Entry #21: Aye! Or Naw?

Yesterday, whilst meandering in the streets of Glasgow, I came upon a large demonstration in St. George Square. That's neither here nor there: since arriving in Scotland, I cannot walk down the street without being pelted by stickers, flyers, and patriotic excitement. I now have enough pamphlets and booklets to kickstart my own referendum kiosk. The city is (more than) a wee bit agitated.

If I expected the demonstration to be a sober affair, I was pleasantly surprised. The man animating the YES crowd was more of a comedian than a politician, elucidating responses from demonstrators by throwing out catch-phrases.

"No-tory-" he would begin-

"US!" the crowd would shout in return. A clever reference to the Scottish disapproval of a Tory government at Westminster.

After screaming back and forth for a while, he launched into a song about [Alistair] Darling's "eyebrows of mass destruction". Directly following was Scotland's National Anthem, which everyone chanted with much enthousiasm.

I have read a lot about the referendum, and have tried my best to inform myself about it in the past week-by reading flyers, asking questions to strangers, and immersing myself in a unfamiliar but friendly city.

When people I'm interrogating learn I'm from Quebec, they usually roll their eyes. They've heard enough about Quebec. The situation is not the same. And I must say, after a lot of reading and thinking, that the issue is very different indeed.

Let me assert: I do not support the separation of Quebec from Canada. I have never supported this. Not because this political standing is without valid points, but because I believe, at heart, that it is motivated by a racist, hateful and supremacist foundation. 

However, if I were in any power to influence the Scotland independence vote, I would say aye.

Scotland's population is a little over 5 million- less than 8% of the United Kingdom's total population. Their vote, though not redundant, is not nearly significant enough to sway the verdict of a Westminster electoral campaign. In fact, in the last federal election, less than 40% of Scots voted at all. No doubt that those who didn't felt it was obsolete, and can you blame them?

"But... isn't Scotland already its own country?" I ask a protester, because I know nothing about anything. I mean, it does have its own prime minister.

"Yes- but ultimately financial and political decisions are made in London," he replies, not offended by my ignorance. "The truth is that Scotland has different needs and a different agenda than most people in Southern England. We have no jobs. Too many people are hungry. The education system is suffering. It's frustrating to have a government who chooses to invest in nuclear weapons. If we were in control of our own affairs, we could focus on issues that affect us directly."

He emphasizes that he doesn't dislike or resent the English. "We jest have a different reality than them."

I ask if they expect to have a good alliance with the UK if they do separate.

"I hope so. I mean, I think they might be angry at first, but they'll get it. And we can keep up business trades and alliances."

To me, that sounds overconfident. Kind of like a son who demands emancipation from his family but comes home to cook meals and do his laundry. Nevertheless, perhaps the benefits outweigh the price. It's impossible to tell.

For the sake of neutrality, I also talked to a lot of NO voters. Although most of them are less overt about their political standing. The first man I talked to was a Scottish shopkeeper. When I brought up the subject, he shook his head.

"Scotland is already struggling financially," he said. "I'm scared this'd just push her over the edge."

He acknowledged that the Tory government was not so representative. "We have our differences," he said. "But it's better to deal with the devil you know, than the one you don't."

NO protesters

JK Rowling, partisan of the NO party, released a statement to back up her standing. "All the major political parties are currently wooing us with offers of extra powers, keen to keep Scotland happy... I doubt whether we will ever have been more popular, or in a better position to dictate terms, than if we vote to stay."

Some of the NO arguments in brief: 

1. Scotland cannot keep the pound and will have to develop its own currency
2. The financial risk of separating is too great
3. Pensions will be at risk. Family allowances will be at risk.
4. UK pride
5. Scotland will have more say in UK politics because the UK does not want to lose them

There are many more, but these are the most significant from what I can gather.

The vote is today! Me and G (I know it's G and I, but Me and G sounds cooler) went to the polling station. It was kind of quiet, but the excitement was tangible.

"For the first time in a long time, I'm excited about voting," she said. 

To quote one of G's referendum post on Facebook: "It's like those feckin annoying motivational quotes that some eejit probably has tattooed on their arse: 'if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always had'".

I'm excited. Are you excited? I'm excited. Aaaahh.