext of forming a United Kingdom.

We must look to the real history and not the history according to the Westminster Establishment, or rather the spin put upon the history by the Westminster Establishments from ever there was a recorded history of the British Isles.

The Romans were the first to write British history and the Romans had a political motive to spin it to suit their political ends. As has every immigrant elite to have succeeded the Romans since the Romans arrive in Britain 54 years before the birth of Christ.

Scotland, even yet, has no desire to colonise anyone, except perhaps the current inhabitants of – The Scottish Office and the Clyde Submarine Base – which are, after all supposedly Scotland’s already.

@Robert Peffers
No disagreement there. Keeping ‘colonies’ poor and dependent is the old and tried British imperial dodge. Indeed, if they were not exactly impoverished before, they certainly were after. India is the classic. Loot is a Hindi word and loot was what the E.I. companymen and the successors did. India did get cricket, English and railways though. Fair trade?
Perhaps they practised on Scotland? The flattering of the compliant with titles and privileges, the bribery and double dealing and the notions of property and ownership all sound familiar.

Jon Drummond at 11.33

The cinema in Dunoon is privately owned (along with another cinema in Greenock). They are very easy to deal with as the cinemas are struggling now.

Saw this at perth Library and Lesley was there doing a Q and A.
Very good session with 20 people not able to get in.
The message is spreading with more no to yes.