A letter to a Unionist
Hello. Someone directed me to your blog today, which I’d have posted this on if I could have been bothered with registering for a “LiveJournal”, “TypePad”, “AIM” or “OpenID” account, whatever the heck those are. But I can’t – at my age I’d rather have a root canal than waste my time signing up to yet another obsolete social-media network for the dubious privilege of commenting on someone’s website – so I’ll write it here instead. You’re welcome to any extra traffic the link will bring you. Consider it a gift.
I don’t consider your post to be “scaremongering”. I consider it a heartbreakingly sad example of something we used to refer to as the “Scottish cringe”, and which is also sometimes known by the term “Stockholm Syndrome”. For someone so evidently young, the terrified conservatism, fear of responsibility and absence of ambition displayed in your post is far more tragic than it is when those much older and more comfortably set in their ways than you recoil in terror from the idea of change.
It seems you fancy yourself left-wing, yet you’d rather see your homeland ruled by Tories for six years out of every ten than by its own people, who haven’t voted for a Tory government since, I suspect, before your father and mother were born. Perhaps your grasp and understanding of that reality is distorted by the fact that you have no first-hand experience of a Tory government prior to 2010 – I’m guessing you were a toddler when Tony Blair won his first victory in 1997, after the rest of us had lived through almost two decades of Thatcherism – but reality is what it nevertheless is.
Many people would consider it a great source of pride that the modern campaign for Scottish independence hasn’t resorted to suicide and violence to make its case, and has instead relied on the power of persuasive argument and democracy to reach the point where the people can have a free vote on their future.
Apparently you won’t consider Scottish civic nationalism a “proper” movement until someone sets themselves on fire, despite there being no need for them to do so. It’s rather ironic that you go on to sneeringly attack nationalists as being driven by “Braveheart” – how cuttingly original of you – when it depicts the very sort of dramatic and grisly self-sacrifice that you profess to consider the only legitimate form of protest.
Cowering in fear of phantom bogeymen, you timorously proclaim Scotland’s inability to defend itself. I note that others have already pointed out the fallacy of your argument in financial terms, so instead I’ll merely ask: defend ourselves against whom, exactly? Which nation(s) do you consider to represent a military threat to the people of Scotland? The only country which has even attempted to invade Scottish soil in the last thousand years is our now-friend and neighbour to the south.
You might retort that while nobody within 5,000 miles currently poses any imaginable hostile intent to Scotland, we can’t predict the future. But if you truly envisage a future where China or Russia might conceivably set their legions against Scotland, do you imagine that they would trample their way across the whole of Europe to get to us without the entire world being reduced to ashes long before they reached Gretna?
And if they somehow did, do you consider that Britain’s tiny armed forces would be able to resist them? The People’s Liberation Army of China stands almost 3,000,000 strong, with three-quarters-of-a-BILLION more of military service age available for conscription. Their active troops outnumber the UK’s twenty to one, their potential conscripts by a far greater margin than that. Your fantasies of imperial British strength belong to your grandparents’ generation, not yours.
Perhaps you’re thinking of Al-Qaeda and their ilk? But defence against terrorists is the province of the police, not the army. Sending soldiers to far-off lands to depose their sovereign governments is what makes us the target of terrorism in the first place. No Islamic fundamentalists ever attempted to kill Scottish people before the British Army was sent on misguided crusades to Islamic countries to impose our will on theirs by force. And when they did, we sent the police, fire brigade and ambulance services to Glasgow Airport, not an armoured division.
I’m sure that you’re right in your assessment that Alex Salmond is no intellectual match for an idealistic schoolgirl. In that case, might I suggest that in an independent, free and democratic Scotland, you exercise your right to vote for someone else? Alternatively, of course, you could simply continue to put up with whoever the people of south-east England, who outvote Scots three-to-one in the UK, choose for you.
I note that you fear the economic fate of Ireland, a country whose people’s productivity still continues to exceed that of the UK despite its calamitous recent difficulties. Yet you display the exact same mindset of obedience and meek compliance that resulted in the disastrous decisions the Irish government took to deal with its problems. A far better alternative was available.
(And despite everything, I haven’t observed the Irish people hammering on the door of the UK demanding to be let back in, nor indeed the people of any other country which has ever gained its independence from Great Britain.)
You fear unemployment in an independent Scotland, yet doggedly insist on staying in a UK crippled by austerity policies supported by every party at Westminster, both in government and opposition. How many “dips” would it take to convince you that neither the party who presided over the crash nor the ones who are making it worse offer you a future of hope and opportunity?
When I read your blog post, it felt like the account of someone who’d been in prison for decades and feared the outside world. Another well-known and widely-acclaimed film came out at almost exactly the same time as “Braveheart”, when you’d have been just a baby, so you might not have seen it. If not, I highly recommend it to you in its own right, but also for one scene in particular. The poverty of your confidence in your own people, and yourself as one of them, is no less poignant, distressing and ultimately pitiable than that of Brooks Hadlen, depicted in those 58 short seconds.
If you read these words, I’m sure they’ll cause you no doubt in your convictions. Certainty, however misplaced, is the speciality of the young. But to see certainty take such negative, defeatist form is much less common. A nation’s youth is normally its vanguard, full of optimism and possibility, too often gradually crushed by the advance of the years. You, my young friend, with your life ahead of you, are old and beaten long before your time. Perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps that DOES scare me after all.
Very powerful, and beautifully crafted Rev. I wish I could write like that. It would take a very heavily armoured set of convictions indeed not to be swayed by your words. At work, so access is blocked to the blog, but I look forward – probably not – to seeing what set you off when I can get on the net unfiltered. Keep up the good work, the best site by a long chalk that I have found, thank you.
Astonishingly well-written piece. So direct, so succinct and so right.
1,000 words – not one of which is superfluous – that gets to the very heart of the matter.
You’re very kind, but I could definitely have trimmed some fat in the opening paragraph.
Excellent riposte Rev. Stu! I see the estimable Mr Daniel responded to her blog, as have I after wondering whether it was worthwhile. I honestly find it hard to understand the atavistic Scottish cringe response of so many unionists, particularly those of her tender years; I can quite understand a principled stance of being opposed to independence, and having arguments to back it up; what I find harder to stomach is the superficiality and lack of any real evidence which leaps off the page of such people!
Thank you, you put into words what I sputter and steam, and (yes) fume over. Non of which is good for my blood pressure!
Our enemies aren’t the idiots we see, they’re the smart bastards behind them. You’re talking to a puppet. What does that make you?
Calling them smart bastards gives them far too much credit. I’d drop the adjective….
I just hope her work at the Uni is of a higher standard than her blog post- No citations or nuffing 🙁
This is (or supposed to be) a democracy.
Some people in Scotland will vote ‘No’ in 2014 as is their absolute democratic right.
So far, those people I know who are definitely voting ‘No’, have been unable to give me a single explanation or reason beyond ‘better together’, Salmond is a fat currymunching liar, Braveheart, SNP dictatorship post-2014, defenceless, no money and too stupid…
I have had ALL of those put to me as reasons to vote ‘No’.
All I ever hope for is that people like that and the blogger you’ve referred to Stu can hold their hand on their heart and believe they voted ‘No’ for a real reason other than lies or fear.
As someone who’s probably about her age, this really is sad. Whatever happened to vision and hope for the future?
I’ve now read the piece, very good responses below from Doug Daniels and Galen10, no great hope that she will take any of it in though. Well done for trying, everyone.
What’s most depressing is people like this who clealry suffer from the Scottish cringe and “we’re too shite and rubbish to be an independent country”; who genuinely seem to think we’re somehow more stupid, incompetent and useless than every other independent country in the world can only really be speaking for themselves. If that’s the way this girl sees herself, fine. Sad, and maybe a shot of CBT could help. But maybe she just lacks any confidence and self-esteem. But someone who feels like that need take no part in running the country when we’re independent.
It’s simlar to the “I’ll vote no because it’ll be too complex and too much of a faff to negotiate independence.” Personally, I know nothing about negotiations or legal arguments and if someone told me, “Cath, after we vote yes, you’ll be doing all the negotiaions with Whiltehall” I’d probably vote no because I couldn’t be bothered and the outcome would likely be very bad for Scotland. Thankfully, I trust there are some very skilled legal and negotiation minds out there – here and in England – who will relish the opportunity and do it very well.
Ditto with defence, currency, international affairs. We have some brilliant people here who are not given the chance, and who could make Scotland an infinitely better place.
If this blogger isn’t one of them and wants to cringe away thinking we’re all crap, that’s her perogative. She doesn’t have to do a thing – those others will do it all for her. Currently she’s presumably happy with Westmisnter doing it all for her. What will be very sad will be if such people stop those who are competent, skliled and intelligent here having the opportunity to use those skills for the benefit of Scotland and the rest of us.
I find it incredibly sad that someone so young has no faith in or proper understanding of politics in her own country.
The negativity just oozed out of her writing, not a very pleasant thing to read.
Excellent address to many youngsters whose political outlook is to be scared by their own shadow. I don’t doubt that in many cases this is a generational issue (“they fuck you up, your mum and dad”) and the red rosette tag in her blog reveals this as the 2013 manifestation of voting labour … because her dad did, and her grandad etc etc
I’ve rarely seen anyone embrace fear so willingly though in a blog piece like hers. Imagine people like this making political, social and cultural decisions in the next 10,20,30 years and then you can imagine the bleak dead landscape that will become the backdrop to Scottish life in the event of a NO vote.
Really dont understand how anyone can describe themselves as on the left yet defend a state thats done more to oppose social justice across the globe than almost any other state to have ever existed in the world.
Does her mammy know she’s oot?
By the way, if I hadn’t seen the blog name, Red Rosette, I would genuinely have assumed that it had been written by a Tory. Makes you think.
Jeez, Stu, I’ve just read the original piece. What an appallling indictment of our education system. I’m not talking about the sporadic inability to construct intelligible sentences, I’m talking about the absence of critical thinking, the lack of intellectual rigour, the chasm that exists where a logically constructed argument should stand, the abysmal poverty of imagination and the evident incapacity to challenge orthodoxies of any kind. Apart from that she’s doing well.
Anyone who has had a role in ‘educating’ this young woman, hang your heads in disgrace. We hear constantly about ‘Scotland’s Shame’. This is Scotland’s real shame – that we produce people as timorous, negative, defeatist and crassly superficial as this young woman. I can only hope she is not typical.
Vronsky says:
Our enemies aren’t the idiots we see, they’re the smart bastards behind them. You’re talking to a puppet. What does that make you ?
Personally, I don’t like the reference to ‘enemies’ – whatever the outcome in 2014 we all have to live together and do the best we can. As for the reference to ‘puppets’ – I presume that means the voting public, or the people that will decide the future direction of Scotland. Hardly a persuasive tone to use.
“I’ve just read the original piece. What an appallling indictment of our education system. I’m not talking about the sporadic inability to construct intelligible sentences, I’m talking about the absence of critical thinking, the lack of intellectual rigour, the chasm that exists where a logically constructed argument should stand, the abysmal poverty of imagination and the evident incapacity to challenge orthodoxies of any kind.”
I’m more outraged by the centred text.
@Training Day “Anyone who has had a role in ‘educating’ this young woman, hang your heads in disgrace.”
Johann Lamont? She was a teacher. I know hard to believe.
I think Training Day said it all, really. The intellectual bankruptcy combined with an utter lack of appreciation of her own inadequacies is a real indictment of whoever had the (no doubt challenging) task of educating her.
A couple of excerpts really did it for me.
Alex Salmond reminds me of those guys in your class at school with too much to say and little to back it up. Simply: “because I said so” ideologies. An idiot with a dangerous amount of power who’s spent too much time watching Braveheart instead of refining his political, economic and general knowledge.
This is the man who regularly an consistently polls eye-watering satisfaction ratings, and won an election for a second term with an unprecedented majority, based on the words “Alex Salmond for First Minister” on the ballot paper. But this immature example of the shallow end of the gene pool thinks he’s an idiot who obsessively watches a crappy movie instead of learning.
And this one.
As for Monarchy, I wouldn’t put it past Alex Salmond to appoint himself Head of State – All Hail, Queen Alec.
Is this airhead for real? I can’t believe anyone with an IQ above ambient temperature actually said such a thing. Oh wait….
I’m more outraged by the centred text.
Says the man who just typed, “…. against who, exactly?”
😉
Rev, are you sure you’re not replying to a spoof site?
When you go through the blog post it comes down to:
1. There’s no armed or violent resistance to being part of Britain so there is no demand for independence.
2. Alex Salmond is not fit to rule Scotland as FM because he’s an idiot and I bested him as a schoolgirl with incisive questioning.
3. Independence is nothing more than a personal project of Alex Salmond’s.
4. Independence is all the fault of the Hollywood film Braveheart.
5. The SNP MSP’s are the ones causing all the trouble in Holyrood.
6. We’re not clever enough to run ourselves.
7. We’ll be out of Europe when independent.
8. An independent Scotland would be poorer.
9. We’d be invaded by a foreign power if we were independent.
10. Alex Salmond will appoint himself Head of State in a dictatorship.
11. Look at Ireland, it’s doomed I tell you.
12. With the pound as our currency we’d be in financial trouble, with our own currency we’d be in financial trouble and with the Euro as our currency we’d be in financial trouble.
If I was going to write a spoof unionist blog post I’d use this as the checklist for writing it.
Just read the blog. Line of thinking and language very much that of a student. By that I mean the world view on offer is one that is the result of being halfway through learning about the world.
10 years ago I poo-pooed the idea of independence along very similar lines to the blog, which comes I suppose in my case from being brought up in a tory voting household, in a middle class part of town. Certain things are truths until either your own experience or the arguments of others challenge you to think on them some more. It took me about 9 of those 10 years to come round to being pro-independence, I hope it only takes her 18 months.
@tartanfever
Congratulations. I’d never before realised that a stick had that many wrong ends.
“Says the man who just typed, “…. against who, exactly?””
I have a dreadful blind spot with “whom”. It’s my grammatical Achilles heel, regularly mocked by a friend who’s quite happy to write “I shall try and do something”.
I still don’t know what the rule is.
Under the snappy title ‘Every Penny is a Prisoner – But What Are 100 Pennies?’ is this statement.
“On the other hand, with our own currency, we’re giving up the most successful currency in history, entering uncertainty and lack of trust from other nations, and taking on the burden of the Euro.” (My italics)
Shome mishtake, shurely?
“Under the snappy title ‘Every Penny is a Prisoner – But What Are 100 Pennies?’ is this statement.
“On the other hand, with our own currency, we’re giving up the most successful currency in history, entering uncertainty and lack of trust from other nations, and taking on the burden of the Euro.”
Shome mishtake, shurely?”
Ooh, excellent spot.
I have a dreadful blind spot with “whom”. It’s my grammatical Achilles heel, regularly mocked by a friend who’s quite happy to write “I shall try and do something”.
I still don’t know what the rule is.
I’m no sure what the rule is, either. It just read wrong. I really only noticed because your English is normally impeccable.
I detest “try and” too, but it’s not as bad as “different than”, face it.
Not sure how old the blogger is from the image but of course she is based in Glasgow, undoubtedly a place where the majority will vote NO, imo. (As a current resident I’ll be in the YES minority). So the opinion doesn’t surprise, regardless of age. After all if everyone at a young age was seriously wedded to making the world a better place by supporting radical change, things would be better the world over?
And I don’t know about others experience but so far the under 20’s, including those currently under 16 who’ll have a vote, I’ve spoken to are generally, currently, taking a ‘conservative’, play safe line ….possibly parental pressure, educational. Time yet to change minds of course!
That was “not sure”, of course. This keyboard is getting old. I wasn’t typing in Scots.
I am curious as to why you seem to think that because we, the people of Scotland, in general have not bombed our way to the ballot box, that we do not deserve to run our own affairs. (You might not be old enough to remember when the UK government claimed that they would not allow the troubles to affect the democratic process in Northern Ireland, but, we have had previous attempts at devolved government decades before it was permitted in Scotland, even after TWO “Yes” votes.)
Alex Salmond, for some reason appears to serve as the demon of the anti independence movement, yet it was well under way long before he came to the fore. During the 70s, we have almost as strong a movement, but aimed more towards increasing our representation at Westminster. How do you think we got the initial referendum on devolution? You may or may not remember both Labour and the Liberal Party campaigning (supposedly) for a number of decades on the “Home Rule” ticket. Alex Salmond was not involved in that.
In fact in an independent Scotland, our First Minister has admitted that the SNP may or may not be the ruling party, as this would be entirely up to the PEOPLE when we have our first elections to an independent Scottish Parliament. We may see a whole new makeup as independents, and assorted small parties get a chance to come to the fore.
As for FMQ, are you really saying that the eloquent oratories annunciated by Johann Lamont, who gets lost once she deviates from the UK Labour Party approved flash cards are really on a par with the FM? Maybe you are referring to the leader of the Tories in Scotland, who attempts to blame the Scottish Government and the FM in particular on a regular basis for the shortcomings of HER Tory party, in power in Westminster? Could it be Willie Rennie, who sits in the corner, piping up every now and then, attempting to sound vaguely relevant, like the wee boy who wants to feel a part of something?
BTW, remind me of the time when Norway and Russia were EQUAL PARTNERS in a political union? (I must have missed school that day.)
You wanna talk finance? Well, it seems that rUK would have no central bank either, as the Bank of England has been INDEPENDENT of the UK treasury since the late nineties, or did you not know that? This means that technically neither they or we would have a central lending bank of last resort going by your logic. In any case, we already OWN a percentage share of it, as current members of the UK. It is NOT only ENGLAND’s bank.
Defence? Well, I must admit, when the sea fog lifts, I can see the flottilla of Russian wessels all along the horizon waiting to come rampaging ashore, Cossack dancing all the way. Maybe you mean the Chinese? Wasn’t it Dave Allen who mentioned that if they lined up twelve deep, they would take fifty years to walk past his house. (How did they find out where he stays?) Are YOU gonna take them on with the might of the British Military? BTW, WHY would they come and attack us? It is cheaper and easier to trade and negotiate for things they want, especially from the other side of the world.
Oh, as far as the most successful currency in history goes, what currency is used for the bulk of world trade? I don’t think you will find that it is Sterling. (A freely tradeable commodity). The point about the currency immediately post independence is that it is a good idea to retain Sterling initially. We can always change that afterwards, at the democratic behest of the PEOPLE.
As is so commonly pointed out, feel free to name ANY country that after attaining independence has decided to try to rejoin the original political union? I can wait till you come up with an answer.
Your post is sadly lacking in any kind of coherent, cogent argument FOR the union, and you have merely posted some of the same baseless comments repeatedly spat out by the “No” campaign. Maybe your political naivete has blinded you to the point that in any debate, any positive claims are meant to be backed up by some sort of valid evidence. You have provided none. Thanks for confirming that the naysayers really are struggling to contribute anything worthwhile to the debate. You are all basically saying that even though Scotland rarely if ever votes in a Tory majority, we are to be saddled with it most of the time, even though the party is more suited to the different society in the south east of England, centred around London. You are saying that THIS is better for us than being represented by a party or parties closer aligned to the political ideals of our people. We have people like Margaret Curran arguing this very point. When she faces south, she witters on about how effectively and hard Labour fights the Tories who are terrible for and are ruining our country, yet when she and her ilk face north, we hear her say that we are so much better off in this same union. How do you square up those opposing POV, especially when there are plenty of Scottish Labour voters who are dismayed by the slide that the national party are taking towards the right.
Morag, Stu
link to dummies.com
😀
PS
On who and whom …….couple of simple rules …… who is always the subject of the sentence, use whom after prepositions, and if in doubt use who.
Who was there last night?
With whom did you dine last night?
“Morag, Stu
link to dummies.com
😀 “
Somehow I feel that explanation won’t be burning itself into my mind. It’s not exactly “I before E except after C”, is it?
Meanwhile, Kate Higgins hates the article. Must have done something right.
I picked up on the ‘who’ but I wouldn’t worry about it. Language moves on and the correct form is the one that is in currency. I get ridiculed every time I say ‘whom’, and due to all the spelling lessons from a grandfather who was a headmaster I still baulk at ‘roofs’.
As to the blog in question – Richard Brautigan would weep.
I understood fairly well who thatcher was and what the trouble was with Britain from about the age of 9. After all, I was forced to leave my home, school and friends because my parents had no choice but to ‘get on their bike’, leaving the highlands behind. I wanted to know why.
This will be the first of her blog posts to receive any comment.
I hope that she appreciates the courteous trouble that those so far have taken to rebut her statements. I hope she reads them within the spirit of wise debate that they have been offered. Change is usually always tricky especially if personal beliefs originate and are tolerated from within long held family tradition as this young woman implies. The risk of giving up the known and familiar to appreciate a new set of ideas – no matter how credible or compelling – is a bridge many will need to cross with confidence and positivity in 2014.
Like others I feel really sad that this young person has seemingly fallen for the superficial, devious and incorrect propaganda of the No contingent. I hope that she realises that were she to change her thinking, the Independent-minded will be very welcoming of yet another capable and thoughtful young person that Scotland needs to promote its future.
“This will be the first of her blog posts to receive any comment.
I hope that she appreciates the courteous trouble that those so far have taken to rebut her statements.”
Aye. I’m really pleased that nobody’s just heaped abuse on her, and hope it stays that way.
I’m simply left with a feeling of sadness after reading the young girls article.
@Vronsky
Our enemies aren’t the idiots we see, they’re the smart bastards behind them. You’re talking to a puppet. What does that make you?
I’m inclined to agree with you. When you look at the opinions in the referenced blog post it reads like an A-Z of unionist memes.
Scotland is too small, poor and stupid to be independent, Braveheart, Scotland will be defenceless without Mother England, independence as nothing more than an Alex Salmond project, Salmond wants to be a dictator, the list is comprehensive.
Now the author of this piece claims to be a third year university student in a previous post on her blog but intelligence has never been a contra-indicator for gullibility.
This is a parrot piece with all the usual phrases like Braveheart in it so who’s shouting out the words she’s learnt by rote?
So sad. So young and so afraid to face the future with anything but very dark glasses.
Regardless, this young woman will find that she, any children she may have and their kids will be able to receive medical treatment free at point of need. Find themselves well cared for in old age, living in a country able to switch on the lights and not wonder which part of their environment they’ve just poisoned. They’ll be living in a country free of the threat of international terrorism because the main target for such would have been removed from Faslane and Coulport by that point. Those kids will have been educated for free too, how cool is that. 2014 is going to be one of those turning point in history moments. You know the kind. Where were you when……? Did you vote for……..? It’s going to take courage and no mistake.
I’m sure we’d all rather the examples above were achieved with her vote in place for this future, but it is going to happen without it.
Well said Clarinda.
“we don’t have the right caliber (sic) of politicians to lead an independent state”
Indeed. How could poor, half-daft, silly, wee Scotland realistically hope to produce politicians of the calibre of say Yvette Cooper, Caroline Flint, Chris Huhne or Eric Pickles?
It’s time to face facts and accept the inherent inferiority of the Scots. The outstanding politicians I mention above represent a mere fraction of the talent available at Westminster. We have been outclassed. Independence was a nice idea like owning an ipad but we’d only get it wrong and break things.
Sorry folks but this has to be a “bogey” blog. There is no way this was written by anyone other than a “Bitter Together” campaigner. It’s just too contrived. I am not a highly educated wordsmith by any stretch of the imagination but I can smell $h!te when I’m near it.
If I were to write such a peice that was so open to criticism I would make damn sure there was factual evidence to backup my assertions but quite simply there isn’t any.
This person cannot exist as I refuse to believe that someone with or currently receiving a university degree would be so foolish.
You must try harder Mr Darling as your not fooling anyone. Such a tragic attempt indeed to push your greedy agenda.
And to say this made up girl was on the left too!
Albalha, I believe regional breakdowns of opinion polls show support for independence is highest in Glasgow. Also, Glasgow has more SNP constituency MSP than unionist so you may have to reassess your opinion of Glasgow’s support for independence as stated at 1:22pm.
Unfortunately this kind of thinking is all too common. I don’t get angry with these people I just feel sadness at how ignorant and brainwashed they are. The amount of people that think like this is all too common and its a tragedy. It’s just shocking that people like Alex Salmond (whatever his faults) has done his absolute best to bring independence, and yet he is vilified and despised by so many “patriotic” Scots. If only they realised they have been taken for fools. I really hope the ones voted NO for all the wrong reasons feel extreme shame and embarassment when an independent Scotland becomes a wealthy succesful nation. I would estimate that 70-80% of the NO camp are this ignorant. The rest may have there own legitimate reasons.
The only viable reasons for voting NO is that you either identify very strongly as British and Scottish identify very much plays a less prominent role and/or you have very strong right wing leaning political views.
Just to backup my reasons for smelling a rat in my post above!
For someone who seems to be so politicaly minded with a breadth of opinions under her belt, she has only started blogging since December with 7 in total. Six bloggs in order for us to believe she’s real before dropping the bombshell!
I think you’re being overly paranoid. I think it’s just coincidence that someone stumbled across the blog now.
@holebender
I haven’t seen the polling you refer to, I’m more than happy if I’m wrong, though not wholly convinced at this stage, do you have links to these regional breakdowns?
I think she is Effie Deans in disguise.
Surely there can’t be two of them?
Nah, Effie’s a true blue Tory.
I respect your opinion Rev but I still suspect it’s a put up 🙂 I can’t accept someone with that level of education would blog the unionist mantra with such verbatim.
As I said on her Red Rosette blog
Rosettes may be red but Labour’s is red, white and mainly blue.
Can you put a Rizla between the two of them now?
Why do I feel that her article was proof read by SLAB? She doesn’t advise the subject she is studying, could it be politics and she hopes to follow the professional politician path “trailblazed” by the like of Murphy and Baker? This would explain, to me, the cynicism of her article where a more idealistic political view might be expected from a young person.
If she, or her mentors, choose to read the Wings response then I caution her that should the referendum result be No to independence, “the ordinary man/woman in the street” No voters will come very soon after the referendum to regret their decisions as they bear the resultant economic consequences. Arguably professional UK politicians and their trainees may well be untouched for a short period but the economic consequences will reach them too.
In short, the UK is bust financially. What kind of country hangs its economic hopes upon successful high street sales? Or a Queen’s Jubilee? Or on Olympics?
Economics, the allocation of scarce resources. The allocation of these UK scarce resources is determined by the English majority at Westminster. Witness this week’s vote on welfare.
If you consider Scotland to be a country and her people a nation perhaps in your next article you could discuss Democracy and Economics. In preparation i recommend a field trip. First to London, then visit a few medium sized Northern English towns.
I like the young, for their idealism,optimism and energy. So come on lass act your age, embrace idealism and optimism.
There have been many confident comments on various threads recently on WoS along the lines of playing the long game, building consensus slowly, keeping our powder dry for the final assault etc.
I hope this young woman’s tragic blog shakes a few people out of that complacency. So incoherent is it, so shot full of half-baked notions, handed down “wisdom” and just plain prejudice that it can only be the result of conditioning, not free thought. That conditioning has come from the home, the school and university, her social circle and the news and current affairs environment in which she has grown up.
This poor lassie is not going to read much in her newspaper or see much on telly that will directly challenge these wrong-headed ideas of hers – and another year and a half of giving the No Campaign almost a free run is only going to make matters worse.
It is simply not enough for us to content ourselves with knowing this girl is wrong. She and others like her need to have the means to work that out themselves. And only an unbiased MSM and proactive campaigning by Jenkins and Co. will be able to deliver it.
As Colin Fox said at the launch of the Edinburgh Yes Campaign a few months ago – two years is NO TIME AT ALL. And it’s even less now.
You just need to have a quick look at her twitter account and who she follows to see that she’s young Labour. I’m guessing a member so hence the party line. Possible ambitions as a future career politician … maybe in the mold of Siobhan McMahon me finks 🙂 hehe
For me, the funniest thing is that I too was young Labour, young socialist at that time. Oh how things change in a generation. I am embarrassed to admit that I too used to part of that party.
FWIW I’m definitely with Vronsky, Rabb and DougttheDug on this one – the piece is spurious, carries no conviction. Cheap and nasty. It’s as if she’s been told to prepare for a debate on the subject but doesn’t know which side she’s on and doesn’t care much either way. Then it turns out he’s been asked to defend the Union, so this is her ‘speech’, attempting to hit all the required buzzwords with a soupcon of personal abuse and half-baked metaphors. Probably similar to the way Ruth Davidson constructs her ‘arguments’.
Her Twitter is all Labour Party and Better Together. I think you’re wasting your time on this person; akin to converting the unconvertible (more chance of converting Lamont). Good article (yet again) from Rev though and will maybe serve to make others, who are not so dyed in the wool, question things.
I blame BBC Scotlandshire.
I tend to agree with those here who believe there is more than a hint of parody to this young woman`s blog. If not, then, there ya go; the concept of Scotland is just wasted on some people. Shame it is wasted on one so young.
I was joking when I mentioned BBC Scotlandshire. Bless `em.
@ianbrotherhood
Probably similar to the way Ruth Davidson constructs her ‘arguments’.
I know, that’s what I thought. I genuinely thought it was a Tory piece as it was so “young fogy-ish” and I tend to associate that way of thinking with Young Tories. Just goes to show that sometimes there’s really not much between them.
I think she should consider, however, that thanks to Alex Salmond, the man she so cheerfully demonises, she won’t be having to pay back a small fortune in tuition fees when she leaves uni next year. She might want to reflect on her own party’s proposed policy on that subject (something for nothing culture) and think about how it would affect her fellow students in the future. In fact, she might just want to take that money she’s saved on tuition fees and donate it to the No campaign she so obviously and unquestioningly supports – after all, I would think it would be beneath her “principles” to take “something for nothing”.
The author of the utterly dismal risible blog piece is a 3rd year politics student at UWS. http://tinyurl.com/bb3hjyl Thats right, I’m not shitting you. POLITICS. Hard to believe eh. A cursory look at her Twitter ‘Following’ list is pretty much Labour Party from start to end. Dear oh dear.
I just had a look at that blog, dearie me I have more ambition in my little finger at 54 than that bonny lassie has in her whole body. but if she wants to go then fine, I hope she find another country to cringe in.
For myself I am so looking forward to serving an independent Scotland in any form I can, the very idea that I will be able to help create a better country and its socity for my 9 year old son and his friends & classmates just makes me tingle with anticipation.
Its a shame that’ that young woman cant feel the same for her own country, but she will have to make her own bed to lie in and live with the consequences.
Alba Gu snooker loopy!, vote yes.
OT
When Newspaper sales are given it is given against the equivalent month the year before and gives a percentage drop. Heres some data comparing October 2012 to Decemeber 2012. Just 2 months apart for some of the most virulent unionist rags.
Daily Express 57,177 to 55,349. (914 per month loss) -60 months until extinction
Scotsman 33,585 to 32,063 (761 loss per month) -43 months until extinction
Daily Mail 102,264 to 101,810 (227 per months) -449 months until extinction
Daily Telegraph 19,768 to 17,345 (1212 per month) 15 months until extinction
Daily Record 246,324 to 240,120 (3102 loss per month) 78 months til extinction.
Of course these losses are variable but it looks like the awful daily mail will be the only paper out of the selected above that will still be here in 5 years time. Of course Newspapers will die long before they hit zero so if the trends continue it will be much quicker than my predicted dates.
I don’t feel the slightest bit of sadness. These papers have done there up most to make the Scottish people hold the views that we are currently discussing in this topic.
link to allmediascotland.com
link to allmediascotland.com
The internet has been the best thing to happen on the discussion of Scottish Politics. Only here can the scare stories and nonsense be questioned and opposing views expressed. We have been silenced by the MSM, we cannot be silenced by the internet.
@UKFacepalm
A politics student eh? At least we can see where the conditioning came from. Someone practicing their craft of the future? Just a few quick questions I’d ask her then. Why did she get into politics? Was it for career or to help others? What is her personal moral code or ideology? Does she understand why the Labour party came to be in the first place and just how far its drifted from those founding ideals?
I’d say her poorly educated blog speaks volumes. As I said before, fairly sad for such a young person.
UkFacepalm says:
The author of the utterly dismal risible blog piece is a 3rd year politics student at UWS. link to tinyurl.com Thats right, I’m not shitting you. POLITICS. Hard to believe eh. A cursory look at her Twitter ‘Following’ list is pretty much Labour Party from start to end. Dear oh dear
Then the only conclusion I can come to is that this young lady has her heart set on being a Labour career politician. Bereft of even a hint of the left values she claims to have.
If you are indeed for real and read this post then please take a step back and think of what exactly your getting yourself into. If you have an ounce of socialism in you then this is not the course you should follow.
As an ex Labour voter myself, the party you are so obviously keen to impress are no longer interested in the working man, they value Tory ideals more than yours. You must see through the rhetoric.
Why not concentrate on acheiving independence for both Scotland and your Labour party and make a fresh start. A new independent Scotland with a revived independent Labour party which can positively ooze the socialist ideals that you and I both have in common; without the interference of a Labour party in London who put more value in the votes of the home counties than Scotlands.
If you can bring yourself to do this then you’ll have my vote in an independent Scottish general election!
@Freddie Threepwood
I hope this young woman’s tragic blog shakes a few people out of that complacency. So incoherent is it, so shot full of half-baked notions, handed down “wisdom” and just plain prejudice that it can only be the result of conditioning, not free thought. That conditioning has come from the home, the school and university, her social circle and the news and current affairs environment in which she has grown up.
Very good post in my opinion. Conditioning is exactly what it is. I believe it is also the main problem facing the Yes campaign. There is no point in being abusive, it does not win over the undecided or the soft No voters.
Rev Stu’s article is very good as it challenges the opinions of the individuals’ piece. The arguments she uses are the standard ones against independence. That they are self-destructive towards Scotland is obvious. I think we all know people who hold these types of views. We need to challenge these views, but in a rational, polite way. Somebody said that she lacked self-confidence and self-esteem. In my opinion this is a dangerous misreading of Scottish unionism. It is not that they lack self-confidence per se, rather that they lack confidence in Scotland, as a nation, to run its own affairs.
Scottish unionists feel this way because their very own ideology puts down Scotland’s ability to govern itself. They can’t admit this though. Consequently, that is why I believe they are constantly abusive towards Salmond and the SNP in particular.
P.S. @Rev Stu I had a look at Twitter and have to say you and Kate Higgins’ feud with one another is highly amusing!
She is a Labour party clone indoctrinated that democracy is a choice between red or blue rosette and nothing else.
I partly blame the education system
link to gla.ac.uk
Rev, As a case study in social media studies she dose a great job. Traffic, Traffic, Traffic based on a gently inflammatory blog crafted simply to create attention. Is this is part of “labour hame” mark 2? A troll blog that so far publishes stock “unsubstantiated” content but now sugar coated in a vulnerable not quite sure of myself messenger. Her last blog’s not the work of a slightly confused political truth seeker – it is crafted carefully to troll for effect!
Why? Because just when Labour need a bright, refreshed call to arms social media outlet along comes Kayleigh – and watch how the debate is now orchestrated there by her/media handlers.
Expect drip, drip and always unsubstantiated comment as thats the best “vehicle for ridicule”. And her last posting is certainly saturated in ridicule – ridicule all based on unsubstantiated comment.
Right, I’m not going to be popular for this, but I reckon Kate has a point about being patronising, and that point lies in the tone of the piece (and of many of the comments) which is not only de haut en bas, but carries the timbre of the parent of the misguided adolescent administering the usual ‘I am not angry, just sad’ rebuke.
Turning to the blog, and stripping out all the weary insults and received opinions (there’s far worse on Twitter every day), I find she makes two challenging points. The first is ‘Do we really care’ (which she then ruins by over-the-top comparisons). Still, I’m not finding much fun, inspiration or passion behind the Yes campaign at present, and if Better Together are doing anything other than stirring up apathy, I have yet to see it. So I think she has a point, and I think if we are to win this, we need to create more than we have at the moment – Angus Robertson spoke of excitement – and that is what we need, infectious excitement. You only need to look at the videos of the Catalonia march to catch a glimpse of what ought to be possible here.
The second point is -to dig it out of a personal attack on Salmond – ‘What is Independence for?” All of us who read Wings will no doubt have our own answers – but how many of them will resonate with voters who are largely content with the way things are? It’s a cliche of change management that people are resistant to change because, despite the promises of a brave new world, experience tells them that change is uncomfortable, unsettling, and the end result is occasionally better, but usually worse.
We have a massive task on hand, and I for one would like to thank Red Rosette for reminding us how far there is to go.
“carries the timbre of the parent of the misguided adolescent administering the usual ‘I am not angry, just sad’ rebuke”
Yes, of course it does. Because that IS what’s happening (except in so far as I’m not actually her parent). I am indeed sad, as I say quite openly in the article. There’s nothing wrong with that. Older people are allowed to express dismay at the young, especially when they’re talking complete bollocks.
Incidentally, I’m not sure it isn’t patronising to use phrases like “haut en bas”, with the implied “Of course, you’ll all know what THAT means, won’t you?” – it’s a new one on me, but in fairness I’ve only been a professional writer for 22 years.
Still, point made. I’ll stick to abuse in the future.
I read the blog and its comments about two, three hours ago. I was very chuffed to see how polite and reasoned the comments were, especially in not using the obvious attack line (too young, too stupid, too girl).
The two things that sprang to my mind while reading the blog entry were: Firstly, she writes she’s a uni student. Would that be in an English, tuition-fee-paying uni, or a Scottish free-tuition uni? Secondly, her rants about Alex Salmond were very puerile, and conflating the whole independence issue with one politician, or even one party, is childish. Independence goes way beyond party politics. It goes to the core of who you are and what you want to be.
If Scotland votes YES in 2014, Scotland will democratically elect a parliament for the newly independent country. The SNP might not be the majority party. Murdo Fraser’s right wing (not tory) party will win seats, LFI, Greens, small leftist parties will win seats, the SNP will win seats, and the remnants of Labour will win seats. The remnants of LibDems might even win a seat or two. It’ll be a new Parliament for a new country, a new age, one where nobody has to look to Westminster for direction.
An idependent Scotland won’t be a land of milk and honey – every independent country has its own problems – but the people of Scotland are best placed to solve the problems in their country.
I’m a citizen of an independent country, Finland, and in our 95 years we’ve gone from a backward, agrarian country to one of the best-educated, most equal, hi-tech, richest countries in the world. None of that would have happened if we hadn’t been independent, so, no, we’re not clamouring to reunite with our imperial overlords, even for some supposed nuclear or other WMD ‘protection’. Duh!
Scotland has a shot of the same, even better, if it gets shot of the dead weight south of the border. By ‘dead weight’ I mean the fairly undemocratic Westminster political system, not the people. English people are lovely, and I’m sure friend and family connections cross-border will continue same as ever.
The UK is broken, and one of the reasons why the establishment is so viciously opposed to Scottish indedendence is because it exposes the cracks in their own house.
Oh, yes, and sorry, that my first comment on WoS is such an diatribic essay:-) I’ve been a reader for ages, didn’t realise I haven’t commented before. 🙂
Another Self-Loathing Scot !!!!
As others have noted, Kayleigh is just yer bog-standard #BetterTogether SLAB drone. Nothing makes her happier than a bit of Salmond BOOING link to tinyurl.com
There are a lot of charitable folk on here, including your goodself Rev. Maybe it’s just the mood I am in but I am getting sorely cheesed off with with unionists who stoop to hurling abuse at Alex Salmond. The author of the piece has a lot to learn about politics, socialism and above all good manners. She is obviously the product of a hateful, spiteful, Labour indoctrination process, designed to brain wash youngsters into believing that the Labour is still a socialist organisation. She has my sympathy.
@ Muttley 79
It is not that they lack self-confidence per se, rather that they lack confidence in Scotland, as a nation, to run its own affairs.
Correct. And that, as I’m sure we’ve all heard time and time again from committed unionists and – more distressingly – from the don’t knows and couldn’t care lesses is mostly down the shocking standard of political discourse at Holyrood.
And no, I am not falling into the trap laid by many before me of thinking a posh accent equals competence or that Westminster doesn’t have its fair share of numpties. But, whether we like it or not, whether it is fair or not, the amateurish nature of a lot of Holyrood’s output (mostly down to the neanderthal standard of opposition MSP) DOES reinforce the dreaded cringe in an awful lot of people.
The conspiracy theory that this is all deliberate is as risible and counterproductive as any dreamed up by 9/11 freaks and birthers. No, I’m afraid the cream (ahem) of the unionist parties head for London at the earliest opportunity because that’s where the real power, real money and status still lies in this country.
Catch 22.
Kayleigh Quinn – remember the name, coming to a council near you. The Catriona Renton of the next generation perhaps.
A Brief Introduction To Why I’ll Vote NO To Independence, followed by a photo of Salmond.
……………………………………..________
………………………………,.-‘”……………….“~.,
………………………..,.-“……………………………..”-.,
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,
…………………,?………………………………………………,
………………./…………………………………………………..,}
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../
…………./__.(…..”~-,_…………………………,:`………./
………../(_….”~,_……..”~,_………………..,:`…….._/
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….”-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……”;,,./`…./”…………../
…,,,___.`~,……”~.,………………..`…..}…………../
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”
…………/.`~,……`-………………………………./
………….`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..,__
,,_……….}.>-._……………………………..|…………..`=~-,
…..`=~-,__……`,……………………………
……………….`=~-,,.,………………………….
…………………………..`:,,………………………`…………..__
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“
…………………………………._……….._,-%…….`
……………………………..,
I think Kayleigh suffers from poverty of thought like so many others in the no campaign. She cant and wont see the wood for the trees because she cant be bothered because if she clutches on to her Britishness then she can lay claim to that culture and save her the bother of doing absolutely anything. She can also play the punch & judy politics game that is red & blue tories never ending charade to the people of these islands and pretend she is making a difference. Her conditioning seems terminal as her nasty outpourings and slanderous dribblings against Salmond and the SNP prove. The man and his party are the only ones to have kept their promises to us and delivered to give us the social democratic policies that Scotland has so desired and craved for so long and this has rocked the British Establishment to their very foundations hence their disgraceful anti democratic propaganda against the man his party and ultimately Scotland. That is why i believe we will win as the truth always outs in the end, thanks to the internet and social media as events around the Arab world can testify to.
The fight goes on but we are where we are and we are having a referendum because that is what the people desired, Mr Salmond and his party was and is merely the vehicle to get us there. Its time the naysayers got their heads round that and if they cant well they’ll just have to suck it up as that is called democracy and by God we have all had to suffer suffer this mis rule of Westminster for so so long.
Albalha, sorry I don’t have any references (although I’ll bet Scottish Skier does!) but I have read it several times in the past. It stands to reason when you consider the demographic breakdowns which show that support for independence is strongest among poorer working class people, and weakest among the affluent. Which end of that spectrum do you thing the average Glaswegian sits on?
“the absence of critical thinking, the lack of intellectual rigour, the chasm that exists where a logically constructed argument should stand, the abysmal poverty of imagination and the evident incapacity to challenge orthodoxies of any kind. ”
That just sums up the whole better together campaign. A bit unfair to blame the education system.
It is quite interesting though, that it’s people like this who have grown up in Labour and are clearly out to be Labour career politicians who are the ones who are convinced – presumably by their own experisnce – that Scots are a talentless useless bunch of shites and are utterly negative. I imagine if you’ve spent your whole young life around the current Scottish Labour party, that’s a reasonable conclusion. The Labour MPs we have at Westminster are frankly an embarassement to Scotland. And that’s supposedly their A-team!
It’s long past time for those who have brought the “we’re too useless to od f**k all” image of Scotland to move aside in favour of those who can. If this blogger is indicative of the best new blood coming through Labour, that’s even more urgent.
By way of contrast, have a read of Allan Grogan’s piece today on the Labour for Indy Facebook page.
I assume Kate Higgins hates this blog entry because it criticises a woman. One of these faults Rev Stu is prone to, not letting the gender of the person he is talking about stop him from making adverse criticism
Erchie: it’s simpler than that – she hates it because I wrote it.
Thanks for that posting “lumilumi” it was most refreshing, perhaps ‘Kayleigh’ needs to take notes on positivity.
No campaign= No imagination
No alternative to Westminster rule
No positive arguments for the union
No hope for the future, vision
Hatred of Salmond and the SNP
No arguments for social democracy, progressive policies
No more powers for the Scottish Parliament, Jam Tomorrow again
@kininvie
May I pick up your second point, “What is Independence for?” All of us who read Wings will no doubt have our own answers – but how many of them will resonate with voters who are largely content with the way things are?”
My only observation would be that I am not so sure they are content, but rather the average voter can see no possibility of a different future. The main parties are clones of themselves, all from one (neo-liberal/market centred) egg. There is no real alternative agenda being presented in ANY of the MSM, especially the BBC. So the drip drip propaganda that there is only THIS way and no other has, I believe, led many people to “give up hope”.
The YES campaign certainly does need to be more energetic, and I assume that this will be the case this year, leading up to the White paper and beyond. But the question is, on WHAT are they to campaign and HOW to overcome the bias in the MSM/BBC? A simple message, a “sound-bite” if you will, is needed. It has to be easy to repeat, and gives a strong idea about what Scotland COULD be. Only by countering propaganda with positive propaganda of our own, will the race be won.
” It’s a cliche of change management that people are resistant to change because, despite the promises of a brave new world, experience tells them that change is uncomfortable, unsettling, and the end result is occasionally better, but usually worse.”
I think it’s also a truism. Change is not usually greeted with enthusiasm unless there is a sharp negative edge to the status quo. In the next 12-18 months, the reality of the Westminster, U-go-I-go politics will be clear. Austerity will produce a major impact on many ordinary people, and the most disadvantaged need to be contacted and enthused into registering on the voters roll, and then voting.
I can resonate with Freddie’s post above as well. If this is a genuine blog, and having read some of the comments, my suspicions are raised, then my question is: is she a ‘one-off’ or a product of systematic brainwashing that may affect a whole generation? Scary, if true.
I have no real answers, only hope and faith in those that run the campaign, and confidence that on the ground independence supporters will do their bit to persuade one other person over the the ‘light’. 😉
Hail Alba
You differ from a great man in only one respect: the great man was once a very little man, but he developed one important quality: he recognized the smallness and narrowness of his thoughts and actions. Under the pressure of some task that meant a great deal to him, he learned to see how his smallness, his pettiness endangered his happiness. In other words, a great man knows when and in what way he is a little man. A little man does not know he is little and is afraid to know. He hides his pettiness and narrowness behind illusions of strength and greatness, someone else’s strength and greatness. He’s proud of his great generals but not of himself. He admires an idea he has not had, not one he has had. The less he understands something, the more firmly he believes in it. And the better he understands an idea, the less he believes in it.”
? Wilhelm Reich,
I think I was a bit too elliptical in my first post. I wanted to give the Rev Stu a slap on the wrist for reporting negative comment from the Unionist camp, because he does it all the time. I hate this wallowing in indignation about what ‘they’ say. If all we do is keep reacting to this fluff, the positive case for independence will become as phantasmagorical as the positive case for the Union. I don’t think a daily fisking of the Unionist line is useful, even granting that Rev Stu is awfully good at it.
I’ve tried to be (quite uncharacteristically, not always successfully) careful about what I say here, respecting Rev Stu’s hope that the blog is read by Unionists as well as separatists (my preferred term, explained in previous posts, please forgive). If there are Unionists or the genuinely undecided looking in here then I guess they want to see a positive case for independence, not a lot of repetitive whingeing about the media. As the wimmin say, don’t get angry, get even!
“If there are Unionists or the genuinely undecided looking in here then I guess they want to see a positive case for independence, not a lot of repetitive whingeing about the media.”
You write ’em, I’ll print ’em. My primary “functional” goal with this site is to provide facts that can be referenced and linked to when Unionists or the media say things that are untrue, and to make those facts as easily-understandable and accessible as possible. I do that because there’s no point in saying “Look at all the amazing things we could do if we were independent” if the answer comes back “Ah, but you couldn’t, because you’d all be so poor without generous English subsidies that you’d be eating tree bark just to survive.”
By and large I let others deal with the blue-sky thinking, because there are only so many hours in the day and it’s hard to fulfil even that primary goal and still somehow keep a roof over my head and do the washing-up. So if you’ve got something positive to say and you can knock a halfway-readable sentence together (which appears to be the case), do it. Send it in. The chances are I’ll run it, and you’ll get that positive message out to thousands and thousands of people.
Constructive criticism is all very well and good and welcome, but sooner or later it’s time to cut to the chase and do your bit. 2015 is too late.
Y’know, one of the reasons I left Scotland at the arse-end of the 1990’s, other than falling in love with a Canadian, and by extension, Canada, was a feeling of each day passing in Scotland with so little of what could be done getting done. I felt it in myself, and in my peers. We’re that generation that went through Thatcherism in its entirety, and I can remember looking around my friends in Glasgow at the time and seeing a bunch of people like myself, detached, demoralized and almost totally lacking in ambition. Not ambition in the Thatcherite money-grabbing sense, but simply the ambition to make themselves and their environment that little bit better, and surely that’s the poisonous legacy of Thatcher and Blair – entire generations of capable people who could be out there making a better world giving up before they’d even tried. And isn’t it just the gift that keeps on giving with each additional generation?
Of course, it’s incumbent on people like me to rise above it anyway, to fight on regardless, and I gave up on Scotland. One thing that makes me glad is seeing that I was to some degree wrong, that there are many of you who are are aware that it is never too late to make that better nation we all hope for. That’s what’s missing in Unionists like this blogger. They’ve given up. On themselves, and Scotland.
Now who wants to vote for that?
@holebender
Sadly I think Glasgow is still steeped in its Labour tradition, it has changed a lot I know but come the hour my sense is this part of the country will vote NO. And many in the West are wedded to the Union, a greater sense of Britishness perhaps. As I say I hope I’m wrong, after all I’m a native Dundonian looking in, not an insider!
I came across this from October 2012, link to heraldscotland.com
not sure how it fits with other polls but here’s the Glasgow paragraph from above article,
Voters in Glasgow in particular appear to have turned against independence, with 21% saying they would vote Yes, the lowest of any part of Scotland, and 65% voting No, the highest. Among males across the country, 32% would vote Yes, 51% would vote No, with 17% undecided.
Like brave fighting bulls to a cape.
I do suppose it is in order to congratulate the lassie for such a fine provocation, which has generated so many (and very good) responses, as the more practice we have in dealing with such opinions the better.
No mean feat for such a tender age.
Shame she’s not interested in commenting here, it would be a good Kezia bashing all over again.
@Nairn Clark
Very good post. I think you are being hard on yourself by saying you gave up on Scotland. You married and went to live in Canada, where your wife is from. It is a beautiful country as well. Many people have been worn down by the political situation in Scotland over the years. However, we now have a great chance to gain control of our destiny again, elect our own governments. We also have an opportunity to create a state that tries its upmost to help as many people as possible. You are right about Thatcher and Blair.
Albalha says:
@holebender
Sadly I think Glasgow is still steeped in its Labour tradition, it has changed a lot I know but come the hour my sense is this part of the country will vote NO. And many in the West are wedded to the Union, a greater sense of Britishness perhaps. As I say I hope I’m wrong, after all I’m a native Dundonian looking in, not an insider!
I came across this from October 2012, link to heraldscotland.com
not sure how it fits with other polls but here’s the Glasgow paragraph from above article,
Voters in Glasgow in particular appear to have turned against independence, with 21% saying they would vote Yes, the lowest of any part of Scotland, and 65% voting No, the highest. Among males across the country, 32% would vote Yes, 51% would vote No, with 17% undecided.
Well I live in Glasgow and I am struggling to find anyone who intends to vote no. I concede my findings have no scientific substance behind them but out of everyone I have spoken to (friends, family, work colleagues etc) the answer is most definately yes to indy.
And pretty much all of these people are Labour voters.
@macdoc, above, about newsparer circulation
I googled the main newspapers in Finland, a small (5.4M) independent country, and their circulation. The figures I found are probably a bit out of date and current figures are probably slightly smaller but here we go…
Helsingin Sanomat (Helsinki-based broadsheet daily, slightly right leaning) 366.000 (the largest daily in the Nordic countries!)
Ilta-Sanomat (tabloid, ‘evening edition’ of HS) 160.000
Aamulehti (broadsheet based in Tampere, slightly right leaning) 130.000
Iltalehti (tabloid, evening edition of the defunct right-leaning daily Uusi Suomi) 120.000
Turun Sanomat (broadsheet, based in Turku, main paprer in southwestern Finland) 103.000
Kaleva (broadsheet, based in Oulu, main paper in north-central Finland) 78.000
Pohjolan Sanomat (broadsheet, based in Kemi, caters for Lapland) 20.000
So, the internet and free, freely available info on the web obviously hasn’t yet killed the paper press in Finland as badly that has happened in Scotland. Maybe we like our papers more. Maybe our papers like us more. Maybe they tell us about ourselves like we see ourselves. Maybe the Finnish press is better than the Scottish press?
I’ll be sad when newspapers go, and go they will within the next 5, 10 years. Gone will be the family squabble of who gets what part of the paper at the breakfast table, and how will you ever learn to read upside down if you don’t do it every morning opposite your dad?
I love newspapers and the crackling of paper but it’s no use being sentimental. Those days are gone, it’s all online now.
The sad truth is, she won’t read the reactions to her article and think “hmm, maybe there’s something to think about here”; she’ll simply go on Twitter and say “OMG been totally abused by Cybernats today because of my article!” That’s pretty much what she was saying last night when the only reaction was a few tweets disagreeing with her (people are very quick to claim they’ve been “abused” online.)
I gave her the benefit of the doubt when writing my comments. Then I checked her other articles, and saw the common thread, including ridiculing the apparently laughable mandate for the referendum itself. As others have stated, she sounds every bit the fledgling careerist Labour politician. I can imagine her being the next Kezia Dugdale, and I expect her politics degree will lead her to a job working for an MSP or whatever. Labour thrives on these people who see politics as a job rather than a calling, because such people tend to have no strong attachment to ideologies and will change their opinions as instructed. That’s why they had to get rid of the true socialists in their party.
Unfortunately, the existence of such people in politics is perhaps the one thing independence won’t fix…
“The sad truth is, she won’t read the reactions to her article and think “hmm, maybe there’s something to think about here”; she’ll simply go on Twitter and say “OMG been totally abused by Cybernats today because of my article!””
Bang on:
link to twitter.com
@ muttley79
Thanks for the kind words. I’m from a multi-generation nationalist family, and I – looking from outside, of course – always worry about how, given previous experiences of referenda (not just Scotland, but the two Quebec votes – although they are a different kettle of fish to some degree), how the Yes side could possibly get over the 50% line.
And then I look at the argument from the other side, and the crucial thing to remember is that they aren’t actually offering one. What they’re giving you is what the British Government always offers opponents. Four words.
There Is No Alternative.
These are the four words that have ruined Britain. They were Thatcher’s mantra as she eviscerated the Welfare State and the industrial base. They were proven by Blair when he showed us that there is no way back from Neo-Liberalism. They were offered by Scottish Labour when they devised a Parliament designed to frustrate the SNP because they believed the SNP could never run the board. Again – There Is No Alternative.
Someone has to break this pattern, for the good of not just Scots, but everyone else in Britain. Someone has to stand up to that four word non-argument, and say – you know what? There is. Because there always is. However hard I think it’ll be to win the argument, it’s heartening to know that what you argue against is not a rational series of suppositions designed to debate a point, but a simple lie. You’re arguing against a lie. That’s all the British state is anymore.
@Nairn Clark
The positive thing to remember is, as you say, we were never supposed to get this far along the road to independence. It will be hard to win the referendum with all the vested interests against it. However, it is certainly very possible. The changes in Scottish politics since 2007, when the SNP first got into office, have been immense. New political groups have emerged and are developing, probably most significantly from an element within Scottish Labour, who support independence. The likes of Dennis Cannavan have a large role to play.
Why has she said that all the comments were made by haters? As far as I can see there was no personal abuse (which is good) and only one comment was deleted, so it is impossible to know what it contained.
To be fair, this one is a BIT rude:
“Your bilious, infantile, asinine and fatuous offering reveals your immaturity in discussing the abstract or physical truths in the ‘Great Debate’.”
Though the rest of even that comment was gentler, and it doesn’t really count as “personal abuse” – it’s just an uncompromising opinion.
Bang on:
link to twitter.com
Rev, Doug Daniel called it right.
In the Labour world view Alex Salmond is untrustworthy, smug, slippery and a new Mugabe, the SNP gained power through some form of trickery, all nationalists are racist except British nationalists who don’t exist in Labour, all SNP members are closet nazis, Scotland is too small, poor and stupid to run itself, the myth of the cybernat is real, cybernats are organised by SNP high command, the independence question should never be asked because British is best, Tory rule is better than independence and the Labour party is the natural and only party in Scotland whatever the voters say.
You can’t argue the toss with a belief system that has survived Thatcher, Major, Blair, Afghanistan, Iraq, 2007, Brown, 2010, Cameron, Clegg, 2011 and Johann Lamont.
@Rev Stu
It is certainly very strong criticism, maybe a bit rude, but certainly not the same as saying the elected leader of a national Parliament is a dictator (and this from his political opponents as well).
@DougtheDug
Excellent summary of the unionist Labour view of things. Also, to all unionists there is no such thing as British Nationalism…
Having found time for reflection, and re-reading the threads, I somewhat regret at least one of my previous posts (regarding the Euro).
Clarinda’s post is by far the wisest post on the thread. It is a point of utter dismay to me that young people now show no interest whatsoever in politics, and I would not like to think that this young girl, who actually does have an interest,should be put off political discourse by being shot down in flames on this forum. Would that more would become involved. We should be encouraging the young to join the debate.
Incidentally if you, Kayleigh, are actually reading this blog – and I fervently hope you are – , and are seriously interested in an adult debate, may I suggest that you should, studies permitting, read Arthur Herman’s delightful book ‘The Scottish Enlightenment’ and then move on to Michael Foot’s two volume biography of the late, great Aneurin Bevan. Having digested the wisdom embodied in these fine works, we could then resume a dialogue regarding the future of Scotland.
I mean this most sincerely, as I too, benefited from a Labour upbringing, joined the party, and worked for the party but, sadly, discarded them a decade or more ago.To quote the late Jimmy Reid (your parents will know him), I too did not leave the Labour party, it left me.
Given that you have a genuine vision for the future of our nation, within the present incararnation of this once proud party, please do not hesitate to come on to this site and share it with us. If it is a positive view you will be assured of our warmth and support. Whatever your stance I extend to you my best wishes.
And my thanks to Clarinda for bringing a positive outlook to the debate, the very last thing we should seek to do is to alienate our young people.
Ah, the folly of youth….when you have unshakeable belief that you are right and everyone is else is wrong, you know it all and have nothing else to learn, your generation has invented sex and swearing and no-one can tell you anything of any importance……I used to be like that….sigh……Happy Days!
@apinal
The reason why I raised the ‘What’s Independence for?’ point is that, when asking people to sign the declaration, a fair number of the negative responses are along the lines of ‘Why fix it when it ain’t broke?’ This, IMO, is a response we need to find a creative answer to. Pointing out the various ways in which it is ‘broke’ doesn’t really help – largely because a) it’s negative and b) drags us straight into the kind of electioneering rhetoric – Tories bad, etc – which is the last thing the referendum should be about…
I think we need (somehow) to inject a lot more joy. I’d like us to stop handing out leaflets and start holding parties, stop bickering on Twitter and start organising fun runs, rallies and all-night ceilidhs..We need people to join in for the excitement of it, and not just rely on their being convinced by a leaflet put through the door.
@kininvie
I think we need (somehow) to inject a lot more joy.
I’ve been saying this for ages! We need to recognise that we’re all part of a movement, not an election campaign and we’ve got to make that movement something everyone else will want to join – because it’s fun, hopeful, positive and visionary.
I mentioned on another post yesterday that it was a joy to listen to Admiral Fallow singing in their own Glasgow accents, rather than adopting an accent of a different culture – as though a Scottish accent is somehow unacceptable in popular music. Scotland needs to speak and sing in the world with its own voice, because that voice is beautiful. Otherwise, how will we ever be heard? So…..more songs!
The legendary Tom Lehrer had good advice on fighting a war with music….Folk Song Army
link to youtu.be
Great post Rev, & some really great comments, Took a look at this girls blog, dear o dear o dear….
just shows what we have to deal with huh!
What does scare me is, she is the FUTURE…The very reason I want Independence for this country, so that MY grandkids can enjoy a better quality of life. Under a Scottish government, voted in by the Scottish people.
Yes kininvie I agree, but it is hard to articulate. I remember how the city of Edinburgh “felt” different after Devolution. But how exactly? I can’t say.
kininvie. I know what you are getting at, but like others I am not sure how to articulate that expression of hope and vision in a way that doesn’t get bogged down in constantly refuting lies and (dis)misinformation from the pro-dependency claque.
It must be more than simply “Scotland’s future in Scottish hands! – Change your fate!” or whatever – I am no marketeer or PR guy. But it needs to be a simple message. I agree with Jeannie that the march for Independence is a movement, and yes it must be open, welcoming and fun (and exciting and challenging) but it must also be bedded in hard facts. there are many nervous people out there that need to be convinced. We can be certain that a better future beckons, but one person’s ‘opportunity’ is another person’s ‘threat’!
I feel hopeful, but THIS year has to see a change in how the Independence debate moves ahead. Another 2012 will not ‘cut the mustard’.
There are lots of people to push the hard facts (and Stu is one of the best, despite what I said earlier). But Jeannie is right about the ‘movement’ – which is what, at the moment, we have not got.
I think there’s a hesitancy to get out there and have fun. Perhaps its the rain, perhaps it’s the dour Scot in all of us, perhaps it’s the spirit of John Knox. Yes Scotland is relying on the grass roots to create the campaign….but we, the grass roots, don’t quite know what to do to create it.
Maybe if we all just set about creating something spontaneous and fun and not too politically branded – think of how people enjoy flash mobs – we could start something? I’ll make it my (rather tardy) new year’s resolution.
What a good thread this is. Particularly like Nairn Clark’s contribution, and Rev Stu’s prodding of Vronsky to write something more substantial – go on V, give it a go!
There’s a real sense of excitement starting to build. It’s tangible on this site, BellaC and NNS.
I helped my Granda back in 79, the SNP had a base in an empty shop on Battlefield Rd, (just beside Ian Luke Sports). I was only 16 at the time and was right into vampires, the Cushing/Lee stuff. There was an SNP poster showing Heath and Thatcher, can’t remember what they were doing, but I got a copy of the poster and customised it, making them both vampires with the big collared capes and oil dripping from their fangs. My Dad thought it was great and showed it to the guy manning the campaign shop. He put it up on the wall behind the counter. I was chuffed. Just recently I saw a poster from that time, a full close-up portrait of Thatcher done by a professional cartoonist, with the raised collar, the manic eyes, satanic smile and oil dripping from the bared fangs. I like to think someone passed that idea on, that it was my contribution to that effort. Maybe not, but I know for sure I didn’t nick it from anyone else.
We just don’t know how the toty things we do, no matter how insignificant they may seem at the time, could end up affecting this movement – even if it’s just the right word at the right time, another Yes might be secured. We’re very fortunate to have this chance, and we should relish it. To paraphrase the Godfather of Soul, James Brown – ‘Say it Loud, I’m Yes and I’m Proud!’
To those who are currently undecided.
The “Too wee, too poor, too stupid” argument is used often and to good effect by those who’s interests lie in Westminster. I will attempt to put these three myths to bed and show you a positive future for Scotland and her people.
Firstly I would like to tackle the “too wee” myth.
Scotland is by no means the smallest country in the world. My relatives have just flown back to New Zealand yesterday after spending christmas with us. New Zealand is a country with a smaller population than Scotland (approx 4.5 Million). With full control of her own finances and no prolific natural resources to speak of (other than geo thermal?) she’s been ticking along nicely with a AAA credit rating. They have one of the lowest tax burdens on it’s people in the OECD. Scotland raises more than New Zealand does in taxation and that doesn’t even take North sea oil and gas into consideration. Her total revenue for 2011/2012 was $60 billion dollars NZ which equates to about £30 billion Sterling (link to treasury.govt.nz) The last figures I saw for Scotland was approximately £53 billion Sterling (doesn’t include oil and gas revenues) which equates to roughly $106 billion dollars NZ.
Should you vote for for Independence you would be sitting in a country with a simillar size to New Zealand with almost twice it’s wealth. Not bad eh?
Next on to “too poor”
As above, we are sitting on almost twice the wealth that New Zealand has. My family down there seem to think that there pretty well off as a country so I think we can safely put the “too poor” myth to bed. We have way more than most countries of our size and in fact it may surprise you that we have more oil than Kuwait which was deemed to have enough oil reserves to warrant the USA to kick out Sadaam Hussein when he invaded!
And finally “too stupid”
This is the most ironic assumption any Scot can make. Let’s look at what Scotland has given the world.
1. The television.
2. Antibiotics.
3. The telephone.
4. The steam engine (which allowed for the industrial revolution and changed the world profoundly).
5. The pneumatic tyre.
6. Tarmac roads.
The list could go on and I could even put the Bank of England on that list.
In short folks, we have made the world what is today, everything you take for granted on that list was given to the world by Scots.
The story doesn’t stop there ladies & gentleman. Scotland is now leading the world in renewable energy, life sciences, carbon capture and our expertise in technology and inovation in the extraction of oil and gas is renound accross the world. Aberdeen is a veritable hot bed of expertise. This is the reason why oil companies from all around the world are pouring billions of pounds into the North Sea. Does that sound like an industry that Westminster tells us is about to dry up? Exactly, it’s a well used story designed to scare you into assuming that we are “Better Together”.
Give that some thought folks and just in case your still not convinced, see that figure of £53 billion Sterling I mentioned above? Stick another £13billion a year on top of that figure and then look at how much better off we would be compared to New Zealand 🙂
And just one more thing. We are also a net exporter of energy. Approximately 26% of all energy produced in Scotland is exported to the rest of the UK. Ask yourself why old Agnes at the bottom of the street can’t afford to put her heating on in the winter.
It really is a no brainer when you weighit up, isn’t it?
And as for inspiration and having fun – this is where we should be by summer 2014 Ok, so it’s propaganda, but wow….
Sorry for messing up the thread, Stu. I’ll vanish now.
@ ianbrotherhood this might be of interest.
link to nationalcollective.com
If anyone is interested in the views of another Labour voter, check this out.
link to newsnetscotland.com
Sounds a bit more like it tae me. 🙂
@cynicalHighlander –
Cheers aplenty. Good stuff.
@cynical highlander
Agree – iconic images work at an unconscious level, as does music, poetry, metaphor and story and are incredibly effective at effecting attitude change and motivating people to join a movement.
Reading Kayleigh’s post made me feel sad more than anything.
Sad because it made me realise, more than ever, that I’m now too old to know it all. 🙁
Never mind, at least i still have hope and belief that Scotland can, and will, become a better place.
Of course, if we still wish to be ruled by Westminster then that is a different story.
Vote YES.
I love the fact that Stu has been criticised for being patronising to someone whose idea of political debate is effectively “la la la, I can’t hear you!”
Clearly Scotland’s future is in safe hands if we vote no…
I was heartened to read the piece by Irvine Welsh in Bella the other day. Not only was his logical sense of reasoning a breath of fresh air to the Independence debate, the comments that followed from it were just as refreshing. Reading through the rational and thoughtful replies on Bella gave me hope that this debate may well receive the gravitas it deserves. When Welsh’s article was covered in the Guardian the comments were once again (in the main) wholly constructive and consistent.
Additionally, the comments on WOS in this article seem to be following in the same vein. I’m not sure if it’s just my imagination or my longing for a serious debate to commence but I think Welsh’s article may well be the catalyst we needed. I also get the impression that the YES campaigners are ‘itching’ to see signs of a ‘groundswell’ or something or someone who can harness their enthusiasm and kick start the campaign in a flurry of confidence building action.
With summer not too far off, perhaps now is the time to organise an event like ‘T’ in the park. A weekend of bands, circus, sideshows, and market stalls etc. to make it a weekend carnival of celebrations. One or two huge bands to get the crowds in would be ideal and they obviously need not be ‘Yes’ supporters. This is one way that the profile of the campaign could be raised amongst the younger generation. I read also that someone suggested a fun run and a “flash mob’. The latter I particularly like. Flash mobs popping up all over Scotland’s landmarks would be a great talking point.
Whatever ideas that do come to fruition will all help raise the profile of our positive message of Independence. It is truly gratifying to read that these ideas are now beginning to surface and be talked about.
50 years ago her blog would have stated simply ‘home rule is Rome rule’. And as a uni student it would almost certainly have been written by a man. So, things have improved since the good old days. And there are plenty smart young politically aware folk out there – read the thoughtful content by the young writers on Scottish Review as examples of this. Why anyone has bothered to pay this particular blog any attention I am not sure.
Lumilumi hits the nail on the head. The Yes campaign needs more people from other small countries talking about the way things work in their countries and asking us when we are going to join them. So long as people’s outlook is insular (which it will be so long as we are served by the MSM – the only outward looking current affairs programme I can think of in the last 20 years is Eorpa, and that’s in Gaelic), it is always going to be dominated by London thinking. I have thought for a while that if Scotland’s switherers could be sent on a week’s fact finding holiday to our nearest neighbours across the North Sea, we would be independent by the end of the year…
Replies coming end af january.
link to rosettesarered.blogspot.co.uk
I honestly think the most offensive thing about it is how poorly it’s written! It genuinely reads like the type of thing that i’d have written at the age of sixteen, when the author is actually a university student like myself. I must say that the majority of student Labour supporters that I am friendly with are at least better at offering a constructive and well-written argument, even if I fundamentally disagree with a great deal of what they have to say. Nonetheless, her opinions are a blatant reminder of how thinking so steadfastly along party lines is constrictive of independent thought. You can tell that she’s a Labourite and actively participating in Better Together from an extremely quick glance. Half of her argument involves criticising Alex Salmond and the SNP, and the other is the standard re-iteration of supposed advantages to being part of the UK, most of which the majority of independence supporters don’t care about (such as “international influence.”)
On Twitter, she’s now simultaneously trying to downplay the argument (and the intended seriousness of her article) whilst accusing the author of the response of being both sexist and ageist. I must say that I disagree with both of these sentiments. I could quite easily of constructed a blog response offering the same criticisms as have been posted above and I am both female and in my early twenties. I’d also suggest that if she wants to avoid being addressed in a manner that could be construed in any way as “condescending”, she should articulate her opinions on independence in a manner that doesn’t so closely resemble the ramblings of a bitchy schoolgirl.
“On Twitter, she’s now simultaneously trying to downplay the argument (and the intended seriousness of her article) whilst accusing the author of the response of being both sexist and ageist.”
In fairness, while she IS trying to downplay the article, her actual reply was the perfectly fair “Whilst we don’t agree…[link to the article] this response post is very well written, and I appreciate your opinion! But I maintain my own.” It’s mostly her friends and the usual Unionist trolls who are calling all sorts of foul on her behalf.
And I did enjoy poor old Longshanker crawling up and asking if he could use her “bovvered” image in a post on his site, and being politely told to fuck off.
In fairness, while she IS trying to downplay the article, her actual reply was the perfectly fair “Whilst we don’t agree…[link to the article] this response post is very well written, and I appreciate your opinion! But I maintain my own.”
Oops, that last comment was supposed to contain a point about how I had not seen her formal response to your post and that the notion that she had to be defended was insulting in itself because she’s clearly capable of standing up for herself.
The arguments she uses are those of the Labour party, and also the result of the biased media. Perhaps with more and impartial information she’ll get a better picture. On the other hand she’s watched FMQ, and picked on the SNP to complain about, whereas an open mind would see that at FMQ Labour were just as bad, if not worse. In fact the whole shower of them are becoming more and more like Westminster; a shower of braying sneering donkeys. But I haven’t watched now for a few weeks.
One of my daughters is against Independence, a graduate who couldn’t get a job to match her qualifications. She went from job to job, always slightly better, and has now 15 months later, quite a good job, but still not matching her qualifications. But she’s a trier, never gives up.
A reason I want Independence is because I see a btter environment for her to get a job in. Scotland is becoming a dumping ground for warehouses and call centres, a cheap labour country. I want better for my kids, and their future kids; I want a country with headquarters, research centres, devolpment and design centres, so that rather than having to go abroad (including down south) to get jobs challenging their abilities, they can go abroad out of choice, to learn different cultures of work – and living – then come back home to an equally challenging and well-paid job, using what they learnt abroad, including the confidence that people outside Scotland have more than we do.
My daughter and my other kids, and Kayleigh Quinn are why I want Indeendence. As well as for myself. At the moment my family including me are 50-50. But the way my kids (and wife) vote is up to them, I’m not after going to try to convince them. I’ll be interested to see if they get a better picture of Scotland and Independence over the next 22 months, and change their votes.
Ah! A blinding light dawns. Kayleigh probably hasn’t watched FMQ (on the BBC Parliament Channel 504 on Sky) Thursday 11.30 p,m. but sometimes live in the morning Thursday, she’s probably watched the “edited highlights”on the BBC news, with Brian Taylor speaking over important bits with his commentary, bless his little cotton Union Jack socks.
So she’s probably never seen Lamont, Davidson or even Rennie in action …
I tried to post this on her blog, but for some reason wordpress wont let me in, declaring that “you do not own this identity”
Could someone do me a favour?
Think a moment on this, Ghandi said “Withholding payment of taxes is one of the quickest methods of overthrowing a government”, just as Amazon, Starbucks, Vodafone etc are doing RIGHT NOW and that fool Camoron instead of moving heaven and earth to close all the tax avoidance loopholes, is targeting the most impoverished, those least able to pay!!
NICE ONE DAVE AND GIDEON!!
Ta!
Dadsarmy
Why not convince your friends and family? This referendum is the most important decision the people of Scotland have ever made in recent memory on a Scottish issue and the the only way we are going to win is to convince the unconvinced. We can’t rely on Politicians to do the work for us. They are intrinsically distrusted by the general population. The best way to convince people is to bring reasoned arguments to people that respect you. Even if it doesn’t work at least we tried. I’m not implying that you become strident and aggressive in your views but even by merely stating you will be voting yes will make the NO voter sit back and take notice of your opinion.
Just visited the blog there, I think you killed it rev, no activity since you made this post!
“This blog is open to invited readers only”
Ha!