some words about things. see also.
And yes, I do want to keep the url, thanks.
A paucity of ambition
I’ve got a few reasons for voting no but the one that’s been bothering me most recently is the smallness of the aims. If you consider it the premise of the yes campaign is that we can have a better country which is a grand idea. However the we in this case is about ten percent of the current UK population. The rest of them will get a worse country.
What bothers me about this is that if the vision for how things could be better is so compelling why not try and persuade the whole UK of it? Surely making the lives of 70 odd million people better is a more appealing idea?
Is it somehow that we don’t think we’re up to the task or that the rest of the country is so different to us that we can’t think of a better way that works for everyone?
Whatever the reason it just irks me that we’ve let our vision become so confined, our hopes so circumscribed by geography.
If nothing else has been shown by this its that if you get people involved and motivated they will engage, they will think about and debate what sort of country they want to live in. Why think small and and aim to change one part of the country when we could aim to change all of it?
Sometimes I wonder if the Telegraph is just trolling.
It will all be fine because the believers believe!