Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx
Well there's an interesting point. The Scottish independence referendum 'Yes' campaign was very details focused on issues such as fiscal union with the UK, leaving NATO, staying in the EU, shutting down Faslane etc. This was published in the white paper 'Scotland's Future (link - https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf) This let the critics in to tear apart these plans, showing many of them to be nonsense. There is a school of thought that if members of the 'Yes' campaign simply painted their faces blue and shouted FREEDOM a lot, the result may have been different as you can't dissect feelings like you can facts.
I think a lot was learned from this campaign when it came to the EU Referendum which was much lighter on solid promises of future states and more aspirational.
There is of course a fine line to be drawn here on relying too much on either feelings or facts when running a campaign. See the last General Election as an example where the Conservatives relied too much on simply not being Jeremy Corbyn with the thought this might be enough to win.
Political Sciences and psychology is fun! |
Throughout the document it refers to negotiations being needed with the UK, EU etc. No finalised plans possible because of that. Scotland would never be able to join the EU until it had it's own separate currency, national bank, and got it's deficit down to less than 3%(it's around 8%, and that include oil). It lists FOUR currency options, not exactly an agreed all around and final plan. It's ALL based upon assumptions that they will be given everything they were asking for.
The EU never kicked up a fuss over there being a non-EU country(ie Scotland) having an open border with the EU via England.