The Scottish wing of the three main British political parties, Labour, The Liberal Democrats and The Conservatives (plus these 200 celebrities no less) are all putting their considerable weight behind the 'Better Together' campaign for the continuation of the union, based, primarily, on the perceived economic benefit of remaining in the UK.
The opposing 'Yes' campaign counters that the Scottish economy is strong enough not only to sustain but boost the nation's prosperity under independence. Whilst still in the union, they suggest, Scotland is diluting its wealth into a wider British economy.
I realise I am arguing for decentralisation of power in one instance whilst supporting the ongoing centralisation of power in another. How can I pick and choose when I am for and when I am against a community of people governing themselves? I understand there are obvious differences between the structure of the UK and the EU but in principal there's surely a valid comparison to be made?
Inevitably, my argument is swayed by my own politics - I am for Scottish independence because I believe that it will give rise to a more socially conscious, leftist Scotland. I am against repatriation of powers from Europe to the UK because I believe it to be motivated by a desire to manoeuvre the country to the right.
An argument for Scottish independence on any other basis, I concede, is objectively poor and, worse still, dishonest.
Are my views fed by a desire for self-empowerment above all? Evidently not, though they probably should be. Instead, I admit, they are driven by my wish to see a more socially democratic world, one more in tune with my own beliefs. Not necessarily a bad thing - obviously, I hold these beliefs because I consider them to be right - but I wonder how far one might be capable of using the economy or any other facet of the argument to attempt to justify a stance that forwards a hidden cause?
Let's be honest with ourselves when we argue the case for Scottish independence (or indeed our relationship with the EU). For dangerous it would surely be to allow the smoke screen to purvey, especially when considered in the context of our past (and future) history...