Sore looser

Loosing with dignity isn't for everyone. And it certainly isn't for Salmond! Two very annoying points in Salmond's mini speech:

- "there's going to be a majority for the no campaign"

There was a majority for the union with the United Kingdom. A majority for Britishness.  A majority of good sense...

- "Scotland has, by majority, at this stage decided not to become an independent  country"

Scotland decided no to become an independent country and that's it. It's not just at this stage!

The silent majority

Living in Edinburgh in the last few weeks, I would have assumed that a vast majority of the population would vote for independence. There were people wearing badges, stickers, tshirts, shouting and campaigning, posting Scottish flags and yes banners in their windows... This all seemed strange when polls showed that there was still a majority for the union until even the polls stoped showing that.
However, seing the results now, in which Edinburgh has 61.1% in favour of the union, I have to conclude that there was a huge silent majority. Why was that? Surely people didn't change their minds in the last day! Why were those who favoured the union so silent?
I don't understand why the cause of Scottish nationalism is so much louder and visible than that of British patriotism when the latter is apparently so much more popular in this city. Maybe this question could provide a thesis for a sociologist or a political scientist...

Still procrastinating...

I know I should be working instead of procastinating... But who can work in a day like this?! Our wee Scotland is on the news all over the world!
At least today I've been practicing different languages. That's kind of working, right?
So, today I voted twice: for me and by proxy for a friend who couldn't be in Edinburgh today. In the voting table, I gave the letter to the lady there and said I was voting for XXX. After a while the lady asks me:
- And you're voting for...?
I made the most shocked face I could for that split second that I thought that someone in the voting station was asking me how I (my friend) was voting! Only then I understood she wanted to know the name of my friend...
Well... Considering that I'm wearing the colours of the Union Jack, my shock shouldn't be that great!

Here I go... For the UK!

So today is the big day... Everyone in the world has their eyes on Scotland. Yes, I know that, I just spent one hour reading what they're writing about us. It may seem like an exercise of procrastination but that's just because that's exactly it! But at the same time, how can anyone just be cool about it? k

Basically we’re deciding today if we should destroy the United Kingdom. It’s a huge decision! And I’m sorry if this sounds catastrophic but that’s exactly what it is… It’s destroying the UK. The UK itself was born out of the union of England and Scotland. And the nationalists can say whatever they want and invent historical “truths” (that are nothing but lies) but these two countries together did very well in the past three centuries. Including the first Western style Democracy in the world with rule of law, parliamentary representation of the tax payers, respect for human rights, etc..

Scotland could do well alone? Yes, I thing it could. Not as well as in the union but still well… And could England do well alone? Same answer. Now the United Kingdom, that one would collapse.

I know I’m not British, I know I've only been here for two years and am not sure if I’m going to stay here for the rest of my life. But I've always admired this country so my vote is going for its continuity. To the United Kingdom! And here I go to the voting station… Wearing blue and red!

It's tomorrow...

Tomorrow is the big day! I feel like I'm living a historical reason. The main reason for this is that I really am! And I feel privileged to be able to participate with my vote (+ 1 proxy, but with that I'm just following instructions) and live this moment. Nobody knows what the result of the referendum will be tomorrow. However, at this moment, there are certain things that seem certain:

1) The result will be a close shot. This is not good for the unionist camp, in which I'm included. If there is only one more vote for YES than for NO, Scotland will become independent. However, if there is no expressive victory of the NO there will be a constant push for more devolution that will become a nightmare of British politics for the years to come.

2) Speaking of devolution... Whatever the result, Salmond already won something. Even with a defeat of the YES, he would have won more devolution, as that has been the promise of the three unionist parties. Some version of his "devo max" will be put in place in the near future.

3) The three unionist parties will most likely have already lost something. The initial huge advantage of the vote for "Britishness". Only a few months ago every poll gave the vote for the union a big lead. On the day before the referendum, nobody is certain of the result. One year ago, a very comfortable majority of Scots would think of themselves as Scot and Brit. Now the nation is divided between those who only consider themselves as Scots and those who also consider themselves as Brits.

4) South of the border this referendum made a lot of people think about devolution for England. This would only make sense... After all, the English MPs don't get to decide on a lot of issues devolved to Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast, but the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs get to decide on all the laws that rule England.

5) Another thing that is independent of the result of the referendum in Scotland, is the political instability this referendum created in Spain. Cameron is already seen as a hero in Catalonia because at the very least he allowed the referendum to take place. Catalans are increasingly united in favor of independence and blame it on the stubbornness of Madrid who refuses to be play according to the gentleman like rules of London.

6) The same argument used by the Catalans against Madrid will be used by the Basques against Madrid and Paris, the Flemish against Brussels, the Corsicans against Paris, the Padanians against Rome... At least Cameron will come out as the hero of all these interdependence movements. I can already imagine buying a t-shirt with Cameron's face over the Corsican flag in Ajaccio. 

What?!?!

So, there will be by-elections for the Edinburgh University Students Union (EUSA). Thing with EUSA is that they can sometimes be so absolutely ridiculous that I find it difficult to take them seriously. One of the positions available is:

Womens Liberation Convenor
The Women's Liberation Convenor takes the lead on issues that affect women students. This role is open to all students who self-define as a woman.

In the full description for this position it says:
What is the Women Liberation Convenor? Liberation groups exist to ensure that the diverse population of students at the  University of Edinburgh are represented fully, especially those groups which have been historically discriminated against and are under-represented in higher education. The Women Liberation Convenor takes the lead on issues that affect women students. This role is open to all students who self-define as a woman.

Now... Seriously?!?! Who writes these things? Is it the same person who invents these positions? Because I would like to ask that person a few questions:
A person can self-define as any gender they want?
Women as a whole are a group? And are men a group as well?
Women, who represent the majority of the students and of the staff of the university are under-represented?
Are there any issues that affect specifically all women and only women?

Orange walk in Edinburgh!

Today I was happily working (yes, I'm being ironic) when my friend told me to be careful if I went out on the street. The reason for this was an orange walk in Edinburgh and the fact that I'm Catholic. Can you believe it? Such a peaceful city receiving an orange walk!

Now, for those of you who don't know what an orange walk is, it's not the world's best proof of solidarity and brotherhood among Christians. Basically the organizers are free-masons celebrating something like "protestant pride".* These orange walks are especially common in Northern Ireland where they are seen as a provocation to Catholics. Now, why on earth would someone in good old civilized UK want to provoke other religious people is out of my understanding. 

We live in a time when thousands of Christians of different denominations are being massacred for their faith by Islamic fundamentalists in the "Isis Caliphate", Nigeria, etc.... A time when Christians are not allowed to practice their faith freely by Communist governments in North Korea, China or Cuba... A time when you can still be stonned to death if you're a Muslim and convert to Christianity (or any other religion) in countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran!* Would it not be obvious that different Christian faiths would join efforts and energies in doing something about these awful situations instead of parading their pride as a provocation to other Christians?

This is not to say that Catholics were always bright examples of brotherhood for other Christians. The inquisition, for example, was not known to be very respectful of doctrinal differences. But this is the XXI century Western Europe! Surely these orange-men can grow out of past differences!

* The explosive cocktail of free masonry with protestant pride must surely mean Catholics should be aware!
* More examples can be found here.

Why Carol Craig* is voting NO

Noon, chief strategist for the Yes campaign, loves the idea of a 100% positive, optimistic campaign. In his blogs he is particularly fond of turning any problem people might raise into an insult to the Scottish people:
The No campaign spend much of their time telling us that Scotland would fail or struggle. That doesn't show much respect for, or confidence in, the people who live here. Much better the Yes approach, which is based on an absolute belief in the people of Scotland.
We will face ups and downs in the future (that's life) but, at Yes, we have total confidence that the people of Scotland have got what it takes to overcome the challenges and, most importantly, make more of the many opportunities and advantages we enjoy as a nation. This isn't a blind optimism, but a realistic assessment of our collective capabilities and capacities.
Some of this upbeat appraisal of Scotland's capacities fits perfectly with George Orwell's ascerbic views on nationalism – a philosophy which is always on the look out for slights and driven by 'blind zeal and indifference to reality'. Look at Noon's quote and ask yourself what's so special about the Scots that every single one of us will be impervious to the financial havoc easily wreaked by the international markets or the restructuring of our economy which will follow independence?

*Carol Craig is the author of the book "The Scots' Crisis of Confidence".

Party place

Old College: where the best parties in town are...

Why Alex massie is voting no

The other day the historian Tom Devine remarked that all the Union has going for it is sentiment, family and history. Like that’s not enough? Those aren’twee things, they’re the things that make us who we are. The blood and guts, the bone and marrow of our lives. The tissue that connects us to our fellow citizens, the stuff that makes us more than an individual. The things from which you build a society.  You can have that in Scotland, alone and independent, too of course. But we also have it in Britain, right now, and we will lose some of that if we vote Yes. Or some of us will, anyway.