I am currently very pro Scottish Independence…

[Iheartscotland]

what do you think, objectively, are the best arguments for independence?

and/or

for remaining in the union?

Answers that are well reasoned and backed up with facts and figures would be great, but you know- go with whatever you feel.

Oh my god that second link?!?! 😂😂😂😂😂

I just looked, @Rainbowshit . Theft, subjugation, shackling, ransacking, stealing, criminal fraud - and that's just the first two paragraphs!! 😆

Plundering, colony. Etc etc.

Total freeman of the land style utter bullocks.

That was my thought too. Those nutters who say that are (for example) Nicola of the family known as Sturgeon as they think the name on your birth certificate is a legal fiction.

Also really interesting that I clicked around that Salvo site and couldn't find a "who we are" page stating who is behind the group which is unusual for that sort of organisation.

What I’d like to know and what no independence supporter has ever been able to answer is how would the “ financials “ stack up .

Suspect I’ve answered the question .

could they please tell us if we’d have an NHS ? Do independent supporters know Ireland doesn’t have an NHS

Their beloved Sweden doesn't have a NHS in the same way either. Costs them between 100 and 300 krone (£9 ish to £28 ish) to see a GP, double that for a specialist, 100 krone each day you're a patient in hospital, 100% of the cost of the first 1,200 krone of medicine and then a sliding scale after that, 100% of dental costs....

Funny how that's never mentioned when people bang on about the high-tax Scandinavian model.

It's a dead duck for now. It'll be many years until the independence movement can build up and sustain a significant majority of supporters.

The only way I can see for Scotland to get independence is to show that we can survive happily on the amounts raised by general taxation in Scotland. Currently Scotland spends £2k more per person than it raises in tax. Cut budgets accordingly to show how Scotland can manage to live within its means. Build up the money saved as central bank reserves. Then the people of Scotland will get a little glimpse as to what the finances of independence might look like, and they can decide if they like when they see.

Thanks for taking the time to respond everyone, and for the links and the arguments etc. FWIW we should probably continue the conversation assuming everyone here loves Scotland and Scottish people and want the best for its/their futures. Also probably useful to assume that people hold their views (pro Indy and pro Union) for intelligible and intelligent reasons even if it doesn’t always feel that way to you.

I would love to hear about what would have to change for you to fully change your current position?
For me to change from Pro-Indy to pro union I think it would be some or all of the following;

Scotland would become equal to England in decision-making that affects the whole union, as would Wales and N.I.

Proportional representation would have to be brought in to the Westminster system. A big issue with the union as it stands is that it’s London/Home Counties centric, if all parts of the union and all aspects of society were better represented this would make the union values more aligned with Scottish values

I’m not sure what it would be, but I would want to see reform that prevented huge moves such as exiting the EU and whatever it was that Liz Truss did to the economy from happening in future. I’m worried that the UK doesn’t have enough checks and balances in place to withstand the whims of political extremists. I think Cameron made a huge mistake by running the referendum the way he did, but a nation as big as the UK shouldn’t be at the mercy of one person’s hubris in any case.

Scottish history and culture would have to become a main stream part of UK education system from the Scottish perspective (along with the other countries too of course). Generally, I would like the curriculum to become a lot more diverse in terms of perspectives and UK cultures. England and English history is seen as the norm, the central story of the UK, while the other nations are important in so far as they played a role in English history/culture.

The final thing that I would need for me to change my position is a change in Westminster attitudes towards Scotland. I think Westminster politicians don’t show enough respect to Scottish leadership and to the Scottish parliament. It’s usually quite subtle (not always, Liz Truss is a good example of overt hostility) but the feeling of the rhetoric from all main parties at Westminster is quite paternalistic, it’s not “we love Scotland, Scottish people and Scottish culture and we think it makes us all better and makes us proud of the UK” it’s more “we might give you more power if you prove to us you can be trusted with it, but so far you’ve acted like a bunch of silly billies, so we don’t want you to leave but only because we’re worried you will do yourselves an injury”. It’s like they see Scotland like a 5 year old who’s bundled up their pyjamas and their favourite teddy and is threatening to runaway, rather than country with a rich and distinct offering to the whole nation.

I should underline that I don’t expect these things to happen, I’m not even claiming they should happen rather I’m saying if these things changed (or my perception of them changed) I’d probably be pro union. What would make you change to pro union? What would make you change to pro Indy?

Also probably useful to assume that people hold their views (pro Indy and pro Union) for intelligible and intelligent reasons even if it doesn’t always feel that way to you.

I don’t think this is a reasonable assumption to make. I think many Indy supporters, and some union supporters do so for ideological/emotional reasons.

Scotland would become equal to England in decision-making

5% of the UK population would be given equal weight to 84%?

I think Cameron made a huge mistake by running the referendum the way he did,

I agree. He should never have agreed to what is a biased question; ‘yes’ for independence gave the independence supporters a huge advantage over ‘no’ for union. The election commission should have stepped in and stop that. It should have been like Brexit; leave/remain

I agree. He should never have agreed to what is a biased question; ‘yes’ for independence gave the independence supporters a huge advantage over ‘no’ for union. The election commission should have stepped in and stop that. It should have been like Brexit; leave/remain

I agree with this too and it's amazing how the support for Leave/Yes drops significantly when the Leave question is used instead of Yes - maybe want to backtrack on everyone having intelligent reasons?

“I should underline that I don’t expect these things to happen, I’m not even claiming they should happen rather I’m saying if these things changed (or my perception of them changed) I’d probably be pro union.”

Sorry I meant to also respond to your first point about assuming motives. my point was it’s useful to assume, rather than necessarily correct, otherwise people get stuck on what they imagine people’s motives to be and judge them on that basis rather than the substantive points of the debate. I’m sure you’re right about ideology driving both sides to a greater or lesser extent.

Re Cameron, I was actually thinking of Brexit rather than Indy Ref- but could have made that clearer. You disagree with the independence movement but they did outline in a white paper what their vision was for Scotland so I don’t think it was poorly thought out, both sides of Indy ref presented well reasoned arguments and the Indy argument failed to persuade a majority. Overall it was a pretty civilised affair compared to Brexit, there was no surge in hate crimes or loss of life like there was during and just after the results came in. I think the Brexit ref did a lot of dammage to the UK and while there isn’t a huge swing towards support for Indy in Scotland the trend does appear to be going one direction in Scotland and the other UK nations.
It is a fair point about how the way the question was phrased around independence though, it probably should have been more neutral, I remember thinking that at the time.

Scotland would become equal to England in decision-making that affects the whole union, as would Wales and N.I.

What do you mean by this OP? Scotland is actually over-represented by MPs in Westminster per head of population. There's a really good breakdown of the numbers in this Quora post. Or do you think that the 5.5 million people in Scotland, 3 million in Wales and 2 million in NI should get exactly the same say as the 56 million people in England? If the latter, I say YABVU.

Yes that’s what I mean, it wouldn’t be very reasonable I suppose, a bit like the electoral college system in the US, which people there think is very unfair, but that’s why I favour independence

Scottish history and culture would have to become a main stream part of UK education system from the Scottish perspective (along with the other countries too of course).

I don't understand this. Scotland has its own education system that is totally separate from the English and Welsh one, so why should Scotland dictate what English and Welsh schoolchildren are taught? Until the Act of Union they were separate countries and I think it's fair enough that Scottish DC are taught their country's history, while English and Welsh students are taught theirs.

it wouldn’t be very reasonable I suppose

Glad you can see that

Scottish children learn Scottish History and English learn English. Unless things have changed.
I think you are banging on about stuff that isn't an issue and demanding fairness when it is already very biased towards Scotland with it's own gov, legal system, NHS and education. Unfortunately the numpties that run the country have failed to implement stuff properly and waste it on eg ferries and not sorting our drug problem and infrastructure (unless you are in Ed or Glasgow which have loads of transport).

So basically our union is unequal because they are bigger than us? That will also be the problem when we come to negotiate our separation - they're much bigger than us and the unpalatable truth for yes voters is we need them.

The cynical side of me thinks that it serves SNP better to keep people down whilst blaming Westminster and giving away cash on non means tested things rather than tackling bigger issues. Maybe instead of free bus travel they could spend the money on having better services in the sticks so that people could actually get to work and education? It just all smacks of control and vanity projects rather than investing in improvements that matter. The homeless and drug addicted generally aren't swinging around their saltire and rushing to the polling station so why invest time and money on them? Much better to be handing out free baby clothes to the middle class.

Yes I see your point, and it’s not that Scotland would dictate to England, Wales and N.I. What should be taught, rather they would create it together. Reason being, I think if you have large country having an outsized influence on smaller countries it‘s importance that all parties understand the interests and culture of the others. Again, I’m not sure it would be practical, it’s not a policy prescription, but the smaller countries in the union do feel like non-playable characters in England’s first person RPG sometimes so the points I made are an exercise in thinking through what would have to be different for me to be pro-union.
What would have to change to make you pro Indy @maranella?

You disagree with the independence movement but they did outline in a white paper what their vision was for Scotland so I don’t think it was poorly thought out, both sides of Indy ref presented well reasoned arguments and the Indy argument failed to persuade a majority.

No I didn’t say any of that. I said the QUESTION was biased because people always lean to Yes regardless of what is being asked. This is a well know affect for any poll on any subject. So a question that asked people to answer yes or no is inherently unfair. That is before you begin to consider the impact of being able to campaign for a positive (yes) versus a negative (no).

Interesting theory @BigBoysDontCry, what does the non-cynical side of you think?
also what, if anything, would lead you to change your position to pro-Indy?

oh sorry! That was bad phrasing, I agree with you on the way the question was framed, it would have caused bias towards yes. I’m not suggesting you said that but rather you seem to be pro union (is that correct?).My point is that most pro union people seem to think that SNP’s bid for independence was similar to brexit, I don’t agree with that take because I think they did more ground work on what independent Scotland would look like, when compared to what the tories did when proposing (or offering a chance to have) a UK outside of Europe.

There is absolutely nothing that would ever change me to pro Indy. But I do think that Holyroodhas 2 options:

1. Run Scotland well, encourage the economy to flourish, make a successful, booming part of the UK and then persuade Scotland they want to get rid of the dead wood that is rUK.
2. run Scotland really badly and tell people that things could be better if only Scotland was independent. Make them think they have nothing to lose.This is what attracted people in the poorer areas of England to vote remain. Yes they hadn’t thought it through, but they were promised sunlit uplands.

Nicola has focussed on the second strategy and it hasn’t worked. Perhaps the SNP could ditch the constant drive for Indy, give businesses some certainly that Scotland will remain apart of the UK for the foreseeable future and the economy might be successful, leading to people being less fearful of what an Indy Scotland can achieve.