Wednesday, 17 September 2014

Hoots, mon! #indyref

OK, let me get my cards on the table: I want a fully independent Scotland. I don't have any emotional attachment to a Union that was created to benefit one group of poshos and bail out another. Smaller territories, genuine community concerns, etc., lead to more relevant politics.

There's plenty of reason why an independent Scotland really appeals to me, not the least of which is that the endless Scottish whingeing about Westminster can finally fuck the fuck off. Labour destroyed for the foreseeable future? Well, suck my cock. David Cameron in a lose-lose situation? Cry me a river.

But the truth of it is that the Scots are going to bottle it. It's going to be a narrow No vote. Narrow enough that Alex Salmond is going to claim vindication and carry on banging on to acquire more powers for Alex Salmond.

Useless, desperate Westminster politicians will throw money and power without consequences at Holyrood in a desperate attempt to hang on to their own power.

The hated and despised English will continue to fork out for every fucking thing.

Alex Salmond isn't really interested in independence for Scotland, the hope thereof is his gimmick, his schtick for more power without any responsibility. If the Scots do vote Yes, what's going to be his unique selling point? People may start to look at his policies and start to question them.

He's not prepared fully for the consequences of independence, that's because he doesn't really want it. He's in a powerful position, pandering to the nationalist elements of the Scots, with massive power over what happens but equally no responsibilities and a handy scapegoat if shit goes wrong.

Which politician would want that happy gravy train to reach a destination?

Proof that democracy is a terrible thing shows in the fact that 97% of Scottish people think that the outcome this referendum is going to make their lives better. It's as stupid as people believing that UKIP will be any different to the existing political structure if they get any power.

The worst possible outcome (and therefore the most likely one) is that the No vote squeaks in. The Yes camp will be outraged, calling it a fix. Westminster will be fully cowed, aware that unless they accede to Salmond they will be only one referendum away from losing the thing that will cost them their own power. Everybody else's money will be thrown at the Scots to keep them quiet and Salmond will negotiate himself even more powers with even less accountability.

Ordinary Scots will be no better off than they are now, but the political elite in Holyrood will be much better off and may trumpet their "achievements" to appease the nationalist vote, to keep them on side.

Ultimately, the only true independence is the one where we walk away from the states that control and shepherd us. That will never happen because people are afraid of the responsibility that comes with that.

A small taste of that fear is what will keep Scotland in check. All the No campaign has offered is fear, uncertainty and doubt. It's much more powerful than hope and opportunity.


Joe Public said...


Woman on a Raft said...

Yep. That's how it will be.

Jim said...

I've actually considered the idea that Salmond has thrown the referendum on purpose, precisely because he doesn't want to be truly independent, for all the reasons you lay out.

If you were serious about forming a new country, wouldn't the currency be the first thing you'd have got sorted out? What exactly the new country will use for money? Not make some wish list, most of which are either ruled out by other parties, or obvious busts (sterlingisation for example).

No, I reckon Salmond calculated that about 35-40% of the Scottish voters would vote for independence if he suggested a dancing pig as its new head of state, and shiny beads as currency, so he had to make sure the manifesto was so riddled with doubts and inconsistencies that the middle ground would be put off enough to vote No by a small margin.

Which he looks to have achieved in spades.

john miller said...

Jim is spot on.

If you were serious about independence, you'd at least have thought about some answers to a list of a dozen vital questions.

But Salmond hasn't because a yes vote would leave him looking like a laughing stock in 12 months time.

Lancastrian Oik said...

I don't agree.

But it's great to see you back, you cunt.

Unknown said...

From being quite desperately sad at the idea of Scottish independence (and probably somewhere deep within me still hoping for a No vote), I have virtually come out the other side. Can't bear the endless flag-waving whinging. You're Scottish and you know it sort of thing and I for sure couldn't bear going through this again. Best case scenario if there is a No vote is that our system of government is changed and some of the anomalies re voting and funding are sorted out. On the other hand, if Scotland votes Yes it will be a relief that they aren't going to get all the goodies they've been promised and will either stand or not on their own. P.S. Never read one of these articles before - it did make me laugh. Very funny.

Dr Evil said...

Sentence over and they've let you out?