Why Can't We Be Independent From Their Dependence?

The recent call, referendum and ultimate failure of Independence by the Scottish people has left an important question for the Pro-Independence proponents.In other words, why does an entire country's population remain attached as only a portion of them want to do so? The simple answer is... Democracy!Thats right Democracy, the idea of governance by the will of the majority, becomes the tyranny that the individuals that were and are still opposed to remaining attached to the UK must now live under.As the calls for the status quo to remain intact were in essence a call for simple social security programs and safety concerns from the older generations and what we call call the Neo-Liberal individuals of the Scottish people, while the others chose independence and a call for building a new Scotland in their own image.Plato says it best with, " Tyranny naturally arises out of Democracy"Here is the tricky, double ender part though...No matter who won this measure, some portion of the Scottish people were to live under the will of the other. Again, Democratic tyranny cannot be escaped by either choice being victorious. It is the nature of governance by majority that holds individualism and liberty in contempt. It holds the very basic freedom of (and from) association from being realized on an individual level.While I leave your impression of Democracy in shambles I do offer an alternative. Individual freedom. That freedom to live as you wish and to respect the wishes of all those others around you. Simply stated, do as you will, but do not will another to do as you.Another proposition.Since we have a population of people living under the will of the majority, one calling for an independent nation, and the other in opposition, why can they not both live in their own ways? I can think of no greater tyranny to another man than to subjugate him to live as he does not intend. If those that wish to remain a part of the UK are ok with their taxation and legislation then they may live by them and afford them and have every supposed benefit deriving from them. And in turn, if those men wish to not put in nor take out any social, monetary or security measure benefit, and if those men wish to not live under legislation of the UK rule, then they, being free beings have every right to refuse payment or service to another, especially in compulsion.Now this proposition I know will not sit well with those on the American Left or Right of the political divide, and maybe so with many Minarchist Libertarians, but it is irrefutable that if a man is forced to live under the decision of another man, he, and every other person can never call him free.