http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/16/media-shafted-people-scotland-journalists?CMP
The Monbiot article looking at the bias of the whole of the UK media

Posted by: Deblonay | Sep 17 2014 14:57 utc | 4

I think the vote will go for independence and the world won’t fall apart if they do vote ‘yes’. However, there will be some extremely pissed off people. Part of the gravy train just left the station, Cameron will be fine, he’ll get a job with some Zionist outfit that have been pulling his strings and he’ll be repaid, handsomely. What I am hoping for is a review into the decision to hide much of the Dunblane massacre court files for 100 years, unprecedented in UK history. Salmond has been influential in the Lockerbie miscarriage of justice too and has called for the US and UK to allow access to all their documents related to the crime.

Posted by: Andy | Sep 17 2014 15:10 utc | 6

I want them to leave England and throw out the navy and rent the bases to Russia. Slip in nato face works for me. It’s only a dream but what hell.

Posted by: jo6pac | Sep 17 2014 15:22 utc | 8

If it cannot be bought, it’s a Scot. If it can,it’s a scotch.
People who say they would be better off looked after by the English are for sale. Prostitutes. Their vote will show if a long English programme of passification and domestication has succeeded in shamefully integrating and colonizing Scotland. For them the Scottish flag is a tea cloth to be sold to tourists.
A balance sheet can not be used to decide Scottish Independence. The most important things in our life have no scientific measure or monetary value. Pride, patriotism, Freedom, love, loyalty, trust, feeling, friendship, joy, peace. The value you give to these depends on whether your spirit is dead or alive. If fear has gripped your heart and you see no value in these you should, in all decency, step aside and take your cold hand off the exciting opportunity and new dawn that will allow Scotlands unique contribution to flourish. What an exciting prospect. A Scottis flag amonst the national flags.
If Scots independence is buried it is buried alive and will be resurrected by angry people without a referendum of North British loyalists who are just visitors without the right to decide Scottish affairs.
We are now dealing with the soul of a nation. This is sacred. There is a vitality in being fully responsible for yourself. Army, Flag, Diplomats…..

Posted by: boindub | Sep 17 2014 15:46 utc | 10

=were i scots, i would vote yes. or abstain. just to make that clear.=
However, the campaign (what I have seen of it, not much, MSM, etc.) is very emotional, and the whole issue is more a question of anti-London, GB, than pro- constructing a new state. In short, it (from MSM) looks like there is no real plan, though presumably? there are some ppl behind the scenes who have clear ideas, policies, if so, they aren’t available, and that is bad.
If an independent Scotland were to:
Set up its own currency (this is perfectly possible), refuse to join the EU or adopt the euro, no NATO, but join the WTO, the UN (and other alphabet soups), sign Schengen-Dublin, join EFTA, join other free-trade agreements, (like with Ukraine for the fun of it) ally with Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, put itself in the huge club of the ‘unaligned’, well allright.
The main point would be – not being part of the EU, except with bi-lateral and easy to cancel agreements. Violent headaches and mess to be sure, but that would be independence.
That won’t happen imho.
In case of YES, Scotland will join the EU, and will set up a currency Union with England, or possibly even take on the Euro. In this way, it will be just as dependent as before (maybe more so as smaller with less power) and at odds with its old historical and geographical partner who will be bitter and angry. It would become a sort of Ireland, a very bad position, dependent on EU largesse, rules, manipulations, and with no real ties to other unaligned.
Some deeper considerations. The EU PTB and elected have a dream. That dream is a Europe of ‘regions’ – Picts, Lombards!, etc. – that are easier to manage, as they are small, and curry for favor to the top, and compete. Some up in Brussels, want to get rid of Nation States (Italy, France, Germany..) as these weigh too much in influence. The EU is not at all against an ‘independent’ Catalonia, Flanders, Basque country, whatever, though they don’t make that public. A split up Yougaslavia, for ex., was championed and suits them just fine. Sure ‘n I’m exxageratin’…
Hollande did something interesting in this direction, heh. He re-wrote the map of France.

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 17 2014 15:59 utc | 12

It would become a sort of , a very bad position, dependent on EU largesse, rules, manipulations, and with no real ties to other unaligned.
…
Posted by: Noirette | Sep 17, 2014 11:59:19 AM | 12
So true. As I was listening to Gordon Brown and other Westminster hacks & has-beens issuing an avalanche of thinly veiled threats, I couldn’t help thinking that if the YES vote wins the Westminster crowd will rename, and treat, the new Scotland as New Ireland…

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 17 2014 17:07 utc | 14

@15 Losing Scotland is not the same as a random colony or even the whole empire. The Doctor won’t be a UK citizen. Ireland was always just conquered territory, useful for oligarchy pillaging.
The entire political system will be indicted. Scotland is an integral part of the UK. Brown, Cameron, and company through political malfeasance created this situation. Labour and the Tories aren’t worried about submarine bases. They are worried about their positions and place in history. David Cameron, a miserable little man, will be the guy who brought Somalia to Libya and lost Scotland during Cold War part deux. His coalition is done, and I doubt the back benches will approve of his continued leadership tomorrow if Scotland votes yes. Labour will lose one of its strongest bastions. For all we know, the UK could become ungovernable with Russian and Chinese money fleeing London.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 17 2014 17:32 utc | 16

The Scots ought to vote Yes. But the voting machines will turn their votes to no. Exit poll tabulations will tell the real story. Bottomline: A Yes vote is a vote for world peace.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 17 2014 17:49 utc | 18

Yes supporters plan to use pens to mark their ballot papers amid fears their vote may be altered if they use the pencils provided.
http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/yes-voters-say-poll-may-be-nobbled-1.538913

Posted by: rob66 | Sep 17 2014 18:20 utc | 20

euro pound or own currency:
from billy blog Monday, August 18, 2014 by bill
The Scottish Fiscal Commission also put out a report on the desirable – Macroeconomic Framework – which says that:
Under independence, the Scottish Government would be responsible for the design and implementation of its own macroeconomic framework.
Yes, it would free Scotland from the decisions made by the UK government – if they also ditch the currency and set up an independent central bank.
So what does the Commission recommend:
– Currency – Sterling
– Central Bank – Bank of England (the ‘BofE’)
– Day-to-day monetary policy discharged independently (operationally) by the BofE.
– Interest rates set to promote price stability across ‘Sterling Zone’
Which they claim would give “Full economic sovereignty with Scottish Parliament” but which in practice would still tie the country to the United Kingdom and thwart any particular spending initiatives that might run counter to the existing fiscal position of the British government.
The Scottish government could not run an independent full employment policy with large-scale public sector job creation, for example, when the UK government was running austerity and it was forced to balance its budget.
There is thus very little to support in the Scottish National Party’s referendum pitch.
I would recommend the Scots vote YES in September. But only if the Referendum was clear that the new nations would introduce its own unpegged, floating currency and avoid any talk of joining the Eurozone or entering a currency union with Britain.
Further, I would only recommend voting YES, if the political parties committed to a clear statement that they would use the newly created currency sovereignty to achieving full employment and abandoned the neo-liberal austerity straitjacket that it is trapped in as a result of being part of Britain.
Under those circumstances,the creation of a separate nation would unambigously improve the welfare of the Scottish people. If they continued to use the British pound and/or maintained the austerity mindset that dominates neo-liberal governments around the advanced world at present, then nothing will be gained that would benefit the Scottish people.
But Plan A is anything but that and so I would vote NO.
While the ‘nationalist’ sentiments that go back in history are an important part of a nation’s defining culture, which are driving the need to be independent of Britain after losing that status in 1707, the currency arrangements define what a government can do and cannot do on behalf of its people.
In general, the statements by the Fiscal Commission about fiscal autonomy and full fiscal responsibilities are fraught with misconceptions given that the Government does not propose full currency sovereignty.
I would be voting NO in Scotland but with a lot of anger

Posted by: c | Sep 17 2014 18:54 utc | 22

In the public debate, the question of North Sea oil has been central. The polarisation of views is clear.
In this article from the Economist magazine (April 14, 2012) – The Scottish play – we confront the question “would an independent Scotland be an impoverished backwater or a land flowing with oil and money.”
The Article provides the following answer, which is not inconsistent with my analysis of the available data:
Scotland’s accounts of revenue and expenditure, based on Treasury data, show that it is not a ward of the state, grossly subsidised from Westminster. In fact it performs better than all regions outside the south-east of England … In 2010-11 Scotland’s GDP was £145 billion ($225 billion) including a geographical share of North Sea oil and gas, around 10% of Britain’s, with 8.4% of the population.
Historically Scotland has received bigger grants per head from central government than Wales, for example—in part a tacit acknowledgment that it contributes handsomely to oil revenues, which in 2010-11 amounted to £8.8 billion. An independent Scotland would lose that subsidy, but gain the right to collect taxes on hydrocarbons locally. For the moment, Scotland’s day-to-day accounts would look little different to now.
Analysts, however, argue that in the longer-term, the North Sea oil will run dry and there are “hidden liabilities” involved in decommissioning the oil and gas installations, which the British government is currently liable for.
The other issue surrounding the British-Scottish relationship is if the Scots get the lion-share (excuse the pun) of the North Sea oil revenue (they are claiming 90 per cent although they would get nothing if the Shetland and Orkney Islands, in turn, achieved independence from Scotland) what share of the banking bailouts will they have to wear?
The Economist article notes that the “financial-services industry” in Scotland is in deep trouble. The 2008 bailout of the two largest Scottish banks – Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and HBOS – required the British government injecting significant funds. Would the Scots have to pay the British Government back?
However, I think this issue would become irrelevant if the Scottish government achieved true independence. They would have all the funds necessary to nationalise the banking sector and guarantee deposits in the new currency. They could offer the British government some settlement in the new Scottish pound.
But if they do not introduce their own sovereign currency then these matters become more important.
The Economist article provides some commentary on that issue:
… most testing for Scotland’s future would be the question of its currency. Mr Salmond’s hopes of joining the euro have soured—for now he plans to stick with the pound. Yet the euro zone has amply demonstrated the dangers of entering a monetary union without fiscal union. Soothing niceties from Cheshire-cat politicians no longer reassure bond markets—Scotland would pay a premium for being part of a monetary union that could break. It would have no central bank, no monetary freedom and limited fiscal autonomy.
The White paper says that “an independent Scotland would have responsibility for macro-economics, defence and foreign affairs in a way that would not be possible while Scotland remains within the United Kingdom”.
The most important point is that to be truly independent the Scottish Government would have to gain “full Ministerial responsibility”, including all central banking and treasury functions.
Scotland should vote yes in 2014 but only if … Posted on Thursday, September 27, 2012 by bill 2012 !!!

Posted by: c | Sep 17 2014 19:06 utc | 24

I really enjoy this site and send my thanks to b for all your efforts. The comment section is a huge plus. Kudos to the community.
Much as I wish for Scotland to vote yes, I don’t think it will happen. The overall political situation is not dire enough yet. We are at the very beginning of the political dissolution that will come as nation states fracture in the face of severe economic decline. When new currencies have to be created out of the ashes of the current ones, then we will have real change. Until then we are just treading water.

Posted by: andrew | Sep 17 2014 19:23 utc | 26

@Noirette (Sep 17, 2014 11:59:19 AM | 12):

The main point would be – not being part of the EU, except with bi-lateral and easy to cancel agreements. Violent headaches and mess to be sure, but that would be independence.

That’s my feeling, too, Noirette. What good is it to break free from the UK, only to shackle yourself to the EUSSR? Scotland would be better off following the example of the Swiss and the Norwegians. Those countries are doing much better than the EU countries. Why should Scotland follow the Irish model?

Some deeper considerations. The EU PTB and elected have a dream. That dream is a Europe of ‘regions’ – Picts, Lombards!, etc. – that are easier to manage, as they are small, and curry for favor to the top, and compete. Some up in Brussels, want to get rid of Nation States (Italy, France, Germany..) as these weigh too much in influence.

That is also a real concern of mine. All of these secession movements seem enthralled with the EU, so I wonder if too much secession would not simply make matters worse for Europe.
Columnist Peter Hitchens claims to have once seen an EU map showing Europe carved into small, bite-sized little provinces:

The EU’s purpose is to abolish the remaining great nation states, carving them up into ‘regions’ that will increasingly deal direct with the EU’s central government in Brussels.
Paris, London, Berlin, Madrid and Rome are allowed to retain the outward signs of power. But it is a gesture. All the real decisions are already taken elsewhere, from foreign policy and trade to the collection of rubbish and the management of rivers. Under this plan, England itself will cease to exist. The European Parliament gave the game away a few years ago by publishing a map of the EU in which all the regional boundaries were shown, but the word ‘England’ was not mentioned. Meanwhile, the smaller nations of Europe are indulged by the EU, because (unlike the big countries) they are no threat to it. They are happy to be allowed a flag, an anthem, a well-paid political class, a little pomp and circumstance – and no real power.

At the end of the day, I want for the Scots whatever they want for themselves. But I do wonder whether this will turn out to be a good idea, a bad idea, or no real change at all.

Posted by: Seamus Padraig | Sep 17 2014 19:35 utc | 28

@NotTimothyGeithner (Sep 17, 2014 1:32:25 PM | 16):

David Cameron, a miserable little man, will be the guy who brought Somalia to Libya and lost Scotland during Cold War part deux. His coalition is done, and I doubt the back benches will approve of his continued leadership tomorrow if Scotland votes yes. Labour will lose one of its strongest bastions.

It’ll probably be bad for David Cameron personally, but this could actually give the Tories a new lease on life in rump-UK, since Scotland historically was so heavily pro-Labour. In fact, the whole ‘better together’ campaign has been so amazingly inept that some are now even spreading the conspiracy theory that the Tories in the cabinet have deliberately sabotaged it to get rid of Scotland.
The only thing that could go wrong for them here is that, once the Scots are gone, UKIP would also probably be more powerful in rump-UK.

Posted by: Seamus Padraig | Sep 17 2014 19:44 utc | 30

The vote is going to be very close and I certainly hope it doesn’t presage another 2000 election. Scots are not a temperate people and if funny bizness in the vote is suspected, I fear OSCE may have to help with a recount. Then there is our own 240 year-old example of democratic republic. The hard work starts after independence is reached.

Posted by: Ben Franklin | Sep 17 2014 19:55 utc | 32

My friends at wsws are vehemently against Scotland ‘independence’, urging every day for a ‘no’ vote.

Vote “no” in the Scottish referendum—Fight for a socialist Britain
Statement by the Socialist Equality Party (UK)
The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) calls for a decisive and unambiguous “no” vote in the September 18 referendum on Scottish independence.
All claims that “independence” is a democratic demand, offering an alternative to cuts and austerity, are lies.
The move for separation from the UK is being led by right-wing forces espousing nationalism, whether or not they attempt to dress this up in fake left language. The aim is to transform Scotland into a low tax, cheap labour platform for the benefit of the banks and transnational corporations.

IMO Monbiot makes the best argument for a yes vote I’ve seen.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 17 2014 20:00 utc | 34

@22 c
I’m with you. An independent Scotland would be great, but only if it had its own floating currency and was not a member of the EU. Anything else is a ticket to euro peasant austerian hell.
I think the weight against a yes is less than you’d think. Scotland’s oil and other resources have already been looted. Scotland has already been forcibly deindustrialized. Other than losing a few million potential rent extractees, there’s not much there for city of London to slurp.

Posted by: Crest | Sep 17 2014 20:16 utc | 36

The pound is a free floating currency. No one needs Osborne’s permission to use it. But it is also a very expensive currency, destroying Scottish exports and so Scottish jobs. Independence will bring the opportunity for Scots to set up their own currency. It’s one they should grab.
Iceland, with around the same population as Aberdeen, has its own currency. So does Cape Verde, with a population around that of Edinburgh. So do Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, and most of the countries and self governing territories of the world, most of which, as it happens, have fewer people than Scotland. Sharing the pound with England wouldn’t make anything worse than it is now, but having our own currency would give us another tool in making them much better.
[There] is a way around the oil problem…
https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/adam-ramsay-peter-mccoll/scotland-should-relish-chance-to-run-its-own-currency

Posted by: rob66 | Sep 17 2014 20:30 utc | 38

Scottish Independence: What?

John Cronin • a day ago
Every Scot in London I’ve ever met has been appalled by Alec Salmond: maybe distance gives them some perspective. One constant whine I hear is why didn’t Cameron insist on allowing Scots-born in England to have a vote? The other thing they seem stunned by is his decision to bring the voting age down to 16: just pure populist irresponsibility. As one person said: a seventeen yr old just off the boat from Lithuania working in Mcdonalds for six months before going home is entitled to vote on a subject which has nothing to do with them, but someone who was born and raised there and has moved a mile over the border to Berwick will have no say.
My guess for what it’s worth is that the vote will be a lot less close than everyone thinks: people have been telling fibs to the pollsters, and I think they are gonna be embarrassed The no vote will win by a larger majority than everyone is currently panicking about. But Salmond’s spinning economic fairy stories to the Glasgow underclass about how they’ll all be millionaires in an independent nation will result in a fairly ugly Friday morning. All police leave has been cancelled. The authorities are expecting large scale disturbances if (when) the no vote wins.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 17 2014 21:00 utc | 40

I don’t really care one way or the other, but one thing I know for certain, the ordinary people, or the Small People, of Scotland will not gain any advantage from this. A small handful of elitists will skim the cream just as England is doing now to Scotland. These Scottish elites are selling Independence as though it will be a boon for all Scots. Fat chance. It never works that way. NEVER.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 17 2014 21:16 utc | 42

Irish independence worked out very well indeed for what was at the time the largest part of the common people of the country, the peasantry. My mother’s family supported Sinn Fein all along, but my father, who had opposed Sinn Fein and supported the Parnell/Redmond moderate Nationalist Party in his youth, had to admit, when he visited Ireland again in the 1960’s, that independence had worked out well indeed for the country folk of Ireland.
Pareto’s iron law may mean that it is ultimately a small ruling class that always occupies the highest political positions in a country, but that does not mean that a political system cannot work better or less well for the rest of the population.

Posted by: lysias | Sep 17 2014 21:32 utc | 44

Poems And Songs Of Robert Burns by Robert Burns: Lines Written On A Banknote
Lines Written On A Banknote
Wae worth thy power, thou cursed leaf!
Fell source o’ a’ my woe and grief!
For lack o’ thee I’ve lost my lass!
For lack o’ thee I scrimp my glass!
I see the children of affliction
Unaided, through thy curst restriction:
I’ve seen the oppressor’s cruel smile
Amid his hapless victim’s spoil;
And for thy potence vainly wished,
To crush the villain in the dust:
For lack o’ thee, I leave this much-lov’d shore,
Never, perhaps, to greet old Scotland more.

Posted by: c | Sep 17 2014 22:07 utc | 46

When “b” uses the words “perfidious Albion” then I know enough. Frankly, I don’t like England too much either:
– England (in cooperation with the US) regularly bombed Iraq between 1991 & 2003.
– England wants to destabilize continental Europe and a confrontation with Russia, as well whereas e.g. Germany wants cooperation with Russia.

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 17 2014 22:14 utc | 48

First off,what the hell would Russia ever attack Britain for?Abandoned Welsh coal mines?sheesh.
As a Scottish,Dutch, German, American with an English surname,I say;Go for it,defang the little sidekick of perfidious America,expose it’s hollow economy of banksters.
And little Joe Goebbels wasn’t always wrong.

Posted by: dahoit | Sep 17 2014 22:19 utc | 50

To CDH at 48 —
Ireland gained its independence in 1921, and for many years its people were its main export. The impoverishment of Ireland after 2007 is an indictment of the Chicago school, not its confirmation. They are apparently back to their old export trade.

Posted by: rufus magister | Sep 17 2014 22:25 utc | 52

Yes the Yesvote even has the US war machine worried…But so far the evidence is YES will win, even tho polls make out NO has aslight edge, on the streets what you see is the YES campaign

Posted by: brian | Sep 17 2014 22:30 utc | 54

‘As well the three national parties… Labour/Tory/Libs have run a joint campaign against independence’
this referendum like that in Crimea is exposing political realities, in this case that every british politician of any party is linnig up behind smiley/teary masks to show their love for scotland, while seeking to sway the minds of the scottish people
one party 3 right wings

Posted by: brian | Sep 17 2014 22:34 utc | 56

@53 I imagine mostly sadness in England if YES wins. Maybe anger in some quarters. Invasion is most unlikely.

Posted by: dh | Sep 17 2014 22:41 utc | 58

On the Scottish Vote —
On a different, earlier thread, I was neutral on Scottish independence. Didn’t support it, but the byproduct of taking the piss out of “New Labour” was a pleasant side effect.
But after seeing an editorial in the local MSM broadsheet today, I’m fully behind it.
As it was a reprint from the LA Times, it’s likely to have been widely distributed. B. Simms & J. Pack argue that “England’s northern flank will be exposed… and all planning against Russian encroachments will have to be rethought.” They further argue that “since Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Europe is once more a dangerous place.” Who will protect the Scots “against the Russian encroachment.”
Is the Looney Party looking for candidates in Scottish constituencies? I have a pair of nominees.

Posted by: rufus magister | Sep 17 2014 22:44 utc | 60

one of the main YES campaigners:
Nicola Sturgeon ‏@NicolaSturgeon ·11m
Home after a long, hard but exhilarating campaign. Thanks to everyone – Yes & No – who played a part. Tomorrow, the nation decides. #VOTEYES

Posted by: brian | Sep 17 2014 22:49 utc | 62

Heres a link to an article by ex UK Ambassador Craig Murray showing overwhelming support for the “Yes” vote. He also has articles on the lies & spin from MSM agitating/scaremongering for the “NO” vote. It’s all going to be down to who counts the votes & how they are cast . . . “Mr Diebold – calling Mr. Diebold – white courtesy phone for Mr. Diebold # 10 calling”
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/09/referendum-conundrum/

Posted by: kiwicris | Sep 17 2014 22:51 utc | 64

The Trident base will most likely become a bargaining chip….versus keeping the British pound. Which would turn out to be some kind of half-arsed independence. If it’s YES…..which I doubt.

Posted by: dh | Sep 17 2014 23:03 utc | 66

@62. What does Diebold have to do with it? Validated votes will be hand-counted under supervision by both parties.
@65 Those are notes printed by Scottish banks. They represent pounds sterling.

Posted by: dh | Sep 17 2014 23:12 utc | 68

Posted by: c | Sep 17, 2014 6:57:02 PM | 63
got it! youre for NO!

Posted by: brian | Sep 17 2014 23:21 utc | 70

@69 There would be an exemption in the case of Edinburgh, Blair added, his birthplace.

Posted by: dh | Sep 17 2014 23:35 utc | 72

Demian @ 69 — I’ll spare everyone a dissection of the complex problem of nationalism (audible sigh?).
Except – to say, it’s like the American Imperium — used to be progressive, now tends to be less so. IMHO.
And to recommend “The Invention of Tradition,” edited by Hobsbawm & Ranger. Neat essays on Ossian and the upgrading of the theatricality of English royal ceremonies (better music, better staging). I’ll note that Anderson’s “Imagined Communities” was quite popular and influential back in my grad school days. Both still in print and modestly priced in paperback.

Posted by: rufus magister | Sep 18 2014 1:30 utc | 74

To me, events such as this is where you watch all the cutting edge tricks of propaganda, social engineering, and everything else go down.
Study this campaign very closely – they use the same tactics used everywhere to drive us anywhere – from war to the local mall: media bias, street rallies, ubiquitous messaging.

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 18 2014 2:02 utc | 76

@guest7 #74:
FWIW, the pro-independence campaign uses grass roots organizations modelled on Obama’s first presidential campaign. And George Monbiot wrote in his piece explaining why he is for independence that the idea of independence gives people hope.
And I think that people who bring up the “balkanization” of Europe overlook that this is a special case. The Empire is often called the Anglo-American empire for a reason. So on a symbolic level and to a lesser degree on a geoporitical level as well, a breakup of the UK would signify a partial breakup of the Empire itself. Neoliberalism is an Anglo-Saxon economic model which the US and England imposed on continental Europe and on most of the rest of the world. (Austria was too German for Friedrich Hayek, so he made England, with its economic liberalism, his home.)

Posted by: Demian | Sep 18 2014 2:44 utc | 78

@34
“Vote “no” in the Scottish referendum—Fight for a socialist Britain
Statement by the Socialist Equality Party”
Thanks for the reminder why I don’t bother reading that site anymore. Scotland doesn’t owe England and its alleged “socialists” a goddamn thing.
I see no such creature emerging from the depths like Nessie anytime soon in the UK. If there is a chance for some type of socialism anywhere in the soon to be ex-UK it will be in an independent Scotland, which will hopefully see the value in ditching the Labour party hacks and coming up with a real leftist alternative.

Posted by: Sean | Sep 18 2014 3:44 utc | 80

to demian at 69, 76
“…Russian studies background. Scotland choosing Yes would obviously be good for Russia/Novorossia.”
Latter part is clear, any weakening of Anglo-Amer. polit/ideological stranglehold is good, Scottish independence gives (some) momentum/legitimacy to other separatist moves, e.g. Catalonia oft mentioned. Benefits here could be overstated, UK still has the City of London, substantial other forces/assets. I’d expect the Scots will be induced/pressured into maintaining bases, and the Tories-Libs-Labs will muddle along. Incremental losses for the status quo.
Former part, maybe not so much. Perhaps you’re thinking of Lenin on the national question. I believe he was wrong on there.
I’m a strong internationalist, I like to think, and I oppose further national division; we should be lessening them, not aggravating them. Though I do have a soft spot for the Gaelic nationalist movements. In my earlier post (still too distracted and lazy to find) I suggest a Gaelic League, with Wales and the Bretons, as well as all 26 counties, be formed with our Scots cousins.
As I argued though on one of my earliest posts, there’s a natural right to rebellion against tyranny. And certainly, resistance to the Maidan coup rises to the serious needed to justify such an extreme. If eventual union with Russia is secured, it should lessen division.
Jeez, but it’s damnably difficult. Here’s the long winded post I wanted to avoid. A dirty job but someone…. The academy thought it had this nationalism business pinned down and on the run in the Cold War. There was no “End of History,” more like “History rears up bites you in the arse.

Posted by: rufus magister | Sep 18 2014 4:09 utc | 82

@Demian 76:
I myself am agnostic, not having my own haggies in the fire, so to say.
You make a great case in your second paragraph, but puncture it in your first. Monbiot, who I used to like ten years ago, is to my mind the kiss of death. And all this Obama 2.0 Hopey Changey shite is downright frightening.
The identity struggle does not negate the class struggle. Nor does it offer any guidance towards economic independence, or to orienting within a network of healthy win-win trade relationships — if that is even possible under the EU leviathan’s remorseless gaze.
wsws generally offers a solid news analysis, at the expense of a viable political alternative.
Socialism (and I say this as a socialist in spirit) was penetrated from within and destroyed in the same manner that the 9-11 Truth movement has been — where the average person does not care about, and is driven away by, minute internecine squabbles.
wsws library of polemics on the four internationals, Trotskyism, the dangers of Pabloism etc,, etc., ad infinitum, is far too obscure for any but the most sincere and ardent student of history. One follows it at one’s own risk down a rabbithole of deception and betrayal, until simply meeting people’s needs appears a chimera. It almost seems unconsciously calculated to push away real voters.
Look at even political blogs: you see over and over again — the call to nationalize the central bank. Now, I am not against that idea, I am in favor of it. But to think that one simple action will solve the vast problems of modernity is a jape’s deception.
So, people need a simple (not simplistic), but relatively complete and coherent political program and roadmap, broad enough to win over a majority of the population. (forget identity and wedge issues) The task is hardly impossible, or even daunting: Debs did it to much success 100 years ago. And the opportunity to repeat, and build upon his successes stands wide open for a sincere group of people with a motivated leader.

Posted by: Malooga | Sep 18 2014 4:49 utc | 84

first it was Georgr Galloway.now its webster tarpley
the new liberal friends of Westminster and opponents of scottisdh independence
WebsterGTarpley @WebsterGTarpley · 3h
Congratulations to @GeorgeGalloway for mounting class-based rejection of fraudulent pseudo-independence of #Scotland-Now #Scots must VOTE NO
https://twitter.com/WebsterGTarpley

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2014 7:27 utc | 86

b said:
There are too much money, personal political reputations and too many strategic assets involved for the “powers that are” to allow or accept a result that would not fit their plans.
All that needs to be said. No vote will win and the “powers” know that.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 18 2014 8:52 utc | 88

Well, today’s the big day. I can’t wait to gauge the reaction if and when the vote is “no.” I’m sure some will scream & holler and say the vote was rigged by Diebold even though it’s been pointed out the vote is paper with pen.
As I’ve mentioned, I don’t care either way but I am mildly amused by delusionally false confidence when it rears its ugly head which is just about always.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 18 2014 10:07 utc | 90

No vote will win and the “powers” know that.
Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 18, 2014 4:52:44 AM | 86
And how do they know that? Once again another commentator implying the vote will be rigged. You have no proof of that but you’ve already decided in advance, before the votes are cast and counted, that it’s a rigged election.
Considering that logic, that all elections that matter (and let’s face it they all matter these days) are rigged, we can than safely assume that if it’s a “yes” that wins the day it was ordained by “the powers that b.”
Using that same logic, it holds that Obama was the Elite’s pick since that election (or those elections) was/were rigged, both of them actually, to elect Obama. What would Billmon say about that since he voted for Brand Obama both times? Is Billmon on board with the rigged election theory? I seriously ask this question since this space is an ode to the spirit of Billmon and he is often quoted here as an authority on all matters.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 18 2014 10:21 utc | 92

It’s hard to say which way the PtB want the vote to go
I think it’s safe to say, both intuitively and deductively, the PtB will win either way. They’re quite adept at burning both ends of the candle. It’s pretty much heads they win, and tails you lose these days. Perhaps it’s always been that way, but it certainly is now.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 18 2014 10:28 utc | 94

– Many a scot wants more independence from “London” but that’s NOT on the ballot. The vote is whether or not Scotland must an independent country.
– And I DO think Scotland has a very significant chance of seceding from “Perfidious Albion” with this vote. The polls show that the “YES” vote (independence) has surprisingly large support.

Posted by: Willy2 | Sep 18 2014 12:15 utc | 96

This is how the UK looks today
https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video_thumb/Bx0NVd6IIAAtJwY.png
for the GIF http://trendsmap.com/v2/Lf62/w

Posted by: brian | Sep 18 2014 13:04 utc | 98

Love these emotional messages … doesn’t prove a thing, but makes you feel better.
Amanda Craig @MandaCraig
My Da, who has been a strong Labour No voter,
changed his mind an hour before he left for the
polling station today and voted Yes. So proud.
Roger Mullin @RogMull • 35 min
Lady in tears of joy in Kirkcaldy “My 38 year-old
son went to vote no. Came back home crying
he couldnt do it and voted Yes ” wow. #Yes

Posted by: Oui | Sep 18 2014 14:12 utc | 100