Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[The Brain]

If both rump-Britain and Scotland accept dual citizenship then what's the problem? Independence being more hassle-free doesn't seem like a negative to me.

[Josquius]

If both rump-Britain and Scotland accept dual citizenship then what's the problem? Independence being more hassle-free doesn't seem like a negative to me.

Sweden and Britain accept dual citizenship. That doesn't mean any brit who asks can have a Swedish passport.

As said there will be loads who can qualify for both but if Scots only qualify for Scottish that's all they should get - or else can people elsewhere in the UK just pick up a Scottish passport? I'll take 3 please.

[The Brain]

If both rump-Britain and Scotland accept dual citizenship then what's the problem? Independence being more hassle-free doesn't seem like a negative to me.

Sweden and Britain accept dual citizenship. That doesn't mean any brit who asks can have a Swedish passport.

As said there will be loads who can qualify for both but if Scots only qualify for Scottish that's all they should get - or else can people elsewhere in the UK just pick up a Scottish passport? I'll take 3 please.

An independent Scotland's law on citizenship is unknown today, so we can only guess who would get citizenship.

[Tamas]

Thanks to Brexit, Scottish independence is FAR more complex than how easy it is to keep unwanted people of one nation out of the other.

[The Brain]

Thanks to Brexit, Scottish independence is FAR more complex than how easy it is to keep unwanted people of one nation out of the other.

What has Brexit done?

[Sheilbh]

Other Tories seem to prefer the Australian model of storing darkies in far flung islands:

It's not either/or. They want to "process" asylum applications overseas (the last I heard was Albania or Montenegro) like Australia and deport Syrians because it's "peaceful" now like Denmark. But there's a weird smorgasbord of countries different political factions in the UK look to - Germany comes up a lot as well.

But Australia has an outsize influence on British politics in general, but especially around immigration - see also the "Australian style" points system. I think it's partly because Australia is the country with most British migrants (I think) - at about 1.25-1.5 million. Everyone knows someone who was emigrated to Australia so there's a degree of familiarity with their process, my family tried but we didn't have enough points.

More particularly though Lynton Crosby (nicknamed the Lizard of Oz) who used to be John Howard's election strategist has run (or his firm and hand pointed successor, Isaac Levido) has run every Tory campaign since 2005.

There is a book to be written on his influence in the last 16 years because he's where we got the "dead cat" idea (true or not), all through the 90s and 00s when he was working for John Howard there were constant "history wars" in Australia, there was lots of dog-whistling by Howard and Australian politics is incredibly brutal - all of which, I think, have echoed over here. Both Labour and Tories hire the odd American consultant - so they both had different members of Obama's team advising them on, I think the 2015 election - but none have had as much influence or success as Crosby and his team. There's even a little bit of an angle to it in Labour because some of the advisers to Labour moderates during their insurgency against Corbyn had worked for Blair and then moved to Australia to work for Julia Gillard.

Plus, especially at the minute, the great Australian tradition of leadership spills - I think Morrison is now the longest serving PM since 2007 at just over 3 years. But Rudd was removed after a couple of years in an internal fight with Gillard, who lasted a couple of years before Rudd removed her again. Then the same happened with Abbott being deposed by Turnbull before Morrison took over. All of them lasting at most three years. Of course part of the reason politics is so brutal in Australia is because it's about how you share a rapidly growing pie - which does not apply to the UK.

[The Larch]

But Australia has an outsize influence on British politics in general, but especially around immigration - see also the "Australian style" points system. I think it's partly because Australia is the country with most British migrants (I think) - at about 1.25-1.5 million.

I can think of other reasons. 

[garbon]

I know, I checked, I wanted 3 passports.

Mono, is that you?

The UK is not the only state that's done that in the last few years. It's certainly been done by Denmark (more generally there is almost no outrageous British anti-immigration policy that wasn't pioneered by Denmark - apparently they are very closely watched by Patel and her advisers for insipration) and Belgium.

Other Tories seem to prefer the Australian model of storing darkies in far flung islands:

Tory MPs suggest sending migrants to UK to the Falklands
(...)
Lee Anderson, the MP for Ashfield in Nottinghamshire, said he lobbied an immigration minister two weeks ago to say that offshore processing, where those who seek asylum are sent abroad while their cases are processed, should begin as soon as possible.

"I would be in favour of [using] the Falkland Islands. The only way we will put these people off is by giving them the message that if you come here you are going to be sent 8,000 miles away," he said.

When I thought I was going to need to live in Ireland for a bit, I wish pushing on my husband to get his Irish citizenship so I could eventually come back to the US as Black Irish.

[The Larch]

When I thought I was going to need to live in Ireland for a bit, I wish pushing on my husband to get his Irish citizenship so I could eventually come back to the US as Black Irish.

Seedy would have been proud of you. 

[Sheilbh]

I can think of other reasons. 

Yeah but I don't think fondness for first half of the twentieth century policies are that much of an explanation of any sentiment in the modern world.

There's more British emigrants in Australia than any other country (I think every year the UK is still the single largest source of immigrants for Australia), there's about 700,000-1 million Brits who visit Australia every year (the main reason is to see family and friends) - I think actual existing Australia is what people like. And modern Australia is a diverse society that is becoming more diverse - as is the UK. I think Australia and Canada are basically the UK in the future.

[Josquius]

I bloody well hope not.
I mean. The space is nice.
But all the urban design leaves much to be desired.

[Sheilbh]

I bloody well hope not.
I mean. The space is nice.
But all the urban design leaves much to be desired.

Fair. I think because we are not a continent we won't behave like one. But I wouldn't be surprised in Brits move to Australia and immediately become NIMBY activists trying to stop any building in one of the least densely populated countries on the planet

[The Larch]

Yeah but I don't think fondness for first half of the twentieth century policies are that much of an explanation of any sentiment in the modern world.

It might be a first half of the XXth century policy, but some of its lingering aspects continued until the 70s and I think that it has had a lingering impact in Australia's emigration policy to this days. I mean, in the late 80s John Howard was still talking about limiting Asian inmigration to Australia, and the way the country treats asylum seekers is deplorable, and I don't think that it's a coincidence given the country's history on the issue.

I think Australia and Canada are basically the UK in the future.

That's bonkers (unless you develop it and I've misunderstood you), both countries have radically different economies, societies and situations to the UK, they're more similar to each other than any of them is to the UK.

Besides that, Australia has, I feel, a rather crude and nasty reactionary streak that doesn't bother to sugar coat it with British politeness.

[Sheilbh]

It might be a first half of the XXth century policy, but some of its lingering aspects continued until the 70s and I think that it has had a lingering impact in Australia's emigration policy to this days. I mean, in the late 80s John Howard was still talking about limiting Asian inmigration to Australia, and the way the country treats asylum seekers is deplorable, and I don't think that it's a coincidence given the country's history on the issue.

No that's fair.

That's bonkers (unless you develop it and I've misunderstood you), both countries have radically different economies, societies and situations to the UK, they're more similar to each other than any of them is to the UK.

So there's a few things that make me think it - but I think a large part of it is that we are English speaking and so have that direct access/flood of American culture/news/neuroses with no mediation at all, which means I think we're all to one extent or another in America's wake.

It struck me as a thing with a few points over the last few years. Those governments have had joint responses agreed very quickly on China, Hong Kong, Belarus and Russia in the Caucasus and Ukraine - through to things like AUKUS and Canada helping the UK in the Arctic. In international comparison polling on things like climate, immigration and multi-culturalism, those three countries are almost always clustered together (I'd bet that in almost any international comparison UK attitudes will be next to either Canada or Australia). I remember it coming up in terms of someone writing about the casual routine presence of BAME politicians in the UK - including in the right party - saying, it was like they were used to in Canada (and I think the contrast they drew was Germany where I believe there has only been one non-white cabinet minister). Edit: similarly there's over 50 LGBTQ+ MPs (I think now the UK, Scotland, New Zealand and Canada fight over who has the gayest parliament ).

Obviously there are vastly different economies and there are other differences, but I never buy the ever-present "imperial nostalgia"/historical pull analysis of why those governments even when from different traditions have worked well together, and why those societies have similar attitudes on big social attitude questions etc. I don't think it's because of the past but because we are relatively similar now. They're all multicultural, increasingly diverse, English-speaking, middle power, rich democracies - and, in my view, becoming more similar. I think Canada and Australia are more down that path and closer to each other but the UK is on the way. I also know that British universities see themselves as competing with Canada and Australia for international talent (especially from China and India) - again, because we're not quite the US but it's an English language degree etc.

Entirely separately but I'm fairly sure Quebec is the future of Scotland too

Besides that, Australia has, I feel, a rather crude and nasty reactionary streak that doesn't bother to sugar coat it with British politeness.

Yeah - that is a thing but I think it definitely exists in the UK too. I think the "politeness" hid worse sins than just crude and nasty reactionary politics. And there's a bit of pride to it (as in the UK and US) of belligerent "saying it how you see it" attitude as a virtue plus the bogun/redneck streak.

And the big factor in UK/Australian similarities is, obviously, Murdoch - I don't know if Lynton Crosby is close to him but I imagine they're mates (although Murdoch's papers stuck with Labour in 2005).

[Sheilbh]

Example #435 of why no-one lost money betting on the authoritarian streak of "freedom-loving Brits"


Not fully up there with the unhinged support for a permanent curfew but, not a million miles away.