Tweets from myself, and various other tweeters I follow who are covering the U.K. election, will appear automatically below. Alas, because neither Cover It Live nor ScribbleLive are importing tweets properly right now, I’ll have to use the non-interactive, non-archive-able Twitter Widget verison. *sigh*
I must confess to something that truly stumps me about British politics, and that is the role of regional third parties. I probably should have studied this phenomenon more closely while I was at Cambridge, but it is fascinating to me It should be noted that the other third parties, the Lib-Dems and the BNP, exist largely as minority parties across the entire of the UK. Meanwhile, the votes in Scotland and Wales (and to a lesser degree, Northern Ireland) are up for grabs between Labour and the regional (read: nationalist) parties, while the Conservatives are largely shut out on those districts. This suggests a number of potential conclusions for why that is so, the time for which I don’t have to analyze in much depth so as to ascertain their real veracity or applicability, or even whether they might potentially be in conflict with one another:
1. England overwhelmingly dominates the UK vis-a-vis Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, to such a degree that their politics have almost no bearing on the British Parliament. IOW, England is the UK.
2. The Conservatives are English. I mean that in the sense that, in British Politics, it appears the Tories largely represent English political interests, to the particular exclusion of any other region, so the Tory temperament in the other regions is by definition an outlier and strictly a minority view, to the extent those other regions persist in having strong national interests separate and unique from England (as evidenced in their local parliaments and assemblies).
3. While devolvement is by far more of a Labour concession than a Tory one, the end result would appear to be a dilemma for both the regional nationalist parties and Labour. A vote for the nationalist party means the weakening of Labour in the British Parliament, and the possible rise of a Tory government hostile to your regional interests. Or, you vote for Labour, which sidelines or delays your nationalist objectives, but which allows for more amenable relationships with a slightly more sympathetic Westminster. Today, it appears the regional nationalist parties won out at the expense of Labour, and with the end result of having a Tory government. As 538 asks, “What will it mean for Scotland if they get a Westminster government that they didn’t vote for, and that owes them nothing?” American readers should try to comprehend that this question is of far greater significance in the UK than it is in the USA, where both red states and blue states can expect to experience periods where their preferred party is shut out of power at the federal levels. Few would ever be concerned, for example, for the long-term interests of a thoroughly blue state such as Hawaii or California under a Republican-dominated Congress and presidency — and vice versa a state like Utah under the current Democratic Congress and administration.
4. We say the UK has a two-party system, but is that really accurate? Here in the US, we had the Jesse Ventura and Bernie Sanders phenomena, but those are strong outliers to a general two-party consensus. In the UK, regional parties in Northern Ireland, Wales, and Scotland wield significant local control and influence versus the Conservatives, Labour, and the Lib-Dems. Yet at the Westminster level, they are merely statistical noise compared to the big three. So if that’s not a true two-party system, but neither is it a classical multiparty / proportional system, then what the heck do you call that kind of system?
5. The Thatcherite / Reaganite small “c” conservative, free-market, classical liberal has no specific party to call home in the UK. While I suspect a large percentage of the UK is ideologically similar to American conservatives, if you’re in England, Labour and the Lib-Dems are straight out, the BNP is only attractive if you’re what we used to call a Pat Buchanan conservative (before he went all pseudo-wacko-left-wing on us after Dubya became president and we had 9/11), and the Tories are even less reliable than the Republicans are for American conservatives. If you’re in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland, the nationalist questions dominate the local parliaments and assemblies, and the kind of policies you’d truly care about as a small “c” conservative would have to be effected far away in Westminster. So again, Labour and the Lib-Dems are straight out, so now you have to decide, can you align with the Tories, who will almost never be popular in your region because they are more or less the English Party; or do you align with the nationalist party, which is almost wholly unconcerned with your small “c” conservative principles and totally focused instead on the regional nationalist interests? The overall result is that, even if conservatives are as large a bloc in the UK as they are in the USA, their combined political force is a whole magnitude less, and that is extremely bad news for those of us who wish to see Britain get its economy and finances in order, the government size shrunk and brought under control, and prosperity returned to that magnificent isle (and Northern Ireland, of course).
Here’s one for the Hall of Fame of unintended meanings:
The above is from 538. Italics are mine.
An actual majority is looking very real for the Tories at the moment, while the Lib-Dems are looking at an unqualified disaster. Even if the Tories don’t quite get to 326, they should hit 320, which should be close enough to ensure Labour is unable to form a coalition, even including SNP and the Lib-Dems. We might have a hung Parliament, but it doesn’t look very well hung to me.
And now the LibLab numbers have pulled very close to the Tories, and with less than 90 seats left to be announced, I think the exit polls are going to end up looking very sharp in their prognostications.
Today’s stock blip may have been due to an operator error, but with Greece headed towards default, Portugal and Spain potentially right behind them, and the UK looking at a hung Parliament, it looks as if the markets are going to have a very bitter summer.
The regional nationalist parties are mostly comparatively honest politicians with local/national pride …
Most Brits are happy to be Brits, and proud also to be whichever flavour of Brit they happen to be …
In Scotland, the SNP (ScotNats) have policy of wanting separation, but they do not have the support for actual separation … they are just considered to be better as a Government than the Labour folk would be …
The Conservatives are close to shut out in Scotland because of a long tradition of voting Labour, especially in the bigger cities … a lot of the folk who would be conservative go SNP instead …
About now, it’s time in the cycle of such things, for a new crop of good to excellent conservatives to surface in Scotland, and in Wales … and we will see the LibDems fading, with swings back to the Conservatives …
Depending upon which publications in the UK that you believe, you can get the impression that Conservatives are the arch-fiends (as per the Grauniad) … sort of like the LATimes/NYTimes/WaPo over here …
In Northern Ireland, with the demise of the old sectarians, things have stabilised significantly to where the pressure to even consider remerging with Eire is fast vanishing – except in the minds of the few Sinn Fein left …
Major party wise – Labour can’t afford to have Scotland separate from England – cuz it would cost them any hope of becoming the Government again … and the Conservatives *are* the party of the Union of the constituent kingdoms of the United Kingdom, so, even though it would give them unstoppable control of England, the integrity of the UK is more important to them …
The LibDems are the UK’s local loony part … imagine a party of Kucinichs …
Does that help ?
Pingback: Live coverage – General Election 2010 | Infant Car Seat Reviews
“In Northern Ireland, with the demise of the old sectarians, things have stabilised significantly to where the pressure to even consider remerging with Eire is fast vanishing – except in the minds of the few Sinn Fein left …”
Alasdair, if the frightening Facts that (a) Sinn Féin topped the Poll in Popular votes in Norn Iron, and that (b) said ideologically bright-emerald Repooblichauns plus their paler-green Nationalist cousins, the SDLP, together garnered 42% of the PV & 44% of the available Seats, suggests that even Consideration of a reunified isalnd of Ireland is fading fast: then I am King Billy’s Uncle. ;>
Her Britannic Majesty’s six-county Statelet is unique in the UK Celtic constellation of Scotland, Wales & NI: for unlike in the other two long-conquered lands, none of the 3 “nationwide” British parties even bother to run candidates under their Own banner in northeast Ulster.
“Ulster Conservatives and Unionists – New Force” was the Ballot designation for Thurday’s tentative Tory foray into northeast Ulster, in uneasy coalition with the dwindling ‘moderate’ Ulster Unionist Party. Note that all their candidates Lost — including in the UUP’s only previously-Incumbent constituency, Down North, where the UC&U – NF candidate, the estimable Ian Parsley ;}, was crushed by more than 3 to 1 by incumbent ex-UUP MP Lady Sylvia Hermon who won re-election as an Independent after refusing to run with the Tory taint.
(A further footnote: the stunning defeat, in hardline-Unionist East Belfast, of NI First Minister Peter Robinson [DUP] by the non-sectiarian Alliance party candidate” [the party that represents the tricolour’s peaceful & neutral White field between the Orange & the Green] is a very Good omen — even if it Did have relatively Little to do with the prevailing Tribal ideologies.)
The preferable UK electoral reform is Not a strict national Popular-vote Proportional-representation scheme, which at present would virtually guarantee a Hung parliament (and hence a potentially unstable Coalition government) almost every time — but rather, the speedy Liberation of all of the still-colonized Celtic nations. Iow, give England back to the English. (And while you’re At it, don’t forget about Kernow. 🙂
Erratum: OK, so I screwed up the Kernow link. (Stay tuned for the liberation of the Isle of Man, Galicia, and Breizh. 🙂
Venerable Loy – once more, into the Breizh, eh ?
The Sinn Fein now running for office without the IRA behind ’em are not the same as the Sinn Fein who knee-capped opponents …
The non-sectarian Alliance folk, afaIk, are not pursuing the annexation of the South … nor do they want to be subsumed into the South …
(grin) Still, there may well be a kernow of truth in what you aver …
The Conservatives are close to shut out in Scotland because of a long tradition of voting Labour, especially in the bigger cities … a lot of the folk who would be conservative go SNP instead …
Alasdair, this is what I do not understand. The SNP is more left-wing than is Labour, so why would small “c” conservatives in Scotland go there at all??? Is small “c” conservatism in Scotland tightly wedded to Scottish nationalism, and if so, what are the nuances of that — because it doesn’t make sense to me, on the surface.
As for Northern Ireland, I would hazard to guess that, to the extent the Republic of Eire is more likely to turn its economy around and stay detangled from international forays like Iraq and Afghanistan, and to the extent that the Catholic nature of Eire continues to erode into secularism, the Protestants of Northern Ireland will increasingly feel their future is brighter under the rule of Dublin than Westminster. At some point there may very well be a referendum on this that the Brits may lose, and if so, even pro-Unionists should ask, what is truly lost by letting self-determination take its course? As long as it is not driven by guns, drugs, and terrorism (fueled by the money and sympathies of misguided Irish-American supporters), the prospect of Sinn Fein getting its way in the end does not truthfully alarm me.
As for the Brits retreating from Scotland and Wales, I just can’t see it. Those lands may very well never be English, but they are thoroughly British (this is more true for Wales than Scotland), and eventually there will be some equilibrium established as a result of devolvement. While neither place wishes to be totally subsumed by the English, the fact that a Welsh son like Michael Owen would choose to play for England tells us anecdotally that the Welsh people would prefer some allegiance with England over total independence. As push comes to shove up north, I expect Scotland will eventually breed the same result.
But Mr. Loy does raise a provocative issue — perhaps, from a conservative perspective, the Tory English would be better off wiping their hands clean of the Celtic lands. Clearly England’s ancient imperialism of Britain has resulted in a modern welfare state that has created unruly, socialist-minded dependents out of its Celtic peoples, and letting them have their own way in their own lands would be Welfare Reform at quite the macro level, no?
“Venerable Loy – once more, into the Breizh, eh ?…(grin) Still, there may well be a kernow of truth in what you aver …”
Alasdair, LOL! Can’t beat ye, my trusty fiere. Maun Join ye. :}
“…not the same as the Sinn Fein who knee-capped opponents …”
Actually many of them Are the same Personnel, at the Senior levels anyway — but yeah, the Policy has at long last changed, thanks be to God — and also to Tony Blair, Gerry Adams, AND (yes, I’ll say it) the redoubtable Rev. Paisley. (Never to be confused with the hapless Mr. Parsley. 😉
Which, to me, validates some unpleasant truths, e.g.: (1) Sometimes you CAN, and even Must, negotiate with Terrorists. (2) One generation’s Carbombers can become the next generation’s Statesmen. (3) Rev. Dr. Ian Paisley Sr., for all his odious demoninational bigotry, became in his Late career exactly what NI needed: namely, the tough old bastard whose political Stubbornness, more than any other single person’s efforts, Frog-marched the IRA into Decommissioning — and then & Only then, bludgeoned his Own people into joining in Government with the disarmed Taigs.
A propos of which, I think your description of the Alliance party is correct, and I Like them. They raise a Standard to which brave & honest Non-sectarians can repair. / And although the stunning Westminster downfall of DUP’s Mr. Robinson may have had more to do with the sad-&-shocking “Mrs. Robinson” scandal than with Peter’s performance as MP (or as NI 1st Minister), I’m delighted that it’s an Alliance woman who replaces him. (And I gather she’s Mayor of Belfast to boot! Good omens.)
Andrew, I want to comment At You too (I like your commenpost a lot) but I gotta take a Breather first, here. [Where DOES Brendan get his Verbosity, anyway? ;]
PS: Alasdair, there Is of course still the Dissident problem:
But lately the British Army & the
Royal Ulster Constabularynewly-devolved Police Service of Northern Ireland ;> seem to have been keeping the Irreconcilables at bay & the Situation well in hand.Andrew #10 – “England’s ancient imperialism of Britain “ – that misperception is a major source both of problems and embarrassment …
England anciently and legitimately and vi et armis conquered a justifiedly proud Wales (hence the British Crown Prince, by tradition, having the title of Prince of Wales) …
England dealt with the “Irish Problem” for over a millennium, trying to deal with the Island of Ireland which historically never had a viable single unified country encompassing the whole island – until the Normans consolidated it in the 1100s and thereafter … (those who want to claim that such things are not legitimate also tend to be the same folk, in the US at least, who have yet to give their ill-acquired lands and homes back to the indigenous north american populations (no, not the descendants of the Aztecs, either)) … historically, over the centuries, prior to the conquest by the Normans, Ireland was divided (by its own population) into a few to many warring kingdoms, all vying for control yet never managing to actually succeed in establishing control …
Then we get to the embarrassing part … Scotland was never conquered – not by the sassenachs, not by the Romans … the Scots monarch – James VI – inherited England/Wales/Scotland – and then turned round and effectively got assimilated by English ways (with some side-trips to the continent for new blood) …
Most Scots, and, indeed, I suspect most UK Celts, are basically happy to be Brits … it’s English that we do not care to be …
“to the extent the Republic of Eire is more likely to turn its economy around and stay detangled from international forays like Iraq and Afghanistan” – ask Brits about Iraq and there will be two major sub-groups of responses ..
1) “The US is only there for the Oil !” – this is from the less-well-informed sub-group who actually still believe that the BBC is an unbiased source …
2) “We don’t like war – but – Saddam Hussein was a Bad Person With Whom *Someone* Had To Deal !” – this second sub-group realise that Gulf War I didn’t actually end – it just got to an actual Cease-Fire Agreement – which Saddam regularly broke; they realise that Saddam’s regime was responsible for chemically gassing Iraqis by the thousands (and that was just Saddam’s civilised side); they realise that Saddam’s regime was proudly supporting terrorism outwith the borders of Iraq;
So the former group march against UK involvement in Iraq – until they learn the facts about what was done and why – and then they become part of the second group …
And the Scots Regiments and Welsh Regiments and Irish Regiments (and English Regiments and US Regiments) continue to fill up with volunteer enlistees who fight against the likes of Saddam Hussein rather than just passively or actively supporting forms of imperialism …
And most UK Celts remain proud to be Brits (and proud NOT to be English) …
Few in the US seem to realise that, at the time of Partition, Ulster – the Six Counties – were about 95% Protestant, and the rest of Ireland was probably about 95% Catholic … over the following half-century or so, in spite of Catholics in Ulster not being able to vote, not being able to own real property, not being able to work in a number of the better jobs, Catholics from the south *still* chose to migrate into Ulster so that their families could have a better life than they could in the south – to the point where Ulster became only about 60% Protestant … back at that time, what incentive did the folk in Ulster have to “rejoin” the south ?
Now, while the legal system and culture in the south have eased considerably, there are *still* reasons why the Ulster folk prefer to remain Brits … (grin) … (and not just to irritate Venerable Loy) …
“…at the time of Partition, Ulster – the Six Counties – were about 95% Protestant, and the rest of Ireland was probably about 95% Catholic … over the following half-century or so, in spite of Catholics in Ulster not being able to vote, not being able to own real property, not being able to work in a number of the better jobs, Catholics from the south *still* chose to migrate into Ulster so that their families could have a better life than they could in the south – to the point where Ulster became only about 60% Protestant …”
Alasdair m’Laird, at the time of partition Ulster was not — and to this day Is not — the Six Counties. The Province of Ulster was, and remains, the Nine counties of the North of Ireland, FROM which the overwhelmingly Catholic & nationalist Counties Cavan, Donegal & Monaghan were Partitioned Off at the initial Time of Partition (which was 1920) by the Government of Ireland Act:
As, in fact, did several Other areas within the gerrymandered Six-county “Northern Ireland” entity:
…and said Inter-governmental Agreement locked in the existing Six-counties Border; and the rest is Bloody History. / My Point (just in case you’ve been Wondering 🙂 is that though I presently Lack the Census data, I aver that there’s No Way the Six Counties were anywhere near to 95% Protestant at the time of Partition, and that the entirety of Ulster — the Nine counties — was Way Farther from that figure. (Cavan, Donegal & Monaghan having been excised in the first place precisely Because their inclusion would have statistically destabilised the nascent statelet’s Protestant Ascendancy.)
Having no reason to doubt it, I’ll Stipulate to your “…Catholics from the south *still* chose to migrate into Ulster so that their families could have a better life…”. Since Cromwell had driven a lot of their ancestors to Hell or to Connaught for to clear the lands for the great Plantation, some may have been also Averring a Right of Return. 😉 But I still think your Percentages are off.
I Agree with a good deal of the Other stuff you said btw. (Someday I’ll get around to explaining to Andrew why it is that He’s right on some of his points, too. )
DAMMIT! I HATE Linkmaking! Here – fixed – I HOPE —
As, in fact, did various Other areas within the gerrymandered Six-county “Northern Ireland” entity:
…and said Inter-governmental Agreement locked in the existing Six-counties Border, and the rest is bloody History. / My Point (just in case you’ve been Wondering 🙂 is that though I Lack the Census data, I aver that there’s No Way the Six Counties were anywhere near to 95% Protestant at the time of Partition, and that Ulster — the Nine counties — were Way Farther from that figure. (Cavan, Donegal & Monaghan gaving been excised in the First place precisely Because their inclusion could have statistically destabilised the nascent statelet’s Protestant Ascendancy.
Having no reason to doubt it, I’ll Stipulate to your “…Catholics from the south *still* chose to migrate into Ulster so that their families could have a better life…”. Since Cromwell had driven a lot of their ancestors to Hell or to Connaught for to clear the lands for the great Plantation, some may have been Averring a Right of Return. 😉 But I still think your Percentages are off.
I Agree with a good deal of the Other stuff you said btw. (Someday I’ll get around to explaining to Andrew why it is that He’s right on some of his points, too. )
(finally) ~ Andrew: I see your point & share your puzzlement about the ideological Base of Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba, vis-a-vis the Tories’ apparent Lack of one in Scotland, in relation to Labour’s continuing dominance.
Notable, though, at least in this latest round — and Also puzzling to one unfamiliar with the UK Districting system — is that once we get below Labour’s commanding 42% of the vote & 41 (69.5%) of the 59 seats, we see SNP, LibDem, and Tory pretty closely Bunched at PV 19.9%, 18.9% and 16.7% respectively BUT with LD’s 3rd-place PV producing 11 Seats, ScotNat’s one-point-Higher PV generating a scant 6, and Conservative’s only-2.2-point-lower-than-LD 4th-place finish securing exactly One. Weird. The “Nationwide Small Party’ whups the Regional Nationalist Party by nearly 2 to 1 in Seats while Losing to it by a Point in the PV. / This calls for electoral REFORM, by Jove! / No wait, I forgot: I’m Against that. ;> (That lone Tory win was in Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale btw. Thought you’d like to know. Sounds somehow Appropriate to me. 🙂
Turning now to Wales [“Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but, for Wales!” ~ Sir Thomas Moore :] — there the Tories, with 8 of the 40 seats and 26.1% PV, were Not shut Out. And the Regional Nationalists, Plaid Cymru, while Gaining one new seat, still won but 3 of the 40 and an underwhelming 11.3% of the PV. (And LD’s 20.1% PV brought them the identical Seat total: 3. Again, Odd. )
And now just a word about the fair county Cornwall. Per the BBC (trust me; Proving it requires too many dreary Links), the PV for its closest approximation to a Regional Nationalist Party, Mebyon Kernow, ranged from a nadir of 0.8% in St. Ives to a robust Zenith of 4.2% in rebel St. Austell & Newquay. ;} ‘Nuff said.
Re Norn Iron (whose recent Returns I have already Picked over, above): I find your analysis in #10 above perceptive, wise, Magnanimous, and quite Possibly correct. / I only wish that Referendum result might occur in 2016. (Y’know. The glorious Centennial. 🙂 But alas, I fear that a mere 6 years hence is Not Enough. / Maybe by the 110th. [??] :>
“As for the Brits retreating from Scotland and Wales, I just can’t see it. Those lands may very well never be English, but they are thoroughly British (this is more true for Wales than Scotland), and eventually there will be some equilibrium established as a result of devolvement…”
Well, ye Got me, ya bum. ;} Notwithstanding my customary Pose (as Postured at the end of #7 above ~ and also Below ) of racist pan-Celtic triumphalism: I Agree.
“But Mr. Loy does raise a provocative issue — perhaps, from a conservative perspective, the Tory English would be better off wiping their hands clean of the Celtic lands. Clearly England’s ancient imperialism of Britain has resulted in a modern welfare state that has created unruly, socialist-minded dependents out of its Celtic peoples, and letting them have their own way in their own lands would be Welfare Reform at quite the macro level, no?”
ROTFLMKeltoidAO!!! You gotta Point there, ya Saxon rat! / Let my People Go! (Then we’ll all apply to Greece for a Bailout! 🙂 [Have patience; there Are lyrics after the instrumental Intro. ;]
Sure, an’ ye have provoked my curiosity !
And it seems that, between 1911 and 1926 Censuses, for the counties that became the Irish Free State, non-Catholic population decrease was 32.5% – so almost 1 in 3 of the non-Catholics in the south left the south in one way or another … (from census numbers here) …
After some more GOOGLEing, I’m starting to wonder if the 95% in the 6 Counties referred to the 6 containing 95% of the Protestants in Ireland – which doesn’t have to also mean it being 95% Protestant … seems like the 6 were more like 75% Protestant … at any rate, Norn Iron has gone from being very majority Protestant to barely majority Protestant … and the South, it seems has gone from more than 10% Protestant in the 1800s to significantly less now …
On a different electoral note, as and when and IF Cameron becomes Prime Minister, perhaps he will exercise a wry sense of humour, and propose (with the LibDems) that, as a proof-of-concept, the Scottish seats for Westminsters should be chosen by PV … so, if one uses the most recent elections percentages, the seat balance would go from 41/11/6/1 to 24/13/12/10 (Lab/LD/SNP/Tory) – giving 316 Tory to Labour 241 to LibDem 59 … SNP seats would double from 6 to 12 …
So it would be good for Tory and LibDem – but is that sufficient to get it passed in Westmionster Parliament ? (grin)
Alasdair, anyone who has seen Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life can quite freely and easily resolve that conundrum for you (and recall the scene with the Protestant couple immediately afterward…). Demography is destiny, and demography is obviously tied tightly to birth rates and immigration — a truism that ought to scare the bejeezus out of the Dutch, Belgians, and other countries where roughly 50% of newborns are born of Muslim immigrants.
Also, you quarrel with my use of the term “imperialism”. Merriam-Webster defines as follows:
I fail to see how England falling into possession of Scotland by happenstance releases Scotland’s rule under Westminster from conforming to that definition. Rather, it appears you are unnecessarily reacting to the negative connotations of the word. I think any rational analysis would have to conclude English imperialism across the British isle has contributed greatly not just to the economic and cultural development of the Scots, but also to the entire globe. With Ireland, you simply have the case of a people who’d much rather be left behind — and ultimately got their way. However, I attribute that sense of cultural and territorial defensiveness, and resulting economic backwardness, more to the ingrained Catholicism of the Emerald Isle, than to any genetic, ethnic, or linguistic mark, as many astute thinkers of Western Civilization have convincingly made the case for us that Catholicism is a powerful retardant of economic and political modernization (for better or worse).
Andrew – my observation is that the changing relative proportions of Catholic and Protestant in the North is not solely due to relative procreative proclivities … there was considerable Catholic immigration/migration to the potential for a better life up in the North as compared to the South …
(grin) And, I repeat, England didn’t “imperialism” Scotland … Scotland *inherited* England (and Wales, and Ireland) – which isn’t covered in either of the Merriam-Webster definitions …
Venerable Loy and Alasdair,
I enjoy the correspondance between th’ two o’ ye. I may struggle to understand it all, but it is a lovely variation of Our Fair Language you use when discussing Britania and Eire.
ROTFLMFOWEST !
Alasdair, there may very well have been immigration patterns that reflected the obvious fact that Northern Ireland was more developed and had more economic opportunities than the rest of the fairly impoverished and backward Eire. My point is, looking at demographic data isn’t going to prove that case, because birth rates are far more responsible for the numbers becoming what they are than any immigration pattern.
As far as the circumstances by which Scotland fell under England’s thumb, again, they are largely irrelevant. The happenstances of the feudal, monarchical era were eventually subsumed into realities on the ground, and by the 1700s, Scotland was very much wishing it hadn’t “inherited” England and Wales.
Andrew – speaking/typing as a Scot, we don’t wish that we hadn’t inherited the rest of the UK – though we *are* embarrassed by what happened with our monarchy … Scots Law is *still* Scots Law …
As for changes in religious demographic balance, while birth rates can make a difference, I have to suspect that the Catholic tradition that kids of a Catholic/Protestant marriage must/should be raised as Catholic, whereas Protestant tradition was/is much more laissez faire, probably has more to do with it than explicit birth rate differences …
At the time of Partition, maternal mortality rates during and immediately after childbirth were still significantly high, due to the as-yet-not-available antibiotics … infant mortality was still up there, too …
B Minich #20 – so – just who or where is this “Britania” ?
(grin)
I also realised that this post and its discussion comments are free of those d-list members – the ones who can read a speech by de Valera and a speech by Bonaparte yet cannot tell their Erse from their Elban …
(innocent smile)
Pingback: U.K. Election live coverage | i UK Love
Pingback: Alteril Reviews