By Moan McVulpine – putting the un into uncertainty
EVERY MAJOR life decision carries an element of uncertainty.
But not as much risk as taking the leap of faith required to believe a Nationalist on the make.
Having your kids read the newspapers is a risk. Especially when you’re the front page splash on the Daily Mail on a good few occasions.
Not just risky, embarrassing as hell – for everyone involved.
Fortunately, for the survival of the Yes campaign, most Yessers are just too focused on the nasty evil imperial tories and their rightwing media cohorts to see through the malignancy and falsehood lieing at the very heart of the Nationalist vanity project.
So, over-proscribed finger pointing proselytising aside, it’s on to normal domestic life risks and the equating of those risks to voting for ffrreeddoomm™ in September.
Normal ‘everyday’ life carries varying types of risk: growing up, accepting a job offer, getting married, having kids, getting divorced, jumping into the sack with other married people, making dodgy payments to those other married people and threatening the innocent injured party with financial ruin in order to cover it all up.
That’s risky behaviour for a ‘would be’ and ‘then became’ politician to indulge in.
And yet, this politician still has the vanity and vainglorious ego to believe that anyone with any decency would take anything they say with more than a pinch of distasteful salt.
But that’s Nationalist types for you – blind to their own shortcomings and hypersensitive to the failings of others.
One of the jibes currently gaining currency as a potential tactic into goading people into voting Yes vote is that of ‘feartie’ and its numerous tedious incarnations.
The Daily Redcoat today has a certain ginger whinger claiming that they think of “personal life choices when people talk about their fear of voting Yes to independence “because of the uncertainty”.”
Put simply, the ‘wee white whine’ thinks voting Yes would be like any domestic life decision which carries risk.
What the ‘whine’ fails to take into consideration is that every one of these personal life decisions referred to also leaves the decision maker with the ability to make realistic future projections for themselves.
A marketing type would call it a SWOT analysis.
In most cases the variables involved are limited and always potentially within the control of the decision maker, fingers crossed.
Whereas, voting Yes involves putting faith in others about whom you know next to nothing and what you do know isnae up to much – or very confidence inducing.
In this instance confidence is being confused with faith. It doesn’t take confidence to vote Yes, it takes faith.
And, the type of faith voters are being asked to be confident about is the faith of supposition, untested projection, delusion and assertion – and that’s just the good points.
When you look at some of the people making these ‘confident’ claims it takes the bravest of hearts not to wilt.
That’s not to say that there’s much to be pleased about with a No vote. Much of what the Nationalists say about the current UK government has a ring of truth in it. Competent propaganda usually does.
But, with the centralised Scottish police ‘tooling up’ in the Highlands, Nationalists like Vladimir Putin being praised for their ‘pride’ restoring abilities and Sun King Salmond working on the recruitment of right wing hawks like Rupert Murdoch to the cause, it doesn’t take too much artistic ‘imagining’ to see what’s coming in the advent of a triumphant vote for the Nationalist Front.
The alternative is to accept that our future is in someone else’s hands as opposed to the alternative alternative of putting our future in someone else’s hands.
Whatever way you vote and no matter how you look at it, you’re putting your future in someone else’s hands.
Of that you can be confident.