Beyond all the positive elements that the Scottish referendum is going to leave and leave, the first record, the most obvious one, is that independence has not succeeded in convincing enough people to get their project going. It has been close, but, of course, it has lost competition. And it is worth emphasising the reasons, at least the main one. The Unionists have shaken the ghost of fear throughout the campaign and, in the end, brought them good results. In the meantime, the independentists in Scotland have not been able to demonstrate their assurances for the future. That is what runs counter to independence, in Scotland and elsewhere: it works on a hypothesis, on something feasible but which is not tangible today. What unionism proposes, better or worse, is known. On the contrary, independence must be imagined. In this field of play, trust is the most effective tool for those who want to achieve an independent state, to convey confidence, for the project to arouse and receive the necessary illusions. In Scotland, of course, fear has prevailed over illusion. And that should give lessons to the rest of independentisms, if you don't want to hit the wall of fear over and over again.

In any event, it is essential to applaud and value the democratic exercise that the Scots have done. On the one hand, because the right to decide has been exercised naturally, letting citizens decide their future. On the other hand, and perhaps more importantly, because the vast majority of society has been involved in the process. The writer Irvine Welsh, in her letter “Glorious Failure” from The Guardian, states that “the Scots have reinvented and reinvented the idea of real democracy.” And, to a large extent, that's right. The participation of 86% of the census, beyond a high number, has meant the return of the sectors not voted for decades. Those who believed that they had nothing to say in the political decisions, on this occasion they did feel part of the decision. The process has been inclusive, to a large extent, thanks to left-wing movements that have taken the campaign to the gates of working-class neighborhoods.

The referendum campaign has shaken Scotland's political culture for two years and affected Scotland. Some say it has changed forever. In a society used to putting the political game in the hands of the parties, there are thousands of people who have been involved in the process and have participated directly. Above all, the social mass activated by the block in favor of the self stands out. They have won the street war remarkably, and perhaps that has been one of the elements that has kept alive until the last moment the possibility of winning at the ballot box.

Regardless of the identity case, the 'yes' campaign has focused on the construction of a new, fairer social model, moving away from Westminster's conservative and privatizing policies. That is where a large majority of Scottish society agrees, which voted yes or no in the referendum. And mindful of this, and alarmed by the trend of the self-pro-self polls, London promised to give Scotland more power.

Perhaps we will never know if the last maneuver of the Better Together campaign was improvised or premeditated. But it has clearly worked. He has not won the referendum, but the chief deputy minister of the Scottish Government – and on a provisional basis, in place of Salmond – Nicola Sturgeon, pointed out in a tweet that “Status Quoa has not been supported”. That is why it would perhaps be fair to say that, rather than the yes or no, the third option has won the consultation. The Scots who have not voted, at least many of them, have not voted blindly to maintain the status they had until now. Far from that, they've given Westminster another chance. Cameron must be able to take advantage of it from now on.

For the time being, it is clear that it has gained time. But you might think it has fallen into the network that he himself built, because together with Scotland he has also devoted new competences to England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The British Prime Minister has made it a condition for the process of Scottish autonomy to take place at the same pace as the processes of three other nations, which necessarily delays the former. The Labour Party has already hinted that it does not see with good eyes a parliament of its own for England, where it would not have enough strength, for the benefit of the Tory. Former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, one of the most well-known faces of the "no" campaign in recent weeks, has reiterated that "London will keep its word with Scotland". But the debate among the major Unionist parties has already been opened on how to develop the process. And, as long as no agreement is reached, the process of reinstating powers to Scotland will necessarily be prolonged. The situation has led to mistrust in Scotland and Salmond has already said that those who did not vote have been "deceived". Surely, it is still too early to deduce any of this. But the fact remains that what the transfer of powers promised by London will do remains to be seen, and it is also true that the Scots are not going to accept decaffeinated autonomy.

At the moment, and as is normal, the sense of failure remains the dominant tonic among the Scottish independentists. But what they have in their favor is a lot. According to the referendum, the new generations are in favour of independence. Furthermore, and contrary to what one might think, failure has not reversed the citizens who have mobilised themselves during the campaign. Since 18 September, 4,000 and 1,200 citizens have joined the SNP and the Green Party respectively, and another 4,000 have advanced their participation in the Radical Independence Campaigne conference in November. On that basis, independence has sufficient reason to move forward. Salmond said in his greeting that “sleep will never die.” For now, it's still alive. And it may only be a matter of time for this dream to be fulfilled, because if London continues to be in line with the policies so far, it will be moving further and further away from the Scots interested in building a new social model.