I have been watching alot of the TV shows about partition in India and Pakistan and what happened. Do you think if Scotland did become independent we would see mass migration on both sides of the border with lots of deaths?
2007-08-15 03:45:53 · 12 answers · asked by Johno 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
But there is a Church of Scotland and a church of England different in a way.
2007-08-15 03:53:23 · update #1
No, I think England will get on fine and the Scots will soon regret it. But it will not happen. The overwhelming majority of Scots voted for the union in the recent Scottish elections. The SNP may be the largest party, but they are a long way short of a majority, both in terms of seats and votes. Let us have the referendum so that Scotland can reject it, and forget about it for at least another 50 years.
2007-08-15 03:52:19 · answer #1 · answered by undercover elephant 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
India and Pakistan were seperated in 1947 because they had different religions. What's more, Bratain played an important role to divide them by helping both of them to descriminate each others. Therefore, they both hated each other from the bottom of their hearts. Apart from bratain's role our(india, pakistan) history was an other important reason for partition. Even now 60 years has gone but still they hate each others and still both facing problems to progress. Which is not good for both of them.
However, scotland and England have same religion plus same culture. There are some problems between both states but it can solved by talk. But if partition does happen then its future will be more and less same as Pakistan and India.
2007-08-15 18:45:39 · answer #2 · answered by M.A.W. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hope that won't be the case. The case of Pakistan-India was religious hatred and differences.
Pakistan was actually created on the basis of the two-nation theory which stated that Hindus and Muslims are two different civilizations, they follow different cultures, have completely different religion and practice different rituals.
This theory was formally coined by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (initially a firm believer of Hindu-Muslim Unity) and did not gain immediate popularity. It was not until the late 1930's that the Muslims began to realize that their rights were being denied. The British rulers favored Hindus and ignored Muslims and their rights. Future events made them worry of their fate in a post-British India. The Pakisan Resolution was passed on 23rd March 1940 that laid the foundation for a formal struggle for independence.
After several failed talks, immense bloodshed and growing lack of trust the only solution appeared creation of two separate states on the basis of religious lines. The Muslim Majority areas were to be declared as Pakistan while the remaining would be India.
The partition remained unjust by far as many critical and contiguous to Pakistan areas were given away to India. The division of Bengal was also seen as unfair. Four autonomous states' accession was disputed and the UNSC was reached for a decision but India forcefully captured three of them with one (Kashmir) still being a hot unresolved issue.
BOTTOMLINE: Unfair treatment to the Muslims by the then British rulers and growing concerns about the fate of Muslims at the hands of Hindus after the transfer of power were major reasons for the partition. The British heavily favored Hindus and a United India meant only the suppression of Muslim rights.
2007-08-15 12:21:45 · answer #3 · answered by Shariq M 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I live in Scotland and hope this never happens. We all hear about the Hatred of the Scots for the English, This is a media hype and acted upon by half wits from both sides of the border. I have met loads of decent ordinary English people and find them courteous and friendly. English people have probably had the same experience with Scots. As usual English and Scots people meet and are friendly towards each other is never reported as it don't sell papers or make interesting TV
Your update about the Churches. I think you will find that the Queen is patron of both of them.
2007-08-15 10:53:51 · answer #4 · answered by john m 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
India and Pakistan was about religion. Scots who want independence do so because of national identity. Since there are more Scots in England than there are in Scotland, what happens next could be interesting.
2007-08-15 10:51:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It would appear to me that England and Scotland "are actually becoming" Pakistan and India through mass migration.
2007-08-15 19:00:24 · answer #6 · answered by Fax21 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What is the point of Scotland becoming independent of England, if it then loses its identity within a Federal Europe. Am I missing something?
2007-08-15 15:27:07 · answer #7 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ha no! Great Britain is built upon a strong anglo-scottish relationship and most English people feel losing Scotland is a negative.
2007-08-15 11:09:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course not. The English and Scottish merely dislike each other - and only then when it doesn't really matter, if there was a war which threatened the nation I'm sure both would work together - they wouldn't KILL each other if they were partitioned!
2007-08-15 11:26:27 · answer #9 · answered by Mordent 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, because we aren't a thrid world region & plus our faiths are both predominantly christian. If there is any hassle it will not be from North of the border.
2007-08-15 11:54:26 · answer #10 · answered by Jock 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋