With things on a knife-edge, the atmosphere here is incredible:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-29216377
With things on a knife-edge, the atmosphere here is incredible:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-29216377
This song's original title was "Eyes of the World".
Nice. It was actually Peter Gabriel's closing lyric to Biko that kept running through my head.Originally Posted by davis
Not we're an oppressed nation, or fighting racial injustice on the scale of apartheid South Africa. But imho, we are fighting social injustice.
The excitement in Scotland this morning is so tangible. Normally at 7am we're all shuffling sleepily to work, but today there is a definite vibe and upbeat demeanor.
97% of the population have registered to vote in this referendum. That's incredible.
The polls currently put Yes at 48% and No at 52%, but even last night during live debates people were changing their minds either way. It's so close, that it'll go right down to the wire.
When the votes are counted, all it takes is for one side to have one vote more than the other side, and that side is the winner.
In my opinion the atmosphere is poisonous and the sooner this is all over the better.
I don't think nationalism brings out the best in people anywhere, and Scotland is no exception.
Hi Stevie, sorry you feel this way.
I agree that there has been bad behaviour on both sides, but the mindless actions of a small minority can't be allowed to overshadow such a momentous day in our history.
Walking around Edinburgh this morning, the whole vibe is one of excitement. And in my workplace, colleagues of either persuasion are openly sharing and debating their views without any hint of rancour or intimidation.
I understand your point about nationalism, but the fact is that this single issue has engaged the Scottish people more fully than any recent elections, especially the younger generation voting for the first time. They are the ones who will inherit the outcome, whatever the result, and as someone who used to run elections and despaired at the ever-decreasing voter turnout, the high turnout of young voters is something that should be celebrated in an age of cynicism.
Can someone explain all this in one or two paragraphs please? I know political discussions are frowned upon here. But what are the advantages or disadvantages of Scotland seceding from the UK? Yeah, I can look it up, and "google is my friend" and all that. I'd prefer to read what some of you say about all this. Just a couple small paragraphs would be good.
Well......
We're voting today to decide whether Scotland should become an independent country - it's either yes, or no.
There's been a lack of information from both camps, and a lot of disinformation too.
But for me, it's a Yes vote for the following reasons:
(I) It's time for us to grow up as a nation, make our own decisions, and make our own mistakes, but learn from them along the way. We've spent too long blaming England for all our problems, and this is a chance for us to move away from the blame game and develop a more positive approach.
(ii) I would have preferred a third option on the ballot paper, offering maximum devolved powers to Scotland, but without full independence (Devo-Max if you will). This would have been the next logical step, allowing us breathing space to adjust to our new responsibilities before taking the next step. But the powers that be at Westminster decided that we should only have 2 options, yes or no. Essentially they were calling Scotland's bluff that we would be too frightened to vote for independence. So for me, it was a choice of continuing with the norm, or a vote for change.
Westminster have been very complacent, and got a huge fright last weekend when a poll suggested the Yes campaign had overcome the No camp's initial 22 point lead, and could win. All of a sudden the party leaders rush up to Scotland to offer the Devo-Max to encourage us to stay. If it is good enough for them now, why wasn't it good enough to go on the ballot paper from the very start? And I feel it's immoral to offer this bribe after many of us have already cast their vote in the postal process.
(iii) I think there will be pros and cons going either way, but by voting Yes, it gives Westminster a wake-up call that we want more say over our affairs and a move away from everything revolving around London. It might also be the start of a shake-up in England, which could signal a change for the better for Northern England which also feels bitterly disenfranchised by London.
(iv) If we become independent, we would no longer have Scottish MPs sitting in Westminster and making decisions on English matters - quite rightly. But this would mean the opposition party - Labour (left-wing) losing a huge number of its MPs, and being unable to win enough seats to govern the country. Which is why there is a lot of bitterness between Labour and the Scottish National Party.
Not sure this answers all your questions, and it's only my interpretation, but hopefully it gives a balanced perspective.
For me it's quite simple. In 1707 or whenever it was, Scotland and England joined together to form the United Kingdom. Nobody forced either party, no-one was invaded, there was no war - it was an idea hundreds of years ahead of its time. Instead of fighting over borders, let's just remove the border and the reason for the fighting. Both parties retained their independence in many ways - Scotland has always had its own legal system, its own education system etc. But they joined together in a political and monetary union that benefited both parties and led to the UK being the world's superpower for the best part of 200 years.
For most of the last 300 years the UK has had a single parliament in Westminster. But in 2000 legislation was brought in to devolve power to Scotland that led to the setting up of the Scottish parliament. Scotland still elected members to the Westminster parliament, but also held separate elections for the Scottish parliament, which has control over areas such as health, education, policing, and lots of other areas. The method of proportional representation selected for Scottish parliament was specifically designed to avoid any one party being able to form a majority government - unlike the Westminster government. It was thought that this would encourage a more "consensus" style of politics. However at the last Scottish elections the Scottish Nationalist Party won a majority of the seats, and thus had a mandate to call the referendum. In many ways it was a freak result - they certainly didn't get a majority of the votes. It was a result of a general disillusionment with Westminster politics in general - and the SNP benefited as not being seen as a Westminster party, even though they are represented there.
So today we are being asked whether or not we want to re-draw the border that was wiped out over 300 years ago. I have already voted No, but whatever the result the country has been split right down the middle and I think the divisions will take years, if not decades, to heal. And it was all so unnecessary...devolution has been going for about 14 years. Give it a chance to work before throwing out the baby with the bathwater...
Stevie, if you read my earlier post, you'll see that I favoured Devo-Max as the way forward, I suspect a lot of folk in both the Yes and No camps would have said the same. The problem arose when it was refused as a third option by Westminster.
They've forced it to be a Yes/No referendum, so instead of a possible majority vote in favour of Devo Max, they've created a 50/50 split in opinion.
I'm sorry you feel that our future looks so bleak. Personally, I think we have broader shoulders than that, and for most of us we'll simply get back on with our lives.
But if nothing else, the referendum has generated an incredible level of participation on both sides, and from all paths of persuasion, gender, age etc. Perhaps the legacy will be to inspire a similar level of engagement in next year's UK-wide election?
As a non-Brit, but of British ancestry, I find it a little puzzling. Shouldn't England be the one seeking independence?
Think of it. The UK includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern ireland. Out of those, England is the only one that does not have its own parliament or assembly. The Scottish parliament legislates on many matters that affect only Scotland, but similar issues that affect england are decided in Westminster, with MPs from England, Scotland, Wales and N.I. voting. I'm surprised that more hasn't been made of this inconsistency in the political setup of the UK.
A referendum has to be a Yes/No question. I know there are exceptions, but they are pretty rare.
The UK is a mature democracy. It can sort out such matters as the level of power devolved to its constituent parts through the normal democratic process. This argument is on a fundamental principle - do you want Scotland to leave the UK. I don't. People are being invited to vote Yes on blind faith, and half the country will do just that. If Yes wins then just remember, whatever happens, that is what you asked for. You have entrusted the future of the country to the nationalists.
Well spotted! This is going to be the next big challenge for Westminster, regardless of today's result. The unionist parties have each promised Scotland more powers in the event of a No vote, but these proposals have not been scrutinised by the Parliamentary Legislation committee, nor have they approved formally by the Government. Even if the unionist leaders are sincere about keeping their promises, English MPs have threatened to vote against any such proposals.
I don't blame them.
This is an inevitable result of the fact that England makes up roughly 90% of the UK by population. What is needed is for power to be devolved to the various English regions, but this is difficult because these regions are not clearly defined, and there seems to be little appetite for this among English voters. Perhaps if the vote is No then this will be looked at again with a bit more urgency...
Very interesting to watch from the other side of the pond. Any time a people are allowed to choose their own destiny, it's a good thing. I only hope that they cast practical votes instead of emotional ones. Too often, people vote for the wrong reasons and end up going against their best interests. We're really good at that over here in the US.
Good luck.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
I'm curious to know if the choice made today is irrevocable. Could a party in Scotland rise to power on the platform of reuniting with the UK down the road? If not, is there an official opposition party within Scotland to ensure democracy is upheld in this new nation or will it be a one-party system for the foreseeable future.
This topic is front page news here with Québec having had a few separation referendums in the past decades. Many people here wanting to see how this can play out.
"Corn Flakes pissed in. You ranted. Mission accomplished. Thread closed."
-Cozy 3:16-
I'm writing from England, but have always considered myself British rather than English, and it is a curious feeeling that the United Kingdom may soon no longer be United.
It's perfectly true that Westminster have been complacent; I think an awful lot of Englishmen and women too have woken up in the last week or so to the fact that the voters could say Yes. And it's an interesting comment that the North of England could take comfort from a Yes vote, being an opportunity to tell the South that there are parts of the UK that are not London. I think that and I live less than 100 miles from the capital.
Which leads me to a question for our American friends; you live in the United States - but how united are they? We never get to hear of any bitterness or squabbling about your regional issues over here, so it's easy to assume that everything is rosy in the American garden. Are powers sufficiently devolved to individual states that there is general equanimity about your lot?
She walks like a bearded rainbow.
As I understand it, the USA being a federation, individual states have extensive powers over tax, legislation, public spending etc. So in that sense it's not really analogous to the UK situation...
Both sides are confirming that this is it - if we vote Yes, then there's no going back, if we vote No there won't be another referendum (at least not in our lifetime).
If we do go independent, I think the political make-up of our Parliament will change, and that there will be a revival in Labour's fortunes to offer a balance against the SNP majority. It might even be that Labour overtake the SNP in votes and forms the new government. (The SNP landslide in 2011 was quite a surprise to us all, but it's what the voters wanted.)
Interestingly the media here have commented on the Quebec question as a comparator with today's referendum.
My one hope is that if we do vote Yes, it will give the deprived and socially abandoned members of our society fresh hope that their voice does count.
Indeed. We are certainly not united on social issues. However, if there's anything that unites most Americans, it's their willful ignorance about what's really going on. But, we shouldn't go there in this forum.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
It's.... complicated.
But other than people from Texas, US people don't generally have "statist" identifications; at least, not any more. If people do have regional identifications then it would normally be towards their cities, and in a generally cultural rather than political manner.
Interesting conversation. Thanks to Stevie B and Valen for their opposing but respectful posts.
Music isn't about chops, or even about talent - it's about sound and the way that sound communicates to people. Mike Keneally
Music isn't about chops, or even about talent - it's about sound and the way that sound communicates to people. Mike Keneally
a couple of years ago, someone in her early 20's told me "people choose who they vote for for selfish reasons. everybody knows that" in response to me saying that I vote for who I think is best for America, generally speaking.
Well in about 12 hours we'll know if it's to be a messy divorce with years of wrangling over how to split the metaphorical album collection or keep calm and carry on...
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks