Those who cannot remember the past...

[Casual Bystander]

...are condemned to repeat it. (George Santayana).

Now, I have used this phrase with discretion as it originally referred to the treatment of minorities during the second world war. However it is rather apt when it comes to the current referendum.

In 1968, the Conservatives promised a devolved assembly for Scotland - called the Declaration of Perth. In the run up to the 1979 referendum that was unofficially beefed up as a carrot for Scots to vote No. It was also coupled with the stick of fearmongering, and fearmongering that sounds surprisingly familiar; border issues, currency issues, oil reserves running out, gap in public funds, an inability to run our own defence and foreign policies were just a few of them. Obviously the world is a very different place to 1979, but as I say it's stunning how familiar the campaign being run by BT now is to the one run then. Many of you will not even have been born by 1979, or if you were you had no political awareness at the time, but trust me the parallels are so close that it is almost like a carbon copy. "it worked once, we can fool them again".

In 1979, a No vote was delivered, a Conservative party returned to power and one of the first things Thatcher did was to water down the Declaration of Perth, after which she pointedly dismissed it as folly and consigned it to the political bin. It took more than 30 years and a change of government in order to achieve devolved powers, and only then in a limited structure intended to ensure that the SNP could not gain a majority (that worked, clearly).

So here we are in 2014, we have the chance to go it alone once more and once more we have politicians promising Scots this and that but with no guarantees. Are we to just keep on swallowing their lies?

When you are making up your mind you need to take head of Santayana, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it", and don't allow this country to be duped by the lies of false promises from Westminster.

[Addie]

^^^ Poor man's Confidemus.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

^^^ Poor man's Confidemus.

That's an insult to Confi.

[Addie]

That's an insult to Confi.

True. Confidemus is a good lad.

[Casual Bystander]

^^^ Poor man's Confidemus.

Were you alive in 1979, do you remember the referendum then? If so you will find what I have written is absolutely spot on.

The current crop of Westminster parties are hoping that somehow people have forgotten about their deception last time.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

True. Confidemus is a good lad.

I wouldn't go that far.

At least he doesn't have a sense of humour bypass like the OP.

[Casual Bystander]

At least he doesn't have a sense of humour bypass like the OP.

How would you know, you had claimed you were putting me on ignore some time back when you (virtually) flounced out of a thread in tears.

[Vacamion]

...are condemned to repeat it. (George Santayana).

I don't accept that putting a quote at the start of a post makes it any more likely that the stuff in the quote applies to the situation you describe.

. "it worked once, we can fool them again".

Is this a quote? If so, who is it from? I would be interested if someone prominent had actually said this. I doubt it, though.

In response to your proposition, this is not 1968, 1979 or even 1997 - times have changed. The SNP were elected in the last Holyrood elections and a referendum followed. We are about to find out the democratically expressed will of the Scottish electorate on the question of independence.

That is light years from the situation in the 60s, 70s and 80s you described.

As such, I think your story is yet another strand of what has been called "the real project fear".

[Casual Bystander]

I don't accept that putting a quote at the start of a post makes it any more likely that the stuff in the quote applies to the situation you describe.

Whether you accept it or not is irrelevant. The quote is about learning from previous events. As we have had a referendum, and due to the parallels of the debate (and certainly the negativity coming from Westminster in regard of a Yes vote), I believe it is a highly apt quote. My only concern is that I am in some way taking away from the context it was delivered in. Clearly I wouldn't describe Scottish independence on the same level as the holocaust.

Is this a quote? If so, who is it from? I would be interested if someone prominent had actually said this. I doubt it, though.

It's clearly not as if it was I would have provided a source. I believe you are being obtuse though, as you know it's not a direct quote. I certainly wouldn't put it past those running the current campaign to look back and 1979 and think it.

In response to your proposition, this is not 1968, 1979 or even 1997 - times have changed. The SNP were elected in the last Holyrood elections and a referendum followed. We are about to find out the democratically expressed will of the Scottish electorate on the question of independence.

At what point did we not see the democratically expressed will in 1979? You seem to think there is no connection, yet it's evident there is a huge parallel between the way the two campaigns have been run. I have acknowledged that the political landscape has changed since then but that is not the point of the thread.

That is light years from the situation in the 60s, 70s and 80s you described.

It is most certainly not. If you think it is then I can only conclude you were either not alive in 1979 or took no notice. Would you care to answer that?

As such, I think your story is yet another strand of what has been called "the real project fear".

You are bordering on arrogance by suggesting it is a "story", what was described above happened, it's fact not fiction. What happens after the referendum whether it's yes or no is obviously open to debate - I don't claim to be psychic, yet there is a precedent for those in Westminster to make many a promise and then renege on them and what's more the precedent includes the promises made then reneged on regarding a No vote in 1979.

[Addie]

Is this a shite surpas alias?

Can't wait what the tedious c**t has to say about referees in an Independent Scotland now.

[Casual Bystander]

Is this a shite surpas alias?

Can't wait what the tedious c**t has to say about referees in an Independent Scotland now.

Are you going to contribute or just snipe insults from the sidelines. I would presume that would be such an awful waste of what seems like a cutting and incisive intellect.

I note you haven't answered my question. I will do the fair thing and answer yours: "no".

[Confidemus]

True. Confidemus is a good lad.

I wouldn't go that far.

At least he doesn't have a sense of humour bypass like the OP.

Love you guys xoxoxox

[Reynard]

no government can be bound by its predecessor in the UK.

[Casual Bystander]

no government can be bound by its predecessor in the UK.

Of course not, but then that simply underlines the pointlessness of the promises given by the Westminster parties. The only people who can give guarantees are the Yes campaign on the delivery of a Yes vote.

[Vacamion]

It is most certainly not. If you think it is then I can only conclude you were either not alive in 1979 or took no notice. Would you care to answer that?

Oh I was about.

I disagree with you, for the reasons I stated.

[Casual Bystander]

I disagree with you, for the reasons I stated.

Well at least you were one of the few on here who does remember it. If you find no parallels then perhaps your memory is not quite as clear as you would like it to be.

Unless perhaps you don't remember the threats about Scotland being independent, that the Conservatives laid out the Declaration of Perth and that Thatcher public denounced it.

[Reynard]

Of course not, but then that simply underlines the pointlessness of the promises given by the Westminster parties. The only people who can give guarantees are the Yes campaign on the delivery of a Yes vote.

They cant even give guarantees on the currency FFS. If you are going to fluff for one side then fair enough.

The conservative party in the late 60s was in the process of being highjacked by the likes of Tebbit, Joseph, Thatcher and people that were much more economically liberal than the old style party. The old style wets were gradually being ousted at that point.By the time Tatcher had taken power the party was very different to the one back then and no way would she be bound by what they were up to. And rightly so. She came in after the referendum, it wasnt her call, she accepted the result and moved on, she was not a devolutionist anyway so to say she was being mendacious is a bit off the mark on that subject. She was always clear enough on the subject. Labour then decided it was politically expedient to grant devolution and fought most of the 80s and nineties on that ticket and eventually delivered it without much fuss.

I lived through most of this, you most certainly didn't.

[Casual Bystander]

I lived through most of this, you most certainly didn't.

A statement which matches it's implicitness with erroneousness.

That said I agree with the rest of your statement, although you simply go to enhance my argument. Don't believe what the politicians promise because they will not deliver.

As for the currency, it's accepted by all that there would be a currency union. I am against that, I would prefer an independent currency for all the obvious reasons, but that's been discussed ad infinitum already in other threads.

[Confidemus]

no government can be bound by its predecessor in the UK.

That deals rather well with H_B and Ad Lib's mewlings about maritime borders.

[Reynard]

A statement which matches it's implicitness with erroneousness.

That said I agree with the rest of your statement, although you simply go to enhance my argument. Don't believe what the politicians promise because they will not deliver.

As for the currency, it's accepted by all that there would be a currency union. I am against that, I would prefer an independent currency for all the obvious reasons, but that's been discussed ad infinitum already in other threads.

Speaking of "erreneousness"...