Scotland Watch

[UndercoverElephant]

So is the real problem with the Yes campaign that it is too successful or a shambles?

The real problem with the Yes campaign is that it is fundamentally and systematically dishonest. It's based on a pack of lies, and the ability of Alex Salmond to mislead people. And he does this instead of, rather than in addition to, having a real, viable political and economic strategy. In short, he knows how to play the crowd - and gain votes - but he does not, apparently, understand the real issues facing and independent Scotland. Either that, or he doesn't care. I suspect the latter. He wants independence at ANY cost, but the people he's fooling into voting for him do not.

[UndercoverElephant]

And hold on to your gold. Its day will come. Patience, my friend...

[Little John]

So is the real problem with the Yes campaign that it is too successful or a shambles?

The real problem with the Yes campaign is that it is fundamentally and systematically dishonest. It's based on a pack of lies, and the ability of Alex Salmond to mislead people. And he does this instead of, rather than in addition to, having a real, viable political and economic strategy. In short, he knows how to play the crowd - and gain votes - but he does not, apparently, understand the real issues facing and independent Scotland. Either that, or he doesn't care. I suspect the latter. He wants independence at ANY cost, but the people he's fooling into voting for him do not.

Oh come on UE. That just sound daft and entirely biased. Whatever one thinks of Salmond, are you seriously suggesting that he is the sole reason for a significant number of Scots wanting independence? Because you think the SNP are bullshitters? This has been building for decades and has been under the surface for centuries. It was always inevitable that the Scots were eventually going to have to shit or get off the pot.

[UndercoverElephant]

Of course he's not the reason for them wanting independence!!!!

The question - and the dishonesty - is about the practicalities and costs, not the general idea or the politics/cultural reasons. Salmond knows exactly how to play to the underlying feelings you are referring to - I am not suggesting for one moment that he's responsible for creating those feelings. What I am suggesting is that he's very, very good at exploiting them, but that this results in a fantasy version of what independence is going to be like for Scotland instead of the reality they'd actually experience.

[UndercoverElephant]

Salmond has done a very good job of convincing people that "everything will be different if we become independent." Unfortunately, he's in a very similar position as that of the LibDems when they were permanently in opposition: promises, promises, promises. Then one day they actually end up in power, and three quarters of the promises went flying out the window, because they were aspirations, not properly thought out policies that could be implemented in the real world. Alex Salmond does not care if his numbers don't add up, or if the arguments he's offering won't translate into workable, real-world policies. He's trying to win a referendum, and in order to do so he has decided to lie to people, big-time.

Good luck to them. If the Scots vote yes, then off they go. They are going to have some nasty surprises though.

[Little John]

The thing is, though, down here in England all we are getting in terms of coverage of the YES campaign is Salmond, Salmond, Salmond and nothing but Salmond. The two or three Scots I know, one of whom lives there and the other two who don’t but are in regular contact with family and friends back home, tell a very different story. According to them the YES campaign is comprised of a large and disparate group of people ranging from predictable nationalists of the SNP stripe, but also many socialists of various hues and that the socialist tendency is at least as dominant as the SNP one. Indeed, they tell me that Salmond is is viewed very much as a bombastic, potato-head politico by many under thirty and it is those under thirty year olds who are the dominant YES voters. But, you'd never know that from what we get in the news down here.

[RenewableCandy]

I'm afraid my guess is that sometime in the past a Scots lass once told UE where to get off.

[UndercoverElephant]

I'm afraid my guess is that sometime in the past a Scots lass once told UE where to get off.

I don't like lies. I'd like the people of Scotland to make an informed choice, based on real facts. Not a load of bullshit designed to mislead them.

To be completely blunt, right now what I'd like is a yes result, so I'd stop having to explain this to people because it becomes obvious to everybody. For example: Salmond has told people that (a) the rUK is bluffing about rejecting a currency union and (b) that if they aren't bluffing, Scotland can walk away from its share of the UK's debt (and get away with this).

These are not small issues, and he's wrong on both counts. The rUK is not bluffing, and Scotland would pay a severe price for defaulting on UK debt. But Salmond is good at what he does, and has convinced a significant number of people that (a) and/or (b) are true. This is good for nobody. Lies, believed, are good for nobody.

[Tarrel]

The thing is, though, down here in England all we are getting in terms of coverage of the YES campaign is Salmond, Salmond, Salmond and nothing but Salmond. The two or three Scots I know, one of whom lives there and the other two who don’t but are in regular contact with family and friends back home, tell a very different story. According to them the YES campaign is comprised of a large and disparate group of people ranging from predictable nationalists of the SNP stripe, but also many socialists of various hues and that the socialist tendency is at least as dominant as the SNP one. Indeed, they tell me that Salmond is is viewed very much as a bombastic, potato-head politico by many under thirty and it is those under thirty year olds who are the dominant YES voters. But, you'd never know that from what we get in the news down here.

Yep, that's a pretty good summary. The onlt thing I'd counter is that, from our perspective in the Highlands, the "Yes" demographic is much broader. May be different in the urban central belt though.

[Little John]

I'm afraid my guess is that sometime in the past a Scots lass once told UE where to get off.

I don't like lies. I'd like the people of Scotland to make an informed choice, based on real facts. Not a load of bullshit designed to mislead them.

To be completely blunt, right now what I'd like is a yes result, so I'd stop having to explain this to people because it becomes obvious to everybody. For example: Salmond has told people that (a) the rUK is bluffing about rejecting a currency union and (b) that if they aren't bluffing, Scotland can walk away from its share of the UK's debt (and get away with this).

These are not small issues, and he's wrong on both counts. The rUK is not bluffing, and Scotland would pay a severe price for defaulting on UK debt. But Salmond is good at what he does, and has convinced a significant number of people that (a) and/or (b) are true. This is good for nobody. Lies, believed, are good for nobody.

I think Salmond is playing the same game as Westminster. He is bullshitting up one side of the argument and bullshitting down the other side and everyone is going to play hard ball if the Yes vote wins the day. I strongly suspect, also, that most Scots know this too and that those who would vote YES are doing so despite the immediate political and economic dangers because this, their single historical chance for independence from the irretrievable political landscape of Westminster that is utterly at odds with Scottish political and cultural sensibilities, is worth any short term potential price. They may come to significantly regret the gamble, they may not. But, I don't think they are unaware of the dangers.

[peaceful_life]

I'm afraid my guess is that sometime in the past a Scots lass once told UE where to get off.

I don't like lies. I'd like the people of Scotland to make an informed choice, based on real facts. Not a load of bullshit designed to mislead them.

To be completely blunt, right now what I'd like is a yes result, so I'd stop having to explain this to people because it becomes obvious to everybody. For example: Salmond has told people that (a) the rUK is bluffing about rejecting a currency union and (b) that if they aren't bluffing, Scotland can walk away from its share of the UK's debt (and get away with this).

These are not small issues, and he's wrong on both counts. The rUK is not bluffing, and Scotland would pay a severe price for defaulting on UK debt. But Salmond is good at what he does, and has convinced a significant number of people that (a) and/or (b) are true. This is good for nobody. Lies, believed, are good for nobody.

The SNP and Salmond, are a conduit. Lies?.....we exist on constructs, 'modern' life is a lie.

This is a peak oil forum, what debt???...let's get real, I assume we're all schooled in energy, resources, fiat, compound,blah........blah. Do you seriously think these things haven't been thought about?.....of course you don't, we know that.....don't we.... Mr Elephant.

'It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more uncertain of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a new order of things.
For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institutions, and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the new ones."
-- Machiavelli, The Prince (1513)

[bigjim]

It'll be impossible to say what would happen in an independent Scotland other than that they'd get a written constitution. Saying that they'd be prosperous and wealthy on the back of their oil resources is pure speculation. A lot of pro independence stuff on twitter goes on about having oil for 100 years, which may well be misleading, as we all know here.

[peaceful_life]

It'll be impossible to say what would happen in an independent Scotland other than that they'd get a written constitution. Saying that they'd be prosperous and wealthy on the back of their oil resources is pure speculation. A lot of pro independence stuff on twitter goes on about having oil for 100 years, which may well be misleading, as we all know here.

True, but it's a foundation for getting the collective shit together other than the neoliberal pyramid scheme. I's a start..something to work with.

[peaceful_life]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23m6CukRUGM#t=316

[Little John]

It'll be impossible to say what would happen in an independent Scotland other than that they'd get a written constitution. Saying that they'd be prosperous and wealthy on the back of their oil resources is pure speculation. A lot of pro independence stuff on twitter goes on about having oil for 100 years, which may well be misleading, as we all know here.

True, but it's a foundation for getting the collective shit together other than the neoliberal pyramid scheme. I's a start..something to work with.

Yes.

As I've mentioned before, this is about escaping the neo-liberal agenda as much as it is about anything else. Paul Mason stated in his recent Guardian article that, as things stand, there is no political avenue for dissenting from that agenda. Some English voters have attempted to expressed dissent through UKIP. The Scots, however, have the opportunity to do so by destroying the union. I don't want to see them go because it means people with my views will be utterly f***ed this side of the border because of the instantaneous change to the demographic mix immediately following Scottish independence. But I can't, in all good conscience, blame them for doing so. Hell, who knows, maybe it will cause some of the people in the remainder of the UK to wake the hell up. I am pessimistic on that front, though, sad to say. Being a north Easterner, I feel as alienated from the London-centric, neo-liberal agenda as the Scots feel.