Independent Scotland

[mahler10th]

On 18th September 2014, that is to say 315 days, the Nation of Scotland goes to the polls to vote for independence...or not.
At the moment, I will be voting YES for Scotland to go it alone, but like a dried thistle in the breeze, I am a volatile voter and can often change my mind.  Anyway, my current vote is based on extremely notable improvements we've experienced in Scotland since getting our own devolved Parliament in 1999.  Public Services and living standards and social expectations are so far improved on what we had before 1999.  Far improved.  Things like pensioners traveling free on buses, and receiving free care.  No University fees...
To know more:  http://www.scotreferendum.com/2013/09/strength-in-the-scottish-economy/  (Saves me writing a more long winded argument myself  ).
So it is not through any malicious desire to break up the United Kingdom, more an utter contentment with what's been done since 1999 in devolution, the fact that it such changes have been palpable, and a belief that a greater number of other improvements in Scotland can only follow through an independent Scottish legislature.  But at the moment, my YES vote is in the minority.      I will not hold it hard against us if we decide to stay in the UK, but it might be a denial of our own potential.
You can vote for me at...

It will be jolly interesting to see what my GMG chums make of the carry on.
I am as flexible as a 1979 shatterproof ruler, so as Scotland gets closer and closer to next September, I'll keep coming back here to report why I have or have not changed my mind at any given time(s) on seemingly random multiple occasions over the next 315 days.  Or whatever....

[Brahmsian]

Hi John, I would wish for a free and independent Scotland nation!  You have my vote (even though I can't technically vote). 

[Gurn Blanston]

Wow, John, a highly interesting and (quietly kept) development. This will bear some considerable thought. Even though my own opinion isn't worth a flyspeck on the issue, I can't even just say 'you should do this...', so I can imagine your own bit of wavering. Now that I know about the referendum I will follow with great interest.

[Todd]

I can understand the urge to split with England.  It will be interesting to see if it happens.

[kishnevi]

Given how often Scotland seems to have gotten the short end of the stick, I'd be surprised if at least a large minority did not vote for independence.  I'm curious exactly what form of government the pro independence movement foresees:  a republic with a president as head of state, in the manner of Ireland,  or some form of monarchy? And if the latter, do they envisage some sort of personal union of the crowns, such as was formally the case from the accession of King James VI/I to the throne of England until the Union in 1707, and calling up some member of the House of Windsor--or the current holder of the Stuart claim to the throne, whomever that might be?  This kind of thing never makes into the news here on this side of the Pond, and being a Jacobite at heart, it interests me.

[DaveF]

John,

This one is a case of heart versus head for me: as a first-generation Anglo-Scot, living in Wales, lover of Scottish literature and all things nationalistic, heart says: Yes, go for it, right the injustices of three centuries etc. etc.  Then head sticks its oar in (or perhaps it's just a different corner of the heart - you decide) and says: Er, if they leave and take their 41 Labour MPs with them, what does that leave us down   here? - a blue future stretching to the distant horizon.  (Surely the Cameron government has thought about that one - perhaps they'll be giving some behind-the-scenes support to the Yes campaign.)

Anyway, sober thought predicts that in the end the No campaign will carry it - I can see there being too much fear of such an unprecedented step (when was the last time a new technologically-advanced Western nation came into being?), too much disquiet over the problems of EU membership and currency.  I imagine the end result will be more powers for Holyrood - and if some of those could trickle down to Cardiff Bay and save us from the worst excesses of Westminster, then that would be very welcome.

DF

[Rinaldo]

If the independence goes through, I hope Scots John gets to choose the national anthem!

[Florestan]

Let's take a look at the larger picture. If YES wins, the biggest loser will be Spain, because Catalonia and The Basque Country will follow immediately in Scotland's steps. Separatism will get a big boost in France, too (Corsica, and possibly Bretagne). Belgium is already on the brink of disintegration. Transylvanian  Hungarians will no doubt seize the opportunity to push for separation from Romania, which actually they are already doing right now. A whole can of worms will be open, that will create a mess all across Europe. Therefore I don't think YES has any chance of carrying the day: there is too much at stake internationally. 

[milk]

John,

This one is a case of heart versus head for me: as a first-generation Anglo-Scot, living in Wales, lover of Scottish literature and all things nationalistic, heart says: Yes, go for it, right the injustices of three centuries etc. etc.  Then head sticks its oar in (or perhaps it's just a different corner of the heart - you decide) and says: Er, if they leave and take their 41 Labour MPs with them, what does that leave us down   here? - a blue future stretching to the distant horizon.  (Surely the Cameron government has thought about that one - perhaps they'll be giving some behind-the-scenes support to the Yes campaign.)

Anyway, sober thought predicts that in the end the No campaign will carry it - I can see there being too much fear of such an unprecedented step (when was the last time a new technologically-advanced Western nation came into being?), too much disquiet over the problems of EU membership and currency.  I imagine the end result will be more powers for Holyrood - and if some of those could trickle down to Cardiff Bay and save us from the worst excesses of Westminster, then that would be very welcome.

DF

Why do you love all things nationalistic? Seems to me that nationalism is one of the most destructive forces to come out of modernity. It's a tossup to me whether radical religiosity or nationalism will be the force that ends up destroying humanity (if humanity is destroyed by itself). This is why the 2012 peace prize winner was truly the most deserving, IMO. I tend to reflexively root against nationalism in this case and all cases. 

[The Six]

Let's take a look at the larger picture. If YES wins, the biggest loser will be Spain, because Catalonia and The Basque Country will follow immediately in Scotland's steps. Separatism will get a big boost in France, too (Corsica, and possibly Bretagne). Belgium is already on the brink of disintegration. Transylvanian  Hungarians will no doubt seize the opportunity to push for separation from Romania, which actually they are already doing right now. A whole can of worms will be open, that will create a mess all across Europe. Therefore I don't think YES has any chance of carrying the day: there is too much at stake internationally. 

Andhopefully Texas follows suit and secedes from the union.

[Todd]

A whole can of worms will be open, that will create a mess all across Europe.

That's a strong argument for an independent Scotland. 

[mahler10th]

Let's take a look at the larger picture. If YES wins, the biggest loser will be Spain, because Catalonia and The Basque Country will follow immediately in Scotland's steps. Separatism will get a big boost in France, too (Corsica, and possibly Bretagne). Belgium is already on the brink of disintegration. Transylvanian  Hungarians will no doubt seize the opportunity to push for separation from Romania, which actually they are already doing right now. A whole can of worms will be open, that will create a mess all across Europe. Therefore I don't think YES has any chance of carrying the day: there is too much at stake internationally. 

Why do you love all things nationalistic? Seems to me that nationalism is one of the most destructive forces to come out of modernity. It's a tossup to me whether radical religiosity or nationalism will be the force that ends up destroying humanity (if humanity is destroyed by itself). This is why the 2012 peace prize winner was truly the most deserving, IMO. I tend to reflexively root against nationalism in this case and all cases.

It is not for 'Nationalism' or 'Seperatism' I will vote - my vote is purely political, based on how much better Scotland and its society has become since we got the devolved Holyrood parliament.  It is unfortunate that 'seperatism' is a by product of this.  'Nationalism' I agree is a most disruptive ideology.  I do not like the consequences of such a stance.  It was that kind of thinking that took Hitler and the World into a catastrophic World war.  Unfortunately though, this is an issue which affects Scotland as a 'Nation', and weighing the evidence I believe we would be much better off on our own.  If things don't go that way though, and we remain in the UK as is more likely at this time of writing, it is highly unlikely I'll keep harping on about it - instead embrace the current status of being a fully fledged Great Briton resident of the United Kingdom.  There is nothing to lose either way, but a wee bit more to gain one way, so no flag burning or anti-England rhetoric or table pounding Nationalist Seperatism is in me at all.
There are two roads, both lead to the betterment of Scotland, it's just that one of the roads has flowers by the wayside and the other just has a sign saying "Keep going, no turning back."  Niether road is a bad road, just one is more preferable to me.

[Florestan]

That's a strong argument for an independent Scotland.

I fail to see your logic.

[Sef]

First of all I can't vote, secondly I have dual nationality (British and USA), thirdly I was born in Wales, fourthly brought up in England, but finally have lived in the USA for 15 years. So my credentials are on the table.

Despite being born in Wales I identify myself as being English. Let me explain what I mean by "identify". English to me is a state of mind. Everyone has stereotypes for various groups of people ,and although those can be destructive they are based on some amount of truth. I identify with much of the positive English stereotypical behaviour. So I am English. No better or worse than any other designation I suppose. Scottish, Welsh, Texan, Jewish, Cornish, Catalonian, whatever.
So what is the point of Independence then - it has to be purely political, because no one says you have to feel "British" - you can feel whatever you want in "Britain".

I agree with Milk when he wrote about Nationalism being destructive. If anyone is voting for Independence for Nationalistic reasons (because I'm Scottish, not British, and we own the land, and the English stole it blah blah blah) then there lies the route to trouble. The strength (and beauty) of the UK is that we are one nation, together, at peace, with similar (if not exact) beliefs and outlook on life. We can support Scotland or England in a football match, we can field a joint team for the Olympics, or the British Lions Rugby team, we are like brothers and sisters in the same family. If more of the world could behave like that then we would all be better off. There should be fewer countries not more! Countries divide, not unite.

So just looking at it politically, you need to answer the question whether just because your perception that things have been better under devolution means that it will continue to be better under Independence? No one is talking about taking the devolved power away. Just thinking about such thorny issues as defence, EU membership, and currency - I can't understand why anyone wants to deal with that. To me it would be a no brainer - but then again I'm English....

[Cato]

Somebody had to post this!   

[Sef]

Somebody had to post this!   

He should be hung, drawn and quartered the traitor!

[Sammy]

There should be fewer countries not more! Countries divide, not unite.

You might have something there.  How about dissolving the U.K. and making it part of the U.S. - good times ahead.

[Brahmsian]

You might have something there.  How about dissolving the U.K. and making it part of the U.S. - good times ahead.

Make Canada and Mexico the 51st and 52nd state. 

[Sammy]

Make Canada and Mexico the 51st and 52nd state. 

One thing for sure.  Proposing that the U.S. add Canada, Mexico and the U.K. would keep the Tea Party agitated.

[Todd]

How about dissolving the U.K. and making it part of the U.S. - good times ahead.

Then New York and London would both be part of one country - and subject to one, very highly effective set of securities laws.  Sweeeeet.

Make Canada and Mexico the 51st and 52nd state.

Both have lots of oil.  We could fulfill the dreams of William Seward and George Dallas at last.