England's fault
My memories growing up revolve mostly around football (soccer to some readers). What seemed most important to the Scots, at least if the pre-teen me is to be believed, was not that Scotland should succeed, but that England should fail to do so. The underlying reason being that every problem in Scotland was England's fault.
I have grown up believing that the key component of Scottish identity is a chip-on-the-shoulder, blame-England narrow nationalism. Anti-Englishness is probably an easy sell to many of the disenchanted, seemingly a modus vivendi for significant parts of the population. It is not something that the SNP (Scottish National Party) and it's leader Alex Salmond have ever lifted a finger to discourage.
My point is, is the push for independence based on anything that's actually positive? An Alex Salmond platitude is not an answer. He has proven an able politician, exceptional at tapping into the emotions of Scots, in part at least because such feelings are very much his own.
The SNP and it's leader just want out. Alex Salmond, the former banker, is probably well aware of the economic pitfalls independence would bring. Privately, he most likely agrees with the case as presented by the no camp. First and foremost however, he is a nationalist, and it is probably a price worth paying. The "Proclaimers demographic" in Scotland is however not big enough to deliver a victory on that basis. Hence the rather vacuous soundbites that he "has faith in the people of Scotland" and that Better Together (the no campaign) is always trying to "talk Scotland down." Hopefully claims such as the publicity surrounding the referendum providing a big boost to the economy will be seen for what they are.
The currency issue to me is a matter of the SNP not having done its homework. Rhetorical acrobatics have been employed to try to explain away the lack of a considered policy.
Twisting NHS policy in London - it seems that the conservatives have been trying to privatize it for its entire history - is slightly better thought out. The anti-Tory feeling invoked also helps to obscure the fact that the Scottish government has had the authority to set it's own healthcare policy for years anyway.
Mists of time
It is perhaps a little known fact that it was King James of Scotland who brought both sides together, when a post-Cromwell England made him its king also. This Union of Crowns took place some 104 years before the Act of Union - of the parliaments - in 1707. It probably occurred to quite a few that occupying the same small island was better done in working together than in fighting innumerable wars.
In a bid perhaps to gain the royalist vote, the SNP has said that the Queen will remain head of state. The SNP is rejecting the gradual federalism coming into being in the UK, and in fact wishes to retrogress to a time of a needless border but also a shared monarch.
The ex-UK in the wider world
Will the component parts of the UK be diminished internationally if they split up?Possibly, however this question is all too often looked at in the wrong way. The UK has long been living under a certain delusion about its importance in the globe. Sticking close to the USA only confers upon Britain a false significance, the opportunity lost long ago to be a key player within the EU that many now wish to leave for largely isolationist delusions.
Excessive political proximity to the USA (closer than Canada) has made the UK something of a target for extremists and others. Being the smaller, quieter nation has the benefit of being able to get on with life instead of interfering around the globe in the mistaken belief that it's being improved.
I seem to be making the case for independence here. Rather, I hope that the referendum stimulates a positive mental reboot across the whole UK: that the inward-looking nature of the desire to draw a thick line across Great Britain on the part of the SNP slowly fades. That the inward-looking, outsider-baiting, frog-in-the-well mentality of the dreadful United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) go the same way. That's the hope anyway.
No to the wrong question at the wrong time
Just as with Quebec and its 2 referendums, there is not an absolute majority that emotionally desires independence at any price, which is the domain of the PQ (and SNP). In pure economic terms, one quiet unspoken truth is that it could end up being bad for Scotland, but good for England.
This whole idea of creating division arose from a persecution complex created in equal measure by Thatcher's bullying and SNP encouragement. Paradoxically, it was the SNP which in 1979 cast the decisive votes to force the election which brought the Iron Lady to power.
My thoughts above would most likely do nothing to pursuade any Scots to vote no. I only hope that English politicians are able to stop creating the perception that they are pushing Scotland around. Additionally of course, I hope Scots see through the fanciful economics of the SNP.
The creation of even greater distance from England that some people in both nations of the Union already perceive (I include myself here, see second paragraph for details), would be a hostile gesture of utter pointlessness.
