Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?

I am not personally a member of the National Collective - Alan is the only person I know that is part of the movement. Alan isn't personally offering anything - he is saying he agrees that voting yes is the best way forward for a farier society. Also, you should know that many people who are voting 'yes' or considering it will explicitly tell you that they are not necessarily nationalists or even members of the SNP. There is a Labour for Independence now after all...

To say that everything the SNP are putting forward is a 'pipe dream' is simply not true. Tory Annabel Goldie freely admitted on Question Time the other night that we could be independent (as pretty much all the parties have admitted - it is possible). What many No voters are saying is that we might be capable of being independent, but we are stronger together. Several countries have become independent and there is no reason why we are incapable of following suit. I would like to see a more balanced view from TSR members like yourself, because rubbishing everything about the referendum/logical reasons for wanting it is non-sensical. Likewise, if Yes voters rubbished the concerns of No voters/pro-Unionists that would also be pretty close-minded. There is rarely smoke without fire after all. I'd like to see more of an open discussion happen on here, but I doubt that's going to happen unfortunately.

That doesn't disguise the fact that for the last 50 years Scotland has had imposed upon it Conservative governments it didn't vote for. We only elected 1 Tory MP and yet have had to put up with a Conservative-dominated coalition.

The Conservatives haven't been in power for all of those 50 years and until the years of Thatcher they were polling a quarter to a third of the Scottish vote-hardly nobody. Scotland is after all predominantly a rural nation where agriculture is more economically important and thus the interests of landowners lie more in tune with the Tories. Coventry returns three MPs to Westminster every 5 years and all three have been Labour for almost 40 years-and many other parts of the UK are the same, but we don't all want to break away, we accept that in a democracy we don't always get what we want.

I'm not saying there aren't concerns about immigration nor that there's no opposition to the EU; I'm merely quoting polls which show Scotland as a whole appears to favour continued membership, while rUK/England appears to favour exiting. Because rUK/England has the largest amount of population, you can guarantee that the way it votes as a whole will determine the outcome of an EU referendum. Scotland could (and probably would) vote in favour of staying in the EU but this would count for nothing - we'd be dragged out due to the vote in the rest of the country.

I think you will find the prevailing opinion is that we want more powers within the EU than to leave it entirely-indeed that is the option which David Cameron is pushing to secure.

The Scottish Government argues Scotland would inherit the UK's right to opt-out of the Euro. I confess to having no idea whether they're right or not. There's no precedent for this in the EU's history and I doubt there's a clearly defined set of regulations otherwise we wouldn't still be debating it.

One of the few things beyond debate is that the SNP bluntly lied about the legal advice they apparently secured on Scotland's EU membership. They claim not to want special treatment but in requesting to be both a new country and a continuation of one that is what they're doing-when it is RUK which surely gets the latter.

I saw it mentioned a page or so back, though I appreciate it's not a mainstream unionist stance. Those figures don't surprise me - I've met a few people in favour of independence who are also anti-EU. In fact I'm surprised the two views don't go hand-in-hand more often (though I'm grateful they don't!). I think the thing with the SNP is that it encompasses such a broad coalition of views, united only by the desire for independence/greater autonomy, that there will inevitably be views among members which drastically diverge from the official party line.

I would encourage anyone with a genuine interest in both sides of the argument to watch this: http://news.stv.tv/scotland/250675-stv-interactive-google-plus-hangout-debate-on-scottish-independence/.

Alan is an acquaintance of mine and what he says at the beginning is correct. It basically sums up how I feel about most of the posts on this thread, especially over the last few pages (not seen the majority of the beginning-middle of the thread). The good thing about the debate taking place in this video is that both 'Yes' and 'No' voters are saying 'Well actually, I can see your side of the argument - but this is mine...'. But no such conversations are taking place on here. Any time a person leaning towards voting yes puts forward an argument on here someone flies in to debunk it. That in itself is symptomatic of the problem we've having on a wider scale/why this referendum is taking place.

Nobody has ever said that Scotland couldn't make a go of it. The question is whether or not we would be better off.....and that's also ignoring the more obvious fact of why we would want to break off from our neighbours who I happen to feel very attached to because I don't suffer from chronic identity politics.

What is this mythical fairer society you talk of. We currently don't discriminate against people through race, creed or colour. We all have access to free education and a free at source healthcare. We can make our lives exactly how we want them.

I find it strange however that so far the SNPs ( and I'm calling you SNP as they're trying to perpetuate this myth that somehow this is a grass roots movement) have so far achieved and advocated a fairer society that has:-
Cut funding to the poorest in society to benefit the middle classes.
Made significant college education cuts to the detriment of working class families in order to prop up university education to middle class families.
Advocated a 'its out oil so we shouldn't share it' greed policy.
Advocated a reduction in corporation taxes.
Advocated the taxpayers of a foreign country act as our lender if last resort.
lied to us on issues such as entry into NATO and Euripe.

Milton Friedman gave a great speech called the Robin Hood Myth. In it he highlights how the middle classes always use their social awareness and claims to benefit the poorest in society to push for changes in society that screw over the poor and benefit the middle classes. There's nothing I've seen from the Yes camp that leads me to even remotely believe that the poorest most vulnerable members if society will be better off. So far I've all I've seen is a collection of romantic nationalist, xenophobic nationalist and hair brained greens and socialists telling an awful lot of lies to ensure that their warped opinions be given a chance to succeed.

which issues would you like to discuss.? YYou'll probably find they go something like this.

Nationalist claims automatic entry to the EU is a given. Evidence suggests otherwise. Evidence gets raised in discussion. Nationalist shouts scaremongering/talking Scotland down etc.

I've been called a traitor/quisling/Uncle Tom/Anti Scottish/scaremongerer and accused if being tied to the butchers Apron and equivalent names that can normally be heard by Republicans in Ulster.

so yyou'll excuse me for having difficulty debating this. All of the concerns have been raised and I'd been told that all of the answers would be in the white paper. That document was just a re hash of the usual rhetoric with no details and just assumptions passed of as fact in many cases.

Nobody has ever said that Scotland couldn't make a go of it. The question is whether or not we would be better off.....and that's also ignoring the more obvious fact of why we would want to break off from our neighbours who I happen to feel very attached to because I don't suffer from chronic identity politics.

What is this mythical fairer society you talk of. We currently don't discriminate against people through race, creed or colour. We all have access to free education and a free at source healthcare. We can make our lives exactly how we want them.

I find it strange however that so far the SNPs ( and I'm calling you SNP as they're trying to perpetuate this myth that somehow this is a grass roots movement) have so far achieved and advocated a fairer society that has:-
Cut funding to the poorest in society to benefit the middle classes.
Made significant college education cuts to the detriment of working class families in order to prop up university education to middle class families.
Advocated a 'its out oil so we shouldn't share it' greed policy.
Advocated a reduction in corporation taxes.
Advocated the taxpayers of a foreign country act as our lender if last resort.
lied to us on issues such as entry into NATO and Euripe.

Milton Friedman gave a great speech called the Robin Hood Myth. In it he highlights how the middle classes always use their social awareness and claims to benefit the poorest in society to push for changes in society that screw over the poor and benefit the middle classes. There's nothing I've seen from the Yes camp that leads me to even remotely believe that the poorest most vulnerable members if society will be better off. So far I've all I've seen is a collection of romantic nationalist, xenophobic nationalist and hair brained greens and socialists telling an awful lot of lies to ensure that their warped opinions be given a chance to succeed.

which issues would you like to discuss.? YYou'll probably find they go something like this.

Nationalist claims automatic entry to the EU is a given. Evidence suggests otherwise. Evidence gets raised in discussion. Nationalist shouts scaremongering/talking Scotland down etc.

I've been called a traitor/quisling/Uncle Tom/Anti Scottish/scaremongerer and accused if being tied to the butchers Apron and equivalent names that can normally be heard by Republicans in Ulster.

so yyou'll excuse me for having difficulty debating this. All of the concerns have been raised and I'd been told that all of the answers would be in the white paper. That document was just a re hash of the usual rhetoric with no details and just assumptions passed of as fact in many cases.

I thought the Yes campaign had nothing to do with Anglophobic bigotry?

And any No voter is labelled a scaremongerer with a 'can't do attitude'. It is actually neither to be putting the SNP proposals under intense scrutiny as, after all, they are making grandiose promises with the intent of dividing a 300+ year old union.

I don't understand how people taking exception to your views/arguments (it's difficult for me to comment without knowing/seeing the context of this) is anglophobic? Isn't that just disagreeing with you?

Yes. I'm not saying you shouldn't putting the proposal under 'scrutiny'. But the truth is that it's going to be up to the will of the people and this is going to be their decision, whether it's yes or no.

What's this got to do with anything? You're just describing what a national referendum is.

Midlander, you have not once sympathised with any of the points I have made about why we want greater powers. You debunk everything I say, without at least recognising some logic at least in some areas, and that is what is frustrating. This referendum hasn't arisen from nowhere - people desire change, and if it doesn't happen with the referendum, that desire is still going to present/ the need for change stemming from that desire will have to be met in one way or another.

Most laughable is how the chief bigot says he intends to make Scotland a fairer society. Is that what he means when he intends to break EU laws to charge English students and nobody else, or to give 16 and 17 year olds the vote for independence but not elections?

The SNP support full enfranchisement of 16 and 17 year olds in all elections, I believe, but I don't think the Scottish government has the power to implement this in all Scottish elections, I presume because it would count as a constitutional issue.

I thought the Yes campaign had nothing to do with Anglophobic bigotry?

To be fare. Some don't. But I've had to intervene on a few occasions over the years with your friendly SNP supporters coming out with xenophobic bigotry. Its one of the down sides of nationalistic based identity politics. It tries to create differences where differences don't exist.

The QT in Falkirk had that singer/songwriter on the panel who constantly talked about 'why should the English tell us what to do?' and that is so God damn offensive it almost made me turn the debate off there and then.

I remain yet to see a single Yes campaigner who talks about how bad it is to be in union with the Welsh or Northern Irish-until I do, I will always associate the movement with Anglophobic overtones..

We just want to have full control over our own country.

Why should we mention them? We don't have any strong political connections with either of their governments. Anyway, independence is really a campaign to be separated from the control of Westminster.

We just want to have full control over our own country. This has nothing to do with being anti-english.