The Scottish National Party’s overwhelming victory in last week’s election increases the likelihood of an independent Scotland. I have never been one to discuss politics (or football, or religion) but I’ve noticed a very distinct pattern over the last few days that I feel is worth pointing out.
I’m cynical enough to discount both the nationalists’ utopia and the unionists’ apocalypse
Although there are strong emotional reasons for wanting independence, we should base the way we’ll vote in the inevitable referendum on more pragmatic issues, in particular how it will affect us financially. I’m cynical enough to discount both the nationalists’ utopia and the unionists’ apocalypse, knowing fine well that they are both extremely biased, as they must be.
But how can we make a decision when the two stories are so dramatically varied? Unionist’s will cite how much we need London’s subsidies, and present us with forecasts of financial ruin if we elect fiscal independence. They may well be right, but the recent admission by David Blunkett that the £250 million projected cost of electoral reform was ”made up” to scare voters into voting against it, demonstrates just how easy it is cajole us into behaving like sheep.
Nationalists on the other hand have finally made space for a more varied financial argument where in the past it was dominated by the claim that North Sea oil would keeps us going. But my inherent skepticism tells me that despite our world leading progress in renewables, the picture they paint is overly optimistic. The reality lies somewhere between the two forecasts.
These are not your Braveheart watching blokes from the pub that derive the same joy from watching England’s football team lose a goal as they do from watching Scotland win a game
Which brings me back to the pattern that the last week has made evident. Every single person I’ve discussed independence with who has had the luxury of the considering their home country from afar as a result of having worked abroad, is pro independence. These are not your Braveheart watching blokes from the pub that derive the same joy from watching England’s football team lose a goal as they do from watching Scotland win a game. No, these are rational business people, who stand to gain or lose most from such a decision.
Perhaps the referendum will be timed to coincide with the high of the build up to the Commonwealth Games in 2014 to help capitalise on the inevitable increase in national confidence and patriotism, giving us a yes vote which won’t have the power to actually create legislation, but will give London’s Conservatives an unmissable opportunity to jettison a vast number of Labour members of parliament. Should Scotland gain some degree of independence (it’s likely we’d still pay some dues to London, subcontracting our defence and foreign policy) the result will be some hard times.
like the doom mongers that vocally claimed the smoking ban would cause pubs to shut down, they will come around once the dust settles
It won’t be plain sailing, but it won’t be apocalyptical either. Those that voted against independence will use the initial hard times to lay on some “told-you-so”, but like the doom mongers that vocally claimed the smoking ban would result in financial ruin for publicans, they will come around once the dust settles, we’ve found our legs, and we stand proud in front of the world having shed our pessimism to finally see ourselves as the rest of the world see us — a successful nation that punches well above its weight.
It will be hard, but in the long run, it will be worth it.
At the risk of making it painfully obvious that I am out of my depth here, and as a former resident for a short while I would have to agree with your support of independence on philosophical grounds. Scots always struck me as a headstrong people, which will surely do you good once you’re out from under Mother England’s skirt, but I fear that it may cut both ways.
The good news is most Americans don’t actually know that Scotland is part of the United Kingdom (or really that the UK is not just England) so it won’t take much adjusting on this side of the water.
One World. One Nation.
The world would be a better place if we all recognised that we are inter-dependant on one another to make considered, intelligent and caring decisions on our future development as a species.
In-dependence is a nonsense. It’s a false reality. From where I stand now, it’s not the answer to our own parochial condition.
Recognition as a valued contributor to a global society needs confidence, innovation and action. Will independence suddenly afford the people of Scotland that luxury?
Shouldn’t we just get better at marketing the positive contributions we make as a small, but equally important part of a global community?
Unfortunately, without independence the record will show the positive contibutions by the UK, not Scotland.
Perhaps independence would remove the predominant excuse for parochial attitudes, and help provide the impetus required to stake out claim in a global society.
Independence is as much about having the power to create stronger bonds with a wider community of nations, as it is about breaking free from our existing situation.
Unfortunately the Breavehearts put so much effort into pulling on the emotional heartstrings to imply we’re a downtrodden nation that can only achieve greatness if finally free from our English overlords. Although this is ridiculous, it is a prevalent outlook that may require independence to eradicate.
Pragmatically though, if we can attract lots of new students by refusing to charge for further education, is it not foreseeable that if we had the power to reduce corporation tax in Scotland that we’d see a similar, although more profitable, influx of industry?
Incentives off a short term solutions. No? I thing that to achieve long term recognition we should hold a referendum to form an independent London. Then we would be fine. As would Manchester.