UKC

This has been a very interesting debate throughout, but I can't help feeling that whether there is a yes or no vote, the damage has already been done. Scotland is now polarised. You are either in the Yes camp or in the No camp. And regardless of that, there is now a true line in the sand between Scotland and England. This has ended up being quite a bruising process.

Let the bun fighting and petty squabbling about who gets what commence where once there was peace and quiet - sadly, whether it be yay or nay.

In reply to ByEek:

Well, that's one way of looking at it.

My own view is that what has been happening in Scotland has been the most exiting period in politics since the poll tax rebellion.

Notwithstanding some minor hassles, I'm proud to be part of a country that can have such a debate without terrorism rearing its head.

I sincerely hope it will give politics in the UK/ rUK the kick-up-the-arse it needs and deserves.

In reply to ByEek:

I have some worries, but despite the rising passions, the vast majority of people are still managing to get on - which I think reflects well on the whole process. It may have a lot to do with the fact that, when it was clear that there was a real mandate for the referendum, it was not suppressed.

I think you might have to be here to see the positive side - I mean, huge numbers of Scots being happy and optimistic!

I'm going to have to be especially dour all winter to make up for this.

In reply to skog: It's easy to be happy and optimistic before the result, but a fair chunk of the electorate are going to be unhappy on Friday (and possibly for a long time afterwards).

In reply to ByEek:
I reckon a third of the voters are yes by nationality* and a third are no by nationality*. Those are baseline votes for both sides and constants in the opinion polls.

In the middle ground there are the people with more ambiguous nationality for whom the issues are complicated and gradually they've been making up their minds.

It hasn't been bruising until the last 10 days and it is not that polarised. The split is so even that near enough everybody will be have spouse or family members, friends and colleagues who will be voting differently. The majority of people know somebody they respect on the other side and have a respect for the different opinion.

Hence I don't think "you are either in the Yes camp or No camp" is so true.

*nationality as an affinity mostly determined by the accident of birth location, parents and the history, language & culture they absorb.

In reply to skog:

Don't be ridiculous

In reply to ByEek:

I don't think you are right. In fact, very wrong.

Politics, voter engagement, community spirit, creativity, imagination and public debate have been products of this campaign.

There is some disagreement but to say Scotland is polarised to to misunderstand.

In reply to skog:


And equally huge numbers being very, very worried. But hopefully we'll be very, very relieved on Friday and the happy optimistic people will be very, very disappointed.

In reply to Saor Alba:


Are you actually in Scotland? It is (mostly) good natured but there is massive disagreement and polarisation.

In reply to Postmanpat:


I do understand this is hard to believe.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Yes.

In reply to Robert Durran:


See, that's still about half of the country being cheerful. It's unprecedented.

In reply to Saor Alba:


Ok. I thought maybe you were in Cloud Cuckoo Land with Alex Salmond.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


That was my thought. The polls are suggesting a more or less 50/50 split. If the vote goes anywhere between 51/49 and 60/40, there will be a sizable minority who are not happy. And if it is YES, the impact on rUK will be pretty significantly negative too.

On average, it is my opinion that there will be more losers than winners in this poll.

In reply to Saor Alba:

From what I have heard of commentators in the press, there is an undertone that if you vote no you are somehow being anti Scottish. Why would a woman camp under her no sign to stop it being vandalised? Anecdotal evidence I know but it all counts. rUK will loose out regardless and we don't even have a say.

Surely a Yes/No answer is the definition of polarisation in this context? There's no middle ground or '3rd way'. It was always going to be polarising. Some tool mentioned 'a sense of community' - not witnessed by me or friends and family from Western Isles, Inverness, to the central belt, certainly no more so than before the referendum was announced but then maybe none of us live in a wholly YES voting area.

In reply to ByEek:
Divorces, or the preliminaries to them, normally do turn out nasty and destructive for all parties.

It doesn't matter how civilised they start out, or the participants want to be, long nurtured, buried grievances, resentments and hurt feelings rise to the surface and get exaggerated. Then the other party starts to defend aggressively and say things like "well if you're going to drag that up again, what about ....". This leads to further recrimination about something else and so the cycle goes on.

The result is normally messy and then the lawyers get involved .... all chance of a relatively agreeable separation is destroyed, assuming the parties hadn't managed to do that themselves.

Anyway, have you SEEN what the Scots do to the toothpaste? Quite beyond the pale.

In reply to ByEek:


interesting... i don't know anyone with at least half a brain who is 100% one thing. labour / tory / snp / green / yes / no included

most of the yessers i know are somewhere between 70/30 and 60/40 percent yes/no in their minds so how do we explain that? at some point you have to put your cross in the box and commit, doesn't mean you don't have doubts. change is hard for most people.

In reply to Simon4:

Maybe we should be looking to Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin for inspiration

There has been no end of pish talked about "polarisation" and "hatred" etc. post the referendum.

Wee bit of common sense here from the Polis.

http://www.spf.org.uk/2014/09/spf-media-release-independence-referendum-2/

In reply to ByEek:

I think you are most likely right. There was phone-in debate on R4 yesterday evening between a girl voting Yes and her "No" Grandad, and he was understandably upset at being indirectly accused of being cowardly and selfish for voting No.

In reply to rallymania:



Problem is you have to make that choice and that choice is divisive.

This is a road I wish we had never travelled.

In reply to rogerwebb:


I'm not sure I agree that making the choice has to be divisive. Yes, it puts you on one side or the other, but it doesn't mean you have to adopt a divisive or contrary attitude to those who vote differently. Lots of people will just get on with it, whatever transpires - there's not much option, and getting steamed up about it isn't going to do anyone any good.

In reply to tony:

I hope you are right

In reply to ByEek:

A report from one of the most balanced newspapers:

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/scotland-goes-full-scottis...

In reply to tony:


Agreed. The trouble comes when the vocal extremists start to take over the agenda. Getting steamed up is exactly what some folks will want to do much to the detriment of everyone.

In reply to ByEek:

Hopefully the rancour that has crept in to the latter stages of the debate will subside -- though I fear it may not. The Scots have long memories - as witnessed by the number of times Thatcher and The Poll Tax get brought in to discussions.

I'm in the fortunate position of being able to have very civilised discussions with members of my extended family who are have strongly held views on both sides of the debate - and doubtless will continue to do so.

I fear however that whatever the result there will now be a lot of bitterness in some circles that will take a long time to heal.

In reply to Saor Alba:

'See the yanks are urging us to stay..bastards could not wait to get rid of England themselves but it is ok for us to bide..bunch o c*nts need to mind their own sh@t x'

'The people of Scotland can take the BBC & the Daily record apart, if they so wish. I hope the do - dirty, backstabbing traitor scum. YES!'

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1400082756894223/

Yes, it's all so cuddly and heart warming.

In reply to skog:

"On the BBC’s evening news programme in Scotland, the presenter referred to SNP leader Alex Salmond as a ‘spunk stain’"

Oh how I wish that had really happened. At least half the country must be thinking it.

In reply to ByEek:

Sounds like the pubs will be winners with all night opening allowed on thursday. Well, that is until they have the clean up bill.With the world watching it can't be a good idea can it?

In reply to graeme jackson:

Cheers, that really had me laughing out loud, quality stuff!

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Pissed and angry scots pouring out of the pubs at 7am so they can drive to work. Cannae wait.

In reply to ByEek:

I live in Stirling and have a vote up here. A few months ago I had this idea for a wee sketch about the Referendum. It hinged on the fact that I was the last person to vote just before the closing of the polls and by the magic of technology I knew that it was exactly tied so mine would be the casting vote. Each side plied me with promises if I favoured them but I got so confused by everything that I spoilt the ballot paper and it ended up a draw. The whole thing had to be run again!

In reply to ByEek:
I don't feel polarised by this referendum. I feel empowered. This is the biggest chance I have to change things for the good of the people, and I am delighted to seize the chance.

If any lines are drawn after the referendum (regardless of a Yes or No), I believe the most likely spot would be around Birmingham as the North, Wales and Northern Ireland really drive to get powers from the corruption of Westminster.

I am not a SNP member and I have never voted SNP. I'm not voting for Alex Salmond. I am voting for social justice.

99% of my inlaws are passionate about the 'No' vote, and that's fine by me. I am happy to respect their choices.

In reply to Wee Davie:



I take it by social justice,you mean some nebulous concept surrounding benefits, taxes, and the systems and financial arrangements underpinning them, that will be decided by whatever government next comes into power as, obviously, the suggestions in the White paper are predicated on SNP victory at any Scottish election.

And obviously whatever government next comes into power (should Scotland become independent) may well be influenced by the approximately 50% of the population that will be voting No.

In reply to off-duty:

A major reason for my Yes vote is that it is intended to take back the voting power of our population and make it actually count. Have you seen the stat that if all Scots votes were subtracted from the last 50 years of UK elections, it wouldn't have made any difference anyway? Tory or Labour would have won anyway.

If No voters are unhappy post- independence at least we'll all be making our votes count in future. As the system stands, we are p1ssing in the wind.

In reply to Wee Davie:



By "wouldn't make any difference" I take it you mean "we have had the government we voted for on a number of occasions".

And I'm guessing that you believe the MSP's and the devolved Scottish Parliament, are just a complete and utter waste of time, not able to do anything, and certainly not responsible for anything... that was a bit of a waste of half a billion in building the damn thing(not to mention the 70 odd million a year to run it)

In reply to Lord of Starkness:

The Scots have long memories - as witnessed by the number of times Thatcher and The Poll Tax get brought in to discussions.

Too right! This whole shebang was, after all, timed to coincide with the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn.
Yes, the 700th.

In reply to alan moore:




That'll be Thatcher the choice of just under 1/3 of Scottish voters in 1979, 1983 and 1/4 in 1987.

So not exactly massively unpopular at the time ( roughly twice as popular as the SNP)

In reply to off-duty:

Thatcher delivered brutally effective remedies to the 'unions gone wild' economics of the 70s and 80s and was a very powerfully charismatic political figure- so its easy so see why she was re-elected at the time.

The legacy of her policies, however, is a North of Britain almost devoid of industry and with no signs that re-investment may be forthcoming in this austerity culture.

You can't underestimate the emnity that people have for the results of Thatcherism in the areas affected.

In reply to Wee Davie:


But surely the same could be said for any individual part of the UK, be that Wales, Yorkshire, Cornwall or wherever.
Presumably since Scots normally vote in a majority of Labour MP's then they got their wish every time the Labour party won, just as the South East of England "lost" but got their way when the Conservatives won.
Was it lost on the Scottish electorate that the last Labour government wasn't exactly short on Scottish cabinet ministers? It wasn't like they didn't have a voice or representation at the highest levels of government.

In reply to Wee Davie:


Who would you like to have won, given you say you don't support the SNP? The Lib Dems? The Communist Party? You have plenty of choices already and the same will be presenting candidates after the referendum. Just as you will be faced by the same employers, the same land owners etc etc.

Over the decades Scottish politicians have had en enormous influence over British politics, Scottish included, what a shame that you would have them limit themselves to just a part of the country, or move South of the border.

In reply to Wee Davie:




I just think it is a bit facile to suggest that it was all Thatcher's fault, nothing to do with us, when it wasn't just "rogue politician gone wild - we never knew..." as she was elected for 3 terms, and voting for her was a significant proportion of the Scottish electorate - with a turn out in the mid 70%.

In reply to Wee Davie:




But curiously lacking in enmity for the preceding government whose disastrous policies created the very conditions which resulted in Thatcher winning 3 elections or for the unions whose suicidal policies made their indusries so uncompetetive in the first place or the subsequent government who did nothing to reverse the Thatcher policies.
They can go on blaming Thatcher for evermore but their lives aren't going to improve until they get over it, move on and do something about it themselves.

In reply to off-duty:


I think you need to look at the history of voting in Scotland. She lost ALL their MPs.

In reply to pec:

Labour have basically lost the plot. They are as rightwing as the Tories nowadays and the SNP have picked up their socialist baton very successfully.

I don't care about the Scottish presence in any Westminster Cabinet. They are all subservient and corrupt IMO.

Many people, like me, who have no history of any Nationalist leanings (I despise isolationism and the way UKIP are taking us) are keen on the Yes vote to see change just for the chance to get an actual change.

I'd be more than happy to see the Cornish, Welsh etc go for the same devolution/ independence. It's natural justice.

In reply to off-duty:

I remember thinking, at the height of the horror, in 1984 (I spent the whole summer in Scotland) ... 'what problems are we reaping for the future?' Amazingly, I met a top judge at a cocktail party who was hopping mad about the Poll Tax, and echoed my own fears. He said there will be a price to pay for this.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

She'd been out for over a full term (7 years) - replaced by Major (voted for by 1/4 of the Scottish electorate) , before the Scottish MP's went to zero. (Though they still had 17% of the Scottish vote)

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Really, these things are easy to check. She didn't.

In reply to Wee Davie:


By the same argument, you could keep shrinking the 'total constituency' in an election to such a size that you were guaranteed you were going to get exactly who you voted for? ie nation > region > district > town > area > street > household > "...BINGO, we win!"


And through many of those elections, Scotland has been governed by the party it voted for. In fact, since WW2, this has been the case more frequently in Scotland than it has in England.

In reply to pec:

>They can go on blaming Thatcher for evermore but their lives aren't going to improve until they get over it, move on and do something about it themselves.

There you go- Bingo- a prime reason for a Yes vote.

Bruce Hooker:

I've voted Labour, Lib Dem and Scottish Socialists in the past depending on who took my fancy. I'm generally pretty far left.

In reply to Wee Davie:

You seem to forget that the Welsh had their own devolution referendums, and voted by a strong majority to stay in UK. If Scotland goes, Wales will benefit, I think. Well, obviously.

In reply to off-duty:

OK ... so that's alright then ... the disaster just took a bit longer to kick in.

In reply to MG:


Her policies did.

In reply to off-duty:


Yes, the biggest implied lie of all in this referendum is that a Yes vote would give Salmond any mandate to anything at all apart, perhaps, as First Minuster to oversee the transition. All his promises are therefore empty.

In reply to off-duty:

The judge was Lord Justice Barry Sheen. As wise, and open-minded, outward-looking Englishman as I've ever met. Very pro-Scottish.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


There are an awful lot of very pro Scottish Englishmen. A large number of them (i believe a poll said 70%) would like Scotland to remain in the union.

In reply to off-duty:

Yup. A hell of a lot of intelligent people are sighing in disbelief.

In reply to ByEek:

youtube.com/watch?v=gApwpSWAhbQ&

In reply to Hyphin:

And in this one :-

youtube.com/watch?v=ZwYxZNbbAaA&

I can't hear where they've put "postal ballot" or "disenfranchised"

In reply to ByEek:

One problem is the lack of respect show by some to No voters.. they are dismissed as not seizing the day, or being scared.. yet some do feel very strongly towards Britain.. its a tough call either way, hence why its so close.

I actually hope one side is a clear winner by a long way, its a huge thing to change, or even not change, with a minimal majority..

In reply to IainRUK:

The whole thing is immensely sad. Even if the No vote wins, a huge amount of damage has been done. I had a very happy trip to the Trossachs two summers ago. Everyone was very friendly, outgoing, open-minded, and the place had a real buzz. Everything seemed to be moving, very impressively, in the right direction. There wasn't a whiff of nationalism. Now, I'm very disinclined to go back, because I fear all that has been soured (and why should I spend all that petrol money to find out?) If they've stuck two fingers up at us, why should I go there? This is entirely their doing, and not at all what I would wish. But for at least two years I'll be inclined to boycott the country to see just how they shape up. Of course, if it all goes wrong, and it becomes much more expensive, I may never go back there.

In reply to IainRUK:

PS. Really hope, in worst scenario, and Scotland splits, our gov gives a lot more help to Wales. Interestingly, I see that Pinewood Studios, that has expanded vastly into different countries over the last two decades, is soon to open a new Pinewood Wales studio near Cardiff. Not a mention of Scotland on their website. I suspect there are some very shrewd cookies at work here, who've been looking v intelligently into the crystal ball.

I wonder what the feasibility is of salmon farms on a large scale in Cardigan Bay, for example?

In reply to off-duty:

Impartial policing?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Nobody is sticking two fingers up at you. That sort of anti-english nationalism (of which I will admit growing up in the 80s I was guilty) has largely been replaced by something much more positive - the desire for self determination as a mechanism for social change that cannot be seen on the horizon in the UK as a whole.

If there was still a left wing mainstream party in westminster to vote for, the result of this referendum would likely be a landslide No, but there's not and a large portion of the Scottish public is ready to say "let's take control of our own affairs and create a political system we can be a part of".

None of my English born friends living in Scotland have told me they have felt intimidated by this campaign, and several have told me they're going to vote Yes.

The only two fingers I'm seeing here is in your intent to boycott the country if we do decide to do things our own way.

In reply to aln:


I am an anonymous cop based in England (though I have substantial ties to Scotland). I do not and never have, suggested that my opinion has any "official" weight (the clue is in the name).

Any particular reason you would rather I don't express my opinion?

In reply to Ciro:


Good for them. Do they have "Vote yes or else" daubed across the doors of their local polling station. Because it seems that I do.

In reply to ByEek:

Devolution gave us the option to add an extra tier of government, today we have the option to remove one. There will always be nutters but today is about a move to more human sized democracy, not about racism.

In reply to jonny taylor:

The only vandalism I've seen where I live says "VOTE NO - LOYALIST BO'NESS".

Wise words from the Polis.

http://www.spf.org.uk/2014/09/spf-media-release-independence-referendum-2/

In reply to Ciro:

According to your profile you're in London so either, a). it's out of date or.. b). you haven't got a clue what's going on in certain areas up here.


Good for them. I know several people here who have been too intimidated by their Yes voting neighbours to put up No thanks signs (me included BTW.)



try coming up here and seeing what happens when you tell someone (with your English accent) that you're voting No.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Gordon, that's a rather negative assumption: why not confront your fears, they may be misplaced, and actually go up and find out. I would guess that nothing will have changed to the detriment of a future visit.

In reply to Removed User:

I read that, a good piece. It's a pity that a fair sized part of the populace will automatically vote No with little or no thought.

In reply to Valaisan:

...or don't take the risk and go to the Lakes instead and know your money is staying in the country. Who knows how many people will think if it's independence. There's nowt so queer as folk

In reply to Wee Davie:


You despise isolationism and yet you've voted for it for Scotland? You've lost me there

In reply to aln:

Folks can vote how they want, arguments are over.

I'm just sick of the media and politicians stiiring up shit and trying to make it a self fulfilling prophecy; that sentiment is not just reserved for the current referendum. Bastards are at it on a near weekly basis. Good to see the SPF give these clowns a severe finger wagging.

In reply to jonny taylor:


Nope, just back from casting my vote and there was no intimidation in sight - there was one union flag hanging at the entrance, one Yes saltire in the field next door, two elderly No campaigners waiting outside (who saw we were obviously yes voters and just gave us a pleasant smile and wished us a good day) and that was it

In reply to aln:

fixed that for you.

In reply to Ciro:

Have you seen this 'vote yes or else!' graffiti at the polling station..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2760618/Vote-Yes-Or-Else-Attempts-i...

Quite clearly there..

I can't believe these aren't painted over immediately, you can't have open threats at a polling station..

I think the flags is fine.. very different to threats.

In reply to graeme jackson:


I'd say a bit of both - left London six months ago, did a bit of traveling, and just moved back to Scotland. I'm not claiming to know what's going on in all corners of the country, but what I'm seeing around where I am, and on the social media, has been a pleasant surprise and a far cry from the bitter, sectarian Scotland I grew up in and had got fed up with when I moved down south.

I'm aware that my social media exposure is biased and a bit self-selecting, as it favours input from people I already have a lot in common with, but in the last few days, there's been a rash of postings from people on both sides of the debate talking of putting differences aside after the vote, whatever the outcome, and working to keep the awakened political will of the people alive and I find that greatly encouraging.

I'm not naive enough to think there's not idiots on both sides of the debate spoiling things for some people, but from where I'm standing the idiots seem to be in a much smaller minority than I would have dreamed of.


I'm sorry to hear that. I hope as a country we continue to progress to the point where everyone can display their political allegiances without fear.

In reply to IainRUK:


Cui bono?

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

True. I think it could be back firing.. I don't think Salmond has done enough and its actually played into the NO's hands now.. we'll have to see.

When will the earliest exit polls come out?

In reply to IainRUK:

Looks like they got the painters in as soon as they could, and whilst both actions are deplorable, one piece of graffiti and one assault does not add up to the campaign of intimidation the papers seem determined to paint a picture of.

If, by the close of polls, it turns out there's been widespread attempts at intimidation such as this from *either* side I will be thoroughly ashamed of my country, but if (as I suspect) it's limited to a few isolated incidents - as regrettable as they may be - I shall be pleased that in the main we've dealt with a difficult decision positively.

In reply to Removed User:




Agreed, but I've seen plenty of this from Yes people too. Troop movements near Inverness, what does it mean!

In reply to Ciro:

Given that in many countries secession leads to a civil war I suppose one shouldn't complain

In reply to nw:



at fort george by any chance?

In reply to nw:


It's because the Catalans have invaded Edinburgh! A vintage car with a massive catalan flag painted on it and a big Yes sticker just drove up and down my street playing Spanish folk music.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


What did I tell you! A Yes vote is just swapping one set of oppressors for another!

In reply to nw:

as a big fan of cuban salsa i welcome our new Spanish speaking overlords


(and yes, i do know how wrong what i just wrote is don't worry)

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Are all the polling stations on decrepid sink estates on the outskirts of crapville?

I only have the pictures from the UK media to go on, but they all seem to be pictures taken through a grey, moody filter of pebbledashed walls or decaying shiplap or graffitied shutters with a polling station sticker on it. You can add token toddler in shellsuit with Yes sticker for effect. Even I don't think it can be that bleak up there

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Thats the bits that don't get on the biscuit tins and calendars mate.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:



No, pebbledashed decaying primary school in a very lovely place here.

In reply to ByEek:

Whatever the result, I'll work toward applying democracy and accept the result of the referendum. I can only hope that many will follow. I was an undecided until a few days ago, many people I know where too...in fact my own perception of it is that most people were undecided. Those will be the people that should be the less vociferous.

It potentially was polarising. My opinion is that most people are disenchanted with the UK political system. There are many loopholes in it. In each nook and crany, some people managed to make their nest...

I am very far from being Marxist but you have to agree that things need to change...unfortunately you cannot make an omelette without breaking some eggs.

In reply to French Erick:

you are Eric Cantona, and I claim my five groats!

In reply to Dr.S at work:

ha, yes good spot!..we had nest and eggs, just the albatross missing

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


Mine was the shiny new council offices just behind Waverly Station.

A snap poll of the statues in central Edinburgh shows Greyfriars Bobby (in a particularly fetching tartan overcoat), Adam Smith and David Hume all sporting large stickers and firmly in the Yes camp. Adam Smith reckons we should go for a Scottish Dollar.

In reply to Removed User:



Slightly undermined by the fact that they have stationed Police at many polling stations. It's obviously in everyone's interests for them to talk any trouble down, but c'mon, whoever takes press releases from anyone at face value.

In reply to nw:

And arresting people

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/18/man-arrested-assault-scotti...

In reply to Dr.S at work:

Oh la la mais non! I am much better with a football than he! My accent is also even more of a joke. Still, my opinion is as valid as anyone.

edited due a typo

In reply to MG:

.... and they looked after my bike whilst I voted.

In reply to nw:


Journos usually just cut'n'paste from them, lazy b'stards....

In reply to ByEek:

I think you are wrong, do you live in Scotland? I had very lengthy debates with friends who are opposing my view, but we are still friends. There is a great buzz about the country. I have never seen so many people interested in politics.It has shaken up people to get involved. Tomorrow it will be either way, I have friends and family who vote differently from me, but they are still my friends and family! We have a democratic right to vote which should be treasured. And if the majority says either way, well, we need to accept it and deal with it. It's fantastic IMHO how voters are actually engaged for once.

In reply to Heike:

This time in October and everyone will have forgetton about it!

Either way.

In reply to Heike:



I guarantee sizeable chunks will fail to do just that, whichever way it goes.
As for how fantastic it is that large numbers are 'engaged' - I agree, up to a point. But let's see how many are still feeling so positive when they realise they haven't got what they want-Yes or No. In the event of Yes,wait and see how people feel when they realise that the personal hopes and dreams they have pinned to the idea of independence aren't shared by everybody else, or those in charge. This is the problem with 'hot' politics founded on emotion and hyperbole.

In reply to nw:

So, you prefer that people have no opinion and are governed by a small elite. Interesting. I disagree. Everyone has the right vote.

In reply to Lusk:

Hahaha, that might be true!

In reply to Heike:
Nice strawman there. Can you show me where I said that?

In reply to ByEek:

I simply don't recognise the polarisation which you are speaking of. In the news you just hear about campaigners and extremists, but these are a tiny proportion of the populace.

In the non-newsworthy world, my partner and I just drank a toast to the future of Scotland (even though we voted on opposite sides today). Tomorrow I will meet a group of friends in the pub to have a 'referendum debrief' - there will be approximately equal numbers of yes and no voters present - and we're still friends you know. Today I had a long and open discussion with a pretty random sample of strangers on the subject - again there were yes and no voters present. No harsh words, lots of common ground, and sharing of ideas and listening to the ideas of others. Just because we have to choose between opposite words does not mean we have wildly diverging views about the political questions that are tied up with the question of independence.

Nevertheless, it has been an emotional day, I feel history and responsibility in it keenly. But strolling down to my polling booth on a warm evening, the atmosphere was friendly, open, expectant, smiles a little wider than usual. I think they all know that they are making a momentous decision, and most of them do not make it lightly. Most must have already voted or already decided how to vote, and instead of polarisation I sense, if anything, the opposite. My experience is more of a coming together of people than a division.

In reply to Ciro:


Indeed, it has been pretty good considering the numbers getting involved. That said any vandalism by Yes supporters is counterproductive, and to be condemned , but this overt 'intimidation' if that is what it is intended to be, is countered by a more subtle type of 'persuasion' I witnessed by the No camp.

I was taking my old mum to vote tonight ( not the same polling station as me)
As we were leaving the neighbours were in a huddle talking about the referendum. They are in a sort of sheltered housing association community. Anyway, as we passed the neighbours ( all elderly) she told them where were were going.
One of them said, rather curtly, to my mother:-

" I HOPE you are voting 'wisely' "
Mother is a No voter, (as they were- most elderly are apparently ) but she had not revealed that to them.

Mum is also a bit deaf, and asked him to repeat it, and it was repeated just as curtly .
She caught it that time, and promptly took the hump, and moved off,as she realised that he was inferring that they were all voting No, and Not to vote No was 'unwise'
She took this to mean, (rightly or wrongly) that Yes voters were perhaps not welcome as part of the community.

When we got in the car, she got a bit annoyed about this. Again , like defacing posters, unnecessary, and negative vibes , which quite possibly might have rebounded, as she has grandchildren that are Yes voters, and she knew they had thought about, and researched things long and hard, and she respected that.
I don't now know how she finally voted, I never asked her, but she was a bit shaken by this.

At work today, there was one vocal,and opinionated, person who was telling, all that would listen, that those who did not vote as he was voting, had not considered things properly, or were not capable of understanding the issues.

All this petty nastiness, does not help things after the vote, best to respect everyone's view's as, as valid as everyone else's .

We will all hopefully accept the result, whatever it is , with good grace, and get on making the best of life in the future 'we' have chosen together.

Of course there will be huge disappointment for some, and, it is down to those that have got their wish, to reach out to those people, and not crow about it.

My eldest voted No, I understand her husband voted yes, so best not to voice opinions like these,mparticularly those that infer intellectual superiority for one camp of another, as it is inflammatory and divisive.
I hope this is not a common thing across the country?

Interesting times

Maybe it's just a different demographic but I have been extremely disappointed with how little most of my friends and work collegues have been engaged. Yes, they have been engaged to a point but have done very little research themselves into the many different issues we face.

Infact last night on a pre-vote curry and drink, I found out, that out of the 8 there, 4 were undecided and had come to the conclusion to vote Yes on essentially what they had seen on the telebox in the last 2 weeks. Infact their specific reasoning was we should just give it a bash and we can't be bullied by big business or lying politicians. The one confirmed Yes has always thought that way just so he can give the Tory westminster elite a doo-ing.

At work, offshore, it is depressingly worse. Whatever the stun says is gospel. And the we hate Jimmy Hill brigade would always be voting Yes.

I fully realise that this is not the case everywhere but I and quite a few others have not witnessed this massive groundswell of political activism outside the major cities.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Not welcome in Scotland?

Personally ,I would have to say ....;

Bollocks.

In my little corner of Scotland this is just not,not,not,an issue

It doesn't even cross most people's minds.although you will always get the odd Nationalist arsehole with their narrow minded ,brainless attitudes.

These people are few and far between .and no one pays any attention to them.

I sometimes wonder whether English people expect The Scots ( or any nationality) to dislike them...Or want the Scots et al to dislike them.

In reply to Wicamoi:

Lovely post!

In reply to Wicamoi:

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


Are you actually trying to suggest that a "no" voter did that? It makes you look pretty silly.

In reply to Wicamoi:

Great post Jason. Pretty much exactly how I feel even though we disagree on the vote! See you in the pub tomorrow night!

In reply to IainRUK:


I don't think they're allowed (and they're not called 'polling stations', for some reason ).

In reply to jonny taylor:


The 'initimidation' thing was one of the main No campaign talking points, that graffiti plays into their talking point so it benefits No. Whereas with a secret ballot Yes have nothing to gain by writing 'or else' on a wall.

It is not impossible some idiot Yes supporter that couldn't think that far did it. However, 'cui bono' is a reasonable maxim. The graffiti benefits No so it is more likely that No did it.

In reply to Heike:

Sorry, i did't write any of this....moderators?

In reply to Kipper:

There are no exit polls because nobody has paid for them - usually the BBC/ITV pay for them according to the Graun :
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/scottish-vote-no-exit-...


PS some of them are 'Stations' (like my local one.)

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

>You despise isolationism and yet you've voted for it for Scotland? You've lost me there

I have no problem with any part of the UK or Europe. I've voted to divorce from the corruption of Westminster.

Ironically Scotland, as an independent nation, has the capacity to be a far more Euro friendly than as part of the frighteningly rightward marching UK as it stands (the UKIP mob etc).

Hope that explains my original point better for you.

In reply to andymac:


I have been going to Scotland almost every year since about the age of 1 (my uncle and aunt lived near Dundee), have spent months working up there, and have always found most of them very friendly indeed. As I said earlier - I had a very good time on a trip up to the Trossachs two years ago. I hope none of this changes as a result of this referendum. I hope also not too many people get hurt.

In reply to andymac:


Things like ABE do hit the target.

In reply to Dr.S at work:

Forgive my ignorance Doc.

But,what is ABE?

In reply to andymac:

Anyone But England - common enough term in a sporting context, and seems to be popular well beyond the UK - given that when most people think of being English they do so in sporting contexts, its very common for folk to form the impression that most people do not like the English. Hence the frequent confusion (?) in discussion on here.

In reply to ByEek:

The real winners are flag manufacturers.

In reply to nw:


It could be that, or it could be the Act of the Scottish Parliament.


I thought they all were.

In reply to Kipper:
Go on...

In reply to ByEek:

Regardless of the result I expect Alex Salmon's reputation to be enhanced. Even if he has lost he has conducted an extraordinary campaign.

In reply to Kipper:



Really?
" they're not called 'polling stations', for some reason"

In reply to French Erick:


Well, we won't have much choice will we. But I think I shall find it very hard to accept it if an inward looking, shortsighted minority of the population has destroyed the country I love. I'm off to bed now. I just have to hope I wake up in the morning and find the potential catastrophe has just been a bad dream; the whole thing seems surreal.

In reply to I like climbing:

He is undoubtedly a brilliant politician, but a slimy lying toad nonetheless. His brazen dishonesty about the currency situation has been absolutely spectacular.

On the other hand, I think Gordon Brown has massively enhaced his reputation. To hear him speak passionately, freed of the shackles of party politics, about a cause he clearly believes in has been a real revelation. If the Union has been saved, I think he can take much of the credit.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:



That's nonsense.. There is plenty of scum on both sides... Plenty.. Hence so many trashed no signs..

In reply to ByEek:

My God, Jeremy, the 'poll of pollsters' guy is pissed.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Well put Big Bob. Alea jacta est!

In reply to I like climbing:


of fooling millions of people with bullshit.
Can't argue with you on that!!!

In reply to Robert Durran:



I agree GB was a revalation - I've been fascinated by the whole thing.

In reply to Lusk:



A marmite politician I think.

In reply to I like climbing:

Please just stop this ridiculous 'marmite' thing.

In reply to Heike:

Here's some of the passion I'm not so grateful for:
https://www.facebook.com/topic/George-Square/137363492953426?source=whfrt&a...

In reply to Wee Davie:


Not really.


Do you think it's worse than in France*, Italy, Greece, Spain? There are bad eggs everywhere but generally if you watch the actual debates on TV they at least have a meaning, people exchange opinions, on the continent often the decisions are made elsewhere by the executive and the debates in Parliament are just rubber stamps.

Could you give an example of corruption in Westminster Parliament in which corruption has actually change laws of late?

* In France we've had three minister resigning for very serious financial matter, their remit being to fight financial frauds, the President has been dragged through the mud for his personal carry ons; in Italy the Berlusconi scandal is on going, in Greece the country is still in partial meltdown... something happened in Spain too but I can't remember what it was, really British scandals are peanuts compared to many other countries. Don't you hear about them in the news in Scotland?

In reply to Bruce Hooker:



You're not exactly setting the bar high there - if being no worse than the home of the mafia is where you want to see yourself then the UK is probably still doing OK.

In reply to nw:
They are just some morons, ignore them. There is always someone to use any excuse for violence. Police are doing a great job to sort them out. They are no reflection of either the yes or no camp. It's only a few anyways

In reply to Ciro:


That's Italy, what about the rest. I live in both France and Britain, going from one to the other, I know which one is more corrupt! It's a different problem but in France I have to lock every door and window, close heavy shutters and switch the alarm on even to go out for a few minutes, in Britain I haven't even got shutters, like most people and no alarm. Overall I'd say in public life there's the same difference in levels of honesty.

Britain has got a lot worse than when I was a kid but it's still in probably somewhere just above average in the corruption and honesty stakes in Europe... and as for the rest of the world!

In reply to I like climbing:


Enhanced in what way? Split a nation in two and then resign before cleaning up the mess he has created. Brilliant.

In reply to Heike:

Genuinely hope you are right.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


See, you're still not setting the bar very high.

Why should we be happy with "somewhere just above average"?

Why shouldn't we aim for better?

In reply to estivoautumnal:


Well you nearly voted for him didn't you ? What did you think was going to happen ? And you are Scottish.
My opinion isn't unique but I think he has helped Scotland. We don't know yet whether the promised concessions will be delivered. We live in interesting times. We will see.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Please go and write another good book, Gordon. There's a good chap.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Where were you living in France? 18th arrondissement? Unless you're comparing La Savine in Marseille to Henley on Thames your experience doesn't chime with mine. Every city in the UK has areas where a strange face will get slashed and the pattern will nicked off the carpet given half a chance.


I've no doubt about that. Thankfully there are a significant number of people (at least 45% of Scotland's population for starters) who don't see that as a reason not to try to make things better.

In reply to Removed User:



You can make things better without totally dismantling something.. which generally the UK has.. its a pretty good progressive society.. Rogerwebb off here has said a fair bit about the SNP's progressive policies…

In reply to IainRUK:


I would love it if that was the case, but I don't see how. There is no mainstream westminster party that represents anything like my political view any more.

Who can I vote for that will get rid of our weapons of mass destruction, stop sending our troops off to illegal wars, halt the firesale of our infrastructure, build council houses and protect them from the right to buy, ensure free higher education and healthcare are a right for all, promote immigration, and try to put a stop to the ever-rising in-equality in our society?

In reply to IainRUK:

You're conflating support for independence and support for the SNP.

In reply to Ciro:


Then maybe your political views are not mainstream?

In reply to I like climbing:

I just love the comment about "We don't know yet whether the promised concessions will be delivered". That applies to both sides of the debate. If the vote had gone the other way round, then all the no voters would be saying what you are saying.

In reply to Coel Hellier:


Indeed, that's my point - in the context of the UK as a whole they clearly are not.

However the SNP won power in Holyrood on these sorts of policies, showing that north of the border they still are.

For the large percentage of Scots who believe they are the way to run a better country, there is no way to achieve it whilst we remain in the UK.

In reply to neilh:


Do you really see no difference between the likelihood that

a) a set of policies devised, revised and campaigned on over a number of years, that were in step with the policies already implemented within the scope of the power they've got will be followed up.

or

b) a bunch of promises made in a last minute panic, totally unofficially during purdah, by a very unlikely coalition of political opponents, whilst a senior member of the ruling coalition was reassuring Westminster that it was just political maneuvering will be followed up?

In reply to Ciro:

To be honest no. For example on currency union there was no formal agreement just a series of wishes ( along the lines of we will negotiate)

In reply to Ciro:

% wise its 45/55. So your % is not large enough.

In reply to Removed User:


Paris suburbs, nearly in the country. We have different experiences, do all the houses where you live in Britain have heavy shutters or bars on the windows? I'd move if I were you, I've never lived in an area like that, even in London.


And there was me thinking the referendum was about Scottish independence. I must read the papers more carefully.

In reply to Ciro:


And yet in the great majority of SNP areas they voted firmly "no" in the referendum. How do you explain that?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29255449

In reply to neilh:

To quote biped, you're conflating support for independence and support for the SNP.

The fact that 55% of the voters voted against independence does not show that scottish political will is contrary to SNP social policies, it shows that 55% of the voters decided we shouldn't be independent.

If the next holyrood elections return a landslide labour or conservative scottish government that'll be a different story, but I find that highly unlikely - apparently quite a number of people joined the SNP yesterday, and my old man has been trying to do so today but the site keeps timing out, suggesting it's a busy place today too.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:



Fear.

Independence is a big step - it's generally easier to have courage in your convictions in smaller doses.

Annecdotal evidence, I know, but I know many people who said they'd like to vote Yes but couldn't bring themselves to do so for one reason or another (economic uncertainty, direct effect on their own personal work circumstances, etc.). I don't know anyone who said they'd like to vote No but couldn't bring themselves to do so.

I always felt that to pull it off Yes would need to be polling at least 55% in the run up to allow for the fear factor in the polling booth with the pencil in hand.

In reply to Ciro: I do agree, they say status quo tends to be maintained but the currency was a massive issue that salmons never got to grips with and it was fatal..

In reply to IainRUK:



Indeed, I think in the end this was a massive achilles heel for the Yes campaign, but I think whatever way they played it, it was going to be difficult.

In my personal opinion, had we voted Yes, it would have gone as predicted by SNP - for all the reasons BT said Scotland would lose out by not being in a currency union, rUK would have lost out too... I don't think westminster would have cut their nose off.

It was the strongest position for both countries in the event of separation so I can see why they wanted to stay on message with that, but I guess with hindsight a solid "plan B" would have enabled them to shift a lot of the focus on uncertainty. Westminster were never going to admit it would be the preferred option, so we should have been able to say "we want to work with you on a currency union to the benefit of both parties, but if you really insist on not doing so we will do X"

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

p.s. Bruce, if you want to go back and examine the political will of the people during the referendum campaign, I would suggest the papers are the last place you want to look.

With a few notable exceptions (George Monbiot springs to mind) the main stream media stayed remarkably well aligned.

In reply to Heike:

http://wingsoverscotland.com/enough-is-enough/#more-61887

If Scotland was a person they'd be under psychiatric care, there is something wrong with my country.

In reply to Ciro:


Fear of what? If they believed in the brave new world proposed by the yes campaign and voted SNP, why would they be afraid? It makes no sense. It seems more likely that they were put off by the Yes campaign, which is understandable, and/or as they were also areas with a higher than average turnout it was voters who hadn't voted for other elections who thought they just had to in order to block the break up of their country.

I don't think most people are afraid that easily, this answer notion comes from yes voters who can't admit that the majority simple didn't agree with them. I never noticed that the average Scot was more cowardly than anyone else, have you?

In reply to Ciro:

Or just the fact that because there was a high turnout people voted for what they believed in... the union.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Fear of change.

We are not robots (or vulcans), so fear doesn't make sense - it's emotional, not rational, and it's largely processed by a different part of the brain that just flags up to the conscious that something isn't right.

A complete absence of fear of change would be considered a serious behavioural abnormality, so you surely cannot expect an entire nation to display it?

Last weekend I was in Pembroke, back on gear for the first time in ages. Preparing for a safe crux move, logically assessing the situation - clear fall zone, bomber gear, attentive belayer - did not prevent me from feeling fear that I would not have felt on bolts, because moving back to gear was a big change that my subconscious could not be reasoned into accepting.

In reply to ByEek:
The 45% are not going away. They are dusting themselves down and starting to get organised again already. And the wide range of democratic groups involved in this campaign have learned a lot over the last two years. And this time the task is easier. To turn 45% into 55%.

In reply to neilh:


For sure there were a lot of people out there who believed in the union, particularly in the older generations who fought together through world wars and all that, but if you think 55% of the electorate believe in the union, ask yourself this:

Why did the Better Together campaign feel the need to focus almost entirely on the dangers of a break up? Why didn't they just spell out the advantages of the union that the electorate supposedly believes in?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


It wasn't all about nationalists. In fact the SNP strongholds were ones who actually voted no! Large parts of who chose the yes vote was Labour strongholds and of course impoverished areas. I said last week and I am not surprised at all that my own county North Lanarkshire voted yes as it is chocking under poverty and deprivation.


Firstly I am of English blood. My family came from London after WW2 and settled up here (surname Miles). I am also a Labour voter. This has nothing to do with England or the English but for our own democracy and self government!

I fear you have been sucked into the media machine.

In reply to neilh:


Glad you like it ! And I agree with you.

In reply to Ciro:

If you were a yes voter then those points were " fears"from the union. If you were a no voter then you can easily argue they were "benefits"of the union.All depends on the side of the fence you sit on and which way you want to view the result.

In reply to neilh:

My parents voted no even though they said they would like independence but they said they weren't risking their pensions as it is all they have.

In reply to alastairmac:


This is quite a common response after you don't get the result you want in a vote; have another vote.

In reply to Ciro:


Isn't that really just two ways of saying the same thing? You seem to be obsessed with presenting people who don't agree with you as negative. Is this because you lack arguments for breaking up a union which the vast majority in the UK think works well enough - and, as we now know, even in Scotland? Look at the map I linked above, it's really only a tiny tiny area where the break up had the majority.

Just saying "works well enough" doesn't mean they don't nearly all think changes are needed but that doesn't imply breaking it up it implies improving it.

Haven't you got the message yet? You are in a minority, even in your own bit of Britain, time to look forward instead of back 300 years and think positively.

In reply to Kipper:


That's generally the way democracy works. It would be a strange world where the results of elections and referendums were binding on future generations.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:

Lol, I did grow up in an area like that but I live in a locale often ridiculed for it's genteelness. The most common crime round here is not lifting your pinky when sipping from a china tea cup.


and the forums.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


No, it's not. To use the family analogy much loved by the better together campaign, it's like pleading with your partner not to leave because they'll lose out on your life insurance policy and the nice house you bought together, instead of saying "we've got a good thing here, lets work on our differences and make it even better." The two are very different.


Did you see any of the better together campaign?


No. The argument is simple - westminster governments do not and will not represent the aspirations of the people of Scotland.


If Westminster decides to move left, the support for breaking the union in Scotland will wane, but if it stays so far right I expect it to grow further.


You seem to be under the mistaken belief that the independence movement of today shares the backwards looking nationalistic sentiment of the 70s and 80s I grew up with.

The youth of Scotland voted in favour of independence, and those kids were not looking back at the past with bitterness, they were looking forward to how they could build a better society. Despite being quite despondent yesterday, today I'm excited and inspired by that.

Before this campaign started, I still thought independence was a pipe-dream, having gone from 30% to 45% support in two years, and seeing the swell of support from the younger generation, I now truly believe the union is living on borrowed time.

I think this piece from Irvine Welsh sums it up quite well:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/20/irvine-welsh-scottish-...

In reply to Ciro:


Once in a lifetime?

In reply to Ciro:


But they do, first in as much as Scotland is part of Britain so has many similar problems, then specifically time is set aside for debates which concern just Scotland - I linked such a debate above and it was very lively. Obviously the time for this will be a bit limited - I don't know if there are rules that limit it to the proportion of the population but that would be reasonable especially as you now have your own Parliament to debate locals issues. Being part of a country means just that, you now have the advantages of being in a country with some influence plus this local advantage.


It won't be "Westminster" who decides this, that's just ScotNat propaganda, it will be the people of Britain from Aberdeen to Dover to Cardiff to Derry. Pretending that a bunch of toffs living in Westminster governs Britain is one of the most irritating bits of SNP spin, the Parliament sits in Westminster, in London next to the Thames and until recently near the Docks but those who debate there are elected all over the country, including Scotland.


Your compatriots don't seem to agree for the majority of the country - the Islands will presumably stay with the Union, as will the Highlands and the Border - just look at the BBC map for goodness sake, it's only the densely populated parts of some of the Lowlands that agree. That's the simple reality - look at the map.

In reply to Kipper:


That will depend on whether the future will of the Scottish people will be solely to work within the current framework, or work towards another chance to change it.

Personally, I suspect it's going to be the latter. I'm already seeing a lot of anger that it took 24hrs for the "vow" to be broken and the start of a campaign to wipe the big three Westminster parties off the Scottish political landscape. The SNP are reporting 5000 new members since the result of the referendum, and there seem to be many more trying as their website is struggling.

Unless Westminster delivers something spectacular on their last minute unofficial "Devo-max" promises, I don't think this is going to go away.

In reply to Kipper:
The promises and pledges used to bribe some Scots to vote No have already been broken. Anybody that believes in democracy will be disgusted if that tardiness turns into a complete failure to deliver what was promised. If the Scottish people have been lied to I am sure there will be a reaction. And if enough voters change their mind as a consequence then it is quite right that the voices are heard and acted upon.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


My bad, I'll re-phrase:

If the larger UK population decides to move to the left, the support for breaking the union in Scotland will wane, but if it stays so far right I expect it to grow further.

The point still stands.


It's not that simple Bruce. That's a snapshot of today. The consensus seems to be that the youth vote for independence was strong and the elderly vote for independence was weak. Without wanting to sound morbid, that means the unionists are going to have to convince a lot of people to change their minds if they want to keep the 45% from growing over time.

In reply to Bruce Hooker:


Labour managed to move quite far to the right from 1997 already to reach out to middle England, and the Tories are already a bit scared about UKIP so will likely move further right on *some* policies to retain these votes.

The fact still remains is that Scotland is predominately further to the left than Middle England.


Only? We managed 45% of the vote with only Glasgow and a couple of other geographically small areas.

I seen that nice map which showed all of Scotland as red with only a few blue blobs which looks like a pretty cool graphic showing that most of Scotland voted no, but when you adjust that map to show shades to represent population areas those small blue areas suddenly become massive to the sparsely populated highlands, islands and border.


Also don't confuse people who do actually want independence but were just unwilling or unable to take the risk on the SNP direction. My parents voted no but actually do want independence and they just were not confident in any of the promises made as they are in the retirement years and the thought of short term instability wasn't logical. I can understand that.

Also keep in mind that many of us have never voted and never plan on voting SNP. I'm a staunch Labour man but I am now making it my person goal to get my local Labour MP out as she lords it up in London and didn't even bother turning up to the bedroom tax vote when she is MP for a large impoverished area - and yes I am aware SNP didn't either but as I said I don't vote SNP. I am going to try my hardest to see some sort of Labour reform happening up here or join the fight to get them out the door. At the moment I have quit Labour and just joined the Scottish Greens until I work out how to play the political game in the new landscape.

In reply to Ciro:

You're right - it isn't going to go away. It's inevitable, Scotland is on a one way street to independence. Friday in the big scheme of things wasn't even a defeat for Scottish independence, the result was an increase in those wanting independence. As a Yes voter of course I was disappointed but I'm now looking at the bigger picture.

Given the lies, fear and propaganda that was broadcast by a compliant media during the campaign, I can't blame a large proportion of No voters for being cautious and sticking their cross in the bottom box. A lot of those voters will see Westminster fudge/renege on the so-called Vow and a 6% swing can be achieved next time, especially if we see a change of view from some of the so-called Scottish press/news who left nearly 50% of the population without a trusted mainstream news source. Labour in Scotland are going to get skelped.

I wouldn't like to predict when the next referendum will be - there are a few factors which will affect/decide that but it's feasible we could be going for this again within 5 years. Thanks to Scottish independence, Westminster has some major constitutional issues boiling away now, they've plenty rope to hang themselves with.

What is it with Labour at the moment? Gordon Brown thinks he's in charge of Britain again and now Jack Straw is bumping his gums about denying anyone the chance to have an independence referendum ever again, methinks the Establishment is slightly rattled by the 'rebellious Scots'!

On a brighter note I bought my last Daily Record last week. Does anyone know how good the Airdrie Savings Bank online banking is

In reply to drmarten:


I'd never heard of them till this juncture but:

"The Bank has no shareholders. It does not need to pay dividends and any surpluses are available for reinvestment for the benefit of customers. The Bank is governed by a Board of Trustees, appointed to represent the interests of depositors and to ensure that the Bank is managed prudently and efficiently. The Trustees give of their time without remuneration and have no financial interest in the Bank's progress. This form of corporate governance is another of the Bank's unique qualities."

Sounds like the sort of thing I should like to look into.

Thanks

In reply to Ciro:
Ciro, I don't know you, and I've never spoken to you, but thank you for expertly and eruditely saying what i would have liked to, both before and after the result.
I genuinely thought I was happy with either result in our referendum, I thought that we, as a nation, would win regardless of the poll.



I woke up to find out that we said no, and my first thought, my first word was COWARDS!
I will never be ashamed to be Scottish, it is part of everything I am, but I am genuinely so very very deeply saddened that a portion of my people feel that lambs are better than lions.
It seems strange knowing we haven't lost anything in real terms, but that that we have lost so much in terms of respect, of unity, and of ability to determine our own future.

In reply to alastairmac:


Quelle surprise. Although they don't seem to have had that much influence on peoples voting intentions.

In reply to crustypunkuk:

"I woke up to find out that we said no, and my first thought, my first word was COWARDS!
I will never be ashamed to be Scottish, it is part of everything I am, but I am genuinely so very very deeply saddened that a portion of my people feel that lambs are better than lions."

This is just wrong.. maybe some did vote out of fear, for many they just want the UK to remain united, live in the same unified country as the rest of their family, not create more borders in the world..

You may not agree but you are just alienating the 2 million plus by dismissing them as cowards or lambs.. thats not how to engage with them...

In reply to IainRUK:

fair point.
I am left deflated by the thought that more than 1m people registered to vote but just didn't bother. We had a great turnout, but it should/could have been so much better.
I'm sure that they may well be the self same people who will in due course complain that things are not their way!

In reply to crustypunkuk:

Cheers crusty, I woke up feeling much the same as you, angry and let down, but Iain's right there were many different reasons for people's votes.

Many of those who voted out of fear had good reason to. We shouldn't brand pensioners on low incomes, or working families with squeezed incomes as cowards for worrying about whether they could cope with the transition to independence - a better Scotland would not happen overnight and it's easy for me, with no mortgage and no dependents to say the pain of transition would be insignificant compared to the gains. Not so easy when you work for a company threatening to pull out of Scotland.

I think we can and should however be angry at a political establishment which whipped up false fears, a corporate world that helped to support their fearmongering, and a media that lined up almost to a man to tow that establishment line.

We have a choice now, to accept what they did, or to turn the heat up.

In reply to Ciro:

So do we remain subservient, doff our cap to the master for the rest of our days?

In reply to crustypunkuk:

I liked this status from six degrees to independence this morning, suggesting a few non-cap-doffing options (https://www.facebook.com/SixDegreesToIndependence)

A new day. A new beginning.

Couple of posts this morning. The first is suggestions for things we can do right now.

1. Stay engaged.
2. Consider joining the SNP, Scottish Greens or SSP. Many people are doing so. They're the only parties fighting for Scotland and there's a General Election around the corner apart from anything else longer term. Send no more Tories, Red Tories or Lib Dems to WM. Links are here.

http://www.snp.org/get-involved
http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/
http://www.scottishsocialistparty.org/join-us/

3. Have a good hard think about what supermarkets, businesses and bank you use. Continue to vote with your feet and your wallet.
4. Join CND. Sign up to Rethink Trident.

http://www.cnduk.org/

5. Refuse to give the BBC and the rest of the mainstream and print media air time. Cancel your apps. Unfollow them. Find new honest sources of information. Start with the Sunday Herald and NewsnetScotland but there will be more.
6. Find post-YES projects and groups to support. We'll post them here as we hear more about how people are regrouping on the ground.
7. Find your nearest foodbank and offer donations or help. The vulnerable need us now more than ever.
8. Set up a Twitter account and follow people and groups with the same passion as you.
9. And when they break their promises make sure everybody knows.

Finally, the grief that you're feeling, box it up and keep it. Try not to dwell on it but never forget what it feels like. The memory of it will help keep you focused, determined and strong.

Obviously you don't have to do any of the above. But it's a start. Please feel free to make other suggestions below.

#the45

In reply to Ciro:
Thanks for that.
as soon as i can rationalise the indyref decision to myself, I can decide how to move on!

In reply to crustypunkuk:


Do you feel subservient?

In reply to I like climbing:


I am. Have spent three years on it already and have at least 18 months to go.

In reply to Ciro:

Regarding trident..

Someone asked would I be happy living near them..

Yes I would, I have a nuke plant just down the road, I had a nuke plant near me in North Wales, there's a nuclear reactor bang in the centre of Boston, some near NYC…

They are in Scotland largely because of deep water access.. that was why a huge container port has been planned for near Largs.. its one of the huge advantages the clyde has, hence its ship building past.

They are also huge employers, is it still the biggest single employment site in Scotland, some are saying they don't want trident, others happy to see the Banks go.. we all know Oil has a finite life.. so how will Scotland manage?

In reply to IainRUK:
Yes.
I'm ruled by a party i have no desire for, and that have no mandate over my country.
That makes me subservient.

In reply to crustypunkuk:

How do you have no control over?

We often have a government in power we personally did not vote in.

But I think anyone in the UK claiming they live a subservient life needs a dose of reality…

Who are the people who rule you?

and anyway how will that change when we become a united states of europe, just a collection of federal states in a unified europe?

In reply to IainRUK:

I'd be interested to know where your figures come from!
The Clyde is our biggest employer? Really?Regardless of the ridiculous inaccuracy, Would there be no Clyde after Indy?
We're happy to see the banks go? Really???????? Would we have no banks after Indy? Would no bank have a centre here after indy?
You're right in one respect though, our oil does have a finite lifespan- MUCH longer than the westminster scaremongers (and you) intimate, but lets not let the truth get in the way of a good scare story, eh!
These points are somewhat void now though, but please don't feel you have to include truth in anything you post!

In reply to IainRUK:

regardless of how i personally voted, my country voted the tories completely out, apart from 1. The tories took control of westminster and became the uk government- am i not subservient and under the rule of an unwanted power? Ruled by an essentially foreign power with no desire or interest in my local issues?
I fail to see your point about Europe i'm afraid..........are you suggesting that we are better alone?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


Great ! Look forward to it.

In reply to crustypunkuk:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/25/scottish-independence-could-threaten-trident

It says there.. the trident base is the single biggest employer..

BuT I worked close to there and that was what we were told.. I worked at sea and had no qualms about the risks around there.

Yes someone else said they were happy the banks were threatening to go..

Don't be an idiot.. you have no idea what lifetime I put on it.. I just said finite..

I've shown you the link.. I've not lied I've just repeated what was in the paper. At 6000 jobs, plus indirect jobs, it is still a massive employer on the west coast.. who's fishing industry is wrecked.. that was why I worked there, looking at more sustainable fisheries as socio-economically the region is in trouble.. there was also a container port planned but locals were opposing it, whereas others were very keen on it due to jobs.

"Member of the Scottish Parliament Jackie Baillie of the Scottish Labour Party has been campaigning against the YES vote.

“Faslane is the biggest single site employer in the whole of Scotland,” she says. “It accounts for a quarter of the full­ time jobs within my local area so the impact of removal of Trident and the closure of Faslane would be devastating on the local economy and on local jobs"

http://fsrn.org/2014/09/scottish-independence-referendum-rekindles-debate-o...

In reply to crustypunkuk:


Trident might have to stay at Faslane for as long as two years while an independent Scotland builds its naval headquarters at the base, the largest industrial employer in Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, the deputy First Minister, said on a BBC webcast yesterday. That represented a move on the SNP’s part, Hammond said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/removal-of-trident-from-independen...


So there's many sources backing that up.. maybe its not but its certainly one of the largest…

So calm down, put your drink down and try responding with some clarity...

In reply to IainRUK:

Replacing trident is set to cost an eyewatering amount (anything up to £130bn depending on who's figures you believe) - I think we could employ a lot of people to do something much more useful with that money.

I am not anti nuclear power - I was brought up in a scientific household and whilst I have some reservations about the waste disposal, I know the chances of another windscale are vanishingly small these days and I'd happily live next to a plant. Or as happily as I'd live near to any large building at any rate, and much happier than a large petrochemical facility.

I was however brought up in a very anti-nuclear weapons family. When I was a kid, my father shocked many of his friends by his strongly held conviction that "I'd rather you fried my children, than I threatened to fry yours".

Despite the fact it was my life he was talking about, that belief sits well with me - I do not find it acceptable that we maintain an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, armed and ready to obliterate another population.

We maintain that we'd never use it unless someone started firing nukes at us first, but in that case I'd rather the UK was destroyed but someone, somewhere was left alive, than we engaged and made sure that the human race was wiped out.

On a more practical level I don't believe there is any threat we are currently facing that can be countered with nuclear weapons. Unless you want to pre-emptively wipe out the middle east, nuclear bombs will not combat islamic militants, our biggest threat from china and india is an economic one, and Russia is not going to drop a bomb on us in the knowledge that it would have to take on the rest of the western world or wipe them out too as a result.

I also don't believe that a rogue state could secretly establish a credible nuclear threat within the 5 years it would take us to re-establish our own nuclear capability if we really had to.

Where is the logic in spending billions on a weapons system that will only be used at the end of the world, when there are people in our country queuing up at food banks to feed their children?

Scotland has vast resources - fish stocks, agricultural land, renewable energy potential, thriving food and drink, tourism, chemical and digital technology sectors, and a skilled and well educated population with many top class universities. I do not believe it needs nuclear weapons, a bloated banking sector or oil to be a successful country - although I do think the oil would be very useful for smoothing over the transition.

In reply to IainRUK:

Also, as long as we all maintain our nuclear capabilities, there's the possiblity that something like this could happen again, and next time we might not be so lucky:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alarm_incident

In reply to Ciro:
The fish is in a bad way.. its much healthier in Shetland, which is very pro-Union.. it is recovering but generally its not going to be the cash cow it was.

Should you force them to follow?


Nuclear has risks.. of course, but its also a deterrent.

As I've said many times I think Scotland would have done fine.. so would the rUK.. I do think the union is stronger as a group but after a bump we'd all get on with our lives.. that's what happens in life.. despite the naysayers the end of the world doesn't happen..

Many on here were loving the 2009 crash saying it would be the end of capitalism and massive unemployment, yet we went through it OK, in fact the UK got off lightly…


Id dispute many top class… but its a strong education system which is now massively underfunded.. with severe job cuts. Once solid Universities like Stirling just have no technical support, no technicians.. there's just a massive shortage of money which will hit soon.