"More than 140 countries have become independent since 1945.

Not one has decided to go back,"

Chances are you've heard this slogan before. The line - or various riffs on it - has long been a Yesser favourite on social media.

There is only one problem: it isn't quite true; over the years a handful of places have become independent, sometimes briefly, only to give their status up again.

Take Anguilla. According to the internet folklore of Scottish nationalism, it shouldn't exist, at least not as British Overseas Territory.

This sliver of an island in the eastern Caribbean is one the last tiny specks of pink on the world's map, along with colonial outposts such as Gibraltar, Saint Helena or the Falklands.

But it hasn't always been. At the height of decolonisation in the late 1960s, its government declared itself a republic and cut ties with the Crown.

Why? Because clumsy British administrators had lumped the island in to a single self-ruling statelet with two other islands, St Kitts and Nevis. The result: a serious fall-out between the three communities.

"Anguillans were treated like third-class citizens," explained Nat Hodge of The Anguillan newspaper. "We had a long history of neglect and we didn't want to continue as part of St Kitts and Nevis, which would have been totally in charge of our internal affairs. So we were at the mercy of what was then a very dictatorial government."

Anguillan independence came after rebellions in 1967 and 1969. It was shortlived - the island was back in the imperial fold by 1971. After all, people wanted to be free of St Kitts and Nevis, not Britain.

Only now, partly inspired by events in Scotland, are some in Anguilla mulling the idea of full sovereignty.

Current Chief Minister Hubert Hughes has made noises about holding a Scottish-style referendum - not least after Britain's governor refused to sign off his budget back in 2011.

Mr Hodge reckons the matter is on the "back burner" for now. Hughes, he believes, has other problems on his plate.

One correspondent to his newspaper, in rhetoric familiar to any Scot, angrily declared Anguilla too small to go it alone. His reason? The island - which, after all, has fewer people than Shetland - couldn't be compared to giant Scotland with its developed infrastructure and oil and gas. "Though we both aspire to be independent, and are on parallel paths, our dispositions are entirely different," he said.

Here even SNP leaders refer to Scotland as "small country". That is not how it looks in the Caribbean. Even the biggest former British colony in the region, Jamaica, is half the size of Scotland.

Earlier this month Sir Randolph Sanders, a former ambassador representing Antigua, referred to an independent Scotland as "medium-sized state", which is, of course, what it would be, both in terms of population and territory. "On the face of it, if the 12 former British Caribbean colonies can each survive as independent states, then Scotland should be able to do so as well," he said.

But would independence by good for the Commonwealth Caribbean? Not according to Sir Randolph, because it would weaken Britain, and Britain is a friend to its former colonies.

"There would also be no benefit in the Balkanisation of the UK for countries in the Caribbean who have relied on an influential Britain to advocate their causes in the European Union," he said. "The Caribbean should care if Scotland votes for independence."

There have always been nerves about independence on some of the smaller Caribbean islands, before, after and during the event.

Many - not just those represented by Sir Randolph - feel the need for an imperial or post-imperial protector.

Bermuda - admittedly not quite in the Caribbean - voted against independence in 1995.

Aruba voted for independence - and began a full transition before its government gave up the process. It is now a "country" under the Dutch Crown. (The larger statelet of the Netherlands Antilles, to which Aruba once belonged, was disbanded in 2010. Some Dutch islands, such as Bonaire, have now been incorporated in to metropolitan Netherlands, ending self-rule.)

Such small islands, with their reluctance to be, or to stay, independent, are not, of course, typical of the scores of states that have emerged since World War Two. Several countries, of course, have since merged with their neighbours, such as Sikkim and Newfoundland, giving up independence. Others, such as Belarus, have flirted with re-unification with the country from which they became independent. Yet most have, for better or for worse, stayed independent. So that nationalist indyref meme, that no nation wants to give up independence? Well, it was always too sweeping and glib to be completely true. But, hey, it's nearly true. And that, as fevers run high and polling day gets closer, seems to be good enough for many nationalists.