TEK wrote:

Totally disagree with that sentiment tbh Matt that it's 'armchair William Wallace's' and 'Braveheartesque' arguements which the YES campaign are putting forth.

For the vast vast majority of YES voters this is not about a desire to be seperate from a union with England or disliking English people or anything as idiotic or  pointless as that.

For me and most other people i hear of who are voting YES,on social media and in real life,voting for Independence is absolutely about Scottish people getting the Government they vote for in the majority ruling them 100% of the time.

It's also about (for me) wanting better for the country.Why can't we strive for better for this country ?We have brought so much to the civilised World yet over the decades our country has lost all self-belief,we are subservient,unconfident (hence the defiant streak in most scots) and really we all sub-consciously have a 'glass ceiling' mentality as Scots,whereby,we feel if we really want to achieve anything in life or have a top career we have to move away from our own country and move 500 miles south.

Great post, TEK, we can only hope more fellow citizens dispense of the institutionalised national inferiority complex and then employ logic and rationality to decide their vote.


 

The Shed wrote:

Mat,

2 questions

1. Are we not already the (very) junior partner in a currency union? (I get that it's not officially called that)

2. Can you tell me 1 good reason for staying as part of the UK?

The only argument I'm hearing from any no voters is "it might not work", if anyone thinks it's working just now for the betterment of the majority of the Scottish population (particularly those under 30) then they're simply deluded IMO.

1. Scotland is presently a region of the UK and is managed as such. If Scotland were to gain independence, we would be a competing nation and treated as such.

2. Don't get me wrong, I am not a 'No' voter. I can think of a hundred good reasons why it would be nice to get away from these fkn horrible zionist war mongering public schoolboy cunts who run the whole of the UK for the beneift of the overgrown parasite that is the City of London and the financial industry. But I think I already gave a reason why it might not be such a good idea. To put things simply, we would be the new kid on the block, small, vulernable, and liable to get our sweeties taken of us by 'bigger boys'. This is not an 'inferiority complex' talking, this is a rudimentary understanding of the monetary system, and of how markets and finance works talking. If this does go through, I would forsee a very harsh transitionary period that nobody will be up for nor prepared for, accompanied by a lot of finger pointing and scapegoating, but at the end of the day, it would just simply be reality biting.  In the long run, if we can avoid the economic prison of being compelled to sign up to the Eurozone (which I suspect is where this is all leading), Scottish Independence may even be a good thing, but for most people who are voting Yes, they are voting for short-term hardship in order to establish 'something better' in the long run, whether they realise it or not.
 

MatTheCat wrote:

for most people who are voting Yes, they are voting for something better in the long run.
 

Good enough for me.
 

arabugsy wrote:

MatTheCat wrote:

for most people who are voting Yes, they are voting for something better in the long run.
 

Good enough for me.
 

Whilst short term hardship would be practically assured, there would be no assurances of 'something better in the long term'. For that to happen, an independent Scotland would have to be governed by a consortium of shrewd and astute players who also happened to be largely motivated out of altruism, and working towards the greater good.....a bit like the way the Scandinavian countries seem to be able to organise and run themselves.

It will be a pretty big leap into the unknown, that is for sure.

Could never appreciate the better together's scaremongering campaign when it was based on fiction but so happy to watch Andrew Neil's documentary on "What's at stake for the UK" providing factual scaremongering.

Apparently, the worst that could happen is:-

The rest of the UK will have to concoct a new flag in place of the union flag.

Nigel Farage looks to make progress of nationalism in England but warns of nationalism elsewhere.

England may not have enough time to adopt Trident, and it may even lead to unilateral disarmament.

It seems the interchangeable England/UK could lose respect/power. 

There could be bathir in Berwick.

Negotiation could take years for settlement.

Relations between the two Sovereign nations could be soured.

Then showed clips of Braveheart.

Shit in Ireland would be resurrected.

England and Wales are being shortchanged despite Scotland's net contribution.

The tory, millionaire PM could be forced to resign and Milliband could oversee a lame duck government.

All in all, I believe my monger hasn't been scared very much and my vote is still a resounding YES.



 

Salmond v Darling Part 2 - tonight on BBC1 at 8.30pm.

salmond pissed that imo

Hopefully thats the momentum starting to shift. Need to keep it going, long way to go yet. 

The debates have still been pretty poor tho overall, audience questions were the best points

What about the post office?

I thought Salmond was great last night and Darling a mess, but I'm not exactly impartial.

Not sure it will sway undecided voters though, unfortunately.

Andy wrote:

I thought Salmond was great last night and Darling a mess, but I'm not exactly impartial.

Not sure it will sway undecided voters though, unfortunately.

 
Agreed, but if any were swayed it could only be in one direction and it wouldn't need too many relatively to make the crucial difference.

Your barber should stick to cutting hair.