Tomorrows Financial Times article slams Ireland's failed state as warning to Scots

Well Ireland was pretty much a kip until the 90s. But so was the rest of the world in fairness.

pO1Neil wrote: »

"Scots should recall poverty of Irish Free State". Should also recall the poverty of the famine in the 1840's or the slums of Dublin in 1900's when it was apart of the Union.

Poor people in England weren't better off than poor people in Ireland. It wasn't about nationality.

IMO De Valera pretty much shut up shop here as far as trade was concerned, there are no backwards self serving scots around to do that in this day and age.

The article just feeds into the canard believed by some of our neighbours that the Empire was really just a benevolent society that helped the natives see the error of their ways.Hmmm....Yes....Quite.

The right of self-determination trumps any scraps and Crumbs that may have been thrown our way by London.

There can be no denying the poverty and early setbacks following independence,and equally no denying that the same poverty and emigration existed under dominion.

Just read the article. OK lets take him seriously for a bit (ie lets assume he isn't a unionist) and look at his ideas.

Hypothesis: Ireland was better economically and socially under British rule
Refute: The famine. religious segregation, Dublin had a death rate the same as Calcutta at one point. Finally look at Northern Ireland as Ireland under British rule. It's an economic black hole that's plagued by bigotry and religious discrimination.

It's a pretty misleading article, as far as the Scottish comparison goes. Modern Scotland is a wealthy, developed area that is not comparable to pre-independence Ireland.

After independence, Ireland was a poor and rural country. But this is no change from the situation under British rule. DeValeras protectionist economic policies and the Trade War also crippled Irelands economy.

But compare independent Ireland to Northern Ireland now. On independence, Northern Ireland was by far the richest part of the island. Now, it is the poorest, reliant on British support. Belfast was the most important industrial city on the island, now it trails behind Dublin and Cork. Ireland was the poorest part of the UK, now it is richer than anywhere in the UK besides the South East of Britain. Ireland is clearly a much better off country independent than it would have been under British rule.

Basically, the message for an independent Scotland should be to avoid the mistakes Ireland made just after independence, and it can reap the benefits of self determination.

osarusan wrote: »

Very start of the article describes British Rule as 'far from benign.'

My reading of the articles is that it is a warning not to be completely swept away by the romantic notion of independence unless the newly independent entity will have a plan in place for its prosperity.

Describing our history with our neighbour(s) as "far from benign" is being rather kind to them.

The gist of the article seems to me to be more of the writer pointing his finger at us and saying "you could end up like them",a common meme used by supporters of empire was that the Irish could not govern themselves.

He could easily have used the 13 Colonies as an example of exiting the empire,but that would refute his central premise that it is better to remain within the Union.

The Scots have had a long enough time to consider the pro's and the cons of independence,it is now up to themselves to vote in good conscience,his use of Ireland in the article was"far from benign" also

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Or export the majority of your school leavers rather than find a way of creating jobs for them.

That isn't true. It isn't the majority it is a portion alright. They already have shown that of that portion a majority return. We also provided education enabling these people to live and work where ever.

Another group of people chose to go into the building trade that didn't remain to sustain them. That was a personal choice people had which they did have the ability to make.

LordSutch wrote: »

I wonder what will happen to Scotland if they leave the Empire?

We'll find out if it happens. I would be wary if I was them. It looks like some motivation is to let people get control over fuel. The whole thing could be a big con.
It is a tough choice to make and not simple.