I don't think I've seen a thread about this on here. Apologies if there was and I missed it.

I'd be interested to hear anyone's opinions on the idea of Scotland being an independent country, whether you're from the UK or abroad.

Personally, I've got a sort of cognitive dissonance surrounding it, in that I have some reasons that I stand buy for why I wouldn't want independence (I'm Scottish by the way) and I have a lot of reasons why I would want it.

This is a product of general world weariness and my assumption that Scotland wold simply become another neo-liberal state, replacing one set of self serving venal warmongers with another. I'm being a bit dramatic here but essentially I do believe this.

A lot of Scots see themselves as quite progressive and broadly left wing. The term Socialist gets thrown around a lot, and there's a self congratulatory patriotism where we think we're innately kinder and more socially minded than out English neighbours. There is indeed a proud tradition in Scotland of the labour movement, trade unionism and anti racism though, so it's not without reason that some of us think we're a naturally socialist leaning nation.

At the end of the day we are a country. Whilst we're not subjugated, we're subjected to governments we didn't vote for time and time again.

I think I'm leaning more towards a Yes vote now.

So those are my garbled, half baked thoughts on it. What are yours?

Alex Salmond seems like a bit of a douche who just thinks that because Scotland is a "proud nation" that it means that it's inherently best for it to be independent and screw the bogeyman domineering English, when in fact they rely a lot on England and Westminster economically (free tuition and hospital parking and such eh, who's earning and providing all that money?) and from what I hear are planning on still doing so after the split (keeping the pound and keeping the Bank of England in charge of theirs and such), so it won't really be independence at all, just a token act of patriotism to satisfy the egos of all "Proud Scotsmen" and give Salmond a cult of kilts so he can feel more important than everyone else. Or something.

But well, I'm not against it in principle, it just seems disingenuous in motivation and poorly thought out at this present time and by the present figureheads.

The pound isnt the property of england by the way. Its as much ours as it is the Welsh, English and NIrish. Also, its an inernationally tradeable currency which anyone can use.

Also, Scotland isnt subsidised by England, Scotland contributes a substantial amount to the UK treasury.

The referendum isnt about Alex Salmond. Its about Scotland being a country, not one overweight politician.

The majority of Yes-voters I encounter daily portrayed in kinder terms than I would've used. I've generally kept my head in the sand during this whole thing, but it's hard to live in ignorance with these loud idiots who may as well be wearing Braveheart facepaint voicing their half-baked opinion at every opportunity.

I'm not picking a side here, but it's obvious that a good chunk of votes will be coming from people who had already decided "Yes!" before even considering the consequences. That's the beauty of it, eh Mr Salmond?

In fact, come to think of it, the only people I know who are adamantly voting No are from English families living in Scotland.

EDIT: Just to emphasize that almost everyone else I've heard in conversation about this topic is either undecided, or doesn't really care. I fall into both of those categories, later folks.

I dunno, I haven't thought about it deeply. Whatever's best for Scotland. I'm tempted to side with the yes vote just to make Cameron/unionists cry, although the SNP do leave a bad taste in my mouth what with their petty nationalism.

I am from the Northern parts of Germany and we had a similar discussion some time ago. As a member of an ethnic minority, there is of course a certain interest in a place that reflects one's own cultural heritage and language. It is quite difficult to get this in Germany, which has to do with the aspect of a nation state and its way of dealing with minorities. There had been a secessionist group and I think they wanted to establish a Great Frisia on the northern shores in these borders. I am not entirely sure about it and what areas of Germany and the Netherlands are supposed to be included. Whatever.

While it would be nice to have such a place, I fail to see how we should get something like the financing right. How to protect the lands, how to deal with a heavy flood (not to mention on how to finance the dikes) and how to handle all those small problems of the daily life; like keeping the standard of living as well as paying for a proper health care for the people.

It is not an easy thing. Not here in Germany and also not in Scotland or in Spain. Somehow it feels like it would be too much of divide et impera. The modern time and the modern communication technologies enable minorties to voice their troubles more clearly and to a greater audience and maybe the established nation states have difficulties in dealing with the matters. Maybe the existing grievances should be addressed more clearly and on a broader level. Their political agendas are still relics from the past and have not been modernized in such as way as to address these problems in a proper kind of way. A new state brings a lot of troubles, costs a lot of money and may be doomed to fail in case the wrong guys get in charge. I fail to see advantages. Especially from the point of view of a German and by keeping our own history -- see the 16th to 19th century -- in the back of the head.

Being Basque it is very strange to me how little importance is given to the language and culture in the Scottish situation. It seems that the only important thing is the money so being (in my case) somekind of a romantic nationalist, I would only support a pro independence movement only to revive and reinforce the tradicional culture and language.

So I am not a very great supporter of Scottish independence(so many Basque nationalists are) but If you get it, I will happy for you.

Anyway the "no" seems to win but we will see what happens.

I actually took a look at some numbers, and it seems that according to some research, Scotland might even be economically viable as an independent state. For a while. Until the oil runs out.

Interesting. I didn't expect that.

The thing is, Gaelic has never been a language of lowland Scotland. Independence for Scotland can't hinge on Gaelic because it;s not the language of everyone ion Scotland.. There's already provision for the preservation of the language throughout the country. It's not like some areas in Spain where everyone can speak Castellano but has their native language (Basque, Catalan) as their main, everyday tongue.

I agree that it's disappointing that money seems to be at the forefront of the debate, but it's really about self determination.

Thanks for the info Marcomai, but its Gaelic spoken normaly in north Scotland? or its located only in very specific areas? for example in rural areas of the Basque Country our language is spoken by a majority of people, but overall only a 35% speaks in Basque.

I also remember that the official website of the parlament or the main nationalist party was not in Gaelic, which was surprising for me too.

Anyway good luck, I hope you take the correct decision, perhaps history deserves Scotland a chance to be a free country again.

Yeah, Gaelic's really a language of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. The overwhelming majority of people living in Scotland have neither a connection to, nor a desire to learn or speak Gaelic.

Thanks for the kind words!

If Scotland leaves the UK, new labour will lose a lot of M.P.s, maybe that's why they encouraged so many to settle in England when they were in power? - nearly 70% of people coming to live here from abroad will vote labour after just 5 years or sooner I've read. But the tories haven't fulfilled their election promise of reducing numbers to tens of thousands from around 240 000 a year (for over 15 years), so I suspect it's just as much to do with keeping pro EU parties in power - and cheap uncomplaining workers for the rich.

Sorry to see the anti-English sentiment good and bad people are everywhere, people if anything are too tolerant here.

Can see why many Scots want to distance themselves from Westminster though, it's hardly democratic, and Scotland suffered a lot under English kings of old - though I hope people won't vote purely on what happened hundreds of years ago.
There are thousands of Scots working in England, and I've always thought they've been well received and respected, so I'm always saddened when I read sweeping statements. Good on the Scots for pushing for a referendum for their future though, I would be sad to see the UK break up but if I were Scottish I would probably want independence, though there are a lot of scare stories as to what would happen (same as leaving the EU if we're ever allowed a referendum) - keeping the pound for example and what about tuition fees and prescription costs which are subsidised considerably I believe.

Well, if you guys vote yes you can see James Bond again.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't Scotland fairly poor? I was under the impression that a good deal of UK money was sent up there to help alleviate and subsidize the burdens.

You are mistaken. There are poor areas in Scotland just like in any country. Scotland contributes (some would argue disproportionally) to the UK treasury. UK money? Scotland is in the UK and Scottish people pay taxes like everyone else.It's not some pauper nation funded by money from England. It's actually a very wealthy country with oil reserves, great universities and thriving tourism to name a few.

It has massive social inequality like every other capitalist nation but I think your impression of Scotland, and how the UK works in general is not coming from a very informed place.

Just for clarity's sake, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland consists of four countries. England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

^ I'm aware of what constitutes the UK; I just didn't want to list out the other three and that seemed the most convenient way to avoid doing so. I'm not an expert on the relative economies, thus my wording of it as a question, but I had heard that Scotland took in more than it sent out. It's nothing I intended as offensive; my region generally receives more than it sends out.

Sure thing, but when you say 'a good deal of UK money was sent up there' it seems to suggest that Scotland doesn't generate it's own revenue.or at least generates such a piffling amount that the rest of the UK has to give hand outs. It contributes a fuck load through North Sea oil without even looking into taxes and external revenue.

I didn't take any offence by the way, I was just wanting to clarify.

Also, many people just now are trying to emphasise the point that Scotland isn't a region but a country.

^ That last statement actually brings something to mind. What exactly binds Scottish people together? I hear often about the difference between Lowland and Highland, but I can't tell how profound the difference actually is, other than it seems the lowlands brought the highlands into Great Britain without them wanting to. Scotland also doesn't seem to have a couple of the things I usually associate with a distinctive culture, such as a strong literary tradition or even a language that links them to their past. I've read a few books on Scottish history, but none of them seem to discuss what exactly links a man in Moray to one in the Orkneys to one just inside the borders.

I'm taking the bait here.
Scotland has no strong literary tradition? Are you kidding me?

Robert Burns, David Hume, Robert Louis Stevenson, Alasdair Gray to name a few from different periods.

Have you heard of the Scottish Enlightenment? Have you heard of Saint Andrews University? People have been thinking and writing here for centuries and centuries before the USA existed but I'm assuming you feel it has a couple of the things that you 'usually associate with a distinctive culture'

The English language, and to a lesser extent Gaelic link us to our past funnily enough. Y'know the languages we've developed and spoken here for centuries.

Is an Indian Punjabi speaker not an Indian if there's an Indian in another province who speaks Sindhi?

I don't even want to start on the contributions to science, industry , medicine and telecommunications. I hate going down that route because those achievements have nothing to do with me personally but they sure as fuck are representative of Scottish history and it's people.

But no, there's really nothing that sets us apart. Religious tradition, ancient families, Neolithic monuments, folk music, cuisine, a legal system etc etc mean nothing.

Scotland has been though all types of governments, clans, feudalism, monarchs all the way though to the modern nation state so your last point is disingenuous.

'I've read a few books on Scottish history'
I think the very fact that such books exist are a testament to the fact that we have a history, that there are people who are 'Scottish'.

A person in Orkney (not the Orkneys) is Scottish as is a person on Galashiels because they live in a country that identifies itself as Scotland. Borders, nation states are a new invention relatively so I can get what you mean in a way, but self identification as Scottish living in a land delineated as Scotland for hundreds and hundreds of years needs no further justification.

Perhaps I should have explained my question better. Much of what I've read on Scotland seems to talk about it in regional terms. They talk about Lowland vs Highland a great deal to the point that I almost think of them as distinctive cultures. Obviously, there have been great authors produced, I really enjoy Stevenson, but I'm more talking subject matter. With Poland, for example, there was plenty of arts that was dedicated to their culture and nationalism after the partitions that I just don't see mentioned with Scotland. To get back to the 'lands dichotomy, much of what was produced of culture seems to have come from the lowlands. You mentioned yourself that Gaelic was never a part of Lowland culture and I've read of people from the lowlands inventing the term "Northern British" to describe themselves. It seems to me like they were largely distinctive groups. As to the English language, that's what I meant, it's a borrowed trait from a neighbor, and not something I think about as a link to previous times.

I'm not from there, so all I can do is read books and news. I can't get a good feel for what goes on in a place I've never been to, so I've asked someone, you, questions that I've raised in my head. I understand that my questioning can seem critical, but I'm simply looking to satisfy my curiosity, and I'm not trying to bait anybody.

The only question you have asked in your last two posts is 'what actually binds Scotland together?'

I think I more than adequately answered your question in my last post.

The English language isn't a trait borrowed from a neighbour as you put it. Scots have contributed to the development of English as I said above. Maybe you could look into dialects like Scots or Doric to get a better handle on it.

I don't read a nationalist literature so I can't comment on what has been produced in that vein. All you said was that Scotland doesn't seem to have a strong literary tradition. That is demonstrably untrue. The partition of Poland was in the 20th century. I would be surprised if there wasn't art that reacted to this. What's your point though? There's plenty of songs, paintings, books written about the Highland Clearances or the Glencoe Massacre.

I've never met anyone from here in my life who describes themselves as Northern British. British yes. There was an LP by a band called Teenage Fanclub from Glasgow called 'Songs from Northern Britain' but that was a tongue in cheek title.

Yes, there are differences between highland and lowland. I'd imagine that someone from Marseille would have different things to draw on culturally than someone from Brittany but they're still both French.

Well, not the best example perhaps, taking into account that people from Brittany had different cultural and linguistic roots (though the French ultra centralist politics use to destroy all the cultural treasure and differences in France). I mean, I would say that you have more in common with people of southern England than the people from Brittany and Marseille.

But I see your point, do not kill me, please

Haha. People where I'm from in Scotland are more like people in Newcastle, Manchester or Liverpool than they are with say, people in Devon or Kent. Mind you I can readily admit that I don't identify much with people from the Highlands and Islands, I actually see myself more as Glaswegian than I do Scottish!

Just to know more, which are the main differences between people from Glasgow and Highlands?

Ahh fuck, I must visit Scotland someday, perhaps this video could me help to understand something haha:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FSWlfcg6oA

my nan was a shetlander, and from what she said (and from what i noticed myself there) they don't really even identify as scottish. they're very isolated from mainland scotland, they fly their own flag everywhere (not the scots), and although it's purely romanticism in 2014, they place a lot of worth in their history as a norse outpost. i'll be interested to see how they and the other islanders vote.

I heard a small bit BBC did on Shetland recently and the view there is rather skewed more towards Norway than Scotland, which was a bit surprising to me, I guess. For example, in their legends and myths when Scots or Scands show up, the Scots tend to be villains while the Scands are often heroes or at least on his/her side.

The Highlands are very different from places like Orkney or Shetland, not to mention Glasgow. I've had friends form Orkney and Shetland but have never been there. As far as the Highlands go, the main difference between them and people form Glasgow is that Glasgow is the largest city on the country while most of the Highlands are rural. That in itself covers lots of differences. There's some towns in the Highlands and Inverness is even a city now apparently.

That sounds so horribly familiar....

So is it right that Scots who live abroad (mainly for work or study) won't get a vote? Something doesn't seem right, only people actually resident can vote? Are you considered no longer Scottish if you move away, even if all your family have lived there for generations? I've read this is to counter nationalism but it seems wrong that anyone who has relatively recently moved there gets to vote (the radio was talking to an English guy who moved up there as he didn't want his kids growing up under the direct influence of Westminster and he can vote) while others who were born there and define themselves as Scottish, but live elsewhere, cannot. It seems this ruling is open to being abused to me.

Ahem, there were three partitions of Poland in the 18th century.

The guy sounded like he was talking about 1939. I definitely don't know much about Polish history but that was the context I took it in.

Yeah, it's a funny one. I know people down South who wish they could vote. It does seem open to abuse but I imagine that the thinking behind it seeks to get a representation of citizens actually living there. I can only imagine the back and forth that must have gone on in engineering this referendum and that seems like this could have been a non negotiable from Westminster! I really don't know the ins and outs of it though.

This is just a quick guide for who can vote. (Yes campaign website)
http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/who- ... dependence

There's always been criticism from within Scotland towards people like Sean Connery for chiming in on Scottish affairs even though he's not lived here for decades. Perhaps he's the microcosm of this question. Lets call it The Connery Factor.

Haha... I remember in one of my British culture courses we were discussing about Scottish nationalism and the professor used the "The Loch Ness Monster's Song" by Edwin Morgan to depict the surge (and the ensuing withdrawal) of the sense of nationalism in Scotland.

Anyways, lived in Glasgow for 6 months and almost all the people I met wanted to emphasise that they are not really British because quite often people treat British and English as synonyms, so there is an apparent sense of differentiation among the people. Although, some of these people had no qualms about getting wasted and wave British flags in bars when William and Kate married and there were parties everywhere. Then again, Glaswegians never turn down an opportunity for drinking

Hmm... Seriously need to re-visit Glasgow soon-ish.

He specifically mentioned 'the partitions', though. Besides, Poland was under the communist government from 1945 until 1989, so (overtly) nationalistic art would be... frowned upon, to put it mildly.

OK. You win. I'm terribly sorry.

Just bear in mind that I 'd taken it upon myself to stupidly reply to someone who seemed to doubt whether Scotland was a nation or not.

I suppose I'll add my thoughts on the matter. I'm a Scot living abroad and I won't get a vote. I have (recently) decided to back the 'Yes' (or Yas min, as certain people from my region are calling it) side; the rest of my family all live in Scotland, and so are able to vote, and they are mostly against independence.

My parents and brother are pretty conservative (not that they'd vote Tory, but you know what I mean); they have good lives and don't want the uncertainty of change. I totally understand that.

I guess I'm the 'radical' in the family. I have no qualms about big changes anyway - but I don't even think there will be massive changes in the event of an 'Aye' vote. Business? It'll go on much the same as before. Money? I can't see a problem with that, despite the constant propoganda that there will be a huge monetary issue. EU membership will get sorted out, of that I am totally confident. And considering that a huge chunk of England is prepared to leave the EU, and the distasteful (to me) agenda of the neocons in charge of the UK, I reckon that a rejection of independence will lead to just as much uncertainty in the future.

But I have two main reasons for supporting independence. First, my whole life I have recognised an inferiority complex in the people of my country: they're not completely in charge and I think this leads to a sort of stunting of our development; it's very much a case of 'the London government will handle the big issues' and I just don't think that's healthy for a people. There's been much more of this 'growing up' since devolution in 1999, but I believe this process requires completion.

The other main reason is that I hate, hate, hate how the UK government is organised and run. It has some trappings of democracy, but when we spend billions on bombing people in Asia while there is still substantial poverty within our own borders - well, it ain't enough. Warmongering is probably the worst thing about the people who run the UK. Also sickening, though, is how most of the oil money was pilfered by a few crooks instead of being put into a national reserve aimed at improving life for everyone in the country. UK remains a horribly inegalitarian society, and that, to me, is worth breaking up.

For what it's worth, I know quite a few English people who think along these lines, and I would also sincerely hope that an independent Scotland could spark off more radical change in the rest of the UK too.

People question what Scotland has to gain being independent, but no one questions what does the UK gains keeping control of Scotland. After the independece things probably won't really change much, in either side of the border.

The day has arrived!!!!

The idea that the 'Scots' are some sort of different people or that Scotland has some sort of separate identity to the rest of the UK is frankly garbage.

Same happened to me (with Gaelic) when I was in Ireland.
Seems like all the debate is based in economy and misinformation about it.
Anyway, I think it's a good thing just because of the fact what scottish people has been allowed to decide.
I would like the Yes to win just because I believe in local administration politics too.
Anyway, let's see!

The old boy net work needs a shake up but there is so much propaganda from both sides, it must be hard for many to choose. Good luck Scotland.
Thanks monarchs of old, you never considered our futures just your own vainglory.