![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Scottish independence, yet again
Sep. 10th, 2016 09:53 amOur fearless leader, Nicola Sturgeon, recently introduced to the Scottish National Party the task of a listening exercise in which they talk to people to, as far as I can determine, try to understand how to package a more appealing case for Scottish independence in another referendum campaign. This presents me with a moral dilemma.
I know what I would tell them. First, it would be to describe a more attractive vision of what truly sounds like independence ( wherein significant benefits accrue from being able to make significant changes )
Secondly, I'd tell them to be more realistic about the numbers ( rather than depicting a nation made prosperous by oil )
Thirdly, I'd tell them to be realistic about the available options ( rather than assuming that in many ways they may continue to seem like part of the UK )
I expect that the SNP are not reading this blog! Of course, the above is but a brief summary of my thinking, and can certainly be fleshed out. But, the broad themes are there. So, this leaves me wondering if I should actually respond to their listening exercise.
On the one hand, I am a big fan of responding when asked. People complain that politicians aren't doing what they want them to but they complain to each other and don't say anything to the politicians! (Indeed, I have a single-page letter beside me now waiting to be mailed to a local councillor.) I believe that we should do what we can to have the voting public presented with the best options possible. If the SNP want to present a better independence plan to the electorate then perhaps it is my duty to assist them in offering that option.
On the other hand, the median member of the voting public is startlingly ignorant and prejudiced, hardly an open-minded truth-seeker( and I am averse to the idea of the SNP running an independent Scotland ) Perhaps my duty is to help ensure that the SNP lose another independence referendum, to which end their having another (literally) incredible plan for independence would be a boon.
I know what I would tell them. First, it would be to describe a more attractive vision of what truly sounds like independence ( wherein significant benefits accrue from being able to make significant changes )
Secondly, I'd tell them to be more realistic about the numbers ( rather than depicting a nation made prosperous by oil )
Thirdly, I'd tell them to be realistic about the available options ( rather than assuming that in many ways they may continue to seem like part of the UK )
I expect that the SNP are not reading this blog! Of course, the above is but a brief summary of my thinking, and can certainly be fleshed out. But, the broad themes are there. So, this leaves me wondering if I should actually respond to their listening exercise.
On the one hand, I am a big fan of responding when asked. People complain that politicians aren't doing what they want them to but they complain to each other and don't say anything to the politicians! (Indeed, I have a single-page letter beside me now waiting to be mailed to a local councillor.) I believe that we should do what we can to have the voting public presented with the best options possible. If the SNP want to present a better independence plan to the electorate then perhaps it is my duty to assist them in offering that option.
On the other hand, the median member of the voting public is startlingly ignorant and prejudiced, hardly an open-minded truth-seeker( and I am averse to the idea of the SNP running an independent Scotland ) Perhaps my duty is to help ensure that the SNP lose another independence referendum, to which end their having another (literally) incredible plan for independence would be a boon.
