Britain, Independence, Politics, Scotland

UKIP England, but we’re wide awake.

‘We could build a Scotland where woman are not “worth less” and where we blame environmental destruction on those destroying the climate, not on men kissing each other.  We could speak directly to those across the whole of Britain who’re taken in by UKIP – and to those across Europe who’re battling the far-right – and stand as a beacon of what a better, fairer country actually looks like.  What Nigel and the Nos fear most isn’t Scotland failing, it’s Scotland succeeding.  That’s why they are scared.

https://i1.wp.com/38.media.tumblr.com/3047ea68a51abd0897f26d575ab885ff/tumblr_n638buniUv1tzmfx3o1_1280.jpg

The indifferent faces of the United Kingdom.

It’s very simple – and scary. The simplistic scaremongering relied upon by No is the same simplistic scaremongering that allows UKIP to gain any votes at all while Labour and Conservatives pander to racism in response. The kind of articulate, intelligent and constructive debate that Yessers have fostered is the absolute antithesis of what UKIP thrives on; fear. It’s hard to be angry and afraid when you have confidence and knowledge and it’s easy to vote for UKIP when you’re angry and afraid.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BcH1mQSIAAAEpIm.jpg

If tea and racism were mutually exclusive UKIP wouldn’t exist.

The transparency and sharing of information that Yes has flourished by also means that other UK politicians have to work a bit harder and actually talk about tackling complicated issues rather than just out-blame-others with UKIP. The reason we’re seeing such a panicked, poorly coordinated flurry from Shiter Thegether at this late stage is that for all this time they’ve taken their default lead for granted and misunderestimated not only the Scottish population’s education, but it’s access to information. Scotland may be angry, but we are not afraid. That’s why we’re voting yes for independence.

Independence and inclusion.

“It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom – for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.” Interesting that the staunchest defenders of the anti-freedom campaign are Westminster politicians…

Standard
Britain, Independence, Politics, Scotland

Spot the Difference; Leader Beans

'The Leader only appears briefly, riding through the fields in a Rolls-Royce.' - Description from a Simpsons fan page actually fits Scotland perfectly.

‘The Leader only appears briefly, riding through the fields in a Rolls-Royce.’ – Description from a Simpsons fan page actually fits the UK perfectly.

Nothing says ‘Better Together’ like their constant conflation of Yesnp/Salmond. Their frequent preference for character assassination over debate reveals their discomfort outside of the usual party politics and betrays their lack of serious arguments against Scottish independence (scaring pensioners doesn’t count as a serious argument). Indeed it’s infuriating that so many of the public meetings/debates organised by local independence groups lack an opposing view. Our nation’s biggest decision in three centuries, which will affect centuries to come, and all they can talk about is one man who won’t be around for much longer? Get a grip. Yet there are occasions when it can be enlightening to look at our national leaders and compare how they approach the referendum…

Alex Salmond spoke in Elgin high street about the revolution of democratic participation amongst ordinary people as a result of the independence referendum (all the new voters desperate for independence, coincidentally).

David Cameron spoke to an ‘invited audience at Scottish Widows’ (you know, the insurers and investors) about ‘the UK family’ and limited top-down reform (possibly).

Meanwhile, back at Westminster, Hague says that offers of more powers for Scotland are “akin to a statement in a general election campaign” and not UK government policy. So there you have it! Even by neglecting the very serious conversation that is going on across our country and focusing on the Scottish/UK figureheads you cannot help noticing the difference between the concerns of a Scottish government and a UK government.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10670104_703156536405700_8456600566318149646_n.jpg?oh=bbce668444c90a48a314a4c5a33749a9&oe=54891C40&__gda__=1418563832_83cfc95f41e8d94ba25508b0d90f32be

Well, since you’re here, Call Me Dave, would you like to tackle any of the issues that are driving Scots towards independence? ‘Nah, I’ll just tell them how great things are and have always been again.’ Seemingly that’s all Westminster politicians have to offer us. History and family ties, but no vision for the future. As a friend of mine put it:

Saying our ties with people in the rest of the UK will change/stop post Yes doesn’t make you pro solidarity Ed, it makes you an ethnic nationalist. My family are English, and the ties and love that bind us together aren’t dependent on an out of touch institution, or the location of decision making. How stupid do they think we are?

This stupid.

Standard
Independence, Politics, Scotland

Spanish (love) Bombs

‘I see what you did there.’

A teacher friend of mine in Spain shared this from one of their Spanish friends who is voting no. He added that his other Spanish friends believe this chap’s opposition to Scottish independence comes from his opinion of Catalonian independence rather than being ‘critically informed’, which is no surprise. Yet while decrying accusations of scaremongering he then proceeds to, er, scaremonger. As suggested at the end of my response his comments betray a sly identification of Scotland as a region rather than a nation.

Rafael says:

My timeline is full of Yes supporters, and I inform myself critically about what a Yes vote could bring to Scotland. I even almost changed my mind, but I’m still voting NO, I only ask every one else to read critically, not only those bits that fit what you already think accussing the rest of scaremongering. If you are interested to know, here are my reasons for voting NO:

– Yes, I would like to be living on a fairer country, and Yes I trust the people of Scotland, but I also trust the people of England, and the people of Wales, and the people of Northern Ireland. What I don’t trust are politicians, neither south or north of the border. Every one of you that believes Indepence will bring a political paradise to Scotland, a system where people have actual voice and can participate directly in the decision making process, you are dreaming of the impossible.

– We (actually the Scottish Goverment, but I’ll keep saying “we” for simplicity) already have many powers, and we are already getting more in 2016. They are not promised, they are signed, put in law. We already own the NHS, we already decided for our education, and in 2016 we’ll have the power to raise money through taxes. Do you still want more? Do you still want to take a risk that will bring so little to Scotland?

– Solidarity. Wanting a better society, but only for myself, is SELFISH. I want Scotland to be better off, but I also want UK to be better off, and Spain, and every single person in the world. I know however that my dream is also just that, a dream, but I’m not stupid enough to sell my dream for the chance of having more money than the people south of the border.

– The fact that the Tories are governing now in London doesn’t mean we haven’t chosen them. You cannot expect the party you vote to win every single time. Even when it’s a different party the one that sits in Westminster, you have still been part of the process to choose it. The process may not seem fair, but then let’s try to make it fairer. It won’t happen in an independent Scotland, and it definitelly won’t happen on a rUK.

– The loss of jobs, probably not my own one, probably not most of the jobs, but have you think of every company that makes most of their business south of the border? Put yourself for a minute on the helm of that company, if your company makes 90% of their business south of the border, won’t you move your offices and facilities down there?

– EU. We are not getting into the EU as quick as you may think. The article by which Salmond is proposing to enter the EU is actually used to modify the accords, and needs the vote of every single member of the EU. That means Scontland wants to propose, from outside, to change the way the EU works so it can have quick access to it, but Spain will vote agaisnt it because it will then facilitate Catalonia’s independence. I know the Tories are proposing a referendum re EU in a few years, but that means for UK to leave EU the Tories have to win the election in 2016 and then there has to be an OUT vote. And well, if that’s what happens, I’ll have to accept it, that’s what a democracy is about. Regardless of what the vote is, I know I’ll respect the outcome and work to make the best of it. I honestly hope most of you do the same.

Some of those supporting the Union of 1707 seem confused about Scotland’s status. Hint: not a region.

My reply:

Rafael, I was interested to know why you are voting no, so thanks for sharing. However your only serious argument against Scottish independence seems to be the possibility of losing EU membership (a flimsy argument at that) and I find it puzzling that you actually haven’t changed your mind based on what you say. Also, your first and third reasons were just insulting.

– Few people believe that “independence will bring a political paradise”. To make this assertion that “every one” of us is a blind dreamer is just as ignorant and offensive as saying “every one who is against independence is scaremongering”. Sweeping statements have always been the enemy in this debate. Here’s a new article that actually deals with the problem that your flippant remark highlights.

– There’s no simplicity in this matter. The Scottish government does not ‘own’ the NHS; it has control of decision-making, but no control of funding. Try giving control of your bank account to your neighbour. Tell them to decide how much to give you back each week; you’ll still have full control of how that money is spent after all! But are you willing to RISK them giving you less than you put into the account? Didn’t think so… If you think that control of ALL revenue (not just a wee bit) as well as spending, along with diplomacy, military, economy, infrastructure, etc, etc are only “so little” then I don’t think you grasp what independence means yet. ‘Invading Iraq? No big deal. Nuclear weapons by our biggest city? No big deal. Disabled people targeted by benefit sanctions and unfair taxes? No big deal.’

– “Solidarity. Wanting a better society, but only for myself, is SELFISH. I want Scotland to be better off, but I also want UK to be better off, and Spain, and every single person in the world.” You’re seriously saying that anyone who desires independence for their country is selfish? That people in Scotland don’t care about others? Get a grip. If the best you can argue against Scotland being independent is that ‘people in England can’t be trusted to govern themselves better without Scotland’ then what bloody hope is there? You know what offers NO hope of change for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales? Maintaining the Union of 1707, because why would anyone in the Labour or Conservative parties want to change something that’s working very well for them after all these years. You should realise that this isn’t just about the Tories, it’s about Labour’s abandonment of its principles over the past 25 years too; that’s why SO many Labour voters are supporting independence, despite what their London and ‘Scottish’ leadership say. No one is saying ‘only we should have a more fair and equal society’ – we’re saying ‘the best hope for everyone in Britain to have a more fair and equal society is to end this outdated political arrangement’.

– Jobs? Why does governing our own country threaten jobs? I’m putting myself at the helm of a company that does 90% of its business south of the border; and I’m thinking if it were to my company’s advantage then why have I not moved my office and facilities down there ALREADY? Some businesses may leave, but guess what? Others will replace them, because Scotland is a rich nation and there are plenty of profits to be made! Not to mention that the biggest threat to jobs in recent decades HAS been the UK government (see decline of industry/cuts to public spending). You’re missing the point that part of the problem with the UK is that everything is tilted towards London. So much of Britain’s big business is centred there already and we want to change that, while also dealing with the horrific tax evasion, corruption and international money laundering that Westminster’s lax laws encourage. Every year I see more of my friends leaving Scotland not because they want to, but because if they want to find a good job then they HAVE to move to London (where they will never even be able to afford their own house). Scottish independence doesn’t threaten jobs, it offers job opportunities.

– Frankly I don’t give a toss if Scotland has to be an EU-outsider like those very poor and backward countries, er, Norway and Switzerland. My nation’s independence will always be worth more than membership of the EU. On the other hand, EU membership is important for many economically, which is why so many farmers and fishermen are supporting independence, because it offers them the least risk of leaving the EU (these are usually very conservative individuals who you could normally expect to vote no). The fact that vocal resentment of the EU continues to grow and that the Conservatives present a real threat of Scotland being forced out of it (regardless of whether EVERY person in Scotland voted to stay in the EU) makes remaining in the UK even more obviously ridiculous. And are you seriously saying that the EU would risk forcing Scotland and the rest of the UK out when so many EU citizens live, work and study in Britain? The sovereign will of the Scottish nation may or may not set a precedent for the region of Catalonia, but I can see no advantage to Spain in trying to deny Scotland’s democratic choice and somehow strip Scots of their EU citizenship. As I said this seems to be your one serious reason to oppose independence and I think it’s incredibly weak.

Now I have a couple of questions for you. Firstly, do you believe that Scotland is a country or a region? Secondly, if the risks of independence are so great, all politicians are just as bad anywhere, all ‘the people’ of any country are equally trustworthy and independence is selfish then tell me, will you campaign for Spain to surrender it’s sovereignty to the UK, France or Italy? If not, why not?

Standard
Britain, Independence, Politics, Scotland

Dr. Strangelove’s Blitz Spirit

*nuclear disarmament not included

I’m sure everyone remembers Cameron’s referendum rallying cry at the start of the year. You know, when he called on the rest of the UK to shower Scotland with resentment affection? The so called ‘love bomb’ tactic, which was probably an improvement on the self-titled ‘Project Fear’; if only we were seeing any evidence of it. If you haven’t read or heard that speech I highly recommend giving it a look or listen. It’s hard not to notice that his positive case for the union mostly rests on past ‘achievements’. Between 1707-1956 to be precise, the 250 year period during which we wrote ‘this great, world-beating story‘. Douglas Robertson summed up Cameron’s appeal to old, imperial unity thusly:

Labour and Conservatives being equally enthralled by power, share the trappings, the cloak of Britishness, as has become so evident throughout this referendum campaign. Britain as a political entity can only be brought into focus through this Nuclear Empire lens. Thus, as hard as it might have once been to envisage, there is no irony in arms dealers, city suits, dodgy oilmen and retired spooks funding the No campaign, happily leaving Labour to front it. Empires are powerful places, run by powerful people: we are powerful people, we run things, so we buy into Empire.

'Two horrible books in one' - and it's a neverending story.

Does this story ever end?

Unionists regularly broadcast their expectation that supporters of independence will hijack any and every momentous and historical event to promote their cause, be it the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn or the Glasgow Commonwealth Games. They must have felt some surprise (or disappointment) then at the fairly low key, apolitical celebration of Bannockburn and the cautious neutrality of the official Yes team and Scottish Government at the Games. Not so their own side! Hypocritically, unionist elements at the very highest echelons (the UK government and MoD) abused their powers in a concerted effort to interfere with both events. Not only was the blatant disregard for even a pretence of impartiality insulting, but the militaristic nature of the intervention on Bannockburn’s anniversary demonstrated exactly where the establishment’s priorities lie.

At least it demonstrates where they’d like us to believe their priorities lie. Years of inadequate funding, privatisation of logistics and procurement, plus thousands of redundancies reveal that Westminster (especially with millionaire Conservatives at the helm) actually regards soldiers with just as much contempt as they do us civilians. Yet memories of ‘glorious’ conquest and continuing delusions of grandeur make the UK government predisposed to showing off military might where possible. This is crystallised in the unanimous backing of Trident however expensive and useless it might be and whether or not the people of Scotland’s most populace dear green place actually want to have weapons of mass destruction beside their homes (they do not).

Ironically of course we could afford to maintain a sensible number of military personnel and properly equip them by scrapping Trident, but the ingrained desire for apocalyptic machismo at the heart of the UK government makes that as unlikely as ever actually dropping the bomb. Speaking of dropping the bomb, whatever happened to that love bomb we were promised? I’m hoping that the infamous Let’s Fail Together video and letter weren’t the sum of it. What about the ordinary people of England, weren’t they going to ‘get on the phone, get together, email, tweet, speak’ to tell Scotland how much they’d miss us, etc? Well after reading today’s Herald, Times, Telegraph or Scotsman you might lose any lingering optimism about that:

Love bombs; no one said they were less threatening than the other kind.

The message from a worrying number of the media, politicians and ordinary folk of England (as badly informed about this referendum as most of them must be) is that Scotland isn’t going to get away scot free; ‘the English want the Government to take a “hard line” with Scotland whatever the independence referendum result’. In other words, ‘vote yes and we will refuse to negotiate on a currency union; we will build a barrier between us; we will prevent you from entering NATO, the EU or the UN; we will shit all over ourselves just to teach you a lesson’. Alternatively, ‘vote no and we will abolish the Barnett formula; we will cut your funding; we will leave your parliament weaker than it already is; we will shit all over you for even daring to consider an alternative future’. What is important to note here is what is within and what is without the UK government’s power.

After an anti-independence vote it is within the UK government’s power to punish us with impunity, because by voting no we throw away the one bargaining chip we had and surrender supreme sovereignty to the English majority at Westminster; they may deal with us as they wish and the world will turn it’s back on any complaint once our moment of democracy has passed. After an independence vote it is without the UK government’s power to prevent us from using our own currency or remaining in organisations that we have been members of for decades. I’ll concede that they may create a militarised border if that is their will – the UK government has form after all – but as noted that would be a self-destructive policy. So much for Cameron’s worry that the rest of the UK might ‘just wave [us] a wistful goodbye and carry on as normal’!

Considering these points surely the choice is obvious? There’s still a month to go in which further love bombing may occur, though judging by previous efforts it’s bound to be as unpleasant as the thinly veiled (and the explicitly stated) threats. The best I can hope for is that the unionists’ incendiary rhetoric instils us with the Blitz spirit that David Cameron criticised Gordon Brown for invoking in 2008: “The PM tells us to find our Blitz spirit when he is the one dropping the bombs – the tax and debt bombshells that are taking Britain to the brink of bankruptcy.” Fancy that! Perhaps he will not object so strongly if I make a similar invocation now, because I have certainly been noticing more and more signs of Blitz-like catastrophe around my country in recent years.

Food rationing? Check.

Short life expectancy? Check.

Apparent bomb damage? Check.

All in it together? Er

I mean what’s not to love? Are we not ‘a source of hope to the world’ as Mr Cameron put it? Love bombs away!

Can you feel it yet?

Standard
Independence, Politics, Scotland, Socialism

The Socialist Paradox?

Tonight I ventured onto the Vote No Borders Facebook page (not to be confused with the excellent No Borders, which actually does what it says on the tin). It was about as dire as I expected with ‘We hate Salmond!’, ‘How can we pay for things when the oil runs out!’ and ‘We’d be defenceless if England invaded!’ drowning out any reasonable discussion. You just have to feel sorry for the view some people have of their own country and how easily they become blind to the other, very real problems that are convincing so many people to vote yes to independence for some hope of solving them. Anyway, one comment that wasn’t just ignorant or hateful moved me enough to reply and I felt it worth sharing. After all, I don’t expect to get a very positive response from most fans of Vote No Borders, although I’m hopeful for the one person I addressed it to who wrote:

‘The whole labour and trade union movement has an age old slogan “Unity is Strength”. I’m no interested in the Status Quo or the Union Jack, I campaign for a Britain and Scotland where there is “a fundamental and irreversible shift in the balance of power and wealth in favour of working people”, to borrow a phrase. Only the United British working class has the power to wrestle the stranglehold of Capital and big business in order to achieve that. So it “Naw” from me, but that’s only the beginning of a fight back against crisis-riddled Capitalism and an economy run for the rich few.’

[Covert socialist], if you want to shift the balance of power and wealth in favour of working people then clearly you do care about the status quo. I think anyone who believes in the principles of the labour and trade union movement can clearly see that the status quo is punishing the working class for the sake of the well off. After all, the parallels between Victorian Britain and Britain now are striking! Rock bottom wages, exploitative contracts, debt, food banks, distinctions between ‘deserving’ and ‘underserving’ poor; these are exactly the kinds of cruel and oppressive circumstances that the labour and trade union movement developed to stop!

When I first approached the question of independence my sentiment was similar to yours; I saw separation as a step backwards, because surely we are better united? But assessing the evidence during the past couple of years my verdict is that the political set up of the United Kingdom is completely at odds with democratic and socialist principles (the House of Lords tells us all we need to know about that). Clearly you recognise that the UK is not OK, but where do you foresee that ‘fight back’ coming from? From New Labour? After everything that party has done (illegal war, PFI, academy schools, censorship of NHS staff to name a few) and while Labour’s main concern is winning right wing votes from Conservatives and UKIP? Remember, even when Labour were in power a march of one million people was not enough to change the UK government’s actions.

I understand why your instinct is to vote no to independence; it was my instinct too, and it certainly doesn’t have anything to do with waving a Union Jack or shouting about the Queen. Yet I implore you to explore these websites to get an idea of the socialist arguments for independence:

Radical Independence
Common Weal
Labour for Indy

Yes, we can enact change for working people in Britain, but it’s not going to happen if we vote for the same parties of the same people to make the same decisions about our fates. Please consider the possibilities.

https://i0.wp.com/www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/sites/default/files/Socialism_Throttling_the_Country.jpg

Not exactly what we’re talking about, but close enough.

Standard
Britain, Independence, Politics, Scotland

Spot the Difference

Time for a quick round of spot the difference!

Firstly, here is an article dealing with the ‘problem of problem families’; why they exist, not as a problem, but as a scapegoat. Politicians like to talk about ‘the hard working taxpayer’ versus ‘problem families’ (who may also be ‘benefit cheats’ for good measure), yet who are they? Is there really such a unified voice of ‘the taxpayer’ that politicians of all stripes claim to speak for? Where is the voice of these ‘problem families’ to answer the accusations against them? In fact there is no unified voice for either (certainly not the misleading Taxpayers Alliance).

What for hard working people? More tax? More illness? More poverty? More prison?

The real problem is that problematic families are hard working taxpayers – and vice versa! It’s just easier for a politician to gain your support if they present themselves as on your side against a common enemy. Yet who is in favour of benefit fraud and against paying taxes? Are you?! I expect only genuine benefit cheats would say yes to these questions and the reality is that far fewer of those exist than Mr Cameron would like us to believe.

They must be far outnumbered by the wealthy individuals as well as corporations that regularly avoid enormous amounts of tax perfectly legally, because a) loopholes exist and b) they have the money to exploit them. Of course many of these happen to be Mr Cameron’s friends, supporters and donors, so why would he want to upset them? His bum chum Osborne’s family even uses a convoluted system of shell companies to minimise tax for their posh wallpaper firm and the chancellor is never less than hypocritical is in his tax crackdowns.

“Underlying all this is the insistence that poor people are poor because they are worse at life.” Too right – and to the delight of Mr Cameron & chums the poor have no voice with which to respond.

'I understand all of your everyday problems. Really.'

‘I understand your everyday problems. Really.’

Secondly, an article in which Mr Cameron boasts about his egalitarian credentials. Bearing in mind this is the same man who for years demonised ‘dysfunctional families’ for ‘breaking’ Britain and made a big deal about the importance of traditional marriage; here he is bragging having dealt a blow to the very pressing inequality of, er, mother’s names not being on marriage registers. Oh.

Rather than addressing “another inequality in marriage”, perhaps Mr Cameron could address the many inequalities across ‘broken Britain’ – or can we recall who actually broke it? Hint: it wasn’t low income families struggling to make ends meet. At the very least Mr Cameron could pop up to Maryhill and explain to the starving ‘problem families’ exactly where on his list of equality priorities they currently feature. After all, they can appreciate better than most the reality of this Victorian inequality he is fighting!

Every person who has had to visit a foodbank since 2010 gets a turn.

Everybody who has been forced to visit a foodbank gets a go.

Once again Mr Cameron your absolute contempt for the ordinary, hard working, tax paying, welfare claiming families with serious problems who make up most of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is entirely apparent and abhorrent. In one month when Scotland votes for independence it will not be out of oil fuelled greed, love of Alex Salmond or misplaced national pride as you will no doubt cynically suggest.

It will be because we are sick to death of self-serving and entitled pricks like you exploiting the most vulnerable in society for the benefit of yourself and your already ridiculously rich cronies. We believe that the people of at least part of the United Kingdom deserve a chance to create something better and we intend to deliver, however hard your alliance of non-taxpayers and expense cheats try to dissuade us.

Prick.

Standard
Independence, Politics, Scotland

Discovering positivity; my conversion to independence.

When I first considered Scottish independence my intuition was against it. I was going to say ‘No’.

Before May of this year though I had avoided becoming involved. I had only glanced at odd articles and attended a few debates at my university, because I intended to concentrate on completing my degree. The year long class that finished my studies did provide me with a new understanding of the United Kingdom’s formation, which I will go into more detail about in a separate entry. Yet I wished to remain undecided while analysing the facts and assessing the arguments. A naïve hope as it happened!

My occasional reading about the referendum did not sway me much one way or the other, because I was not able to pick up the narrative of it in mere glimpses. The debates I attended, on the other hand, were very instructive and enormously disappointing – but for a good reason! Despite a diverse range of people on both sides, the pro-independence speakers’ message of optimism, confidence and change was in consistent contrast to the ‘cannae dae it’ attitude of their opponents. Each time I would turn up hoping to hear some sort of sensible, coherent and (god forbid) positive case for maintaining our union. Each time I would hear the same dismissive negativity and reliance on fearsome ‘unknowns’ that I saw as having little to do with the question: Should Scotland be an independent country?

Before I had thought that we should seek to become closer with other nations and that creating a smaller political unit must be a step backward. Was reclaiming the independence of three centuries ago not a romantic folly? Although I recognised the many problems of the UK political system and it’s dubious claim of democracy I thought that attempting radical change must bring instability. Wasn’t the progressive choice to strengthen our ties, especially on this wee island we have to share? After those debates though I really began to question the status quo and to read an increasing amount from both the aye and naw camps.

Originally I’d had an inkling to start a blog analysing and criticising the Yes and Better Together campaigns from an undecided position, which I never did have time for. Yet besides being too behind on events to do that, I quickly became disillusioned and overwhelmed by the sheer negativity of Better Together. It’s true that there are poisonous elements on both sides, particularly on social media and blogs, and particularly in the comment sections of those. However the general feeling of what I read from the official Yes campaign and the many, varied groups aligned with it impressed me.

Not only was their message continuously positive, but more importantly there was an attempt to address the actual question: Should Scotland be an independent country? Since the other side kept falling back to scaremongering this won me over a lot sooner than I expected or desired. Nonetheless I’m likely to write something about the negative aspects of both campaigns at a later date, because I think it’s important to address rather than ignore the venom, whether the snakes happen to be friendly or not.

For now I am content to say that the reason I am voting Yes is that I want to live in a nation that has solid democratic foundations; with a government that is accountable to the people who live here; and which has the welfare of those people as its primary concern. As far as I’m concerned there is nothing more to discuss.

Oh, dinnae worry, I’m gonna discuss all that too…

Standard