I'll come to the question at hand but first I wanted to reply to this...
I imagine (and I could definitely be wrong) that Scots also cling to their cultural differences (there's no doubt Scots are drastically different from Englishmen)
This is more complicated that is seems; parts of Scotland are very different to each other, much like parts of England are very different (I'd wager for those outside the UK surprisingly so), with some areas closer to England than you might think and deep divisions in the country as a whole.
For a place smaller than most US states we are a diverse lot over here
I know the PAST leaves a stigmata, but clinging to a past conflict that affected individuals that are all dead and gone is refusing to move forward.
That's the thing, there is no 'past conflict' here as such. The Kingdom Of England did not invade or conquer the Kingdom of Scotland, we fought each other often but back then that was practically a European hobby to kick off a fight with another country. The union came about in two stages; first by the death of Queen Elizabeth The First of England which gave the throne to James VI of Scotland, James 1st of England, bring a 'personal union' and easing of tension and then, secondly, by a disastrous attempt by the Company Of Scotland to establish a colony in Panama in 1698 which was funded by Scotland (to the tune of a quarter of her liquid assets) and ultimately nearly broke the country which allowed the Act Of Union in 1707 to take place.
It was a political union which has benefited both countries over the years.
----
As to the issue at hand, I do not believe that the time is right to dissolve the union; the world wide conditions do no favour a new country and the associated costs of separation (which would probably take more than a year) make it all the more risky. That said ultimately it is up to the Scots to decide.
The problem is they are being persuaded to vote 'yes' not under a banner of 'lies' as such but under a banner of wishful thinking, assumptions and The Tories Are Bad! which isn't the best platform but this is, for many people, not an issue of head but of heart, particularly where the Tory party are concerned.
However, even putting aside the Tory issue there are still significant points where the answer to questions are 'of course this will happen' with either no proof or basis in reality.
- Automatic entry into the EU.
While no one has said they will block it Scotland will have to apply once she is an independent country (despite what is said there is no legal or other structure in place to allow them to negotiate for entry until such time as they are independent) and countries like Spain have already stated they won't make it easy due to their own internal regions wanting to break away.
Related to that is the various concessions, rebates and other things the UK has negotiated for herself over the years, none of which Scotland will automatically get and, more than likely, none of which will be granted to her either.
- Currency Union
Again an assumption that they will be able to use the UK Pound ("of course we'll use the Pound") despite the UK Government stating they won't be able to and, even if they do go back on that, the Bank Of England will be bound to do what is right for the UK Economy not the Scottish one, so if the two get out of step then Scotland will suffer with no say in the matter. Scotland's economy will be, for all intents and purposes, controlled by Westminster and the UK economy making a bit of a mockery of the whole thing.
Further problems are considered when it was stated that, upon achieving independency the plan was to take out a massive loan to fund running the country something which would be restricted by not controlling their currency.
EU entry could be a problem too, depending on how others feel, as entry now (iirc) requires member states to adopt the Euro in a timely manner. (At one point the SNP was talking about using the Euro rather than the Pound, a position they quietly reversed more recently).
Finally, and most amusingly, is the threat of not taking any national debt if a currency union isn't granted - I find this amusing because it is effectively blackmail while accusing the other side of bullying; the irony is tasty if nothing else.
Plans to lower taxes and increase spending on things like the NHS simply don't add up regardless of how you look at things; less income and more spending doesn't work, my own bank balance shows how that plan goes.
Beyond those two issues there are assumptions about automatically taking on treaties (the assumption is they will be in NATO for example) and other more minor issues which will affect Scotland's position on the World Stage.
The final thing which annoys me about the process however is the requirement to be able to vote; if you are a Scot living in England you have no say. You'll be granted Scottish nationality if independency occurs, but because you've moved across the border you have no voice. While I appreciate that you could argue for some restrictions (the children born in England of parents both from Scotland not being allowed for example) but the fact that people who might have only moved for work a couple of years ago have no voice is just wrong imo.
(I'm also not convinced about extending the vote to those aged 16 and 17; while I'm sure some will understand the issues comments I've heard about 'voting yes because they have a more positive message' speak volumes of the problem with engaging people of that age - hell, at 16 I wasn't in a good state of mind to vote but if I had at least I would have had better reasons than that.)
The only thing for certain, based on the polls, is that after Thursday there is going to be an almost 50/50 rift in Scotland between those who won and those who lost, regardless of the outcome, and that alone will cause a great deal of harm.
