the scottish independence referendum

I suspect the civil service has been planning, but I'm not sure that counts for much. There certainly hasn't been any planning at the political level, and all the sounds of panic we're hearing tonight are proof of that.

Hell, if the government had been taking this seriously would they still have acted like they have the past four years? New weird taxes on the poor, cuts for the wealthy and even more privatisation is almost the perfect mix to ignite the Thatcher grudges again.

(But from what I can tell, this isn't just the old wrongs reheated. It's much more positive than that. Which is fantastic to see: All sorts of politically disengaged people I know are firing up)

that single poll is a statistical 50/50 as it says, and combined with all of the other polling the weight of probabilities is still with no

nobody is calling it yet but once it goes from 80/20 no to 60/40 to....it isn't an inexorable movement because it could just trigger a backlash but it gets hopes up, and that might be the difference

Davis Moyes being right back on the no team might just about win this for the yes team.

I suspect the civil service has been planning, but I'm not sure that counts for much. There certainly hasn't been any planning at the political level, and all the sounds of panic we're hearing tonight are proof of that.

― stet, Sunday, 7 September 2014 00:25 (9 minutes ago)

the political level has mostly been minor tories crowing but the civil service is mostly what i was referring to, that there will be (necessarily crude) contingency planning in the cabinet office that will have some approval by the higher ministers, it wasn't a suggestion that the dynamic against the no compaign was foreseen by cameron et al

Hell, if the government had been taking this seriously would they still have acted like they have the past four years? New weird taxes on the poor, cuts for the wealthy and even more privatisation is almost the perfect mix to ignite the Thatcher grudges again.

(But from what I can tell, this isn't just the old wrongs reheated. It's much more positive than that. Which is fantastic to see: All sorts of politically disengaged people I know are firing up)

― stet, Sunday, 7 September 2014 00:25 (2 minutes ago)

there's a sort of contradiction here because you acknowledge, this has its own momentum which is far more than just 'the current uk administration is detestable'

the better way to look at it isn't that cameron et al failed to cater policy to scotland, rather that they clearly underestimated the movement for independence else they wouldn't have granted this referendum for 2014

'the sounds of panic', insofar as they truly reflect the will of the cabinet itself, are about that miscalculation

all of this neglects that throughout the inept support for the no campaign within the conservative party, they have recognised for years that there is a long game to be played that could favour them in the case of independence, if the dissolution is managed successfully

if you look at everything the newer generations of conservatives have been saying, there isn't a lot to suggest they are wedded to the union as an end in itself, certainly not as a transcendent political ideal

To respond to Matt DC "Nationalism of any stripe is pretty repugnant to me and I don't really believe that the SNP or a lot of their supporters are particularly left wing at heart, any more than the Lib Dems were."

This isn't about nationalism, it's about democracy, being a normal country as opposed to a very junior partner in a moribund, over-centralised and undemocratic union. I'm a Green and a Yes, and while I don't like everything the SNP has done, they have a solid record of social democratic policies, the sort of things the right-wing Labour party has long abandoned.

"But Scotland strikes me as very monocultural in a way that could get worse after independence."

Scotland has never been a monoculture and the existence of campaign groups Asians For Yes, Poles for Yes, Africans for Yes is testament to the absence of any ethnic element. Scotland isn't immune to the toxic anti-immigration rhetoric of down south, but all the political parties up here have generally avoided going down that route.

"I suppose what I'm interested in is the sort of Scottish Right that will emerge in the event of a Yes vote. I suspect that both Labour and the SNP have benefited from the Scottish Tories being such a tainted party that even right-leaning people wouldn't vote for them, but the emergence of either a new RW party or a lurch to the Right from the SNP would hoover up those voters."

Of course there's a Scottish centre-right constituency who an independent Scottish Tory party would cater for, but it's not large enough to win. But even if it did become the government so be it, that's democracy. The beautiful thing about this referendum is that it's not about party politics.

the better way to look at it isn't that cameron et al failed to cater policy to scotland, rather that they clearly underestimated the movement for independence else they wouldn't have granted this referendum for 2014

You're right, but there's underestimating and then there's showing complete contempt for. Some of the things they've done recently, especially TTIP, almost seem like they're goading Scottish sentiment. Of course, they aren't intentionally provoking, they're just oblivious. And it's that obliviousness which I think is particularly infuriating to Scots.

Whether they're playing a long game is an interesting one, not least as it feels like the short game is all downsides for the conservatives. Losing oil, a spike in Sterling rates, more austerity, a surge in UKIP, none of the likely consequences should sound appealing to them. Nor is it certain that they'd weather them well enough to enjoy the long-term benefits.

i thought the losing oil bit was not foregone?

I agree with Stew, It's not about nationalism. I don't actually see that element, at all, amongst people i've been talking to

"But Scotland strikes me as very monocultural in a way that could get worse after independence."

Scotland is moving pretty fast. Monocultural perhaps describes Scotland 10 years ago fairly well but now? No. I think this view of the SNP is also one that's about ten years old but doesn't reflect what's actually happening now. In fact the BNP/UKIP axis influence in Scotland is laughably small.

Almost nothing's foregone - that's been pretty much the whole No strategy in a nutshell. But it's more likely than not that at least some will go. Sterling's rate will reflect even the uncertainty pretty quickly. xp

is dr. who voting yes or no?

Don't be lasagna, Mordy

This isn't about nationalism, it's about democracy, being a normal country as opposed to a very junior partner in a moribund, over-centralised and undemocratic union. I'm a Green and a Yes, and while I don't like everything the SNP has done, they have a solid record of social democratic policies, the sort of things the right-wing Labour party has long abandoned.

Yeah I know, I'm familiar with all this, and I agree with a lot of it. But most of the Yes people I follow on the internet are passionate, articulate, relatively young and left-leaning. The Yes campaign strikes me as overwhelmingly positive in a way that, cynic that I am, I don't quite believe, and I wonder if there is a nastier element lurking in there in places I don't see. If not, then great.

In fact the BNP/UKIP axis influence in Scotland is laughably small

But why is it laughably small? (Actually the BNP axis in England is laughably small as well but that's neither here nor there). Do those reactionary elements just not exist in any real numbers in Scotland? Are Scottish people just better? Or is it that existence of a viable alternative to the two main parties just means that there's a more positive outlet for post-New Labour disillusionment so reactionary parties and policies gain less traction? I'm guessing the latter, but would that state of affairs continue in the event of a Yes vote (especially if Scotland were to get into economic difficulty)?

all of this neglects that throughout the inept support for the no campaign within the conservative party, they have recognised for years that there is a long game to be played that could favour them in the case of independence, if the dissolution is managed successfully

In the short-term a Yes vote is likely to be disastrous for the Conservative Party, Cameron will go down in (English) history as a clown and a bungler. In the longer term, given the voting patterns in the rest of the UK, I'd guess it would favour them, given the removal of a big chunk of Labour seats? The rural South of England isn't going to stop voting Tory any time soon.

I guess I'm in "don't want them to leave, hope they succeed if they do, my opinion doesn't really matter" territory. Except the consequences for England look grim here, especially the North of England. I also haven't read very much on the potential consequences for Northern Ireland, who is good on this subject?

the labour party is essentially fucked if scotland go, right?

Not necessarily, but it will be interesting to see if various voices in the media try to paint a Yes vote as Labour's fuck-up rather than lay it at the door of David Cameron, who will obviously try to bluff through being the PM in charge at a point of deep humiliation.

The Labour Party is essentially fucked anyway, I think. I doubt the independence movement (and arguably UKIP) would have gained as much traction if Labour was seen as caring much about the people they claim to represent. Sometimes you only really see the effects of governments several years after their time in office but we're only now seeing the deep damage Blair has done to both his party and democracy in this country.

speculating about the medium to long term results impact of a Yes vote on England is pretty random, there's no real clear picture of what the impact will be on Scotland either, not least whether it becomes a beacon or a cautionary tale - for those inclined to need those things

also of course there's a nationalist element to the whole history of the campaign for independence, some arbitrary "North of England" will never be able to secede precisely because it wd have too tenuous a nation-state mythology

Whether they're playing a long game is an interesting one, not least as it feels like the short game is all downsides for the conservatives. Losing oil, a spike in Sterling rates, more austerity, a surge in UKIP, none of the likely consequences should sound appealing to them. Nor is it certain that they'd weather them well enough to enjoy the long-term benefits.

― stet, Sunday, 7 September 2014 00:55 (14 hours ago)

In the short-term a Yes vote is likely to be disastrous for the Conservative Party, Cameron will go down in (English) history as a clown and a bungler. In the longer term, given the voting patterns in the rest of the UK, I'd guess it would favour them, given the removal of a big chunk of Labour seats? The rural South of England isn't going to stop voting Tory any time soon.

― Matt DC, Sunday, 7 September 2014 11:42 (3 hours ago)

this again reflects different elements of the conservative party. very difficult to analyse because the different elements of the decision making within the conservative party are not transparent there's a lot of cognitive dissonance at work in the conservative party.

clearly it isn't either 'save the beloved union at all costs' or 'alienate scotland to ensure future conservative hegemony.' for cameron it's surely true that he has miscalculated the referendum date and terms. his political shelflife was expiring rapidly even before the dynamic shifted in scotland though, and he has little personal support. for the rest it's not so clear, high conservative politics is a sublimated knifefight, each for himself.

maybe it could be analysed within the normative scheme of weber's political sociology, traditional/affective or rational (value rational or instrumental). the affective bonds towards union are strong only with the dying coterie of edward leigh and other artefacts. maybe cameron still has some vestigial clan loyalty to the auld ones. traditional bonds, 'this shall be done as ever it was' also don't seem that relevant. traditional constitutional arrangments have been evaporating over the last 20 years, the artificialty of the 1707 union is evident.

so in terms of rationality, whatever that might mean, instrumentally there are all sorts of immediate difficulties with sterling, cta, faslane etc. the weighting is clearly towards a new settlement with extended devolution terms as osborne describes today. the dissonance occurs when the ideological value rationality gnaws away at the conservative conscience. the spectre of a newly streamlined, liberalized english core further weighted towards finance capital and english separate development, singapore floating somewhere in mid-atlantic on renegotiated terms outside or on the periphery of the eu. further ideological split from the nativist/reactionary ukip to the neoliberal internationalist conservatives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0flxQCmb5oY

Could Cameron continue as PM if Scotland voted for independence? He'd have to go surely?

too close to a general election they're already committed to, any challenge wd be hand-waved away under that rationale

also he had the sense not to be leader of the No campaign

I think he's dead if there's a Yes vote, this is worse than Eden and Suez.

that is a patently absurd comparison

Why would he be finished? (I mean, I think he's a dead man walking anyway, unless there's a massive shift in the polls, as he can't survive if the Tories fail to get an overall majority again and the odds are still against that - but why would a vote for Scottish independence finish him off sooner?)

this a conservative prime minister who plenty within his own party hate or distrust, surrounded by ambitious people who could try to foment uprising/leadership challenges

so it might well happen but it isn't inevitable

I also haven't read very much on the potential consequences for Northern Ireland, who is good on this subject?

This is a huge unknown, isn't it? What should the name of what's left of the UK even be? 'Great Britain' wouldn't make sense any more, but England, Wales and Northern Ireland is more than a bit unwieldy.

the Remaindered Isles

winner^

Maybe I'm overstating things but I think being Scottish gives you a different relationship to the Union, in that you actually have one, well I do anyway... so apologies for melodrama.

Is there anything to read article-wise on the analysis of implications for Norn Iron?

there are a lot of english people who don't give a shit and outside of the labour party there is ambivalence about it virtually everywhere

as noted shithead, new labour house journalist and iraq war advocate martin kettle says at the end of his column today

English opinion is overwhelmingly in favour of Scots remaining in the UK. Do the English care enough, or know how to get their message across?

the second sentence rather invalidates the former -- evidently not enough english people do care about union, though someone who spends their days talking to blunkett, darling &c would be forgiven for missing that

(xp) if anyone was unsure whether to vote yes, this might persuade you

^ that might swing the vote to yes, right?

eh, in what way?

"If that happened I think an influx of people might move from Scotland to the remaining part of the UK to stay in the union, and their first choice of residence would probably be Northern Ireland," he says.

this is patently ridiculous unless you count less than 100 people out of 5 million as in influx.

I'm assuming that loons with sashes 'n' flutes might persuade a fair few to vote the other way to be rid of them .
Or is tom d saying the Scots should vote no to save norn ireland?

This article says most intending to vote yes do not even identify as nationalists and that the Scots just hate Tories & Nu-Labour. Sectarianism isn't mentioned. Is it playing a part in Scotland? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/07/poll-scottish-independence-nationalist-yougov

The BT campaign has tried to politely ignore support from the BNP and the Orange Order. They're relying on support from that faction of Scottish society but don't want to say much about it as it puts off as many as it gains.

but the "other side" aren't automatically yes amirite?

Is there much anti-English sentiment driving the yes vote or is it just anti-tory in your opinion?
Would non-scots feel welcome there post-independence? Is there any chance of N Ireland style trouble from loyalist unionists?

there's no anti english sentiment on my facebook feed although i have seen some complain of it on theirs. maybe i just move in the right circles but i imagine non-scots would be welcome and that there will briefly be some trouble which will be hugely magnified in the press.

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/09/07/world/europe/08SCOTLAND2/08SCOTLAND2-articleLarge-v2.jpg

based on nothing i feel like yr gonna need yes to have cushion going in election day cause some people will prob chicken out once it starts to seem real

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bw-1Yr5IMAAY31f.jpg:large

hopefully ice or lightning powers

based on nothing i feel like yr gonna need yes to have cushion going in election day cause some people will prob chicken out once it starts to seem real

yeah this tends to be how votes between "more radical" and "less radical" positions go down. momentum is a helluva drug tho.

This article says most intending to vote yes do not even identify as nationalists and that the Scots just hate Tories & Nu-Labour.

the figures cd be right for all i know, but "most just hate Tories" is not the same as "there is no Nationalist component or agenda" - the rest is like, nationalism needn't inevitably lead to anti-sassenach pogroms

What if Scotland becomes a country and you end up with a bunch of samey jackasses in power? In 1995 for Quebec it was extremely close. 19 years later, a few french speaking left wing nationalists are still yearning for a country, but since then the Quebec population keeps electing champions of austerity as provincial Prime Ministers, it's been either that or casual racism/anglophobia disguised as nationalist rhetoric. I mean sure, there was a dream for the scandinavian model republic but as soon as a politician went 'hey guys less taxes' he was elected and re-elected and so on. I don't know how much power Scotland already has, canadian provinces actually have a lot (culture, health, education are mainly provincial affairs) and I feel that if really quebeckers wanted the left wing nation they dreamed of, they would have found a way to become a true left wing province, elected real left wing politicians and we wouldn't have seen the (quite relative) growth in austerity we've seen in the past 15 years.

No pogroms, just Clockwork Orange style re-education centres where people are forced to watch 'Scotch and Wry' and 'The White Heather Club' until the proper Scottish attitudes have been absorbed.

The '95 Quebec referendum seemed far more about banishing the English language from Quebec than installing a left-wing government in tune with their values

http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/article/1585089/courting-dragon