The Big Scottish Independence Debate

[IBM]

I had a good day through at the European Pipe Band Championships at Forres yesterday where I observed the No Thanks brigade on High Street with free balloons and leaflets.  The only thing they seem to be getting rid of were the balloons to very small children who were bursting them along the street! 

[Oddquine]

I had a good day through at the European Pipe Band Championships at Forres yesterday where I observed the No Thanks brigade on High Street with free balloons and leaflets.  The only thing they seem to be getting rid of were the balloons to very small children who were bursting them along the street! 

 

 

Bugger......had intended to be helping to man  the YES set up in Forres at the Victoria Filling Station on the way into Forres from Elgin-side, but it was bucketing rain and freezing where I was at 8am and nobody ever got back to me to say weather had cleared later in the day.  Not overly keen, I have to admit, with my health problems, to be exacerbating them for one-offs when I have to cover regular shifts in the Elgin Yes Shop, but I would have if I had to do  that.

 

That's the second year I've missed it...first one was because  I was in Caithness and this time was the weather, because nobody told me it had cleared (which it had, where I was by lunchtime)......and which I hope means that they had enough help and I wasn't needed.

 

Have to say, if Better Together  was on the High Street, can't see why YES was not, but then again, the Convenor of The Moray Council chaired the only (so far) Better Together meeting in Moray.

[Alex MacLeod]

Dont anyone be disillusioned. A NO vote is far from being a vote for the status quo. There will be changes. Changes to the Barnet formula. Changes to the voting system. Changes to the boundary system. Changes to the powers of the current Scottish parliament. Rest assured there will not be a status quo. Why should there be? After all the powerful within the parties see our children as being like Hitler Youth. They will need to be controlled.

[Alex MacLeod]

And on TV we can watch footage of Danny Alexander laughing and smiling as he's opening food banks.

[Oddquine]

What will almost definitely happen, Alex, imo, apart from continued austerity at whatever level the UK Government decides (even if we elect 59 SNP MPs in Scotland, who vote against, and even if all MPs from Wales and NI join them), is that we will never ever be allowed to do this again. I'm quite prepared to bet that in future, all referenda will have to be UK wide only.........or we will become the UK version of Catalonia....as I don't believe there is any obligation on the UK Government to put constitutional change to a referendum........or if it is, I slept soundly  through the referendum they had before they changed the rules of succession in favour of Catholics and women (not that I'd have voted against either).

 

Always surprises me that anyone with at least two working brain cells would ever believe that the UK version of devolution, come the Scotland Act 2012,  was about giving us any power....and not just about charging us to raise our taxes.or not...and also restricting our borrowing interest rates to those the Treasury decides to charge us, because they want to make damn sure we won't have any chance of getting a credit rating from the markets, so we don't get to borrow from them.

 

And into the one-sided bargain, if we do borrow to do the stuff  in/for Scotland, that the Union has neglected for the last 307 or so years, we have to pay every penny of our borrowing from the block grant (or however Westminster decides we are to be funded), and also pay our share, over and above, of the UK borrowing  to fund the likes of HS2..just as we already pay our share of foreign embassies, but have additionally to pay £3000 a throw to get  our  foreign embassies to promote Scottish goods.

 

Now maybe I am really fecking stupid....but can any unionist explain to me any benefit in continuing in a Union in which Scotland is not treated as a part of the Union?  Given we are obliged to pay for the likes of HS2, the Olympics, the London sewage system, the backhander to water company customers in the south of England etc etc, I'd have expected that we could use the foreign embassies we already contribute towards, and the HMRC, we already contribute towards, without having to pay any extra......but devolution, UK style, means we will be obliged to raise taxes or cut services in Scotland to compensate Westminster for having gone to the bother of letting us have devolution in the first place.

 

Is it only me thinks that Westminster takes the proverbial, and too many of us just don't have the guts to tell them to feck off....you need us more than we need you?

[Joe DiMaggio]

The rules on succession and Catholics hasn't been changed. Only the female part has. So you can be a woman and be monarch. You could even be a Muslim/Hindu/atheist woman and be monarch but you still can't be a Catholic.

[Oddquine]

The rules on succession and Catholics hasn't been changed. Only the female part has. So you can be a woman and be monarch. You could even be a Muslim/Hindu/atheist woman and be monarch but you still can't be a Catholic.

 

Mea culpa, Joe. The rules have only been changed a little bit re Catholics, and I misinterpreted them.  Marrying a Catholic, in future, will no longer disqualify a person from succeeding to the Crown.  Though it doesn't appear that the monarch can be anything but Protestant (and I suppose the CofE version, at that), so we won't ever be having a Muslim or Hindu one yet. Westminster is still taking much the same wee baby steps re bringing the succession into the 21st century as they are with devolution/democracy.

 

I suppose what the bill has done is open the door to monarchical "mixed marriages" (as defined in areas of Glasgow). That's the Earl of St Andrews back on the succession list now, I assume.........and Prince Michael of Kent. 

[clacher_holiday2]

I still don't understand why people in Scotland are looking to vote No in the majority, are you all worried you'll be losing your dole money?  People in Scotland are gutless, its no wonder so many of us leave.

[starchief]

Well, I'm neither on the dole or gutless, I just simply disagree.  So less of the insults, emigre.  Much as I'm proud to be Scottish, I'm also proud to be British.  I would have been tempted to vote indy if Yes has done their homework but:-

• If we aren't allowed to use sterling, what is Plan B?
• If the EU insists on the Euro, is that acceptable?

These are basic questions that should be able to be answered.  I'm profoundly disappointed with there being no answer.  I can't vote for a pig in a poke.

 

I also have a problem with the European project.  I was very much a Euro-phile, where the EU had an interest in federalism.  Now it's an over-centralised, anti-democratic institution, where a central bank can fine an elected government for following voted-on policies.  In this situation, having Scotland have to satisfy the current regime to gain entry means we can't be on the side of reformers.  So, in that case, it's a not yet.  Not everyone is so entrenched as a Yes or No.  In fact, I'd say the majority are in that field.

 

Having some outsider castigating the people of Scotland and saying he's glad he's not here is just simply insulting.  And it's guaranteed not to further your cause.  After all, it won't even affect you, so why should anyone listen to you? 

 

You want your opinion to be valid?  Get back and start paying your taxes.  Otherwise, it's not your decision what other people do with their lives.

[clacher_holiday2]

"I also have a problem with the European project.  I was very much a Euro-phile, where the EU had an interest in federalism.  Now it's an over-centralised, anti-democratic institution, where a central bank can fine an elected government for following voted-on policies.  In this situation, having Scotland have to satisfy the current regime to gain entry means we can't be on the side of reformers.  So, in that case, it's a not yet.  Not everyone is so entrenched as a Yes or No.  In fact, I'd say the majority are in that field."

 
So you are anti-EU but want Scotland to remain within the UK because of the problems associated with re-joining the EU?
 
Whos to say Scotland would even rejoin the EU as a full member?  Were the time to eventually come round to applying you can be sure there will be a referendum on it, Norway isn't in the EU and if you've ever been there you'll see they're surviving just fine.

 

What you have described above is the status quo, the EU is an undemocratic nightmare, a nightmare which the glorious United Kingdom has been in from the start and has never wielded any influence over, even when there was half as many countries and the UK was twice as rich as we stand today.  The argument that staying in Union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland gives us a louder voice in Europe is a mute point when you consider the decades of ineptitude shown by the UK at the EU level.

 

You sound like you want change but advocate sticking with what we already have? 
 

If you want your opinion to be valid in my eyes, stop contradicting yourself.

[clacher_holiday2]

"Having some outsider castigating the people of Scotland and saying he's glad he's not here is just simply insulting."

 

I consider the no voters gutless cowards, not the people of Scotland as a whole.
 
Every time I hear or read the supporters from the No camp, I'm half expecting them to burst into tears.

[starchief]

Whos to say Scotland would even rejoin the EU as a full member?

 

YES should be saying.  This campaign seems to be aimed at only those desperate for independence, no matter the consequences (including those that pulled a Sean Connery and berate the public for having an opinion about a country they are glad that they left).  I'm surprised YES have so few answers to some basic questions.  I, like many I suspect, was there to be convinced.

 

 

What you have described above is the status quo, the EU is an undemocratic nightmare, a nightmare which the glorious United Kingdom has been in from the start

 

As I've said, I was very much in favour of the EU until the economic crash.  Then it switched it's mission from federalism to centralism.

 

 

If you want your opinion to be valid in my eyes....

 

I don't.  I pay taxes and live in Scotland.  My opinion is valid and I have a voting card to say so.

 

I consider the no voters gutless cowards, not the people of Scotland as a whole.

 

So, only most of them then.  I don't consider Yes or No gutless cowards, just people with different ideas.  This is just abuse.  If there's anything going to kill a Yes vote, this is.

[mainstander]

 

 

I consider the no voters gutless cowards.

 

 

What pathetic, presumptious arogance thats typical of the Yes campaign where everybodys wrong but them. Look son, you dont live in Scotland, you dont pay taxes in Scotland so you dont have a vote and whatever you think doesnt actually matter a toss.

But on the other hand just keep opinions like that coming because people like you are a Godsend for Better Together.

[clacher_holiday2]

 

 

 

If the Turkeys want to vote for Christmas, I'm not about to lose any sleep over it lads, take care.

[Oddquine]

Well, I'm neither on the dole or gutless, I just simply disagree.  So less of the insults, emigre.  Much as I'm proud to be Scottish, I'm also proud to be British.  I would have been tempted to vote indy if Yes has done their homework but:-

• If we aren't allowed to use sterling, what is Plan B?
• If the EU insists on the Euro, is that acceptable?

These are basic questions that should be able to be answered.  I'm profoundly disappointed with there being no answer.  I can't vote for a pig in a poke.

 

I also have a problem with the European project.  I was very much a Euro-phile, where the EU had an interest in federalism.  Now it's an over-centralised, anti-democratic institution, where a central bank can fine an elected government for following voted-on policies.  In this situation, having Scotland have to satisfy the current regime to gain entry means we can't be on the side of reformers.  So, in that case, it's a not yet.  Not everyone is so entrenched as a Yes or No.  In fact, I'd say the majority are in that field.

 

Having some outsider castigating the people of Scotland and saying he's glad he's not here is just simply insulting.  And it's guaranteed not to further your cause.  After all, it won't even affect you, so why should anyone listen to you? 

 

You want your opinion to be valid?  Get back and start paying your taxes.  Otherwise, it's not your decision what other people do with their lives.

 

Plan B is almost undoubtedly, in the short/medium term at least to use sterling without a currency Union....(.which I'd prefer, given my druthers) ..just like Ireland did from its independence until it joined the ERM. Sterling, just like the dollar and the euro is a tradeable currency, and any country at all can use any of them if they want.

 

The EU can insist on the Euro all it likes, but it is only obligatory once a country meets all five of the convergence criteria....and with the propensity of politicians not to think things through, four of the convergences are financially based, like level of debt to GDP and stuff like that....but the fifth one, membership of ERM II for a minimum of two years is optional...which is why Sweden has never adopted the Euro....because it has never chosen to join ERM II.

 

Come independence, btw there will be one party, at least, standing in elections with not being in the EU as a policy....the SDA. They would prefer the EEA or EFTA, which they think would give the trading benefits without the centralism and regulations.

[dougiedanger]

Clacher is basically right, fear and ignorance are BT's only weapons and we either stand up and overcome them or fall into line and know our place like we have done for centuries.

[robbylad]

 

Well, I'm neither on the dole or gutless, I just simply disagree.  So less of the insults, emigre.  Much as I'm proud to be Scottish, I'm also proud to be British.  I would have been tempted to vote indy if Yes has done their homework but:-

• If we aren't allowed to use sterling, what is Plan B?
• If the EU insists on the Euro, is that acceptable?

These are basic questions that should be able to be answered.  I'm profoundly disappointed with there being no answer.  I can't vote for a pig in a poke.

 

I also have a problem with the European project.  I was very much a Euro-phile, where the EU had an interest in federalism.  Now it's an over-centralised, anti-democratic institution, where a central bank can fine an elected government for following voted-on policies.  In this situation, having Scotland have to satisfy the current regime to gain entry means we can't be on the side of reformers.  So, in that case, it's a not yet.  Not everyone is so entrenched as a Yes or No.  In fact, I'd say the majority are in that field.

 

Having some outsider castigating the people of Scotland and saying he's glad he's not here is just simply insulting.  And it's guaranteed not to further your cause.  After all, it won't even affect you, so why should anyone listen to you? 

 

You want your opinion to be valid?  Get back and start paying your taxes.  Otherwise, it's not your decision what other people do with their lives.

 

Plan B is almost undoubtedly, in the short/medium term at least to use sterling without a currency Union....(.which I'd prefer, given my druthers) ..just like Ireland did from its independence until it joined the ERM. Sterling, just like the dollar and the euro is a tradeable currency, and any country at all can use any of them if they want.

 

The EU can insist on the Euro all it likes, but it is only obligatory once a country meets all five of the convergence criteria....and with the propensity of politicians not to think things through, four of the convergences are financially based, like level of debt to GDP and stuff like that....but the fifth one, membership of ERM II for a minimum of two years is optional...which is why Sweden has never adopted the Euro....because it has never chosen to join ERM II.

 

Come independence, btw there will be one party, at least, standing in elections with not being in the EU as a policy....the SDA. They would prefer the EEA or EFTA, which they think would give the trading benefits without the centralism and regulations.

 

Fair play to you oddquine. What's plan b is asked over and over again yet you patiently answer it. I admire that. Especially as it's people who don't want to know the answer in case they have to rethink their position. Personally, I can't be arsed trying to explain things to people who have made up their mind and just pretend that they are open minded. You can lead a horse to water....

[starchief]

So, one of you accuses me of being a spineless coward and a crybaby, whilst the other accuses me of lying...you really know how to win people over with your personal abuse.  Even on this forum and on this thread, I've waivered between the two positions due to being more interested in federalism, rather than Scottish or British nationalism.  Neither suits, so I need the information to choose.  Blind patriotism isn't enough, especially when misplaced in a European context.

 

Oddquine hasn't explained Plan B but speculated.  That's a big difference.  Yes has refused to consider a Plan B.  Why?  It's a basic question.  Similarly with the EU and the Euro.  They need solid answers.  It's been a poor campaign to persuade the neutrals, aided by the arrogance shown by those posters above and the cybernats in general.  Do you really think calling someone a liar or accusing the majority of Scotland as being spineless cowards is going to advance your cause?  I don't even just mean with me but with those neutrals also reading this?

 

I was there to be convinced and, until the holes in financial policy became so great, you could drive a ship through it with basic questions still unanswered, I was veering towards a Yes.  I still wouldn't be disappointed with that outcome but they haven't made a strong enough case.  And it's not just me.  I read other questions, such as from DoofersDad, that just can't be adequately answered without individual speculation or, often, abuse.

 

But carry on lads, if you think calling people crybabies, cowards and liars is the way forward.  Just never play football in a team of mine.  We'd be 3-0 down with the amount of own goals you guys are capable of.  Enjoy what was long ago a debate thread but is now just a fan club for one side.  Get your excuses in early though.  I think you'll need them.

[Oddquine]

So, one of you accuses me of being a spineless coward and a crybaby, whilst the other accuses me of lying...you really know how to win people over with your personal abuse.  Even on this forum and on this thread, I've waivered between the two positions due to being more interested in federalism, rather than Scottish or British nationalism.  Neither suits, so I need the information to choose.  Blind patriotism isn't enough, especially when misplaced in a European context.

 

Oddquine hasn't explained Plan B but speculated.  That's a big difference.  Yes has refused to consider a Plan B.  Why?  It's a basic question.  Similarly with the EU and the Euro.  They need solid answers.  It's been a poor campaign to persuade the neutrals, aided by the arrogance shown by those posters above and the cybernats in general.  Do you really think calling someone a liar or accusing the majority of Scotland as being spineless cowards is going to advance your cause?  I don't even just mean with me but with those neutrals also reading this?

 

I was there to be convinced and, until the holes in financial policy became so great, you could drive a ship through it with basic questions still unanswered, I was veering towards a Yes.  I still wouldn't be disappointed with that outcome but they haven't made a strong enough case.  And it's not just me.  I read other questions, such as from DoofersDad, that just can't be adequately answered without individual speculation or, often, abuse.

 

But carry on lads, if you think calling people crybabies, cowards and liars is the way forward.  Just never play football in a team of mine.  We'd be 3-0 down with the amount of own goals you guys are capable of.  Enjoy what was long ago a debate thread but is now just a fan club for one side.  Get your excuses in early though.  I think you'll need them.

 

Starchief, I prefer to think of my "speculation" as  logic...the same logic which had me saying from the very beginning of all this, on a question (which is still being repeated ad nauseam by people who simply don't want to hear the response) ie "who will be paying the state pension I live on now if we go independent"? I have always that it would be the responsibility of the UK government to pay all, or part of all, pensions for those who have paid NI into the UK system, up until Independence day, so someone already retired will receive the pension they already receive, and anyone who has not yet retired, but has paid NI in the UK would receive that proportion of their pension from the rUK. This has been confirmed, specifically, by Westminster ministers, not so long ago...but we still see people asking the same question. We don't know the mechanisms by which it will work, of course, because that would be a subject to be negotiated, but we do know that, despite still Westminster fear mongering on pensions...that the rUK will be paying mine till I die, and part of my grandson's until he does. The only uncertainty over pensions after independence is the uncertainty over the future finances of a UK without Scotland's input given, there is a £5 trillion unfunded pension debt.

Re currency...we all know the available currency options......Sterling, Euro or Own Currency.....and we all know that come May 2016, there may well be a different Government to the SNP in Scotland post election......and we all know about the requirements of the Edinburgh Agreement. So logically, and however much I dislike the idea, a relatively short-term negotiated Currency Union would fulfill  the requirements of the Edinburgh Agreement, and give some certainty for at least the first term of iScotland/rUK Governments.

As the Euro is simply not an option in the short term, given the need to negotiate with the EU and the time lag between that and meeting the convergence criteria, if we decide to do so. Similarly, having our own currency, which would be my preferred longer-term option, is well down the list of essentials to be in place as soon as possible. It took Ireland seven years, I think, after independence, to introduce  the punt and set up a currency board pegged 1 to 1 with the pound (again my preferred option, at least initially). There is always the option of having our own currency with a free floating or fixed exchange rate policy, which would give us full control of our monetary policy, not available with the other options, but that would require the setting up of some kind of Central Bank, which would not be in place by 2016.

Ergo, as the Euro and our own currency are longer term options to be considered/prepared for by an elected Scottish Government, post 2016, that only leaves the option of using Sterling in the short term.....and failing the currently preferred option of the Fiscal Commission Working Group for a Currency Union, that means using sterling without a formal Union. (ie Sterlingisation). Can't see that that is speculation, just logical deduction.

 

[clacher_holiday2]

Whos trying to win you over?  I've nothing to gain either way on this referendum, I'm just offering my opinion as an outsider.

 

Scots get the chance to leave the EU, the chance to build a new constitution from scratch that includes new rights to property ownership which finally makes the Abolition of Feudal Tenure Act 2000 worth the paper its written on, the chance to slash the national debt hanging over your future pensions, the chance to stop being dictated to by arms and pharmaceutical conglomerates supplying government services, the chance to regulate banking in such a way that they cant bet your mortgage on the derivatives market (among others) and get away with it... **** me its the opportunity to leave those murderers in NATO as well, all this from a country who turned out in their hundreds of thousands to protest the war in Iraq?

 

To say you don't want to vote yes for the opportunity to see real changes to all of the above and hundreds of more issues because 'am no really shure aboot the posties like' makes you and others willing to put trivial details about a change spineless cowards.

 

Don't worry beggers, you'll still get dole money in an independent Scotland, they might even pay you in pounds if you're that desperate for them.

Edited July 9, 2014 by clacher_holiday2

[starchief]

Where do you get your info that the unemployed are more likely to vote No?  A quick look at the last poll says Social Grade C2DE (which includes unemployed) are more likely to vote Yes.

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wz75xbwh76/Sun_Scotland_Results_16-Jun-2014_FINAL_W.pdf

[Yngwie]

 

Scots get the chance to leave the EU

 

But the Yes proposal is to be in the EU, at any cost!

 

the chance to build a new constitution from scratch

 

Yes, with an English, unelected monarch as our head of state. Seriously, WTF!

 

the chance to slash the national debt

 

But we'll inherit our fair share of national debt, and then run at an annual deficit by spending like there's no tomoroow on the wish list of social measures whilst oil revenues continue to plummet.

 

the chance to stop being dictated to by arms and pharmaceutical conglomerates supplying government services

 

Don't see how anything will change in that respect, if Scotland still wants arms and pharmaceuticals.

 

the chance to regulate banking in such a way that they cant bet your mortgage on the derivatives market (among others) and get away with it

 

You don't have to look back far to find Salmond proclaiming how prudent and well run Scotland's banks are, hence they would only require, and I quote, "light touch" regulation!

 

 

Independence would offer the chance to do lots of things differently, but nobody is proposing to take those opportunities. Maybe your "spineless cowards" are the ones who are in a position to make a real difference but daren't do so!

[Charles Bannerman]

 

 

But carry on lads, if you think calling people crybabies, cowards and liars is the way forward. 

 

 

One of the main reasons I withdrew from this thread several months ago was that, apart from the conspicuous exception of a couple of individuals who have always been entirely courteous, the quality and tone of the pro-Separatist comment has degenerated into little more than abject Cybernattery. Long experience of ovserving the SNP and fellow travellers tells me that such behaviour is par for the course, along with the rather puerile mass posting up of stickers and placards to make it look as if their support is a lot greater than it really is.

By "a couple of individuals" who have been commendably gracious in their presentations, I would specifically mention Alex MacLeod who has always posted his views in very civilised terms, as has Oddquine - albeit somewhat more longwindedly and with the odd hint of not being very keen on "Westminster", "Whitehall" or "London" or whatever SNP High Command's euphemism of the day for "the English" happens to be.  Doofers Dad's largely neutral views have also been outstanding.

Otherwise, comment has degenerated into more and more embittered and intolerant rhetoric on the part of a caucus of arrogant, self righteous Ultranats who seem to think theirs is the only view which should be tolerated and that anyone otherwise minded should be regarded as some form of Untermenschen.

But, as has been commented by other posters in recent weeks, keep up the good work lads. Your comments and the manner in which you express them, are a huge asset to Better Together. In fact it's almost in the same league as the hairy guy swathed in tartan, looking like an unemployed extra from Brigadoon and with a targe on his back proclaiming "Aye" who wanders the streets of Inverness and joins Yes Scotland canvassers in the High Street. A veritable modern day Willie Bell  More seriously... it's people and comments like this who make the future of Scotland after any yes vote look chillingly dystopian.

So if my withdrawal from this forum has contributed to its degeneration into an increaingly embittered discussion only among Separatists, then I am glad to have made my contribution to saving Great Britain in this manner. The more undecided voters who log on here the better.

Time to withdraw again then....

[Oddquine]

Whos trying to win you over?  I've nothing to gain either way on this referendum, I'm just offering my opinion as an outsider.

 

Scots get the chance to leave the EU, the chance to build a new constitution from scratch that includes new rights to property ownership which finally makes the Abolition of Feudal Tenure Act 2000 worth the paper its written on, the chance to slash the national debt hanging over your future pensions, the chance to stop being dictated to by arms and pharmaceutical conglomerates supplying government services, the chance to regulate banking in such a way that they cant bet your mortgage on the derivatives market (among others) and get away with it... **** me its the opportunity to leave those murderers in NATO as well, all this from a country who turned out in their hundreds of thousands to protest the war in Iraq?

 

To say you don't want to vote yes for the opportunity to see real changes to all of the above and hundreds of more issues because 'am no really shure aboot the posties like' makes you and others willing to put trivial details about a change spineless cowards.

 

Don't worry beggers, you'll still get dole money in an independent Scotland, they might even pay you in pounds if you're that desperate for them.

 

Most outsiders couch their opinions in more temperate language, because it does the pro-independence side no good at all to have anyone being so blatantly abusive, and they realise that there is a propensity on both sides to take offence at everything which could even remotely be construed as offensive.  Unfortunately, the MSM only listens to, and reports on, what NO supporters consider the offensive comments of YES supporters, and blows them up out of all proportion, hence the almost obsessive ranting against Cybernats as opposed to even gently censuring the insults emanating from pro-Union politicians and high heed yins or looking at the kind of abuse by supporters of the No campaign, contained within the likes of twitter, as typified in the BritNatAbuseBot. 

 

So using terms like spineless cowards or beggars etc to describe the generality of those who are voting NO, for various reasons that nobody but those people are aware,are both insulting and counter-productive, just as is that of the pro-Union side, with their descriptions of pro-independence supporters as fascists, nazis, cybernats etc, and the personal abuse directed against the elected FM of Scotland.  You tend to find, out and about, that a lot of those who are not voting YES because of stuff like "I don't like Alex Salmond/SNP" or for one specific reason which has nothing to do with the independence concept, but relies on future party policies are making excuses for a decision they have already made.   Into the bargain, abuse against NO voters is insulting to me and my family, because while some of them will vote YES, others will currently either vote NO or abstain altogether.......and none of them are spineless cowards or beggars.....or any of the other epithets used to describe NO voters in these last few posts in response to your original one.

 

Three of them are British first, before Scottish, if they even think of themselves as Scottish at all.....all born before and during WWII, and brought up to think of themselves as British. That view of themselves is their norm and has been since the 1930s/1940s....and there is no changing it.....and believe me I have tried in the past. But they are not voting, in their opinion, against something, but for something which is not the same something as that against which many in our extended families will be placing their cross. That is not cowardice in an extended  family of, afaik, predominantly YES voters.....that is courage..and I respect that. You may not..but it is easy to have opinions when you don't live here and will not be one of those having, regardless of the vote result, to maintain relationships with family, friends and the wider community following an extremely rancorous and vituperative debate, fuelled, and I make no apologies for my opinion, by the negativity and language used by those running the No Campaign.

 

I myself have been known to say that people who read and listen to the "news"  produced in/by the MSM, and believe every word of it, are terminally stupid..which, while intemperate, does at least differentiate people like my cousins, who would vote NO if Utopia was guaranteed with a YES vote, or  those who are still undecided and searching for answers, from those who still, on forums and elsewhere, repeat already debunked information as fact, because it is still being reproduced in some newspaper, and sneer at those who would vote YES on that basis.  An attempt at differentiation, though, still doesn't stop those who read and listen to the "news"  produced in/by the MSM, and believe every word of it, from being offended.....and saying that I am denigrating all pro-Union supporters.

 

I'm going to stop digging the hole for myself I started in that last paragraph.....and it would be really good if outsiders.and even insiders, on both sides, stopped digging holes for us all to have to spend time, better used in debate/discussion, on attempts at damage limitation. Neither side, unfortunately can do much about twitter which seems to attract some of the most irrational people in the world.....but I do find it somewhat hypocritical for the NBTT campaign to be insisting, all over the media, that Alex Salmond controls/is  to be held responsible for all the eejits on the YES side, even though he does not lead the Yes Campaign......but no such demand is being made all over the media of Cameron.or, even, if it comes to that, Darling, who does lead the No Campaign.

[robbylad]

So, one of you accuses me of being a spineless coward and a crybaby, whilst the other accuses me of lying...you really know how to win people over with your personal abuse.  Even on this forum and on this thread, I've waivered between the two positions due to being more interested in federalism, rather than Scottish or British nationalism.  Neither suits, so I need the information to choose.  Blind patriotism isn't enough, especially when misplaced in a European context.

 

Oddquine hasn't explained Plan B but speculated.  That's a big difference.  Yes has refused to consider a Plan B.  Why?  It's a basic question.  Similarly with the EU and the Euro.  They need solid answers.  It's been a poor campaign to persuade the neutrals, aided by the arrogance shown by those posters above and the cybernats in general.  Do you really think calling someone a liar or accusing the majority of Scotland as being spineless cowards is going to advance your cause?  I don't even just mean with me but with those neutrals also reading this?

 

I was there to be convinced and, until the holes in financial policy became so great, you could drive a ship through it with basic questions still unanswered, I was veering towards a Yes.  I still wouldn't be disappointed with that outcome but they haven't made a strong enough case.  And it's not just me.  I read other questions, such as from DoofersDad, that just can't be adequately answered without individual speculation or, often, abuse.

 

But carry on lads, if you think calling people crybabies, cowards and liars is the way forward.  Just never play football in a team of mine.  We'd be 3-0 down with the amount of own goals you guys are capable of.  Enjoy what was long ago a debate thread but is now just a fan club for one side.  Get your excuses in early though.  I think you'll need them.

I've offended you by suggesting that you don't really want to hear the answer to the oft repeated questions. I apologise for that. It's been a long campaign and tempers may be getting a bit frayed. I'm guilty of making a generalisation from the folk I've met. Please accept my apology.