In all the writing and the arguments for “yes” and “no” for independence for Scotland I failed to notice a real fact and that is:
The “United” Kingdom was forged in blood on the fields of Scotland. Scotland was not really a “union” of countries. It was a takeover.
As far as I have read it has always been very much a one sided affair until perhaps the past few years. So where does this sentimental “what we have achieved together” (Cameron PM) come in. At least here in Australia we were not taken over in blood and cruel warfare, simply in persecution of sections of the population for reasons of religion or race.
But what really worries me because I hear the same arguments here, is the question “what will the change do for me” or “what difference will it make to me”, “what will I get out of a change”? And this I can’t understand. In wanting independence here (Republic) I am not looking for “what will the change do for me” because it won’t actually make any difference to us here in Australia in our daily lives but don’t some of these “no” people ever think about the abstract “standing on our own feet”, “being our own people entirely”, “not a subject”. And I expect that this could be the same feeling in Scotland.
I agree, not much may change in the event of a “yes” vote but Scots will know that for the first time in over 400 years they are themselves, they are Scots, they can make their own mistakes.
And haven’t you loved the fear campaign? “You won’t be able to return”, “the big institutions will get out of Scotland”, “Scotland will not be able to stand alone”. And the dirty tricks – reducing the voting age to 16 and disenfranchising overseas voters. The politics of this campaign by the “No” side have been astonishing even for British politicians.