This is already ridiculously way too long, and I haven't included citations but will be happy to do so if you care enough to want to see them. These are just some sketches of my thoughts mainly on risk/fear and the economy; I haven't looked into the academia angle yet I'm afraid.
So essentially I think that a No vote is a vote for continuation of a status quo that can't continue, while a Yes vote is a vote for a largely unknowable future. They're both dangerous, and the either-or choice is unwelcome, but Yes makes a more hopeful offer.
I would certainly have preferred devo max originally, but the Westminster parties have behaved so badly over the last couple of years that now I'm pretty happy with going for independence.
I think that it's nice that the Yes campaign have concentrated on positive aspirations and somewhat avoided getting negative about the BT future, but it also means Yes are unfairly bearing the brunt of the uncertainty argument. Time for redress: why am I uncertain about the BT future?
Some TL;DR for you.. [1/5]
So essentially I think that a No vote is a vote for continuation of a status quo that can't continue, while a Yes vote is a vote for a largely unknowable future. They're both dangerous, and the either-or choice is unwelcome, but Yes makes a more hopeful offer.
I would certainly have preferred devo max originally, but the Westminster parties have behaved so badly over the last couple of years that now I'm pretty happy with going for independence.
I think that it's nice that the Yes campaign have concentrated on positive aspirations and somewhat avoided getting negative about the BT future, but it also means Yes are unfairly bearing the brunt of the uncertainty argument. Time for redress: why am I uncertain about the BT future?