Bravo Ralfy!

Peut-ètre vous avez voté oui en 1995?

It is amazing how difficult it is to type in French on an iPad with autocorrect on...

I think Ralfy presented a very biased view of the referendum. That said, he is more closely attached to the issue than I am (I am not of Scottish descent) and perfectly entitled to his opinion, which I agree he presented well.

I have my own wishes about the outcome, but my biggest wish is that the issue be resolved respectfully.

And of course, I hope this has no effect on the greater issue of single malt Whisky....

I for one would be wary of gaining 'independence' from the UK.

As an American - I've been following what's been going on - however since I don't live there I haven't a clue as to all the facts - just what we read on the internet, and what we see on tv.

I can understand how both sides of the 'YES' & 'NO' campaigns have considerably different views, and their outlook of years to come.

I hope as a collective whole - all goes well for Scots, and the nation of Scotland be it going alone, or remaining part of the UK.

@CanadianNinja I hope that Scotland all vote to be independent, and good luck to them. And it will save the English taxpayers around 17 bn pounds a year in subsidies.

@FMichael Not trying to be a smart ass but you might remember your history lessons re the American War of Independence 1775-1783 when your countrymen fought the British to gain their right to govern and tax themselves. Seems to me that the USA has done very well after that important political changeover. I am also very opposed to my country Canada being a "colony of the British Empire". Strange to me in this day and age that we still scrape and bow to the puffery in England. Shame on us and I hope that Scotland takes control of their own destiny. Hopping down off my soapbox now. Came by it honestly as my greatgrandfather used to rail against the establishment in the town square of Cullybacky Northern Ireland :) Jonesz

@Jonesz Different times - different conditions, and economics.

1776 - the 13 Colonies were self sufficient, and being thousands of miles away - only 'tax men' from England were around to get the King his share.

2014 - Scotland relies heavily upon England economically, and is a 'next door neighbor'.

I hear what you're saying, but IMHO - these are 2 distinct differences.

As the son of Scottish immigrants who was born and raised in Quebec but now lives in Taiwan, I'm well accustomed to arguments for and against becoming a sovereign nation. While I have opinions about Quebec and Taiwan (places I've actually lived in for long periods of time), I don't know enough about Scottish/British politics to blurt out an opinion. Listening to my grandfather's rants about the "stupidity" of the Scottish independence movement, watching a Ralfy review, and reading the recent news stories hardly seems like enough information.

These things need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis, and history, economy, politics, and culture all play roles here. Unless you've studied it closely, I think only people who live or have lived there can appreciate the gravity and complexity of the situation. But anyway, cheers to making the choice that's best for you, Scotland.

Oh, and whisky prices better not go up!

@FMichael Do not want to get into this too deeply on a forum dedicated to whisky. Guess I have always cheered for the underdog. visited Scotland two years ago and talked to some of the locals re independence and came to the conclusion that many thought that England didn't regard them as a valued 'neighbour' but as "theirs". Was also amazed at how deeply that sentiment was entrenched in Ireland. I am not a religious person but quite often pass by a barn 15 miles north of our town that has the biblical quote "For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" painted in bold letters on the side. I am thinking maybe it applies to how some Scottish people feel about themselves. Anyway enough from me. I will be watching with interest tomorrow night and cheering for the underdog. And your points are very valid re the economics of the situation. Jonesz

@Jonesz I by no means am an expert on this issue regarding Scottish Independence, and I hope whichever path they choose in tomorrows vote - it all goes well for them!

You know what this thread needs?.......an expert on the issue of Scottish Independence.....

@TheConscience Agreed!

Heh, I wish being a historian would qualify as an expert on Scottish independence. Alas. I remember seeing Ralfy's vlog and thinking that it certainly looked more informative than many others I've seen, but there's no doubt it is a very biased view towards 'yes'. Righly so, some would say?

What I do know however, is that the whisky industry in no way brings in enough revenue to keep Scotland above water on its own. (I'll dig up some numbers if I can find them, and isn't on my phone). That leaves the oil, most of which is located around the coast of Scotland or in what will probably end up on the Scottish continental shelf. How this is going to be worked out between Westminster and Edinburgh, we don't know yet.

On a more whisky related note, I applaud Glenlivet's brilliant YES and NO bottle scheme. Brits seem to cheerish memorabilia like no other.

I'll be having a scotch tomorrow, to acknowledge what will probably be the most important decision in modern Scottish history. Outcome doesn't matter to me.

Oil revenue would certainly go a long way to help Scotland if it is nationalized, even in terms of the taxes generated. Then again, if the referendum passes, I would still be surprised if this happens.

I hope it does for the sake of the Scottish, but the richest blokes on earth have a way of getting in the way. If you doubt this, check out the recent history of Venezuela.

As for the whisky industry helping to keep Scotland in the black financially, that would require some fancy footwork with the international corporations that own most of the distilleries.

The good news is that Scotland has these MNC's by the casks, so to speak. How? Well, Scotch has to be made in Scotland, unlike microchips, sneakers, or even haggis. This would give the country a huge lever to enforce taxation that goes back into the economy of Scotland instead of being sucked up into the giant hoover that is the Bank of England et al. Whisky regulation, if it were actually controlled by the Scottish, for the Scottish, would certainly help to accomplish such an incredible feat.

My advice would be to keep your eye on the ball once the referendum passes (if it does). Things have a way of moving fast when the big money is at stake. And this most certainly will include a bountiful helping of propaganda and corruption in the reforming autonomous government and its subsequent laws, including a constitution other than the Bankna Carta of England-a.

Then again, we're assuming the results of the referendum will be tabulated accurately and honestly. Isn't that a bit naïve given the history of Scotland, not to mention England?

I would like to have a look at the geography of yes-no votes, but I am not able to find a map, is there anything like that somewhere? And some socio-demographic/socio-economic trends (is the Yes vote predominant in some specific social groups, for example?)

@rigmorole Whisky makes up for one quarter of the drink and food revenues in the UK, according to Wikipedia (the link provided there is dead, unfortunately). I've also found an article claiming that whisky contributes with £4,25 billion (to the Scottish) economy each year.

You can google "Contribution of the Scotch Whisky Industry to the Scottish Economy" if you are up for a 15 page read on the topic. :)

As usual, a very interesting discussion here on Connosr!

As the results have shown now, the Scottish people have chosen to stay in the UK. I am, obviously, disappointed by the outcome. I was very excited at the thought of Scotland peacefully gaining it's independence. It would have set quite the precedent for others that desire independence in other parts of the world.

Having followed the referendum rather closely, it should appear quite obvious that the usual scare tactics were utilized by corporate media and establishment 'journalists' who tow the line.

One positive I think, is that this may cause Westminster to adjust it's behavior toward Scotland and hopefully, lead to improvements and changes many Scottish people believe to be necessary. Not just in Scotland, but all over the UK.

@LordGlascarnoch if you check the BBC web site they have a break down of the percentage of yes and no. No exit poles were taken but it is suspected above 70% of 16 year olds voted yes.

In my deprived area of SW Scotland it was the less well off that were shouting for independence to make things "fairer" for them. In turn any no posters would be vandalised, house windows smashed and family's intimated. It has not been a nice place to live at all.

The majority of businesses owners around here were a no.

In all honesty I'm glad its over and I think the extra powers given to Scotland is a good thing, but it really has stirred up a hornets nest over the whole of the UK.

@CanadianNinja

I'm not disappointed. While I would have respected either result in keeping respect for self-determination, I lean toward the together is better view. Maybe it's my experience from 2 referenda in Canada.

Take note though, together is only better if everyone is treated well, equally, and If it's what they want. Unlike 1995 when the number of spoiled ballots was greater than the difference between no and yes, this appears to have been more conclusive.

Both sides presented a number of arguments, both used hyperbole and misinformation (Yes said they'd keep everything and lose nothing, and No said the opposite).

This was an example of democracy in action, but it also now mandates an end to democracy INACTION, and I look forward to seeing the UK government keeping its word.

Congratulations to Scotland. If it were not morning here and I didn't have to work, I would raise a special dram.

Sorry Ralfy.....

@CanadianNinja, @Nozinan, Quebec province has proven that you don't have to 'succeed in seceding' in order to get a very good deal indeed from the larger national government. Many would say that Quebec is in much more prosperous and influential position now than it would have been if it had achieved full independence from Canada. "No" voters in Scotland may have been motivated by the belief that they could achieve more clout by remaining within the UK, many perhaps even secretly delighting that the threat of Scottish independence may have increased that clout.

My mom's Scottish, so she's been following this closely. Although the results are already in, here's a joke she sent me yesterday, which I thought was cute. You can probably guess where she stands on the issue.

If Scotland gains its independence as a result of the forthcoming referendum, the remainder of the UK will be known as the "Former United Kingdom" (FUK).

In a bid to discourage the Scots from voting "yes" the English government has begun a campaign with the slogan

"Vote NO for FUK's sake."

@Onlyhalfmad, extremely interesting. Above 70% of 16 year olds voted 'Yes' to independence.

What does that tell us? I believe it tells us that a generation of people who are more and more exposed to alternative media, a generation of people who have lived their lives knowing only the corporate sponsored lies and misinformation that are produced by western mass media, is able to break away from the systemic modes of control and come to the conclusion that autonomy from their historical oppressors is what is in their best interest.

@Nozinan, my brother, I am interested as to why you are not disappointed. Is it because Westminster will be able to continue to benefit from the wealth produced by oil located in the northern sea, wealth that is by all rights the sole property of the Scottish people, while dispensing whatever amount of those profits to Scotland they deem fit? Is it because, as part of the UK, Scotland will continue to be militarily involved in lunatic wars undertaken by the American empire and all it's vassal states, Canada, Australia etc?

I'm asking this sincerely because I believe that the issue of unity, the issue of remaining part of the UK was nothing more than a distraction from what was really at stake for the Scottish people. What I believe was at stake, was the chance to break away from a government entrenched in old, outdated systems and transform into a progressive, vibrant nation able to decide it's own future.

In an election this big with so much at stake, I just can't assume that the vote was honestly tabulated and "move on." I would need to see more proof than simply assuming such a thing. Independence would have meant a higher standard of living for the Scottish, that's for sure.

@CanadianNinja '. Above 70% of 16 year olds voted 'Yes' to independence.'

I have a different point of view...How many 16 yr olds are married, have children, full time employment, a mortgage, etc, etc?

Don't mean to sound like a 'stick in the mud', but many 16 yr olds have that luxury of innocence, and little to no responsibilities...I can understand why the majority would vote 'NO' - it's looked upon as a safe bet.

@rigmorole ' Independence would have meant a higher standard of living for the Scottish, that's for sure.'

I honestly don't know if that is true, or not?

Guess we'll never find out.

I drank a quarter bottle of Supernova last night. Now my head aches a bit. I would like to hear how the votes were tabulated, as well as how the counting was supervised by an outside unbiased and uncorrupt neutral third party organization.

If the voting counting was not supervised then I don't believe its accuracy. Too much at stake. In oil taxation revenue alone, we're talking billions of pounds, not to mention taxation of Scotch and many other things that would go straight to Scotland instead of the Bank of England, et al.

As for Scotland's debt, that tired old game has been written about, ad nauseum, in John Perkins' Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. It's time the middle classes grew up and threw the money changers out of their living rooms, if you ask me. Once bankers are put in charge of government, as Thom Jefferson said, it won't be long before you wake up homeless in yer own home (triple mortgaged to the hilt in order to make ends meet). If the Scottish don't demand a recount with a netural third party auditing the proceedings, then the House that is Scotland's government can only get even more Bleak from here on out.

I can remember Ralfy speaking about homeless kids begging change in Scotland's bigger cities. Rather David Copperfield-ish sounding. And how's the education system doing these days in Scotland? If it's anything close to America's, then I'm not surprised so many Scottish actually voted "no"

As Aldous Huxley once said, the real trick is to get the slaves to love their servitude. "Stay with us Scotland," the words allegedly penned by David Bowie, might be translated, "Stay under the thumb of your friendly and caring oppressors, Scotland . . . speaking of which, Ziggy Coke Dust, [sigh, hand on forehead] needs a new 100 pound manicure."

Not sure if anyone had seen this, but I would've voted for 'Willie'.

www.youtube.com/watch

@CanadianNinja

I thumbed up your post challenging my lack of disappointment. I think you ask very valid questions. I wrote a long post that I think got erased on my mother's iPad so I'll be more brief here.

My upbringing is socialist. Unity is a big thing for me. That the people of Scotland chose to be a part of the UK instead of breaking away makes me happy. They were not forced. They chose this path. If they had chosen the other path I would have respected that choice too. But I'm happy that they voted to stay.

I don't support the Conservatives in UK and don't need to justify their foreign policy or domestic spending habits. Note that 40 of 59 parliamentary seats in the house are Labour, only one is Conservative.

Now, if Canada could just do away with the Monarchy....

@Nozinan And the senate!

@Jonesz

Absolutely...

Being a fan of Austria-Hungary, I confess to being completely befuddled by the Yes campaign. As mentioned with Quebec, it is possible to succeed without formally seceding and the whole is usually worth more than the sum of the parts. But,really, for once I'm fine just being a bloody, ignorant Yank.

One person asked about the geography of the vote. The weekend US edition of the Wall Street Journal had just such a map. The Lowlands voted overwhelmingly No (kind of makes sense given their closer proximity to the rest of the UK). The farther up in the Highlands the vote was more to Yes.. Oddly though the Orkney and Shetland Islands voted overwhelmingly No (I can say my recently deceased Shetland Sheepdog still wanted to be British!). Glasgow and Dundee City voted moderately Yes, Edinburgh voted overwhelmingly No, not sure about Aberdeen but presume given its location it was more Yes. I have no idea why Edinburgh would vote the way it did.