I was slightly perplexed to see this comment appear:
I am assuming you would not agree that Latvia and Russia, for example, are “better together”?Clearly not, but you cannot compare a brutal occupation and a mutually beneficial, legitimate union. Perhaps a little history lesson is in order.
Let's have a look at the recent history of Latvia from Britannica.com:
The uncompromising effort of the regime to transform the country into a typical Soviet bailiwick compounded the devastation of the war. Severe political repression accompanied radical socioeconomic change. Extreme Russification numbed national cultural life. Several waves of mass deportation—of at least 140,000 people—to northern Russia and Siberia occurred, most notably in 1949 in connection with a campaign to collectivize agriculture.It's hardly the same thing as a union entered into peacefully and mutually and which has served Scotland well.
From Better Together's Facebook yesterday:
It is 306 years today since the Act of Union came into effect. Over those three centuries we have achieved so much together. Our thinkers and inventors created the modern world. Our writers and artists have inspired billions across the globe. We fought together to defeat fascism. We have married, traded, shared failures and triumphs, all together. We can make history again next year by renewing the world's most successful union.The UK isn't perfect. We need proper home rule in Scotland and a fairer voting system and wider political reform at UK level wouldn't go amiss. It's the best option for us now, though, by a long way. If you believe in independence of course you are not going to see it that way. That's fine. But please don't spread the idea that we are unwillingly occupied by some sort of repressive regime, because that's just ridiculous.