Interview with Alastair Redman, Resident of the Island of Islay

Pearl of Tyburn:  We have Alastair Redman, from the Island of Islay, with us now. Hello, Mr. Redman.

Alastair Redman:  Hello!

P.T.:  Could you tell me a bit about yourself and your background?

A.R.:  I am a crofter’s son on the Island of Islay, my mother in a nurse, one of my three brothers is a fisherman, one works for the forestry and the other is a crofter like my father. My girl friend is from the north of England, but was originally born on Shetland. I run a small shop and post office in Portnahaven on Islay.  

P.T.:  How did you get involved with Unionism, and why?

A.R.:  I am proud to be both Scottish and British, and I don't want to have to choose between the two.   

P.T.:  What does your British identity mean to you, and what do you think it means to the world?

A.R.:  It means that I am part of country that is a force for good in the world, loved by our allies, feared by our enemies, and respected by all.     

P.T.:  What would you say to an undecided Scottish voter to keep in mind tomorrow?

A.R.:  Being a unionist makes you no less or more patriotic than a yes voter. Too often the Yes side will claim that we are doing Scotland down by saying no to separation, that to vote no is unpatriotic well they are wrong no one person or political movement has a monopoly on what it is to be patriotic.  

P.T.:  What are some of your personal interests/hobbies/goals in life?

A.R.:  I love books, TV, video games, some sports and politics. As for my goals we will see how this referendum goes first. 

P.T.:  Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me, Mr. Redman.

A.R.:  No trouble.

Interview with Jonny Lipsham, Professional Musician

Pearl of Tyburn:  Now I’ll be interviewing Johnny Lipsham. Good day, Mr. Lipsham.

Jonny Lipsham: Hi there.

P.T.:  Could you tell me a bit about your background and cultural/political/religious etc. identities you may have?

J.L.:  I am a Christian, ethnically and racially a Jew, born in Scotland but lived 31 years in England - so have a messed up accent - and have been a member of the Labour Party since 1990. I am a professional musician, vocalist, songwriter, recording and mixing engineer, and a music educator and vocal coach.

P.T.:  What is your opinion on the Scottish Independence Referendum?

J.L.:  I am a passionate and committed Unionist. I will be voting NO. My opinion of the whole thing? - Biggest waste of time and tax payer's money in British History. Scotland is at the forefront of British innovation, ingenuity, bravery, pioneering spirit, and making the impossible possible. We are the cutting edge of the sword of the Union. We have been since 1707, and I see NO reason that breaking the sword will make any of its constituent parts stronger or better.

P.T.:  What do you think of the current campaigns for and against? What is your opinion on the way they are being run?

J.L.:  “Yes Scotland” is fighting a campaign based on LIES, and increasingly in these latter days, fear, bitterness and anger. Better Together have been slow to debunk mythologies and the invented fables of the Yes campaign, leaving that to us on Facebook and Twitter; which is a poor idea and leaves us ordinary folks fighting a war with no support from our commanders.

P.T.:  How would you recommend the Better Together improve their game and better support their people in the street and online in these coming weeks?

J.L.:  I have seen much better coordination in recent weeks, but I think they, and we need to communicate more clearly and I believe that the senior leaders of BT need to make some kind of show of encouragement, endorsement and support for us on the streets and online.

P.T.:  What do you think of the decision to let 16 years old vote?

J.L.:  A major blunder by Salmond. It was a clear attempt to out-flank. It has back-fired on him.

P.T.:  What do you think of Alistair Darling and the way he has been handling things?

J.L.:  I’ve actually met him a few times. I used to live and work in London in the jazz scene, but I know Lib Dem Simon Hughes very well. He helped get me in to Parliament for PMQs when John Smith was Labour Leader. I first met him around about that time. And a few times since. Great guy. He is exceedingly intelligent, but also possibly the calmest, coolest guy under pressure I have ever known.

P.T.: Well, we can only hope that he and his campaign will make it through to the finish successfully. Thank you for letting me record your thoughts, Mr. Lipsham.

J.L.:  You’re welcome.

Interview with Alan Day, Founder of Ulster-Scots Online and The Orange Chronicle

Pearl of Tyburn: Today I’m interviewing Alan Day, the founder of the Ulster-Scots Online Website and The Orange Chronicle Website and a resident of Northern Ireland. Hello, Mr. Day.

Alan Day:  Greetings.

P.T.:  Could you please give us a quick biographical sketch about your family background?

A.D.:  My mother is from County Tyrone, Northern Ireland. My father is from Leicestershire in England and was in the Army. I was born in what was then West Germany in the British Military Hospital in Rinteln. I have two brothers - one born in Scotland and the other in Northern Ireland.

We moved about a lot but lived in Scotland for a couple of years in Kirkcudbright around primary school age. The Army was based nearby. When my youngest brother was born, we returned to Scotland just after I had entered the first year of High School and I attended Kirkcudbright Academy and then the University of Paisley before moving to Northern Ireland to look after my grandmother at the age of 23.

P.T.: How did you get involved in The Orange Order?

A.D.:  A couple of years after moving to Northern Ireland I was asked by a friend if I would be interested in joining the lodge. To be honest I didn’t know much about it and wasn’t religious or a church attender. I have to say that becoming an Orangeman along with my mother taking a brain tumour were all instrumental in myself becoming a born again Christian.

P.T.:  How did you become active in your work to preserve Ulster-Scots culture?

A.D.:  I got involved with Ulster-Scots through articles, particularly history articles appearing in news papers and online. Having a mother from Northern Ireland and having lived in Scotland I could see the linguistic and cultural links clearly.

I responded to an advert in the local paper (Mid-Ulster Mail) with regards the formation of the South Londonderry Ulster-Scots Association where we held numerous concerts in the local high schools, performed living history re-enactments & floats at various events including the Twelfth. We were given a platform in local schools and brought the Ulster-Scots Agency community radio station fUSe FM to Maghera.

P.T.:  What inspired to create Ulster-Scots Online and The Orange Chronicle?

A.D.:  I created the Ulster-Scots and Irish Unionist Resource website which later became the Ulster-Scots Online website which has been going for many years and gone through some major changes. There are Twitter and Facebook pages connected with the site.I also created The Orange Chronicle website around the same time and has connected Twitter page and a Facebook page with 12,000 followers.

P.T.:  What is your opinion on The Scottish Independence Referendum?

A.D.:  With regards the Scottish independence referendum - I am very much in favour of retaining the Union. I have lived all around the UK and feel British and have a particularly affinity for Scotland & Northern Ireland. To rend Scotland from the rest of the UK would be heart breaking.

P.T.:  What have you been doing with regards to the referendum?

A.D.:  Unfortunately I do not have a vote in the referendum but I will be raising my voice in support of the Union and urging friends in Scotland to vote No.

P.T.:  What would you say the similarities are between Irish and Scottish nationalism?

A.D.:  With regards Northern Ireland, it will obviously go tribal with obvious splits, albeit Sinn Fein seem to be going ever so softly about associating themselves with Scottish nationalism, perhaps so as not to taint the Yes campaign with IRA baggage. However, social media shows that Irish Republicans and Sinn Fein types are indeed Yes supporters (Bernadette Devlin McAliskey has been campaigning and speaking at with Radical Scottish Independence events).

P.T.:  What about the comparison between Irish unionism and Scottish unionism?

A.D.:  Unionists have also been mute as Scottish Unionism is not identical to Ulster Unionism and many are aware that Orangeism and Loyalism do not necessarily sit well with some sections of Scotland and may be counter productive in the independence debate. But I am glad in recent days we have had some voices raised from the DUP & UUP.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on the way that different political parties have interacted during the course of the referendum debate?

A.D.:  The SNP has been very successful at framing the debate as Scotland vs. the Tories and I am glad to see that the First Minister of Wales, Carwyn Jones and the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Peter Robinson have both spoken out this week. It is good to see such a wide political spectrum of campaigning for a No vote from Unions, Labour, DUP, UUP, Lib Dems, Tories & Orange Order through UKIP.

P.T.:  Thank you very much for giving me your perspective on the recent political proceedings, Mr. Day.

A.D.:  Of course; my pleasure.

  

Interview with “Wyndysascha”, Legal Student from London

Pearl of Tyburn:  I’ll now be speaking with “Wyndysascha”, a resident of the great city of London, England, capital of the United Kingdom. It’s nice to have you on board!

Wyndysascha:  Thank you!

P.T.:  Can you give a little summary about yourself and your background?

W.S.:  I'm British, of English and Scottish ancestry. I was born in England, baptized into the Church of Scotland, and moved to Scotland at a young age. I now live in London, UK, where I attended university for a bachelor’s degree in history, and am now studying for a second degree in law. Although I haven't always lived in London, I do consider myself a Londoner (and I find it difficult now to imagine living anywhere else - a typical Londoner's conceit!). I am also a recent convert to the Catholic Faith.

P.T.:  Could you please tell me what your British heritage means to you?   

W.S.:  I've always seen my heritage as one of a thoughtful, measured, civilized, yet firm approach to tolerance, fairness, liberty, and the rule of law. We don't submit to tyrants; but we also don't have blood-in-the-streets revolutions either (although we do occasionally riot and decapitate our king!). Nowadays, though, we seem not only to fail to live up to our own image of ourselves, but we don't even know what that image is.

P.T.:  Why do you think “Britain” is such a good thing?

W.S.:  The reason why "Britain" is such a good thing is because, no matter what the cause of its inception, the history of conflict between the nations of The British Isles produced an authentically "British" idea of liberty. No matter how hypocritical we are in applying it, that is what the Union stands for, and why it should continue - above and beyond all other considerations, the Union represents how different nations can co-exist in one state and remain at liberty.

P.T.:  What do you think of the assertation that nations should, as a matter of necessity, have their own states?

W.S.:  The nations of Britain don't necessarily need their own states; they just have to love our liberty enough that they force the politicians of the Union to work towards it. Things like the European Union are bureaucratic exercises, and simply can't evoke that feeling of loyalty. The United Kingdom, as with the United States, represents an idea, and an ideal, of how people should live and what we should be willing to fight to preserve. That we've got to where we are now is a failure to hold faith to liberty.

P.T.:  Could you clarify what you mean when you say “liberty”, as opposed to “freedom”?

W.S.:  I say Liberty, and not Freedom, for a reason: "Liberty", understood as a British concept, is the God-given right to quiet enjoyment of one's private and family life and the state protecting us as we need it to; "Freedom" always seemed to me to be the running-around shouting, do-whatever-you-want thing.  It implies a positive effort of will, not simply a tendency to mobbishness and licence.

P.T.:  What do you think the active moral responsibility of the Union is?

W.S.:  The Union has an active moral responsibility to remind the nations of why the Union is a Good Thing and what it stands for. It shouldn't be forgotten that the Union was created in a shady politician's deal that the people, at the time, were overwhelmingly opposed to. But that didn't stop us coming to realize what the true character of the Union should be: a coming-together of equals established so that subjects could live their lives peaceably, free from undue interference.

That ethos came from centuries of intra-British wars, turmoil, and upheaval, and our common battles against monstrous tyrants that would make us slaves in our own country. The Union could be the fruit of all that, and prove that the world should draw closer together, find common ground, and agree on virtues to uphold instead of flying apart, with everyone trying to look out for themselves. We could just give-up and call it a few-centuries-old convenience and be done with it, but I think we'd all be the poorer for it.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on the monarchy?

W.S.:  The same historical connectivity applies to the British Constitutional Monarchy. It's very difficult to defend monarchy as an institution in the modern world (although not the need for a single strong leader of government, such as the US President). But the monarchy, traditionally, has been the source of authority for the law.  In The King's Speech, King George VI says that he's only the King if the people believe he speaks for them.

An overarching theme of British history is the reining-in of the Crown, so it didn't evolve into a Continental-style despotism but one rooted in the "ancient laws" of the people. People had to see the monarchy as a product of our ancient liberties: not as in-your-face as, say, the explicit American declaration that the government is the servant of the people, but rather an organic relationship where We were loyal to the Crown, and the Crown upheld the things that made Us, Us.

P.T.:  How do you think the view of the monarchy has altered in present times?

W.S.:  Now, because they have lost their sense of common nationhood and are ignorant of their history, people don't understand how the monarchy is a source of authority any more. That has a terrible impact on British ideas on Law, and so on the Union itself. Laws in this country derive their authority from the Crown, and because they are promulgated by the Crown-In-Parliament. If you don't think the Crown possesses authority, as the authentic voice of the ancient laws and liberties of the people, why obey the law?  We end up being a nation of laws obeyed purely through fear of compulsion, not one where laws are respected.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on the importance and meaning of history?

W.S.:  I believe that "History" as a cultural enterprise (not merely an academic one) is the set of honest stories about the past that we tell each other to reinforce our sense of self and community. Despite what some in the Eighteenth Century thought, life cannot be a purely rational exercise. That's not how people function. We are under a positive moral duty to make sure that our stories are true and morally good: when we stop concentrating on honest history and stop telling these stories to our children, we eventually lose our cohesiveness.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on the Braveheart craze?

W.S.:  It’s easy to stick people in front of a TV playing Braveheart and then tell them it's the end of the story. But it's not the end. A simple look at British history would show that the heart of the Union is about nations fired by their own sense of liberty and independence being able to come together and work in common cause. I'm not unaware of the irony that the virtues associated with unity and liberty arose out of intra-British conquest, oppression, and struggle but, having fought and hated and brutalized, by the Grace of God we now have a higher standard to hold ourselves to.

P.T.:  What do you think might have made more Scottish people see the Union in a positive light?

W.S.:  Scotland's current generation might be more well-disposed to the Union if they saw how the original unification of Britain, though unpopular, became popular over time because of the mutually-beneficial nature of the arrangement. The Union forestalled Scottish bankruptcy after the Darien Scheme's failure. It brought a greater measure of peace to the Isles by excluding continental interference in Scottish affairs.

The Union allowed Scottish access to English (then British) markets.  In short, the Union allowed Scotland to punch well above its weight on a world stage. Not only this, but Scots have always been more than capable of holding the highest offices of state in a British Union; Scots are not the oppressed minority that Scottish Nationalists would like to portray themselves as, but rather are and always have been active participants in the Union at all levels. 

P.T.:  What do you think of the nationalist presentation that other people view Scots as having been disgraced or suppressed by the Union?

W.S.:  The peddled idea that "other people see Scots as brought low and wallowing in self-pity, and the Scots see themselves in a similar way" is the worst kind of rubbish: Scottish Nationalists get to present Independence as a solution for a perception that barely exists outside nasty right-wing media and pub loud-mouths, or gloss over that it's one implausible approach to dealing with something best dealt with within the Union anyway.  If self-respect and a sense of nationhood are so dreadfully lacking in the Scottish people, why not try to tackle this supposed problem within the Union, the institution that offers greater stability, greater opportunities, greater access to a world stage?!

Furthermore, the Union has never subsumed "Scottish" institutions beneath "British" ones. This flexibility is part of what makes the Union work. Constitutional protection has always been afforded to a separate Kirk, education system, and so on. Legislation, boards of control and state departments have been established in response to Scottish concerns over Scotland's needs. Development of devolved institutions continues today. If one believes that Scotland should become an independent, sovereign nation again then of course it is laudable that the process is peaceful, and through the political process. But that the process exists, has an historical presence, and is a viable route for future change - even if that change is independence itself - is a factual rejection of the idea that "Britain" somehow suppresses Scottish liberty.

P.T.:  What do you think are the main issues at the heart of the independence debate?

W.S.:  The true issue at stake in the whole Independence debate is this: unless there's some sort of complete, fundamental change in the governance, public morals, and general education of the people of the United Kingdom, then the Union is doomed to fail eventually. The pro-union Better Together campaign is fighting on the technical downsides of Independence. But people want more than that. I'd bet that any number of people voting For independence are sensible, sceptical people who don't believe the Yes Campaign's promises to give them everything they ever wanted without having to pay anything to get it - they're voting for independence because they've been presented with a vision of the world that makes them feel like they're part of a community again.

P.T.:  What do you think is “the best form of government”, if any?

W.S.:  I believe firmly that any state can only derive its authority from the informed consent of the governed.  This, obviously, doesn't necessarily imply either democracy or a republic, still less any inherent value to referenda.  However, I question what authority an independent Scottish state would have coming into existence via a brief moment of mawkish pseudo-patriotism.  There are nations around the world who are brutally oppressed by governments and regimes, who have a legitimate argument to make that they'd be better off with their own governors and states.  No-one oppresses the Scots, nor are the Scots lacking any opportunities within the Union.  Other independence movements elsewhere are similarly shallow. Who oppresses the Québécois, for instance?  What opportunities for localised government and international standing do they lack?  Like the Scots, they live in mature, rights-respecting states with civilized flexibility out of which they've done remarkably well and, when bumpy periods are passed, probably will do in future.

P.T.:  What do you think of the way individual politicians and parties affect the debate?

W.S.:  The manipulations of canny politicians lead people to forget their own interests and (not a popular opinion, perhaps) their just allegiances and duties. Governments you dislike aren't a reason to fracture one's country: they're a reason to stick it out, campaign for your point of view, and take an active role in the process.  I dislike many aspects of Conservative Party policy, their fairly cheap and nasty approach to the poor being foremost.  I'd probably have similar feelings towards any future Labour or Liberal Democrat government.  But pretending that the Scottish nation is so utterly, fundamentally divorced in its opinions from any policy these parties could implement is Fiction, pure and simple. 

 Scottish Nationalists draw the distinction between "Scottish politicians" and "Westminster politicians" to foster the "us-and-them" mentality necessary to break Scots from the Union but that's politics, not some fundamental character of the Scottish nation.  It's rare to find someone who identifies wholly with their elected leaders - we laugh at our MPs' supposed ineptitude regularly, Americans have their "clowns in Congress", and so on - and all the "Westminster politicians" argument does is piggy-back on this sentiment.

P.T.:  How do you think a lack of true patriotism towards Britain has contributed to the Scottish nationalist movement?

W.S.:  Our sense of Britishness has decayed to the point where the Union may be about to split. The past sixty years of British history have been the systematic dismantling of emotional attachment to one's own country. "Patriotism" is, apparently, something for right-wing thugs; the left/centre-left sneer at anyone who thinks that there's such a thing as "British liberty". Say what you want about the nationalists, they’re not stupid: they understand "History" far better than the Better Together campaign appears to (the fact is that they're cynically manipulating that history notwithstanding).  Again: although the Union provides tangible, real-life benefits to its citizens, its raison d'être cannot simply be measured in pounds, shillings, and pence.

I'm not naive. I know that "patriotism" is something that is used by the wicked on the gullible. But it's not a bad thing in and of itself, if it's attached to a good and noble cause. Love can warp easily into a greater, more general evil because it's an emotion, which is why love has to be married to reason and virtue to endure.  Love of one's country can warp easily into terrible things.  This is the line that Scottish Nationalists are skirting.  They're using Scots' love of the Scottish nation to foster division rather than unity, or a unity that is narrow and parochial, and encouraging self-pitying reactive chauvinism rather than genuine national character.  These things are being set against an authentic, British idea of liberty - something that emphasises common ground between different groups - in favour of a weak, ivory-towered concept of national freedom that isn't so much written solidly in history but slides greasily off its pages.

P.T.:  Could you wrap up this interview with a summary of the main problem as it stands now?

W.S.:  The sum of the problem is that we are forgetting our history, our unique sense of liberty, and our belief that our nations have a common centre that organically emanates authority but also derives its authority from us.  It can only end in division, and "suspect government" that has all the trappings of "rights" and "democracy" but enforces a deadening cultural uniformity on us.  Scottish Independence won't see some glorious rebirth of the Scottish Nation: it will say to the world that one of the foremost partners in the great, historical Projects of Union and Liberty has decided that it's just not worth the bother any more.  We don't have long to impart this on the Scottish people, and I'll be praying that it's a vision they can be persuaded to cleave to.

P.T.:  As an aside, can you tell me a little about your personal interests?

W.S.:  I maintain an interest in British and American History. My period of study is the Long Eighteenth Century, as affecting Britain and her empire (especially in North America). I've probably sucked up too much Eighteenth-Century pamphleteering, as I'm a big fan of the constitutional forms and theories of the time: whether the constitutional, parliamentary monarchy of Britain; or the federal, checks-and-balances American Republic ('The Federalist Papers' being one of my favourite works).

I also follow politics and consider myself to be a middle-of-the-road centre-right pragmatist with an attachment to ideas of individual liberty. I enjoy playing games, especially strategy ones, and I also love playing 'Minecraft'. I’m in the process of taking up blogging about his new Catholic life, politics, and gaming against the backdrop of ‘Minecraft’ (www.wyndysascha.com), as well as producing videos and vlogs on YouTube. I also try to deepen my newfound Catholic faith whenever I can.

P.T.:  Thank you very much for putting down so many excellent thoughts for this interview. I wish you all the best.

W.S.: Thanks; you too! 

Interview with Rory Stewart, Westminster MP for Penrith and the Borders

Pearl of Tyburn: I have the privilege of speaking with Rory Stewart, Westminster MP for Penrith and the Borders. Mr. Stewart, could you please tell us what your British identity means to you, and why you believe it should be preserved?

Rory Stewart:  We are a result of shared institutions, languages and articles. The United Kingdom is the definition of what our nation is about. We are a nation that stands together in the face of adversity and hardship, we should not shy away now. Scotland is a vital part of our nation and needs to remain just that.

We have been working to preserve the UK for over 300 years; if broken up, it would be a very hard place to imagine. Our complexity, that feeling of being Scottish or English but also British, is one we should embrace and cherish. We need to stay together to continue being a strong and successful nation in this ever changing world.

Interview with G. Wright, Resident of Glasgow

Pearl of Tyburn:  I’ll now be speaking Mr. G. Wright of Glasgow. How are you, Mr. Wright?

G. Wright:  Well, thanks.

P.T.:  Could you please explain what your British identity means to you?    

G. W.:  For me, a Scotsman, to be British is to enjoy a unique and special identity.  Most people only have one culture and one history; but we British are lucky to have a share in several other cultures, as well as our own.  I love all things Scottish, but I'd still prefer a Dry Gin to a Whisky, a Shakespeare over a Burns and a St Thomas More over a John Knox.  And despite these things being English in origin - they have become very much part of my culture - thanks to the UK.  This is part of the beauty of the UK - as to be British is to be enriched in this way.

   

P.T.:  What is an analogy that you might use to describe the Union?

   

G.W.:  Our very successful Union is like a family, in that the Nations are close and affectionate of one another, but also distinct in identity and at times rivals.  There is nothing quite like the UK, and - should the worst happen in September, God forbid - there never will be anything quite like it again. For it is more than just a bland Union of Nations - like the EU - it goes way beyond that, via having unity of language and a shared and lively history too.  The Peoples of the UK Nations are not simply mere 'partners', but kith and kin. To be British is to be part of a family.

P.T.:  Do you ever feel like your British identity takes away from or diminishes your Scottish identity in any way?

G.W.:  Unlike some, I do not feel like my British Identity is an unwelcome "bolt on" to my Scottish Identity.  For me, it is a complimentary aspect - not a rival one. Like two luxurious room in a large Mansion. The rooms are not competitors, but each is wonderful and interesting on its own merits. You can flit from one to another, or place them alongside one another. It is fascinating to see how they compliment one another.

   

P.T.:  What do you feel it is to be British, on an international level?

G.W.:  To be British is to belong to a Nation which has done more than any other, over centuries, to shape the modern World.  I think this is shown by the enduring successor of the Empire, the British Commonwealth.  That the vast majority of former Empire States choose to remain part of this family of friends today, is a testament to how the bonds of brotherhood and friendship have ultimately prevailed over conquest and domination.  These friendships are the real legacy of the Empire. 

P.T.:  What did you think of the Commonwealth Games recently held in Glasgow?

G.W.:  The recent Commonwealth Games in Glasgow were a lesson in how blessed we are to be British, to enjoy links and friendship with so many different People and Nations from across the globe.  And the enrichment of Britain, through contact with these friends, was clearly visible - not least by the welcome presence of Men from the Gurka Rifles, at the security points! It may not fashionable to boast of Empire in the modern era, but the size of the British Empire was impressive by any standards. I believe that, one day, historians will talk of the British, the way they talk about the Romans today. And so to be British is to be International. 

P.T.:  How would you answer some of the negative charges made against the British identity by separatists?

G.W.:  Some separatist extremists try to extrapolate neo-fascism from a simple pride in, or admiration of, British identity and the United Kingdom. But in spite of this, many people continue to be proud of their British identities. We are not especially vocal about it - that would be quite un-British indeed - but that doesn't mean its not there. We have just as much to be proud of as Britons, as we do as Scots. One cannot blame keen fans of British culture for admiring the more romantic aspects of an exceptionally rich tapestry of history, as others do with the Romans, etc. As a Scottish Briton myself, I cannot help but share their sympathies!

P.T.:  What do you think has contributed to the antipathy towards the British identity on the part of many Scots?    

G.W.:  Sadly, many Scots today define themselves by what they decide to dislike - be it the English, or the Catholics – instead of appreciating the fullness of their heritage and important historical events. Many Scots think resenting these groups is what it means to be Scottish - it’s very sad. This kind of negative, or inverse identity is a phenomenon I have not encountered elsewhere.

I think in part this "negative identity" explains the verses in The Flower of Scotland which attempt to create a sensation of loss or grievance - rather than pride in our own nation, our anthem is all about whom we dislike and how hard-done-by we feel. The end result of all this is an ignorant and divided society. Most people have no real sense of themselves and are simply unthinking clients of cheap, imported pop culture. And that which is thought of as being genuinely Scottish (kilts etc) is in the main a modern and contrived caricature of an identity. 

P.T.:  What do you think of the claim that the British army used Scottish soldiers as cannon fodder?

G.W.:  The type of Scot who can seemingly see nothing but ill-will and exploitation in the United Kingdom strikes a chord of frustration with me. I hate the "cannon fodder" argument you often hear, about Scots in the British Army. It’s just not true. On the contrary, Scots Regiments have always been an important and illustrious part of the British Army. The Royal Scots were the oldest British Army Unit, till they became sadly defunct. Now it is the Coldstream Guards. And where is Coldstream? That’s right, Scotland! I also strongly dislike the bogus notion that Scotland is an English colony, rather than a partner of the English. It’s just absurd. 

P.T.:  If Scotland were to become independent, what do you think the Scottish people could expect?

G.W.:  I think people would get a shock in an independent Scotland. We would have no G8 seat, no permanent UN Security Council seat, no permanent UN veto, no major EU influence, no major global influence, no nuclear deterrent, no conventional military power, no fiscal control over our own currency, etc. As part of the UK, we currently have all of that. I don't think our coffers would be able to support the large number of public sector jobs the country depends on.

Before recent cuts started 1 in 4 employed by the State in Scotland, compared to 1 in 5 UK wide. And this is before all the extra ones needed if independent. Let’s not forget the many Scots communities, often isolated, who depend heavily on local British bases and military installations to drive their economies. All that would be gone if we split from the UK.

P.T.: What’s your opinion on the currency debate?

G.W.:  Control of our currency is another major issue that ceding throws up. We have to either take the euro (assuming we even got into the EU - not guaranteed) and let the EU control our currency, (that's going really well for Greece right now), or we keep the pound and let the Bank of England control our currency. The Bank of England currently controls our currency, but does so while taking us and our economic circumstances into account (along with the rest of the UK).

Post independence, they would still be in full control, but the Scottish economy would not feature in their considerations whatsoever, as they no longer have any duty to us. This then has grave implications for anything our Government would try to do: fiscal plans, the economy etc. Why would sane person, who was not intoxicated or under duress, freely vote to give up fiscal control of their own currency? If people think seriously, they can only credibly vote no, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens almost "by accident"! 

P.T.:  Can you please give me your closing thoughts, and what you see as the heart of the referendum?

G.W.:  Ultimately, the name of the "no" campaign - Better Together - sums it all up.  Were it not for the UK and its centuries of history, none of the constituent parts could ever have expected to have such an eventful history, or range of experiences and opportunities.    We know from the work place that working together achieves more, and so it is with the UK too. To be British is to have broad horizons.

This whole referendum comes down one major question: do Scots want to be part of a nation which helps to shape the world (The UK), or do they want to be part of a nation which is shaped by the world? No Scotsman worth his salt would choose the latter! Here's to a prosperous + proud Scotland within a happy + strong UK!

P.T.:  Thank you very much for your taking part in this project.

G.W.:  Sure, no problem.

Interview with Damien Davies, Unionist Activist

Pearl of Tyburn:  Tonight we’ll be speaking with Damien Davies, Unionist Activist. Hello, Mr. Davies.

Damien Davies:  Hello.

P.T.:  Could you elaborate about your background and what identities you might see yourself as having, culturally, nationally, religiously, and otherwise?

D.D.:  I am a 31-year-old British Person who happens to live in North West England, Runcorn, 9 miles downstream from Liverpool. Religiously, Church of England, although have Broad Catholic Leanings but to not regularly practice.

I have always regarded myself British first (as it is more inclusive) and English second, although was born in Scotland to Parents of Welsh. I consider England to be one of the Historic Countries in The United Kingdom of Great Britain (a state as it were), but The United Kingdom to be my country. England, Wales and Scotland are all internal regions of the UK, but they make up a whole.

P.T.:  Where in Scotland were you born? Do you feel Celtic at all in your mix of identities, and what do you think about the issue of Celtic language preservation, such as Welsh?

D.D.:  I was born in Edinburgh, raised in England and have Welsh/Irish Decent. I have no affinity for Celtic identity even with my Scottish/Irish and Welsh background, but I do believe that traditional Celtic languages should be preserved as much as possible.

P.T.:  What are your feelings with regard to the Scottish independence referendum?

D.D.:  It is an affront to everything The United Kingdom represents and is absolutely heartbreaking to me.

P.T.:  What do you see the UK as representing, to you and to the world?

D.D.:  I see the collective diversity and comradeship of this Island as our biggest asset and not a weakness that the separatists would have Scotland believe. Look around the world, 50 percent of inventions; the locomotive, the telephone, television, World Wide Web and the automobile, etc. etc. All are British innovation within the Union.

For good or ill, the Greatest Empire the world has seen which turned English into the 2nd or 3rd most spoken language in the world, just logistically for us is splendid. The colours of the Red-white and blue of our flag are in most overseas territories and former colonies.

P.T.:  What would you say about the post-imperial slump that seems to have affected many Brits psychologically?

D.D.:  It has not affected me in the slightest; the United Kingdom does not owe me, a typical working class man in the North of England, anything. Frankly the people it has affected need to get over themselves

P.T.:  Do you think that countries owe their people anything? What do you think the role of patriotism plays, and what do you think people owe their country?

D.D.:  I do feel that the Country or State owes the Taxpayer a lot, good defence, reasonable priced housing to buy and a chance to make a pound, gainful employment as it were. For this, the Country is owed our allegiance in turn. That’s patriotism.

P.T:  What about the supposed historical arguments brought up by separatists?

D.D.:  Historical Battles of the indigenous peoples of Britain is old hat, 400 years old hat. The British built this Union with British hands is a much more immediate reality than fighting for something that you have no personal stake in.

I would not fight for that cause, I would fight for the cause to preserve the Greatest Social, Political and Economic Union the world has ever known. Twice in the last Century our forebears gave their lives for defend our freedoms. That is worth a lot more than the separatists can conceive.

P.T.:  What symbol of Britain stands out most in your mind? What do you think would happen to the Union Jack should Scotland break away?

D.D.:  For me, it is the Symbol of Britannia. She is embossed on the Train Bridge in Runcorn so get a daily reminder of the Kingdom of Great Britain. The Union Jack will be no more if the separatists get their way.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts about the Saxon vs. Celtic analogies and the way that Ireland and Scotland are often compared?

D.D.:  Ireland is not Great Britain; the Irish Troubles are largely over with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Bringing that in the debate would just antagonize the whole peace process in Northern Ireland, who resoundingly decided they were British. Let that be an end to that issue. This is about the Constitutional Future of Great Britain, not Scotland as the separatists would like to make out.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on Federalization and the home rule bodies in the UK? Also are you a part of any political party?

D.D.:  I vote, but am not affiliated with any political party. I do not agree with federalization and home rule bodies, but that is neither here nor there because it is here. I can elaborate on that, if you wish.

P.T:  Please do.

D.D:  Federalization works best with Large Areas of expansive land which is sparsely populated relative to size, Great Britain or the UK could fit inside Texas, just one of the 50 States in the USA.

So the conceit with Devolution in the UK is that Scotland and Wales are NOT British but Scottish and Welsh respectively. This is a problem as it teaches Scots and Welsh to regard themselves as something other than British

P.T.:  Under the circumstances of home rule existing in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, do you think England should have a home rule body?

D.D:  In theory that is a sound idea; at the minute the UK pays for English MP's in the UK Parliament and for Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland too, but now three of the home nations have two sets of MP's so basically there in a job share with each other but with no reduced hours or wages. So we are all paying more cash for more politicians, which there are too many of already.

P.T.:  What do you think about the SNP argument about Tory Rule that they hope will help advocate independence among mostly anti-Tory Scots?

D.D.:  Scotland is the only Country in the United Kingdom which has ever returned over 50% of votes to the Tories, in addition when the UK General Election rolls around we vote as ONE in the Unified Great Britain, the "us" and "them" mentality is merely a confection drummed up by the SNP, which I deplore. Tories have more MSPs in Holyrood than the SNP have in Westminster also, and yet the SNP have a mandate to Break-up-Britain...

P.T.:  What's your opinion of Alex Salmond?

D.D.:  I cannot repeat it but there is a lot of expletive deleted in there. It is telling that the SNP were against the National Minimum Wage in 1997 and Devolution in 1997 also, against more powers of the Edinburgh Agreement in 2012 and supported the dreaded Margaret Thatcher’s rise to power in the 1970's. She was known as milk snatcher in England too. It seems as if this party’s primary function is to antagonize and provoke.

P.T.:  What do you think of Alistair Darling? What is your opinion on the debates that took place between him and Salmond?

D.D.:  Alistair Darling is a decent chap, but Salmond is an utter disgrace. The debates were okay, but Darling was way too nice.

P.T.:  What do you think is the best way to defeat Salmond?

D.D.:  VOTE NO! Hopefully there will be a vote of no confidence in the leadership of Mr. Salmond.

P.T.:  What methods do you think the Unionist campaign should use to bolster than no vote?

D.D.: I am offended it is actually been raised as a question. That's how much of a no-brainer the United Kingdom is to me. I feel as an Ideal, if the United Kingdom can say that we can achieve so much more together than apart, lots of Countries come and go, new Countries formed and regimes fall, not in Britain?

Because we have a tried, tested, true and stable form of Liberal Democracy, which is something other parts of the world can only dream of. This should be a source of pride that we can engage in this debate without violence and some out the other side stronger for it. And to be fair, if our United Kingdom is everything us Unionists think and believe it is we have nothing to worry about :) Better Together, always were.

P.T.:  What do you think about arguments turning the whole thing on its head, saying "smaller better", "weaker better", etc.?

D.D.:  I would say that collectively the United Kingdom has the 5th Largest Economy in the world and the second largest in the EU, but are the 80th largest Country in terms of Size, why would anybody wish to diminish this? I cannot abide the mentality which would see the separatists metaphorically cut of one of my healthy legs.

P.T.:  How do you feel personally affected by the concept of the British culture being split apart and ultimately dissolved as we know it?

As a British person, Nessie is part of my culture, as is the bagpipe and tartan. The separatists with to take this away from me. Imagine if there was a British Government voted in at the last general election trying to cut away Scotland, what would Scots call the rest of the United Kingdom?

P.T.:  Dirty rats, snakes-in-the-grass, etc.?

D.D.:  My sentiments exactly. My personal view is that the SNP got in on a protest vote against the Tories and Lib Dems climbing in the bed with them.

P.T.:  What's your opinion on the sterling issue?

D.D.:  Pound Sterling was the English Currency before the Acts of Union; the exchange of the Pound Scots to Sterling was 12 Pound Scots to 1 Pound Sterling, so no wonder the separatists want to keep it, but it would need to be the English currency as not to get all playground but it was England's first. I would not support an official currency union, have already written to my MP about that.

P.T.:  Again regarding Ireland, how would you respond to the nationalist assertation, "Well, lots of young nations struggled at first, like ROI, but got back on their feet...etc. etc."?

 D.D.:  Ireland is in the EUROZONE, how is that going again?

P.T.:  What are some of your personal interests/hobbies and what do you see for your future, of yourself and the UK?

D.D.:  I enjoy creative writing and write a lot of plays and screenplays in my spare time. I also enjoy photography, do a lot of hunting and angling, and am into movies in a big way.

Basically United Kingdom has been here for over 300 years and based on the success story of our Union I want the next 3,000 years, just sad that I will not be here to see it...our decedents will make us all proud to secure our Union and retain our Britishness.

P.T.:  Thanks, Mr. Davies. Thanks for everything.

D.D.:  No problem.

  

Interview with Jonathan Robert Waddell, Student at the University of Aberdeen

P.T.:  Today I’ll be speaking with Jonathan Robert Waddell, a Student of History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen. Hello, Mr. Waddell.

J.W.:  Hello!

P.T.:  First could you tell me a bit about your background?

J.W.:  I'm from the north east of Scotland, studied at Aberdeen College, now North East Scotland College and moved on to study History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen. I'm president of the Aberdeen University Liberal Democrats and I'm campaigning for a Federal Britain through quite radical constitutional change post-no vote in September.

P.T.:  Could you please explain what type of constitutional changes you would be interested in seeing? And would the federalization be similar to that in the USA?

J.W.:  Starting with a full transfer of domestic policy to be handled by the devolved parliaments of the UK, the creation of an English parliament or maybe regional assemblies within England. From there I believe we can start to consider what we want our union to look like, how it will function on a constitutional basis and where we want to take it. I believe the model the Scottish parliament currently has is a great direction to take the other parliaments in.

P.T.:  How does this contrast with the situation as it is now?

J.W.:  As it stands, the current powers the Scottish and UK parliaments have in relation to each other, are defined by what are 'reserved' powers at Westminster, the Scottish parliament handles everything else. And then all of this to be embodied in a fully written, codified and entrenched constitution. I feel a system like this would give the Devolved parliaments the autonomy they deserve and need to run a success Federal UK. It's very ambitious and will require a lot of hard work, but I believe it's achievable if we work hard enough for it.

P.T.:  What do you think about the participants in the movement to bring about Scottish independence?

J.W.:  It's hard to say. In all debates I take part in and campaigns I respect my opponent and in many cases get on very well with them. Some of my best friends are Labour and Tories when I’m a Liberal Democrat.

In this debate I feel it's been so polarized that I’ve not had the opportunity to really make friends with them, and although I don't wish to make out that there has been no potential guilt on the Unionist side, I do feel that from my personal experience, the Independence movement has been much less accepting and much more hostile which has led me to find it hard to respect them while disagreeing with their campaign.

P.T.:  What are your reasons for being a unionist?

R.W.:  To me it's how we can use our resources to the best possible ends. I feel the various countries within the UK all have their various different strengths and all have very similar problems and very similar aims. If we work together, pool what resources we have, put all of our best minds together and work against our common enemies of poverty or homelessness, then we can do better to reach our common goals and eradicate these things.

I don't see what I have largely more in common with my neighbour in Scotland than my family in England or Wales. Ultimately, I feel the system we have is a good one, it's far from perfect and the policy isn't always right but the system itself has so much potential to work to the benefit of 63m people rather than just 5m. I want to make the best of that system for the benefit of everyone in the UK, including Scotland.

P.T.:  What would your consider your personal identities, national/cultural/religious/or otherwise? What do you think of the "crisis of identity" in Britain?

R.W.:  Well, this is probably the toughest part in the debate. Nationalists to me seem to be concerned with the Scottish identity and little else. But I don't really understand what that means. Cultural identity means so much more than the political boundaries you're parents were born in. My parents are from the central belt and I have a bit of that in me, but I was raised in the north east, in a town called Banchory, and then in Aberdeen. Hence, I’m a 'Taucher' and a 'Toonser' then I guess 'Scottish' and as part of that 'British' and of course, 'European'.

But all these things have so much to them they can mean whatever you want them to mean. I think the idea that you can be 'Scottish' is inherently not Scottish. As Scotland is made up of so many various, extremely rich cultural identities that to be Scottish could mean any number of things. As for the identity in Britain, we're in an increasingly internationalist and globalizing world and I feel clutching onto old ideas of Nationalism of any description is living in the past and we should start to expand our ideas into the modern world.

P.T.:  Do you believe that there is any place for a robust British identity, something along the lines of what is shown in America throughout the individual states?

R.W.:  I really hope not. I find both nationalism and patriotism quite futile ideals, the belief that your nationality is inherently good and others inferior and the idea that you can be proud of achievements you had no place in. I love where I live, and as an extension of that of course I love Scotland.

I want what's best for all the people who live here, but I want what's best for anyone living anywhere. Why wouldn't I want to extend a higher standard of living to anyone I can whenever I can? I consider myself an internationalist in that regard. I want what's best for the greater amount of people.

P.T.:  What is your view on the way history effects and informs the present? What do you think about the different "narratives" presented by nationalist and unionist camps in this debate?

J.W.:  Well, I'm a History student, and I would like to introduce the age old, over used yet under appreciated quote from George Santayana 'Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it'. I think we need to understand our past and the context to understand where we are today, learn from our mistakes and move forward from them.

I must admit whenever I bring history into the debate, nationalists like to tell me that 'this debate isn't about the past, the independence movement is about the future' before dropping into some narrative about some supposedly horrible thing 'Westminster' did way back when, completely contradicting themselves.

P.T.:  Being a student of history, what do you think of the referendum being held on the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and the whole connection with the wars of Scottish independence in general?

J.W.:  I think in a historical context, it's completely irrelevant. The wars of independence are not only so far in the past it can't be compared to modern day events and we can't allow ourselves to judge events of the past by today’s standards, but even if we could compare them, it was a very different situation that we were in.

However, I think it's very of the SNP’s outlook and tactics to make it this year. They are desperate to inspire an idea of Scottishness over Britishness. But we've already discussed the idea of identity. In short, I feel the SNP think they can inspire people to vote with their hearts and distract people from their flimsy arguments on economics and practicalities.

P.T.:  What do you feel about the monarchy?

J.W.:  Generally passive on the idea. I feel they don't have any divine right to rule, but they have no real power and exercise purely ceremonial powers. They contribute more to the treasury than they receive out of it and are generally favourable in public opinion as well as being hugely respected diplomats across the world. I see no reason to get rid of them, but they exist as a formality, if they exercised real power I’d be far more skeptical.

P.T.:  What do you think of them as they apply to the subject of unity? And what is your opinion on the Jacobite rebellions as they are being used in Nat propaganda? And with regards to them making the current Scottish monarchy "illegitimate"?

J.W.:  I think this moves us into a much broader debate that moves us away from the contentious issues that the referendum will be won and lost on. In general, I don't feel these historical events contribute to the context that we're debating in the run up to the referendum.

P.T.:  Thanks so much for the interview, Jonathan.

J.W.:  Sure! It's nice to get different questions for a change by the way. I've answered the same questions over and over, but these are bit different and I like that :) I've done so many debates and interviews. Same issues, same questions, over and over again. This is a nice change. I’m glad you're getting involved! :)

P.T.: Could you tell us a little bit about yourself personally?

J.W.:  I'm 22! :) I'm afraid I’m a complete nerd. At university I do a lot of debating and in my free time I like to go hill walking, rock climbing and cross country mountain biking. I also play guitar and drums, punk/rock etc.

P.T.:  Thank you for taking the time to be interviewed. I do hope everything works out well in the end for you and all of us.

J.W.:  Thanks; me too.

Interview with Euan McTurk, Resident of Glasgow

Pearl of Tyburn:  This afternoon I’ll be speaking with Mr. Euan McTurk, Unionist activist. Hello, Mr. McTurk.

Euan McTurk:  Hello.

P.T.:  So could you tell me a little bit about your self, your background, and identities?

E.M.:  I'd prefer not to tell you too much about myself, to be honest. The position I and a lot of other Scottish Unionists are in at this time forces hide our real identities because of the culture of intimidation that has been promoted by the nationalists.

P.T.:  Please speak broadly, then, only as much as you feel comfortable telling.

E.M.:  I'm a born and bred Scot, with Scottish roots going back generations. I consider myself to be Scottish, British and European, the order of which depends on the circumstances!

With regards to religion, I would have to go back at least three generations to find any churchgoers in our family. I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it to be honest, if I did I could probably identify both Catholics and Protestants. However as above, I don't associate myself with either. I consider myself an atheist.

P.T.:  Are you a member of any one of the major political parties?

E.M.:  Yes. The Labour Party. Have been for over 20 years.

P.T.:  Can you say whether you live in north or south of Scotland? As in Highlands or Lowlands?

E.M.:  The West! Glasgow.

P.T.:  "The Rose-Red City as Old as Time...."

E.M.:  Yes. Smells like it too some mornings....

P.T.:  Ah, city life! Give me the country any day!

E.M.:  Or, in the context of what we’re going to be talking about, give me MY country any day!

P.T.:  Yes, and to that point, what is your reaction to The Scottish Independence Referendum?

E.M.:  I see it as an utter distraction from the proper business of Government. The Scottish Parliament currently has one of the lightest legislative programmes going since it was established, all while the nationalists try not to "upset the apple cart" while pursuing their constitutional objectives.

This means that some of the real things that they are charged with delivering on, such as child poverty, such as employment, such as the delivery of public services, are all being neglected. Which they then turn around as justification for pursuing constitutional change!!

P.T.:  As a Labour member, what would you say about the SNP trying to make people nervous about Tory rule in order to advocate independence?

E.M.:  I'm more nervous about the SNP. I don't agree with most Tory policies, but a two-party system needs two parties to work. Labour comes in and improves the offer for the poorest in society, the Tories come in and create the conditions for business to generate the wealth that can be used to support the delivery of services. Each has its place in the electoral cycle.

The SNP are like the cuckoos of the electoral system, preying on whatever policy they think will attract support to their constitutional objectives, but not actually believing in any of them. They are a broad-church of opinion whereby the only thing that they have in common is their chip-on-the-shoulder nationalism. As you might have guessed, I detest them!

P.T.:  What's your opinion of Alex Salmond? And what do you think are his main weakness?

E.M.:  Salmond is a dangerous man who has been in power for too long and now thinks he is untouchable. He is holding his party together on the promise of separation. When that is denied to them on 18 September I would expect the SNP to start a civil war of recrimination, and he will be the first casualty.

P.T.:  What do you think of the Unionist campaign thus far? What about Alistair Darling?

E.M.:  They always had a hard sell. Life is never going to be perfect and people will always have something to complain about. The challenge has always been about selling what we have - warts and all - vs. the rose-tinted pipe dream that promises everything and anything. Gullible people are always going to be taken in by the latter. Alastair Darling is doing an OK job, although he's not the most dynamic. He shouldn't be underestimated, though.

P.T.:  What do you think about historical arguments for and against, regarding historical events like Bannockburn, the Jacobites, etc.?

E.M.:  This is 2014, not 1314. The purpose of history as I see it is to learn from our mistakes, not dwell on them. The Jacobite cause is an example of history being corrupted in that it is often presented as a Scots - English dispute, whereas it was a religiously and politically generated struggle with Scots fighting on both sides. Bonnie Prince Charlie died a drunk riddled with syphilis. He would have made some Leader!

P.T..:  Do you believe there is any place for romantic historical in national consciousness? Do you think Bannockburn's 700^th anniversary should be celebrated at all as a representation of something?

E.M.:  I might have taken a mild interest in the Bannockburn anniversary one time, but the fact that this referendum has been designed to coincide with it has put me off. Bannockburn is a word in a text book that took place 700 years ago and was about an English Lord who wanted to be a Scottish King (Bruce) and who spilled the blood of the common man to achieve his aims. It is a quaint aside and has no bearing on what matters most today - jobs, prosperity and equality.

P.T.:  What historical characters and events, do you think all Scottish Brits should be particularly proud?

E.M.:  I think that's a personal choice for each and every one of us. We've got lots to choose from. As before, history for me is about learning from our mistakes, I'm not one for dwelling on it and certainly not one for hero-worshipping figures from the past, most of whom have been painted one way or the other depending on who was holding the brush!

P.T.:  Do you have any that particularly interest you? And aside from hero-worshipping, any that you admire in some way or another?

E.M.:  Not really. I have a measure of admiration for lots of people, but I can't think of any who are flawless. Whatever they did, it's done and they'll play no further part. The future is in our hands now.

P.T.:  Could you elaborate on the issues of "jobs, prosperity, and equality" in the UK as opposed to a hypothetical independent Scotland?

E.M.:  We currently live and work in a growing economy, one that is the 6th biggest in the world and that can justifiably be described as one of the fastest growing Western economies. That has positive implications for jobs and prosperity. Anything the SNP has to offer is a finger in the wind by comparison. On equality, nationalism essentially has discrimination at its heart.

P.T.:  How do you think the relationship between Britain/Scotland would change with other nations (such as my own USA) would change after hypothetical independence?

E.M.:  It wouldn't be any better. The remainder of the UK would suffer the consequences, too, and would be justifiably upset at having to experience hardships as a result of our selfishness. Negotiations would not be easy. Obama and Clinton have already said that it would be better if the UK stayed together, and they are right.

I can't see us ejecting Trident from Faslane as being appealing to our NATO allies. Scotland would have a minimal defence force and would therefore be unable to join the USA on world peace-keeping duties, etc. As such, we would just be yet another small nation amongst many, and there would be no basis for any sort of "special relationship" with the States.

P.T.:  What do you think about environmentalism and the nuclear issue the SNP seem to have quite some antipathy for?

E.M.:  Environmentalism is a global issue and a perfect example of an issue that nationalism cannot sort. The SNPs stance on nuclear, like many of their stances, lacks common sense and is simply intended to appeal to as many people as possible while bringing them over to their way of thinking on the constitution. Nuclear power deserves serious consideration if we are to keep the lights on.

P.T.:  What do you think the UK represents to the world and to you personally? How would that be lost through independence?

E.M.:  We are one of, if not THE, oldest political and economic union in the world. We have had our shot at being a Superpower, we have one of the world's largest financial centres in the city of London, our armed forces are amongst the most highly regarded in the world, and our culture expressed in terms of our history and comedy attracts visitors in large number. We have a lot going for us, and separation puts it all at risk. As the phrase goes, we are Better Together, weaker apart.

P.T.:  In the end, what do you think the outcome of this referendum is likely to be?

E.M.:  We're on course for a NO Vote. The latest poll published today shows NO leading by 60:40, and that has been fairly consistent for at least the last 2 years. Barring something unexpected, that's roughly where I would expect the result to land in September.

P.T.:  What do you plan on doing as the referendum draws closer?

E.M.:  More of what I've been doing so far! Campaigning, leafleting, posting on social media, that sort of thing.

P.T.:  In addition to your political activism, do you have any hobbies or interests you wouldn't mind listing?

E.M.:  Fishing, snorkeling and sky-diving. And caber tossing. And walking in to people who are texting on their phones on the pavement (sidewalk). I particularly like doing that.

P.T.:  Thanks for all the help with the interview!

E.M.:  No worries.