Feargasm, part 3247
Oh, what the heck, let’s do all of it.
We can’t find a single line in the text of Blair McDougall’s article for Progress which refers to any sort of “revolution”, or discusses its “bloodless” character. Pretty impressive – we’re only two words in and already there’s something inexplicable.
“With Scotland’s vote on independence one year away, Blair McDougall finds the nationalist strategy stalled
Next September Scotland will be asked to make a choice. Do we want to remain a strong part of the United Kingdom, or do we want to make a leap into the unknown and go it alone?”
We’re fairly certain that’s not the question on the ballot paper.
“It is a choice that the people of Scotland will make, but it is a decision that could have a profound impact on everyone who lives on these islands.
Most readers of this article will likely be inside the UK but outside of Scotland and so may not have been following Scotland’s debate as closely as those of us living it every day. So, with a year to go, where do things stand in the independence debate?”
For some reason, Progress appears to have neglected to include an alternative assessment from anyone on the Yes side, or even anyone notionally neutral to discuss it from a Labour perspective. We’re sure it’s just an oversight.
“The first thing to understand about the referendum is that it is taking place in spite of the level of support for independence, rather than because of it.”
Let’s generously call that “disingenuous”, rather than a flat-out lie. “The level of support for independence” is completely irrelevant in the context of the referendum taking place. It’s happening because it was a manifesto commitment of the SNP in 2011 and they won a majority of seats in the Scottish Parliament, enabling them to pursue the goals of said manifesto.
Nevertheless, public support for a referendum has been consistently and conclusively in the majority even before 2011. In 2010, for example, the Guardian referred to “regular opinion poll findings showing that up to 80% of Scots want a referendum”. Whether they wanted independence or not, Scots wanted to have a referendum to settle the matter, and the Scottish Government is granting their democratic wish by giving them the voice that the three London-based parties fought for decades to deny them.
“Alex Salmond has worked hard since he became first minister to try and tell the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland that we here in Scotland are somehow desperate to break away from them.”
[citation required]
“In telling this particular story he is being dishonest. For generations, support for independence has been a minority view. The overwhelming majority of people are entirely comfortable with being a Scot within the UK.
Current polls average out to around 60-40 for the Union. That’s a majority, but the word “overwhelming” seems rather a dramatic exaggeration, particularly when several polls put it considerably closer or even give the Yes camp a small lead.
“Salmond and his party strategists know this. That is exactly why he absolutely refused to talk about the constitution during the last election.”
Except for putting it prominently in the manifesto, of course. The word “independence” appears 35 times in the document, including the fourth paragraph of Alex Salmond’s statement (p3) and the third paragraph of Nicola Sturgeon’s (p5).
(For comparison purposes, the number of times the word “socialism” appears in the Scottish Labour manifesto for the same election is zero.)
“He knew that to push independence front and centre in the campaign would have lost, not won, votes.”
Or, that he knew the election wasn’t about independence, but about the devolved government of Scotland. The referendum IS about independence, and we think it’s fair to say that the First Minister has mentioned it once or twice since 2011.
“Indeed, 55 per cent of people who said that they voted for the Scottish National party in 2011 have said that they are not in favour of independence.”
We’re still awaiting a source for this claim.
“Indeed, since Salmond started his campaign to break up the UK, support for independence has dropped in almost every published opinion poll (apart from one poll that the SNP commissioned and which has since been largely discredited).”
“Largely discredited”? We must have missed that happening.
“Recent polls show that support for independence currently stands at just one in four.”
See above. (This is also, obviously, a subtly dishonest way of presenting even already-dubious data. It implies that backing for the other option is 75%, when in fact a large percentage of voters are undecided.)
“But Salmond pushes on undeterred. He is a politician who builds his success by creating an unstoppable sense of momentum. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, his narrative of recent Scottish history is that independence is inevitable, that devolution is a staging post on a journey to the inescapable dissolution of the union.”
[citation required]. But “overwhelming evidence to the contrary”? What evidence is that? Can you have evidence about the future?
Scottish independence may or may not be “inevitable” and “inescapable”, but as there’s never been a vote on it before and there won’t be one for almost a year yet, it seems unarguable that there is, in fact, no “evidence” either way.
“Therein lies his difficulty today. His belief in leaving the UK is based on faith rather than facts. Like all nationalists he starts with a conviction that Scotland should, and will, be a separate state. The evidence follows afterwards.”
Isn’t that how ALL debates work?
“He describes those leading the opposition to his project as a traitorous ‘parcel of rogues’ whose job is to talk down Scotland.”
[citation required]. As far as we’re aware neither Alex Salmond nor anyone in the Yes campaign has ever described opponents of independence as “traitorous”.
“In his mind, when these ‘anti-Scottish’ forces are defeated, national pride and patriotism will awaken and Scots will achieve their true destiny. It is an utterly dishonest and objectionable prospectus.”
It’s also, as far as we know, one Blair McDougall has just invented.
“To suggest that people who do not share his faith-based world view are somehow less Scottish than those that do”
Once again, we’ve never heard Alex Salmond or anyone in the Yes Scotland campaign say such a thing or anything remotely akin to it.
“is an insult to the majority of people in Scotland – the very same people that he has to convince to vote for him if he is to have any chance of success.
Most Scots do not feel any less proudly Scottish just because we are part of a union with the other nations within the UK.”
[citation required]. The most recent survey found that 62% of Scots defined themselves as exclusively Scottish, with just 18% opting for “Scottish and British”.
“The great Scottish achievements and triumphs – from the age of enlightenment to our modern innovations – have occurred as part of the UK. They may not have happened because of the union but being part of the UK certainly has not prevented us from being a distinctive and successful nation.”
That rather depends on how you define the word “nation”. It is, clearly, impossible to say definitively how much better Scotland might have done as an independent country.
But the example of Norway – a nearby nation with an almost identical population and very similar natural resources – seems to provide a possible comparator, by whose standards Scotland within the UK has fared extremely poorly.
“In fact, from the preservation of our own religious and legal institutions, to the powerful and successful devolved parliament in place since 1999, Scottishness has always coexisted as part of something bigger.”
This sentence doesn’t appear to make any sense. In what way did Scottishness “coexist as part of something bigger” prior to 1707?
“The nationalists’ strategy is trapped between a need to excite the electorate about the change they claim could occur with independence and a fear that a radical offer will only further alienate a sceptical electorate. The result is an independence offer best described as ‘everything will change but nothing will change.’ Ironically, this attempt to ‘de-risk’ independence has only further alienated voters.”
[citation required]
“Sometimes described as ‘indy-lite’, rebranding a product Scots neither want nor need has left a once-passionate and well-defined cause seeming inauthentic and bloodless.”
In fact, polls consistently show that when offered a three-way choice between independence, the status quo and a “halfway house” of greatly expanded devolution, Scots divide into three almost exactly equal groups. What Blair McDougall sneeringly dismisses as “indy-lite” is at least as popular as either of the two other options, and usually the most popular.
“Take the issue of what currency an independent Scotland would use. A couple of years ago Salmond argued that the pound was bad for Scotland and that early entry into the euro was essential. After the eurozone crisis the SNP switched to a policy of creating a sterling zone after independence underpinned by a fiscal pact between an independent Scottish government and the government of the remainder of the UK.”
A sensible reaction to events unforeseen by any UK politician.
“Honest nationalists have raised questions over whether such a fiscal pact would make a ‘free’ Scotland truly free, as Edinburgh’s spending and taxes would have to be sent for sign-off in London. And this policy is not something that the SNP could promise: a currency union, by definition, would be something the rest of the UK would have to sign up to.”
Even a contractually-agreed currency union would not give Westminster a veto, merely require the Scottish Government to pursue broadly-sensible fiscal policies.
“With Scotland having just walked away, would the rest of the UK agree to enter into a currency union with a new foreign state? It is a big risk, yet the SNP refuses to say which currency Scotland would use if a deal to share the UK pound could not be done.”
A straw man. Any country can use Sterling even without the agreement of the rest of the UK, so the question of Scotland being refused permission simply could not arise, as McDougall goes on to note:
“There is vague talk from Salmond of using the pound informally – which would leave Scotland without a lender of last resort.”
This isn’t true. The Bank of England is not the only option, and Scotland’s assets, particularly its natural resources, would ensure the availability of lending.
“The result of the nationalist effort to pretend that leaving the UK comes without any cost or risk has, paradoxically, meant that the electorate in Scotland has actually been left with greater sense of risk.”
[citation required]
“If on this issue, as with so many others, the Yes camp sets out a radical change, along with the risks and potential rewards, voters could make a judgement and some might even decide the gamble was worth it. Its dishonest strategy has only increased the level of doubt.”
In fact the only dishonesty and doubt on the issue has come from the No camp. The UK government has consistently refused to say that it would reject a currency union, for the very good reason that to do so would be completely irrational. Refusing it would have disastrous results for rUK businesses who trade in Scotland (which is almost all of them), and be political suicide.
George Osborne could in all probability completely torpedo the Yes campaign by simply saying categorically that there would be no Sterling union with an independent Scotland. (And Ed Balls could say the same on behalf of a prospective incoming Labour government.) So why doesn’t he? The answer is that every company director in the UK would string him from the nearest lamp-post.
“As a group of people who believe unquestioningly in the need for an independent Scotland, the nationalists now struggle to articulate why it is that we need independence. Their starting point has been an ill-defined promise of a more socially democratic nation. It is a familiar tune from them: We will be all the things that Labour used to be. Of course, while Labour was introducing the welfare state, the NHS and the minimum wage, the SNP was, as ever, arguing that what really mattered was independence.”
The SNP backed all of those things, despite regular Labour attempts to suggest otherwise. The welfare state is currently being dismantled at speed, thanks to a UK government implementing policies rejected by large majorities of Scottish MPs. The Scottish NHS is only saved from the large-scale privatisation currently being inflicted on its English equivalent by the fact that it is, and has always been, independent.
We’re sure the irony is lost on Mr McDougall.
“Leaving aside its record in government, where it has been sacking nurses and cutting college places, the idea that the SNP are socialists seeking to build a Nordic model north of the border lacks basic credibility.”
We’re not aware of the SNP ever claiming to be “socialists”.
“Oil companies have been offered a cast-iron guarantee that taxes in the North Sea will not rise”
[citation required]
“while multinational companies have been promised a Reaganomics race-to-the-bottom corporation tax cut of three per cent below the rate of the rest of the UK – regardless of what rate the rest of the UK has.”
Leaving aside the addition of the pejorative adjectives, ALL companies – large, small, multinational or one bloke operating out of a shed in Auchtermuchty – have been promised lower Corporation Tax. Mr McDougall’s own party cut it by FOUR percent over its last period in office, as well as making numerous other downward adjustments.
“In contrast to the effort expended to reassure international business, on issues that matter to Scots, like pensions and welfare, the nationalists have failed to make basic preparations. When Scotland’s chartered accountants pointed out that cross-border pensions schemes are required to be fully funded under European Union rules it caught Scottish ministers completely by surprise,”
[citation required]
“despite the fact that the creation of a new border would create a £200bn cost for UK pension schemes.”
This is completely untrue. There would be no new “cost” whatsoever as a result of independence, only an obligation to adjust the structures of some pensions in order to avoid exposing to EU rules the vast black hole which has arisen under the policies of successive UK governments.
“When, at the start of this year, after five years in office, Scottish ministers gave a panel of experts less than six months to write a plan for establishing a new welfare state the experts concluded that separation presented ‘serious risks to the continuity of payments’. Remember, this is not an insurgent political movement: It has had the full power of the Scottish civil service at its disposal for six years now.”
The quote cited by Mr McDougall applied only in the event of an immediate separation of welfare, which had not been proposed. The report found that it would be mutually beneficial to both Scotland and the rUK to have a period of transition in which the two nations shared infrastructure.
“When you consider that the nationalists have been waiting 80 years for this moment, their failure to articulate a compelling, credible vision for independence is remarkable.”
The Scottish Government’s white paper on independence is due to be released in November, fully 10 months before the referendum. We understand Mr McDougall’s impatience to begin rubbishing it and insisting that Scotland, alone among the nations of the world, is incapable of running its own affairs, but that seems like plenty of time to discuss its vision.
“However, those of us who want to maintain the unity of the UK cannot be complacent. The nationalists are well funded, disciplined and will devote every waking hour of the next year to their cause.
But we also cannot be complacent because the cause we are campaigning for is so important. In practical terms, sharing risks, rewards and resources with the rest of UK is a better future for Scots.”
In fact, we’ve already been told by Gordon Brown and other Labour figures what that actually means – Scots subsidising the rest of the UK even more than they do now.
“We have the best of both worlds today with a distinctive Scottish voice in our parliament alongside the back-up of the bigger UK economy. But we should not lose sight of the principle at stake here. This is also a battle of ideas between division and unity. We are proud to argue that the people of this small island have far more that unites us than divides us.”
Bad news for everyone in Northern Ireland, Orkney and Shetland, there.
We’re still not sure what the “revolution” was or why it should be notable that it was “bloodless”, but not for the first time we doff our caps to Blair McDougall and his incredible ability to pack large numbers of lies, distortions, red herrings and unsupported assertions into small amounts of text. We make it 35 this time round, which might be a new record.
We remain, we’re pretty sure, his most avid readers.
It’s worth pointing out that time and again, by knowing how internationally trade-able currencies work, both Swinney and Salmond have said in various sources that Osbourne can’t stop them using it.
Whether that is a sensible option in the long term is kinda doubtful but I’ve no doubt in the short term it would be fine.
Only a proper numpty who knew absolutely nothing about economics work would persist with this “lose the pound” narrative. Is that what Blair is?
The man is a buffoon and not to be trusted.
Oh, what the heck, let’s do all of it.
Now, that’s the Rev Stu we know and love!
He’s just a bit crap, might be read by anoraks and labour wonks but as far as the public are concerned, he’s just another boring political word cruncher, and a pretty accomplished one at that.
I mean I would say this, but when he talks, I am immediately turned off. He’s so obviously not a genuine person.
I’ve already mentioned the lips thing haven’t I?
Great response to Blair McDougall’s mindless feargasm! Keep up the good work!
Stu – you’re obviously feeling better very quickly. Can you now share with us which of the readers’ many helpful and varied cure-a-cold tips worked best for you, as the cold season is fast coming upon us up here 🙂
I thought there was something like a “truth Team” set up somewhere? Oh well I guess it was a lie!!
A comprehensive demolition of the half truths, obfuscations and downright falsehoods included in Blair McDougall’s piece. Well done Rev., especially in your delicate cold-induced frailty. Get well soon.
How this man gets away with producing this farrago of untruth is beyond me, as is the inability of his masters to control his output of vitriol. But then I look at who, exactly, are his masters and then I know!
“Stu – you’re obviously feeling better very quickly.”
Nah, still got the cold. Yesterday was just a gloomy miserable day for all sorts of reasons, whereas today I got to start on a positive note (100K readers) rather than by watching George sodding Osborne.
Just tae say thanks for the badges at the rally last week rev
I was in the independent country of Montenegro (popn. 625,000) recently and they use the Euro, without, as far as I know, actually being in the Eurozone. No one can stop them using it and they seem to be doing fine (if you count the number of super-yachts at anchor).
Rukiestan is down and out if Scotland does not use Sterling as its currency.
Presently the UK’s balance of payments is hovering near the bottom of the league table of all the countries in the world. Without Scotlands exports they would sink even lower if that’s possible putting pressure on Sterling , interest and therefore borrowing rates. Remember we are estimated to be producing 2 million barrels of oil per day by 2017. We will only use about 150000 bpd, (based on uk consumption of 1.6mbpd)
That will leave equiv of 1.8million barrels per day to be exported outwith Scotland, at todays rate Brent crude is trading at $108 per barrel (Down due to less demand from States etc) that is £66.66 x 1.8million x 365 days nearly 44 billion per year plus the whiskey, food etc, probably about 50 to 60 billion pounds per annum off course oil prices can go up as well as down but they are more likely to go up. Therefore the gove of Rukiestan would be more stupid than they look is they tried to stop Scotland entering a currency union. IMHO staying with Sterling for the short/medium term is best for us as being part of a weak currency will help our exports otherwise with our own currency it will be the opposite.
By the Way the use of the word Rukiestan to describe the rump of the UK after Scotland leaves is not meant to be anti anybody or indeed racist.
It just sounds good…
I sometimes wonder if Blair McDougall has been quietly offered a safe Labour seat (Dunny-on-the-Wold?) post referendum, for services to fearmongering and the UK state.
Blair McD can lie and lie knowing he will get away with it because the
msm will not hold him to account. It the same old chestnut , if independence
is so bad and we’re so cumbersome why are they lieing to keep broken
britan.
Yes, we can be Scots within the UK, but to me it feels like an impotent kind of Scottishness – an identity in name only..
Personally, I think that the ‘best of both worlds’ involves a new partnership of equals.
And I suspect many people feel this deep down, which is why I think the NO vote is very soft. Yet many people will still vote NO out of fear, not hope.
A ‘Don’t hold your country back’ campaign nearer the vote, might help to keep the NO vote at home..
Why do only 81% not trust him? Maybe the other 19% never hear him as they live in caves:-) Our allegedly guaranteed destiny if we vore YES:-)
I don’t think there will be any safe Labour seats soon.
Today’s piece by Derek Bateman is well worth a read on why the MSM buy all this crap and regurgitate it with our comment.
@Jingly Jangly
Rukistan, quite good but I prefer Rukitania. Has a certain air of fantasy about it
He is not believed he is self destructing, losing all credability, even within his own ranks, he thinks he has followers AND CHEERING SUPPORTERS. When he falls, and fall he must, he will find, the suport he thought he had, and friends he thought he could rely on has long left his side. or were never there. the last payday in sight.
“the very same people that he has to convince to vote for him if he is to have any chance of success.”
We’ve already voted for him. Twice. That’s why we’re having a referendum next year on whether we want Scotland to be independent or not.
McDougall should perhaps consider the following passage from the Liber Pluscardensis. (Pluscarden Abbey chronicles)
Now Edward, invading Scotland, meaning to destroy it, was stricken by illness through the vengeance of God on St. John’s Eve; and when he came, lying on a carriage, to Burgh on Sands, without sign of repentance he miserably died.
And in this same expedition an English knight, Sir William Banlister, was seized with a grave illness and fell into a trance. He, rapt in the spirit, saw as it seemed to him, King Edward carried off by a crowd of devils, singing, who bore him to Hell.
This knight Sir Banlister, for the great fear this gave him, renounced the world.
Look into your soul McDougall.
I love how the NO campaign believe this debate is purely one-sided.
They believe that The YES Campaign have to convince 50% + 1 of the population that their vision of a future Scotland is the one to choose. WRONG Blair.
The NO Campaign parties are currently doing quite a good job at convincing people that there is only 1 future available to Scotland, and it sure aint the same as the present!
Have to say, reading this guff and his comments beneath, he just sounds like one of the tedious BTL posters. Same style.
Devoting endless passages to what he says Salmond thinks is also horribly reminiscent of the unionist style of debate that pushed me off some other comments sites. I got utterly fed up of their entire argument being a strawman one based on what they were saying I thought. You can’t argue with people like that because they’re not listening at all, just railroading.
I hope Blair Jenkins and others who might be debating are primed and well versed in that technique because you can’t let people get away with saying you believe things you don’t and have never remotely said.
Major Bloodnok – aye, and before the Euro, they used the Deutschmark. I believe in both cases, the “official” currency users are not exactly overjoyed at Montenegro using the currency, but I don’t see Montenegro being held up as some sort of pariah state, so it’s obviously not THAT much of a big deal to them!
If Alex Salmond and the SNP are so obsessed with independence and neglect all else, why do they keep coming first in elections to the Scottish Parliament?
Isn’t Blair McDougall simply insulting the Scottish electorate?
Mendacious feargasm
Murray McCallum
Isn’t Blair McDougall simply insulting the Scottish electorate?
Yes.
This is also a battle of ideas between division and unity.
This is what gets me, the framing of the independence debate as Scotland “breaking away” from the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, as if we all have an equal status in the union.
Let’s be clear about this: this is nothing to do with division, and everything to do with self-determination. The divisions already exist by virtue of the fact that we’re still calling Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland by those names instead of North, South, West and Overseas Britain. The divisions already exist by the presence of borders, separate institutions and parliaments. The divisions already exist when many places in the rUK won’t accept Scottish currency, and laws are different depending on where you live.
This is nothing to do with creating divisions which don’t already exist. This is to do with not wanting to be governed by people who don’t represent us. Like it or not, England, you got the government you voted for. Like it or not, North England, you got a referendum for a devolved Northern English parliament, and you voted No (though as with the 1979 referendum in Scotland, there was a lot of shady business in the aftermath). Like it or not, Wales, almost half of you voted for the Conservatives. And Northern Ireland seems to be fine with being a colony given its overwhelming rejection of unification back in 1973. Scotland, on the other hand, returned by far the lowest votes for the Conservatives of any of the three British mainland countries, and has consistently voted against the Conservatives for the past 60 years.
If there are any English, Welsh and Northern Irish people who actually do think the Scots are “leaving them” as opposed to seeking true representation, I have only this to say: Stop making this all about you, guys. You got the governments you voted for. We didn’t.
The Yes campaign uses quotes that the perpetrators wish they hadn’t said eg Brave Dave’s “Scotland … successful independent country.”
The No campaign use quotes they wish their opponents had said eg the bad Blair above “He describes those leading the opposition to his project as a ("Tractor" - Ed)ous ‘parcel of rogues’ whose job is to talk down Scotland.”
Given the contribution of Scots to logic and the Enlightenment, which campaign describes themselves as “proud Scots but …”
Some say McDougall is disingenuous on a regular basis; however after reading this piece I still conclude this individual goes beyond manipulation of material and should be accused of bare faced lies again and again as the Rev’s piece does.
Brilliant work
Sorry but the guy is a puddin’ that needs lampooned regularly if he is at this carry on.
Blair mcdougall is the ("Quizmaster" - Ed)’s ("Quizmaster" - Ed). Sell out your country for a few pennies (or several hundred thousand pounds and a possible peerage)
Is it any wonder that ordinary people are revolted by this desperate excuse for a human?
I often seriously wonder what actually motivates Blair MacDougall. I mean is he genuinely a socialist, and does he genuinely believe that a more progressive Scotland will NOT be possible with independence, but actually will be possible with (a remote possibility) Miliband as PM in London?
How does he motivate himself, misleading and distorting to the detriment of Scots and Scotland, day in, day out. A very strange person, who, as we now know from polling evidence. most Scots think is a liar.
Of course the reality is, he has a pointless task. There is NO positive case for the union, so there is a need throughout ‘better together’ to tell whopping great lies and scare stories on a daily basis. It really is that simple.
HDQ
This is what the Unionists fear.
Being HDQ, especially by WOS.
Oh, you don’t know what HDQ is?
Well its that thing that WOS keeps doing with people like Blair and Hothersall.
Think on it as a kind of Wallace Revenge.
Is every one with me?
The Unionists mostly deserve to be HDQ by superior intellect and argument…
Rukistan, Rukania – can they not call their country what they call it now, i.e. England?
An interesting observation about Blair McDougall made by my partner. I always thought McDougall was one of those fat BBC / STV fitba pundit types. For some reason it was in my mind he was a weegie. My partner says to me, ‘God I was listening to that Blair McDougall on youtube.’ ‘Really’, says I, ‘what does he sound like, I’ve never heard him?’ ‘Edinburgh private school rugby type’, says the partner. ‘Oh good’, says I.
Eric,
You’ve got me hooked. Gonnae tell us what HDQ is. Suspense is killing me.
Since hardly anyone in Scotland believes anything this man says,I wouldn’t get myself in a lather about any of his utterings.
@Eric
HDQ is the only acronym for it
And it’s especially good when the Rev does it.
I often seriously wonder what actually motivates Blair MacDougall.
100 k/yr + expenses.
OT An old dinosaur (GARL) we thought we’d slayed weeks ago has reared its ugly old head again , and the BBC is of course throwing it another lifeline.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24352404
It is just astonishing that Strathclyde Passenger Transport is not mentioned once in the article!! Tomorrow’s article, Rev?
Blair McD. will go down in history as the only man to campaign on two “sure things” (David Miliband leadership election and anti-independence) and lose them both.
Looking at this, it’s a wonder Project Fear hasn’t resorted to exploiting arachnophobia yet.
‘”Spiders to be the size of horses in independent Scotland,” warns academic.’
They can’t be far away from it.
Should it naw be HD&Q?
Robert Louis – Hung, Drawn + Quarterted 🙂
Three instances of No” Voters” I’ve met, and their fears.
1) A man who has never voted is going to vote No, because he is a Monarchist? Even though we are going to keep the Queen as head of state. 66 years old.
2) A man who didn’t want to pay £3 for a bottle of milk, which he thought would happen if we became Independent. Asked why he thought that would happen, well he just did. 40 years old.
3) Small boy, not exactly a No, but concerned that the price of food would go up, his Dad told him it would it for sure., but with no reason to explain this. 7years old
Then two people who have just decide to vote Yes.
1) Woman who didn’t want to even discuss it 6months ago. Was moving to Yes, as information was provided, then went to the Rally and March. Now a firm Yes.
2) A man who practically shouted at me that we would be going in to a ‘black hole’, and he didn’t like Alex Salmond. Over the last few weeks looked at information then moved to Yes. 65 years old.
‘ In practical terms, sharing risks, rewards and resources with the rest of UK is a better future for Scots.” Think it’s about time that old chestnut was tackled too. Why is it better than doing so within Scotland? As other normal countries do. And of course it’s primarily, from the UK perspective, all about the resources.
To borrow from the film “Billy Madison”
Blair McDougall, what you’ve just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent article were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having seen it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
scottish_skier says:
1 October, 2013 at 6:18 pm
I often seriously wonder what actually motivates Blair MacDougall.
100 k/yr + expenses.
*******************
Right on the mark. You might want to add the prospect of Ermine fur and all the trappings, a la Darling!
I don’t watch the telly, and I don’t buy newspapers, but I do listen to radio and have a quick gander at the headlines when I pass the stall in the supermarket – I can say hand-on-heart that the image of the Manchester demo in the article is the first I’ve heard of it.
Just as most Scots and few other folk in the ‘UK’ will be aware of what happened in Edinburgh last weekend, any action by citizens which takes the form of rallies and/or demonstrations doesn’t even have to be ‘memory-holed’ because, in effect, it never happened in the first place.
just read the latest Bateman piece. Wow! Pure dynamite. Can we hope that the Yes campaign will do something with this -perhaps act on the many calls for an intervention into media bias? Curious though. Whilst I understand the pressure on journalists to get a story, do they not see that their no questions asked approach has led to the near collapse of our broadsheets? And eventually to the loss of their jobs. I’m putting to the side the moral imperative to report the facts, of course.
Just read the article on the Progressline site.
He fair got his arse tanned in the comments. 🙂
@For die,
“Can we hope that the Yes campaign will do something with this”
Yes are already dealing with media bias by highlighting the true picture with their extensive leafleting and referring people to internet sites like this and that of Mr Bateman assisted by the Rev’s Aye Right leaflet.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/make-yourselves-useful/
I think many of you truly believe that McDougall and all the other Bitter together mob just lie.
The big tragedy is they actually believe the lies they spout.
Any of us that have tried reasoning with a naysayer know that already.
They just refuse to accept the reality and truth they walk about with fingers in their ears and eyes closed.
They genuinely hate Alex Salmond and all the SNP .
They believe as Lamont said that we are a virus ,worse than Nazis.
They want to believe that AS is dishonest and all nationalists are nasty people.
This is why when we point out anything to them they refer to it as an attack or abuse.
Be assured of this ,these die hard fundamentalist unionists hate us with a passion.
Mcdougall is lying sack of shite we all know it but more importantly so does most of the Scottish public know it , let’s all just marvel at his buffoonery .
@Jon D. Yes, with you on that. Thinking also though of eg http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-scottish-government-approach-the-osce-and-request-an-election-monitoring-mission (link posted on WoS before) or a statement from Yes, as a minimum, stating that media bias is of concern. I understand Scots Government Ministers and pro-Indy MSPs treading carefully but Yes is boots on the ground representing us folk. Many of us hope that there will be a call, re BBC, of non-payment of licence fee. We can do this as individuals but who will hear us? Complaints to the BBC are largely ignored – I speak from experience. It is compounded by the latest farcical accusation by the Labour Party in Scotland of BBC bias. The Yes Campaign response to bias, is not in my opinion, sufficient. Suffice to say that bias in the printed media correlates with falling sales. At least there, you can vote with your money.
The big tragedy is they actually believe the lies they spout.
No. They don’t. That’s their main problem. When someone tells something false, believing it to be true, it’s not a lie and they come across as convincing/genuine. When someone tells a lie, knowing it to be so, those listening can tell something is not right about what they are saying.
@Tarranaich
“You got the governments you voted for. We didn’t.”
So simply put! I’ll be using that at some point.
“The first thing to understand about the referendum is that it is taking place in spite of the level of support for independence, rather than because of it.”
————-
Rev, I had a comment last week from one of my colleagues at work who is a Unionist who said, that the SNP were forcing this onto the people of Scotland. I wonder if this is a new line that is being trotted out; that we nasty Nationalists have dumped this horrible referendum on the people of Scotland without their permission.
I didn’t reply with the SNP manifesto pledge for a referendum, but I did point out that the SNP won the Scottish elections, and had taken a majority in the Parliament. To me, that meant that the people were not happy with UK politics.
Which then led to a bitter rant from my colleague which I will not bother to repeat. One thing is for sure. For those in denial; if you throw the facts at them, they seem to go into hysterical mode. This is NOT in the bag as this lot make it out to be. They’re ‘bricking it’ …make no bones about it!
This afternoon at half past four I was standing at Stirling railway station (not ‘train’ station!), watching everyone coming and going and wondering how many Yes voters were in the crowd, and how many potential ones.
Inform them and inspire them, and this referendum is there to be won. That’s what McDougall and his sort can’t stomach. I cannot believe that, next year, this nation will turn away from the opportunity to take charge of its own affairs and will instead say, ‘Nah, we’ll just go on being governed from the capital city of the country next door.’
Given his past almost unintelligible spouting should we assume that this stuff has been written for him? They are attempting to make him seem at least to have a grasp of history, even economics maybe? They just can’t make him suddenly appear to know what he’s talking about, they’ll try anything though. Next instalment?
Another one bites the dust.
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/8111-better-together-charity-complaint-thrown-out-by-watchdog
Jamie Arriere – An old dinosaur (GARL) we thought we’d slayed weeks ago has reared its ugly old head again , and the BBC is of course throwing it another lifeline.
Is the BBC keeping this alive because it thinks (or has been informed) that Glasgow City Council has something up its sleeve on the rail project?
“The great Scottish achievements and triumphs – from the age of enlightenment to our modern innovations – have occurred as part of the UK. They may not have happened because of the union but being part of the UK certainly has not prevented us from being a distinctive and successful nation.”
That rather depends on how you define the word “nation”. It is, clearly, impossible to say definitively how much better Scotland might have done as an independent country.
———————–
This is absolute drivel by McDougall. Scotland was ahead of the world curve even before the Union. From John Knox’s vision of a school in every parish, it meant that the children of Scotland, and their descendants for the next 100 years, were being taught to read, write and do basic arithmetic. We were a 100 years in front of England!
Scotland was not just destined to transform with such an educational system. It was going to happen! No other nation was close to what Scotland had in the mass educational system. How could it not?
A few years into the union, it wasn’t long before the English landowners and businessmen realised that Scotland was a treasure trove of educated people. They were snapping Scots up up by offering them key positions within business in the fledgling ‘English’ empire.
The Union actually drained Scotland over the next 200 years. Scots took the opportunities in the empire, and settled all over the world. It’s one of the key reasons why Scotland’s population didn’t grow (same with Ireland which at one point in the 19th century, had a population of 9 million people!! Today, Ireland is around 5 million like Scotland). Along with the clearances and famines, emigration was a fundamental factor in Scotland’s low population growth.
As you say, Rev ….only God knows how Scotland might have risen from her backward poor state, and thus headed into a very different future if she had never made union with England. We might not have had an empire, but Scotland might have become a viable trading nation due to our literate and educated masses. Creating a safe banking system that was offshore and probably safe from invasion, and away from the wars in Europe might have appealed to companies who would want their money invested in a safe place. In the end …who knows what might have been!
“I didn’t reply with the SNP manifesto pledge for a referendum, but I did point out that the SNP won the Scottish elections, and had taken a majority in the Parliament. To me, that meant that the people were not happy with UK politics.”
More relevant would simply be to point to all the opinion polls conducted between 2007-11 which without exception showed that a clear majority of Scots wanted a referendum, whether they were pro-indy or not. People wanted (and want) it settled one way or the other.
@BuckieBraes ‘ I cannot believe that, next year, this nation will turn away from the opportunity to take charge of its own affairs and will instead say, ‘Nah….’
No, they won’t. Speaking to 2 of my colleagues last week. They were asking about the Rally after I emailed them a pic (of me!) on WoS. Both said they would weigh up the merits nearer the time and both were, though formally undecided now, minded to Vote Yes. Why? As they said, why would they miss the opportunity.
I still get Labour voters telling me that the SNP allowed Thatcher in – can you point me to some info folks? For them that is the root of their hatred.
Anyone who spouts the mantra of being “proud of being Scottish and British” (my dad is included here despite my best efforts) should live in England long enough until they realise that the Scots are practically the only people on the planet who don’t use “Britain and England” and “British and English” as synonyms….
Yes I guess by attempting to indoctrinate the Scottish electorate by saying that the referendum is being forced on them as opposed to being an actual choice, the ‘no’ lot expect people to reject outright their right to decide whether their country remains slave to Westminster or whether their actual vote will determine how their country develops…Also how it takes its place on the world stage and how in fact their vote will be instrumental in changing for the better the functioning of their own country. Never mind the influence that this will have on the rest of the so called ‘uk nations’ in terms of the mindset of the people in rejecting the right wing destructive attacks on the people, by a uk government which is meant to work for and with the best interests of their own people but are doing the opposite, except for their very rich pals.
It was one of these daft arguments, Rev. They are not often in my section, but as soon as they saw me (there were two of them), then it kicked off. Usual nonsense of ‘There he is; bloody nationalist.’ I then mentioned that I had marched at the weekend, and at that point, they leapt down my throat. That was when they came out with the ‘Salmond has forced this referendum on us when no one wanted it.’
At the end of the day, I just pointed out, that the SNP had a majority in the Parliament, and therefore the people of Scotland were not happy with UK politics overall.
Believe me, mate. I get called everything under the sun at times. There are few Unionists with whom, you cannot debate with. But there are glimmers of hope; there always are.
One or two in the section who are Unionist, are quietly asking what I know. They’ve spoken when no one else is within earshot. That gives me hope. To the first two, I don’t think I can ever win over, even if I got on my bending knees. It’s literally a hysterical shout down, but there are others who may be ‘No’ men, but they are willing to listen. Really willing to listen. I’ve told them to wait for the white paper …and then we’ll quietly talk.
@Paula Rose
I still get Labour voters telling me that the SNP allowed Thatcher in – can you point me to some info folks? For them that is the root of their hatred.
Firstly, the loss of the vote of no confidence only brought forward a general election in 1979 by about 6 months. There was going to be one anyway. Labour should have called it in 1978, but they delayed, and the Winter of Discontent happened etc. On the vote of confidence: the Liberals voted against the Labour government, and so were at least as culpable as the SNP. David Steel voted the same way as the SNP, and yet this is rarely mentioned. Thirdly, the SNP only voted against Labour because the rigged 40% rule of the devolution referendum meant that Home Rule for Scotland failed. It was Labour’s own fault that the referendum failed. The SNP had also actually supported the Labour government of 1974-1979 in a solid way.
In addition, Thatcher unfortunately was always going to win the 1979 election, primarily because of the failings of the Labour government, and also due to the economic problems of the mid to late 1970s. The idea that Labour would have won the general election if they had won the vote of no confidence is barmy. Lastly, Callaghan blamed Labour backbenchers for the failure of the devolution referendum, and losing the vote of no confidence. He did not blame the SNP for the downfall of his government.
@Paula Rose:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/just-for-the-record/
Thanks Rev
@pro-loco
It looks like a continuation of the MSM/Better Together tactic of repeating lies and distorting the truth often enough that people will start believing it. In this case, despite it being shot down at FMQs and dropped from news reports within 24 hours, they wait a few weeks and just repeat the accusations or at least try and waft the smell in Salmond’s direction, despite having well-skidmarked underpants.
Of course SLab and Glasgow Council will know the details of it – they, under the guise of SPT, bought the bloody land in the first place!! But once the rules of the SG having no choice but to sell the land once the project was cancelled – Govts are forbidden from indulging in land/property speculation – the story will be dropped once again – but the rumour is allowed to circulate AGAIN.
Having read Derek Bateman’s blog today about the Boothman/Sinclair relationship, you can only surmise that Sinclair has asked the BBC what they have found about this story since it started 2-3 weeks ago, and has chivvied an update.
(and muttley79 xx)
@Paula Rose,
You might find this BBC link handy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/28/newsid_2531000/2531007.stm
@JLT-
By the sounds of it, you’re right on the front-line.
If it helps at all, please remember that hundreds of thousands of people are with you when you confront these folk with sound, reasoned argument – it just so happens that YOU are the one who has to carry that message at that moment.
Can’t be easy, and I’ve no idea what kind of atmosphere you’re working in, or even what you do – but be assured of this: if you keep the heid and tell these folk a fraction of the facts you have to-hand, and don’t let them rattle ye? You’ll win hands-down every time, cause you know you’re telling ‘the truth’ – no-one can beat that.
If they don’t like it? Tough. But they can’t beat ‘the truth’, and that’s what they’ll respond to, whether they admit it or not, and they’ll vote accordingly, even if they’re cautious about admitting it.
@JLT
On education – We were a 100 years in front of England!
More than that. Universal education in Scotland began in 1561. In England, it began in 1833.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_England
@JLT
On education – We were a 100 years in front of England!
More than that. Universal education in Scotland began in 1561. In England, it began in 1833.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_education_in_England
Monty Carlo
@ Jamie Arriere
So having received a bloody nose once and the BBC/Scottish Labour relationship being what it is why has this story cropped up again? They want it to remain a live issue for another as yet unrevealed reason !- too paranoid? too gullible?
JLT said; “…We were a 100 years in front of England!..”
And with their current drive back to Edwardian conditions it’ll be 200 soon after a Yes victory!
D.
Mosstrooper says at 4:08 pm
@Jingly Jangly
Rukistan, quite good but I prefer Rukitania. Has a certain air of fantasy about it
I like both but think Rukitania has an appropriate Duchy of Grand Fenwick feel about it. In The Mouse That Roared, the Duchy is involved in an arms race with the US.
In The Mouse on Wall Street (1969), the Duchy disrupts the world’s finances. In an attempt to dispose of a sizable royalty payment from an American chewing gum company by investing it in failing companies, Duchess Gloriana finds she has the Midas touch for the stock market, and in a flurry of rumor and assumption, the Duchy becomes a financial superpower.
In The Mouse that Saved the West (1981), it is discovered that the Duchy is sitting on the largest oil deposit in the world.
Well it think its appropriate.
And it goes on re. teaching http://news.stv.tv/scotland/241607-scotland-rated-as-top-destination-in-poll-of-international-students/
Look at research eg http://www.sdi.co.uk/invest-in-scotland/why-scotland/business-and-economy/innovation-and-research.aspx ‘In fact, Scotland’s academics produce one percent of all research publications in the world – ranking Scotland third in the world for the number of research publications published per head of the population’.
Made me chortle when we heard via the Tory/Labour conference – sorry, they sound the same – that Scotland would lose access to the UK research councils funding, of which Scotland get’s more than it’s population share. Duh. As all other things, as it’s UK funding, we pay into it and we get more because we’re good. Funding awards are based on highly competitive bids.
TW, TP, too stupid. Don’t think so.
Sterling work Rev.! (as ever)
1. @Rod Mac, Be careful about describing people as ‘they’ and claiming to know what ‘They’ think about us bud, because that type of ‘Black & White Thinking’ is exactly where the BT campaign is trying to pitch the debate.
most people have been deceived by the Unionist Parties/MSM, so they are there to be convinced.
2. I’m delighted that Blair McDougal et al are continuing to tell these lies, as we have seen in a recent article on Wings, that this is one of the reasons people are turning away from No.
(Most) People in Scotland are not ‘zipped up the back’ the more lies and silly scares, the more people stop and say ‘aye right’ from that moment on they begin to look for answers.
people don’t like to be lied to or taken for fools, so the BT campaign is now finding itself in some trouble, as they clearly did not factor in the success of sites like Wings, when they decided to pursue the negative campaigning style favoured by Unionist/Status Quo campaigns.
No wonder they despise us at BT Headquarters and have tried so hard to demonise Rev.
We have messed up the whole BT campaign big time, and we are slowly but surely turning their big guns on them, as we expose the lies and media manipulation.
104, 000 so far, Blair/BT………. suck it up!
ianbrotherhood
Hi Ian,
To be honest, I get on fine with both guys. With one of them, it’s the usual East Coast – West Coast banter (I’m an east coaster), but when it comes to politics …and Scottish politics at that, then it’s typical banter. To compare it, would be like two supporters supporting two different football teams. Imagine Hearts v Hibs.
Everyone in my section knows my politics. In the end, there is no way that we can win this unless someone sticks their head above the parapet. Someone has to be shot at or take the blows.
But as you say, for as long as I don’t provoke, antagonise, call names …anything like that, and I just mention the basic facts, and ‘check the internet’ if you don’t believe me’, then amongst the other, it may be perceived that old Jamesie here, might have something (that’s my name).
Along with another colleague, we have both noted that the main ‘deniers’ are the those folk who almost go into a hysterical mode; fingers in the ears and a La-La-La-La-La mentality. They talk over you, shout ‘rubbish’ and ‘Scotland is not populated enough / too small / too poor / too stupid / too scared …’ (choose form the list …or choose them all!!!). their voices are loud so everyone can hear them as they try to put you down.
I have no doubt that everyone …and I mean everyone …who has come to this site has suffered the same.
But as you say, Ian …patience is the key. Slowly, but surely, we just keep plugging away. We may not get everyone, but others will listen, and they will quietly become ‘Yes’ folk. They may not be the hardcore like we are, and they may only talk privately with their family and friends and tell them what they intend to vote, but for the rest of us ..yep ..it will have been a long 3 years. We are the ones who have do the fighting, and to take the crap that goes along with it. But I believe that we will win.
As you said earlier; for as long as we have the ‘truth’, then that is all that matters. I’m sure there is a saying in the Middle East, or it’s an Arabic saying (I’m not sure), but I’ve heard the saying ‘the truth always rises up.’
Only God knows what I am going to do on Friday the 19th of September once this is all over! Find a life I suppose… in fact …the wife will demand it!
@JLT
I know how you feel. I am retired now so dont have to suffer the workplace thing but I do know some hard no voters and like you try to engage with folk while out and about. An example would be a lady that I bumped into while dog walking some time ago. (Her two dogs were pups and my dog slightly older.) She has obviously done very well for herself as I found out at the end of a walk she loaded her two wee Jack Russells into a new Bentley Continental. Having said that She is from humble origins as she told me that she originated from the high flats in Springburn. I had a wee attempt at converting to Yes but I gave up quite soon thinking that I was wasting my time. I havent seen her for some time and then a week or so ago I met her again this time she had a friend with her as we met she exclaimed to her friend “Look heres Citizen Smith coming” (Hope that you are old enough to get that?)
I now just say “Whatever” to hard no voters and move on to someone who might just listen to what I am saying. Some folk are just a waste of time and energy.
TMINJ
Mate, that sounds just like the quips that I get.
And yes, I remember Citizen Smith (I’m 45. I was about 12 when it first came out). What was the line …’Power to the people’
Totally agree with that line. Power to the people.
More fear over pensions and currency from Danny Alexander speaking at ICAS in London –
http://icas.org.uk/news/dannyalexander_londondinner_05112013/
Essentially, we’ll be thrown out of the currency union so that we don’t drag rUK’s booming economy back into the mire.