Gabbing to folk...

Whilst speaking to people about the referendum, I have quickly come to realise that most folk are totally uninformed. They are crying out for information, unfortunately the mainstream media (MSM) have already taken a stance of supporting the union with Westminster. All be it with a few surprise front pagers backing independence, the majority have wonderful techniques of instilling the "fear" amongst their readers.

Headlines of overly exaggerated figures, job losses, currency, EU, immigration....you all know the ones. The thing that truly baffles me though is that folk who read these papers, and believe the headlines, know fine well that the papers are sensationalist, liars and all have an agenda or a boss man/woman encouraging the writers direction. Look at the Leveson inquiry, look at what horrors were unveiled in the media procedures. The other blatant point about the stance of the MSM is look where they get their orders and directions from.....yup well done, 10 points....their headquarters in London.

London.....That big city down in the South East of England, where the highest proportion of wealthiest households are. Where the wealth of the UK is gathered and where most of it stays. That big city and region where there is such a huge population there are more MP representatives than anywhere else. That place that influences the direction of politics all over the UK due to the fact they can outvote any other region. (Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland are all classed as regions btw. Union? Domination more like.)

So when these folk, who believe the Better Together blethers or MSM headlines, argue with me I struggle to have a comeback as how do you convince someone who believes something they know for themselves is a media spin?

This has been a few of my attempts:

Naysayer: "I don't want to swap London for Brussels..."
Me: "Well right now we kinda bend over and touch our toes for London, it would just be a nod of the head to Brussels."
Naysayer: "But why have a kid-on version of independence?"
Me: "Why would it be kid-on?"
Naysyer: "Aye well......"

<convo end>

Naysayer: "The union has worked well so far"
Me: "Really? Give me an example....."
Naysayer: "Erm.....eh.....Defence. MoD."
Me: "You do realise that we have Trident 30 miles from our largest city, the same defence that is too unsafe for South of England? And the majority of our military bases in Scotland have been radically reduced."
Naysayer: "But an independent Scotland wouldn't have an army!"
Me: "Why not?"
Naysayer: "Eh, erm....I read it in the Mail."
Me: "Would the members of the forces from Scotland no longer want to serve Scotland? Do we not have a right to a share of the MoD's assets?"
Naysayer: "I suppose...."

<convo end>

Naysayer: "I don't want to be in the EU after independence so I'll vote No."
Me: "What''s wrong with the EU?"
Naysayer: "Prisoners get human rights!!!"
Me: "But we have human rights too, get rid of the EU human rights convention and you are affected."
Naysayer: "But then Padeos, murderers and rapists don't get them."
Me: "And either will you!"
Naysayer: "So?"
Me: "Ok, thank you for your time and enjoy the rest of your day."

<convo end>

The bottom line is that a bit of pragmatism has to be employed in all these arguments. Why will an independent Scotland be any different from any other independent nation in the world? Why are we always referred to as "Seperatists" and "Breaking up the Union"?  Because it makes it easier to promote that fear-mongering, repeat it enough and folk will start to believe it. However I believe the Scottish people are wiser than that, they wouldn't let their neighbour next door to them control their finances and they don't avoid walking down the street in case a bus crashes into them on the pavement. The awakening is spreading, the No campaign realises it and some of the stories coming out of their corner are getting rather amusing.