to start a new Scottish Indyref thread?

[FannyFifer]

Round 2 folks, ding ding!

www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-independence/referendum-outcome Most popular votes Yes, 9/2, no 2/11. Bookies odds are dropping all the time.

Sconequeen, we xposted, but I think I love you!

Toad, Wings is a registered campaigner, so has obsevers at the count, which was being viewed as all sorts of bad, upthread. The Orange Order is also a registered campaigner, and can have observers at the count. That's the comparison that's relevant on this thread.

"Small wonder that there so many people who want to see an exciting new independent Scotland where people are not written off because of their perceived lack of status or worth, or because they dare to question the status quo and the establishment."

Judging by the way the Yes folks have categorised those who disagree with them, I don't think much questioning would be allowed if the Yes voters become the establishment, because there's no, "independence and we'll see what happens", instead the Nat powers that be seem to have a very fixed idea as to exactly what the "exciting new independent Scotland" would be like.

As for "an exciting new independent Scotland", this is just bluster wrapped up in ad-speak. I don't know whether to laugh or roll my eyes at the whole "Scotland is Magic" sentiments that seem to deal very little with actual facts. From the southern side of the border, it looks rather embarrassing.

Well said scone queen!

Some of the people on this thread make me so depressed for the UK.

The notion that for your opinion to be valid you should be working full time, mainstream, establishment, solvent, have no vulnerabilities or addictions etc is so blinkered and elitist . And wrong.

One thing is for sure, regardless of the result, people are waking up to their power. This process won't stop with the referendum.

Comparing the Orange order to WOS is rather odd - I don't think I've seen anyone link to the O/O, I've seen plenty of links to Wings though. That awesome website where he was complaining that the timing of the 100th anniversary of the 1st world war wasn't held in November, and that commemorating the start of the war on, you know, the anniversary of the start of the war was unfair and against the nationalists.

His "facts" take cherry picking to the extreme and have been shown to be inaccurate numerous times. Plus the entire website is vile, vitriolic and abusive.

Ok OldLady re your points:

Yes, I am busy but I am still finding the time to be out campaigning. I've met a lot of people doing this - some politicians, some people who are normally party activists, most people like myself who have never got involved in campaigning before.

Yes, I am aware that the Labour party in particular has advertised for help. I've also seen chat on Bella Caledonia about getting buses organised from English cities to come up and campaign for Yes. I have no doubt that both sides are getting extra help, and I have no doubt that both sides have lots of committed supporters.

Yes probably have the advantage on getting lots of attention and making lots of noise because they want a very radical change and are agitating for it. A lot of No people also want change, but following a wider discussion with the rest of the UK. Some want absolutely no change, and I think they will be disappointed in the event of a No vote.

Yes initially had a lot more donations. The No donations seemed to really come in just before the controlled funding phase. I'm not a millionaire, I'm not even particularly well-off, but I've made several smallish donations to Better Together.

The Wee Blue Book - you are aware that people are debunking that regularly?

Once again I'm sorry my genuine political convictions aren't original or edgy enough for you. I'm sorry you think the cairn is laughable - personally I think it and Dan Snow's letter are a lovely thing, I like to see people celebrating the unity I have. I'll probably be a lot less active on here now, because I have to go and do some non-grassroots campaigning over the next few weeks. And I will be taking time off work to do some of it, and I will not be getting paid (they do give us coffee and biscuits though).

I vowed I wouldn't get involved in any debate over independence. Everyone is entitled to their views. I am, however, getting a bit fed up with the continued references to an independent Scotland being a fairer Scotland, and the implications that No voters are right wing reactionaries who would see their fellow citizens starve in the streets rather than pay into a fair society.

I honestly, hand on heart, cannot see what difference Scotland being independent will make to most of the people who live here. For many years now, Scotland could have been encouraging businesses/entrepreneurs to set up here, could have been supporting development etc. There was nothing stopping this from happening. Why, in the case of a Yes vote in September, would all this change suddenly be possible. It's not impossible now. It just feels as if the Scottish govt would rather blame their lack of progress on Westminster than on their own lack of initiative.

Sometimes, everybody needs a helping hand. Always, people need to do something towards helping themselves. A more socialist Scotland will not be fairer. It will be more divisive and poorer both financially and socially.

I really don't recognise the Wings that some of you see - do any of you actually follow the site? Sure there a are some nutters posting comments, but you find that in the comments on all the mainstream media sites too.

Wings writes well written, and vitally, well referenced pieces. That is what makes it such a valuable resource. Surely where he lives is completely irrelevant.

Also why on earth would he seek a publisher for the WBB?! Publishers sell books, the hundreds of thousands of copies of the WBB are all being given away free. All he needed was a printer.

Sconequeen and Deeedee while you might be scathing of people who actually go out and work for a living, personally aI think they are owed respect. I would certainly respect someone more for that, than someone wo has all the time in the world to post abuse on the internet. Remember that many people in work will be worried about losing their jobs if they get embroilled in internet debate. I would certainly give more credit to, say, a social worker than to Murray, above. Or to a doctor working in Scotland than for example, Sean Connery. But I wouldn't give credit to anyone who tries to tell me how to think or who is blinded by ideology, whether they are unemployed or employed.

The issue with sources is that anyone with a good education ought to have learned to distinguish between academically acceptable sources and stuff like zWikipeadia, self published fan fiction, blogs, etc.. Or tone able to use neutral, as opposed to biased sources, such as a well regarded textbook.

The basic and much repeated failure to do that is a pretty clear sign of a lack of education. Now this in itself is not a problem if a person has an enquiring mind - some of the creates Scottish minds in history lacked formal education but not the integrity to enable them to fill in the deficit. We live now in times of much greater educational opportunity, but if you think you are going the create a society where the (relatively) uneducated pull the wool over the eyes of those they need to pay for it, you are living in a fantasy world. You are also wanting to create one I the most unjust, unfair societies on earth in the name of selfish ideology, as opposed to what benefits the most people.

The issue with sources is that anyone with a good education ought to have learned to distinguish between academically acceptable sources and stuff like zWikipeadia, self published fan fiction, blogs, etc.. Or tone able to use neutral, as opposed to biased sources, such as a well regarded textbook.

Recent Wings articles mostly about what people have said back, references original recordings, newspaper articles etc

Most recent "facts" piece about long term interest on borrowing across the EU references the ECB for its data.

The WeeBlue book has some wiki references, due to the target market of the book this is a friendlier way of presenting them, and the wiki articles themselves are referenced.

The issue with sources is that anyone with a good education ought to have learned to distinguish between academically acceptable sources

And many voters will not have been lucky enough to have what you would consider a "good education" so they are absorbing what they read in the media with less filtering. Everyone is entitled to a vote.

That's a perfectly good point ItsAllGoibgToBeFine my issue is with people lacking that education trying to tell me what to think or being critics or abusive about my choices.

I also abhor ideology. So many wars are caused by a blinding devotion to ideology. Socialist ideology is no different. Ee already live I a country with such a generous welfare state that people flock to it from all over the world for Tha very reason.

I haven't looked at Wings for a while. As I found it so offensive when I last looked I saw no need to keep checking. I doubt its tone will have improved.

My partner hadn't heard of it until a couple of weeks ago and was equally shocked by how childish and nasty it was.

I did in the interests of fairness read quite a bit if Wings and I was genuinely shocked and horrified by the poor standard of presentation, tge aggressive and bullying tone and impression that the author was quite willing to bend facts to feed what was clearly in many cases a rather gullible audience, lacking in extensive education. It was incredibly depressing. Pccasionally I do look at it again in short bursts, a bit as you would a car crash type of magazine article.

I'm equally shocked, and feel rather sorry for, posters on here who find nothing untoward about Wings.

There have been numerous debunkings of wings so called facts, and many of the main posts, not just the comments, absolutely drip with vitriol. It's a truly awful site

Anyone not at work listening to Radio Scotland just now? Phone in with Douglas Alexander. It's mostly been well run with callers making their points and getting a response from him. Respectful. Unfortunately let down yet again with a pro independence caller, disjointed ranting with no one else allowed a word in and ending up calling Mr Alexander a fucking liar live on air! Intelligent and articulate - not!

Why can't the mumsnet no gang (who I never see on other threads) engage in this debate without resorting to calling yes supporters names?

Most yes supporters I know are degree educated professionals working full time.

Even if some yes supporters are stay at home mums, retired, students, disabled, carers, unemployed do their voices not count as much?

Income tax is only a small proportion of total tax. The poor pay a higher % of tax overall than the wealthiest so it's a non argument.

The tone of these no supporters who always show up on these threads (secret Facebook group?) is so similar to the numpties who came up with that awful ad 2nights ago it wouldn't surprise me if they were closer than they would have us believe.

No argument can get away from the fact that the current set up is undemocratic.

The no camp never answer the democracy question.

They have no answer.

That's why they try to spin the currency issue continuously. Spin, spin, spin but we all know what inevitable happens to a spinning top.

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/28/closed-shop-deepy-elitist-britain

Chelsy, glad you have had the opportunities for a good education. So did I, very fortunate that I went to an English grammar school and then an English university degree and MA. These were funded by the state as I was educated before tuition fees came in. I wouldn't have been able to go otherwise as my single benefits claiming mother wouldn't have been able to afford it.

I'm glad my children are going to grow up in Scotland and where tuition fees are still a level playing field.

I guess I'm lucky that that education didn't teach me to look down on people like yours seems to have done.

What a load of shite (no disrespect) weatherall re "no gang". "Ooh it's a conspiracy"......
I can't speak for the others but I've been on MN for many years, certainly predating the independence debates. I don't use Facebook either as I found it immature.
Excuse me (us?) for taking part in discussion threads which are important. Your ranty post does you no credit tbh.

The (No voting) dh of one of my No voting friends (a SAHM BTW) tried to suggest that higher rate tax payers should have more heavily weighted votes than non-tax payers.

As she herself doesn't pay tax, he was quickly disabused of this notion!

Weatherall I'm a very regular poster so your insinuation is certainly incorrect in my case. I'm not sure what tone you think I'm using, and I'm not aware of any secret Facebook group either.

The democracy question -what do you mean by don't answer the democracy question? You think the current set up is undemocratic but most no voters don't because they see themselves as a part of the UK where their vote has an equal value of that of any other individual. I don't see it as Scottish votes -I see it as my vote, your vote, individual votes that have the same right as anyone else. And we have a separate parliament too. I don't think it is undemocratic.

weatherall, the currency issue is huge and unanswered. It determines who manages Scotland's fiscal affairs. It may determine whether Scotland can join the EU.

How can it be spin? I'm in England and don't have a vote. I'm happy for Scots to decide for themselves but believe me I'm against currency union unless I get a say in how iScotland manages its finances.

An American friend (living here) of my very strong Yes dsis, asked just why Tony Blair wasn't debating with Alex Salmond, with him being the Prime Minister and all Uninformed numpties on both sides.

Why can't the mumsnet no gang (who I never see on other threads) engage in this debate without resorting to calling yes supporters names?

To be fair, not every No voter on this thread is calling people names. But when those sorts of comments are made (and again to be fair, there has been name-calling), it's best to just not to respond.

Most yes supporters I know are degree educated professionals working full time.

Same here. Whole family (bar one) are voting Yes, all have degrees (and postgrads in some cases) and are working full-time in various professions. I don't think it matters, it was said a while back (or possibly in the last thread) that there isn't a certain type of person who will vote either way, and if there is a 'trend' in Yes/No voters, there's always an exception (or a few).

Secret Facebook group?

Oh dear.

Tinfoil hats at the ready.