Independence is a simple thing really. The ability to do as one pleases without outside interference. True, no country is truly independent in today's globalized world. But it is fallacious for Salmond is lead a vanguard suggesting independence would bring radical change to Scotland.
This week, Scotland's lawmakers are sitting down to stage a debate on the legacy of Britain's first female Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher - carving yet another notch into the Scottish Parliament's already prolific belt that celebrates the body's obsession with utterly pointless parliamentary procedure.
ew people realise that the UK is one of the most centralised welfare systems in the world. Whitehall controls healthcare, education, tax and benefits. Local government controls only social care and a few other minor services. It doesn't need to be this way.
Scottish people living outside Scotland should have a vote on whether the country should be independent from the rest of the UK. Over 800,000 people, like me, are Scottish but since we live outside Scotland we are to be excluded from having a voice on this historic issue.
At the age of sixteen, I can now legally join the army, get a full-time job, leave home without my parents' consent and get married, yet people my age still find themselves denied the right to vote, one of the most important rights you can have in a democratic country. How can it be that anyone of my age can get a job and pay taxes towards a government whom they are not even able to vote for?
On one hand the YES campaign needs to win over more people in two years than they have in the last 30 combined. However, another way of looking at it is that if everyone who supports independence converts at least one friend then they'll win by a landslide.
In short, does he choose the chance of victory but risk his party, or privately concede the result in order to guarantee the unity of his base. It is a difficult judgement call that only he can make - but too many more half-measures and he may end up with the worst of both options, and the comforts of neither.
There needs to be a much more detailed and transparent vision of Scotland made available in order for the Scottish electorate to determine whether independence is the best option for Scotland.
The nation could go the way of the parish and Great Britain could become a prototype for states across the world.
For those, like myself, who want to see Scotland take its place amongst that community of nations that is Europe, these are challenging times that demand real leadership.
As things stand, the shadow cast by the SNP and Salmond over Scottish independence is so great it is hard to conceive of another party or vision challenging its dominance in an independent Scotland post-referendum.
All YouGov's evidence from the past four years is that independence is a minority passion north of the border.
What the talking heads are missing is that the vote will have little, if anything, to do with the sporting prowess of British athletes. If anybody really believes that the flags worn by Andy Murray or Chris Hoy are as important as who is responsible for running the welfare state or the military budgets then they are mistaken.
I can see that bickering about the question feels irrelevant to decisive Scottish residents who know how they are going to vote, but the importance of the wording of the question extends beyond the act of voting and that will make a difference to everyone.
'Your Scotland, Your Future', he tells us. Then come clean: have you received legal advice that undermines your understanding of an independent Scotland's status in the EU, or have you not even bothered to find out?
Although there's (probably) more than two years to go, the referendum on Scottish independence is becoming more of an issue. Unsurprisingly, the Olympics have played a part, and similarities and differences can already be seen between the independence campaign and the AV referendum.