UK Politics Thread XII: The Lockdown

[Celritannia]

But do they get separate passports?
Because, nearly every other federal country does not do that, and even if the UK was to become federal (which I hope it does), the idea of having a dual citizenship would not be one of them.

No, but not all citizens get passports. Having a passport does not make you a citizen. Because the US federal government has control over foreign affairs.

It matters for purposes of court jurisdictions, voting and taxation though. Especially for military personnel and the like.
For example you are not necessarily considered changing your residence on military duties, so if you were an Alaska citizen stationed in California you can still be an Alaska Citizen. Which you of course would stay for the tax benefits.
So you can also see a Hawaiian license plate in California and such.

Not sure how the UK would manage it though.

Well, there are some difference between England&Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, such as Justice, Education, Health etc. But the US comes from a confederal structure that evolved into a federal one. The UK would be working from the top down so it would not be as loose as the US one. For one thing, the idea of having a "Scots, Yorkshire, Welsh, Cornish" TA would not be as necessary due to how small the UK is.

[Celritannia]

Depends which federal route is taken. I think the "super federalism" concept the US or Belgium has would not be for the UK, but something akin to Germany would work.

Mmmm I dont know, never have been a fan of any type of federalism.

I think federalism may only be the right approach if the UK is to be maintained. Devolution can only go so far before it becomes a federalist approach.

[Dumb Ideologies]

The entirety of Europe is lebensraum for Greater Northumbria. We'll have no federalising impulses here.

[Celritannia]

The entirety of Europe is lebensraum for Greater Northumbria. We'll have no federalising impulses here.

Everything belongs to Sealand.

*Throws federal impulses everywhere.*

[North American Imperial State]

Mmmm I dont know, never have been a fan of any type of federalism.

I think federalism may only be the right approach if the UK is to be maintained. Devolution can only go so far before it becomes a federalist approach.

Yer true, I would except it if it was the last thing that could save the UK from breaking up, the Union is stronger together then split up.

[The New California Republic]

The entirety of Europe is lebensraum for Greater Northumbria. We'll have no federalising impulses here.

I'll flee to Ascension Island if such a thing comes to pass, I'm sure they'll have me back.

[Novus America]

No, but not all citizens get passports. Having a passport does not make you a citizen. Because the US federal government has control over foreign affairs.

It matters for purposes of court jurisdictions, voting and taxation though. Especially for military personnel and the like.
For example you are not necessarily considered changing your residence on military duties, so if you were an Alaska citizen stationed in California you can still be an Alaska Citizen. Which you of course would stay for the tax benefits.
So you can also see a Hawaiian license plate in California and such.

Not sure how the UK would manage it though.

Well, there are some difference between England&Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, such as Justice, Education, Health etc. But the US comes from a confederal structure that evolved into a federal one. The UK would be working from the top down so it would not be as loose as the US one. For one thing, the idea of having a "Scots, Yorkshire, Welsh, Cornish" TA would not be as necessary due to how small the UK is.

True, within a general federal structure there is a lot of leeway, so it would not have to be federal to the same extreme as the US.

You could be like Germany which is federal but with less state powers and more federal ones.
Or Canada or Australia could be possible models given those are closer.
Although Scotland and England do have separate criminal law systems, which is already somewhat like the US (each state has their own compete legal system, constitution, taxes etc.)

It depends too on how it is formed. The US uses an interesting sort in rather than saying “these are state powers, these are federal” the states can do whatever they want unless it conflicts with federal law.
And federal law only applies to certain things. All governmental powers automatically default to the states unless the federal government has the explicit right to exercise those powers and chooses to do so.

But the UK might not go that extreme, and say that state powers are limited to only certain things.

[Celritannia]

Well, there are some difference between England&Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, such as Justice, Education, Health etc. But the US comes from a confederal structure that evolved into a federal one. The UK would be working from the top down so it would not be as loose as the US one. For one thing, the idea of having a "Scots, Yorkshire, Welsh, Cornish" TA would not be as necessary due to how small the UK is.

True, within a general federal structure there is a lot of leeway, so it would not have to be federal to the same extreme as the US.

You could be like Germany which is federal but with less state powers and more federal ones.
Or Canada or Australia could be possible models given those are closer.
Although Scotland and England do have separate criminal law systems, which is already somewhat like the US (each state has their own compete legal system, constitution, taxes etc.)

It depends too on how it is formed. The US uses an interesting sort in rather than saying “these are state powers, these are federal” the states can do whatever they want unless it conflicts with federal law.
And federal law only applies to certain things. All governmental powers automatically default to the states unless the federal government has the explicit right to exercise those powers and chooses to do so.

But the UK might not go that extreme, and say that state powers are limited to only certain things.

I would certainly opt more for a German federal approach, probably with a little more central control. Perhaps creating a whole new wacky political concept that merges Federalism and Unitary.

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

1. nope
2. 16 now and I have decided not to thanks
3. lol okay then
4. because those are the people who consciously think of themselves as British (as opposed to those who have never thought about it and are just like "yeah, i'm british, i guess")

1. Then provide evidence.
2. Very well.
3. You kept calling yourself Northumbiran and thinking the Eltie was Norman, so...
4. That's not evidence, that's an opinion.

What is this country called? The United Kingdom. What citizenship do we hold? British Citizenship. What does it say on UK Passports? British Citizen.

1. Already have, it's been ignored every single time.
3. Unrelated.
4. it is EVIDENCE. the people who actively hate Englishness are the British-identifying elite.

The UK isn't a nation-state so that's irrelevant.

[Vassenor]

>actively hate Englishness

-wheeze-

Maybe you should start by defining what Englishness actually is and why its elitism to have a problem with that.

[Celritannia]

1. Then provide evidence.
2. Very well.
3. You kept calling yourself Northumbiran and thinking the Eltie was Norman, so...
4. That's not evidence, that's an opinion.

What is this country called? The United Kingdom. What citizenship do we hold? British Citizenship. What does it say on UK Passports? British Citizen.

1. Already have, it's been ignored every single time.
3. Unrelated.
4. it is EVIDENCE. the people who actively hate Englishness are the British-identifying elite.

The UK isn't a nation-state so that's irrelevant.

Your "evidence" is opinionated by you with no actual articles.

Oh no, it is very related. You can't seem to understand there is a long history of the UK, and that currently, we are all British citizens.

Do you understand what evidence is?

Have you ever thought that, calling ones self English is to negate the Union that has been established since 1707?
But this article does not say those who call themselves British are elitists.

nation state
noun
a sovereign state of which most of the citizens or subjects are united also by factors which define a nation, such as language or common descent.

The UK is a nation-state, and a sovereign state.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom is an unusual example of a nation state due to its claimed "countries within a country" status.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_st ... onal_cases

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

Scotland is part of the UK, so no international country is holding "Northumbrian lands" by "illegal occupation." Last time I checked, Scotland does not have an independent military, so how can it be under occupation?

That's just as bad as the Argentinians saying the Falklands are theirs, despite the people not wishing to be Argentinian.

Scotland is a foreign country. I don't care if Scotland is part of the "United Kingdom", it is still holding lands that belong to us. It is an occupation enforced by the British state, which for 16 out of the last 20 years has been ruled by Scots.

The lands claimed by Northumbria either have a Borders identity or, in the case of Edinburgh and its surroundings, have been colonised by affluent middle-class Britishness. If you held a referendum in the Borders and asked them if they wanted to join an independent Scotland or an independent England, I'd bet everything that they'd pick England.

I want the annexation of the rightfully English (Northumbrian) lands under illegal Scottish occupation.

Lol we aren't doing this dogshit again.

LOL, your guy brought it up, not me.

Oh, you aren't, it's just that if you don't consider yourself English and you aren't a minority you're almost certainly part of the elite.

Lol, folk in NI, Wales, and Scotland are all part of the elite apparently.

Think the fact I was talking about England is pretty obvious

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

The entirety of Europe is lebensraum for Greater Northumbria. We'll have no federalising impulses here.

I wouldn't go that far, but certainly God has chosen the English in general and the Northumbrians in particular to guide western Europe.

[The New California Republic]

Scotland is a foreign country. I don't care if Scotland is part of the "United Kingdom", it is still holding lands that belong to us.

Lol they don't belong to you, what a load of shit.

Lol we aren't doing this dogshit again.

LOL, your guy brought it up, not me.

You brought it up in the first instance, so let's not split hairs.

Lol, folk in NI, Wales, and Scotland are all part of the elite apparently.

Think the fact I was talking about England is pretty obvious

Not really, considering the both of you were talking about Britain and England at the same time.

[North American Imperial State]

Scotland is part of the UK, so no international country is holding "Northumbrian lands" by "illegal occupation." Last time I checked, Scotland does not have an independent military, so how can it be under occupation?

That's just as bad as the Argentinians saying the Falklands are theirs, despite the people not wishing to be Argentinian.

Scotland is a foreign country. I don't care if Scotland is part of the "United Kingdom", it is still holding lands that belong to us. It is an occupation enforced by the British state, which for 16 out of the last 20 years has been ruled by Scots.

The lands claimed by Northumbria either have a Borders identity or, in the case of Edinburgh and its surroundings, have been colonised by affluent middle-class Britishness. If you held a referendum in the Borders and asked them if they wanted to join an independent Scotland or an independent England, I'd bet everything that they'd pick England.

Lol we aren't doing this dogshit again.

LOL, your guy brought it up, not me.

Lol, folk in NI, Wales, and Scotland are all part of the elite apparently.

Think the fact I was talking about England is pretty obvious

WTF, well since my family is 98% from Scotland, I find you comment very obnoxious and very stupid.

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

>actively hate Englishness

-wheeze-

Maybe you should start by defining what Englishness actually is and why its elitism to have a problem with that.

Englishness is Englishness. It does not need to attach itself to any stereotypes because the English are the oldest of all nations, just as how Twitter is Twitter and Facebook is Facebook unlike all the ripoffs that have to be defined as "it's like Twitter for..." or "it's like Facebook for...". It is elitism to have a problem with it because it is the elite who have a problem with Britishness. See the article I've linked like ten times already.

[Celritannia]

Scotland is part of the UK, so no international country is holding "Northumbrian lands" by "illegal occupation." Last time I checked, Scotland does not have an independent military, so how can it be under occupation?

That's just as bad as the Argentinians saying the Falklands are theirs, despite the people not wishing to be Argentinian.

Scotland is a foreign country. I don't care if Scotland is part of the "United Kingdom", it is still holding lands that belong to us. It is an occupation enforced by the British state, which for 16 out of the last 20 years has been ruled by Scots.

The lands claimed by Northumbria either have a Borders identity or, in the case of Edinburgh and its surroundings, have been colonised by affluent middle-class Britishness. If you held a referendum in the Borders and asked them if they wanted to join an independent Scotland or an independent England, I'd bet everything that they'd pick England.

No, Scotland is a member of the Sovereign state, which is the United Kingdom.

Even if it wasn't, the lands of Northumbria were awarded to David I of Scotland when Henry I offered MAtilda, daughter of Waltheof, Earl of Northumberland, her hand in marriage. This made David's Son, Henry of Scots, the rightful holder of Northumbria. Let alone David I supported his Niece, Empress Matilda, as the rightful claimant of the Throne of the English instead of Stephen and honouring his Brother-in-Law's will, Henry I.
Although Matilda failed, her son, Henry II, granted the rights of Northumbria to David I and his son (who was, through his mother, the rightful Earl of Northumbria).
So forced occupation? No.

But the history lesson aside, an area of the United Kingdom cannot be held hostage by another area of the United Kingdom.
Unless you can tell me, which sovereign nation and which army is holding onto those lands?

If they would pick England, request a referendum to the UK and Scottish Parliaments.

[Celritannia]

>actively hate Englishness

-wheeze-

Maybe you should start by defining what Englishness actually is and why its elitism to have a problem with that.

Englishness is Englishness. It does not need to attach itself to any stereotypes because the English are the oldest of all nations, just as how Twitter is Twitter and Facebook is Facebook unlike all the ripoffs that have to be defined as "it's like Twitter for..." or "it's like Facebook for...". It is elitism to have a problem with it because it is the elite who have a problem with Britishness. See the article I've linked like ten times already.

No, that's not how nationalities work.
Also, no, the "English" are not the oldest of all the nations.

Citing the same article that does not even support your claim, is not evidence.

[Andsed]

The entirety of Europe is lebensraum for Greater Northumbria. We'll have no federalising impulses here.

Hah. Silly DI. A nation that no longer exists (and has not for literally over a thousand years) cannot claim anything! Your threats are weak.

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

Your "evidence" is opinionated by you with no actual articles.

Oh no, it is very related. You can't seem to understand there is a long history of the UK, and that currently, we are all British citizens.

Do you understand what evidence is?

Have you ever thought that, calling ones self English is to negate the Union that has been established since 1707?
But this article does not say those who call themselves British are elitists.

1. "Already have, it's been ignored every single time."
2. I am saying that your "You kept calling yourself Northumbiran and thinking the Eltie was Norman" comment is unrelated.
3. Yes.
4. Why do you do this every single time? "oh, haha, you were arguing this thing which you were not arguing, here is me saying that the thing you were arguing is WRONG" please refer back to my comment "because those are the people who consciously think of themselves as British"

nation state
noun
a sovereign state of which most of the citizens or subjects are united also by factors which define a nation, such as language or common descent.

The UK is a nation-state, and a sovereign state.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom is an unusual example of a nation state due to its claimed "countries within a country" status.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_st ... onal_cases

They're quoting the British government. Is North Korea a democratic people's republic?

[Celritannia]

Your "evidence" is opinionated by you with no actual articles.

Oh no, it is very related. You can't seem to understand there is a long history of the UK, and that currently, we are all British citizens.

Do you understand what evidence is?

Have you ever thought that, calling ones self English is to negate the Union that has been established since 1707?
But this article does not say those who call themselves British are elitists.

1. "Already have, it's been ignored every single time."
2. I am saying that your "You kept calling yourself Northumbiran and thinking the Eltie was Norman" comment is unrelated.
3. Yes.
4. Why do you do this every single time? "oh, haha, you were arguing this thing which you were not arguing, here is me saying that the thing you were arguing is WRONG" please refer back to my comment "because those are the people who consciously think of themselves as British"

The UK is a nation-state, and a sovereign state.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_st ... onal_cases

They're quoting the British government. Is North Korea a democratic people's republic?

1. Where is the evidence then? If you have already provided the evidence, humour me and link it here.

2. It is related, because you altered "all elitists are Norman" to "all elitists are British", neither those comments are true in the slightest.

3. And the Union exists, therefore, we are all British by fact.

4. Again, that is generalising with no evidence.

Ahaha, these sources are not from the British government.
What other government exists within the United Kingdom?

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

Lol they don't belong to you, what a load of shit.

Why not?

You brought it up in the first instance, so let's not split hairs.

"uh, um, you talked about something unrelated to this particular conversation in another thread so it's okay to bring it up here"? You can skip to reporting me to the jannies for "threadjacking".

Not really, considering the both of you were talking about Britain and England at the same time.

Was obvious to me.

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

WTF, well since my family is 98% from Scotland, I find you comment very obnoxious and very stupid.

Cool, which comment?

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

Even if it wasn't, the lands of Northumbria were awarded to David I of Scotland when Henry I offered MAtilda, daughter of Waltheof, Earl of Northumberland. This made David's Son, Henry of Scots, the rightful holder of Northumbria. Let alone David I supported his Niece, Empress Matilda, as the rightful claimant of the Throne of the English instead of Stephen and honouring his Brother-in-Law's will, Henry I.
Although Matilda failed, her son, Henry II, granted the rights of Northumbria to David I and his son (who was, through his mother, the rightful Earl of Northumbria).
So forced occupation? No.

"one Norman told this other Norman sympathiser who was Normanised and then Normanised Scotland that he could have parts of Northumbria" Yes thank you for proving me correct in theory if this actually related to what I am talking about, but actually incorrect because those parts of Northumbria were then regained by England and are today called Northumberland. I don't like talking about 1138 and the Lothians were annexed way before then anyway btw.

[Munkcestrian RepubIic]

No, that's not how nationalities work.

Nationalities don't equal nationalism.

Also, no, the "English" are not the oldest of all the nations.

We are, though.

Citing the same article that does not even support your claim, is not evidence.

The article does support my claims and is evidence.