Scottish Decisions

Next year Britain faces a referendum that has the potential to irreversibly change our country socially, culturally, economically and in geographical and population terms. I am of course talking about the Scottish vote for independence, which takes place on 18th September. Aside from the date of the vote, I have purposefully abstained from researching anything, arguments and information, whilst writing this article. I have done so for several reasons. Primarily, most opinions on the subject will be born from either for or against political rhetoric, long felt, hard wired opinions or drunken chit-chat. As such, I want to offer an argument that echoes this mode of understanding rather than offering cold figures or obscure points of contention that will either be lost or ignored in the face of the emotive scale of the question. Leading to my second reason, economic figures and predictions of the effects of the vote are at best spurious, not simply due to the unpredictable nature of society and politics, but also thanks to the fact that the economic partition of Scotland can only be fully discussed if independence is chosen. The vote is one of ‘in or out’ and not one of ‘out and we keep the North Sea oil’ or ‘out and we keep Trident’. Such discussions, and thus the true economic outcome of the vote, can only be reckoned once our two separate governments begin negotiations. Thirdly, I am writing this article deep in the Scottish highlands; a place in which deer are abundant and internet is scarce.

Clarifications and subtle deflections of blame concerning the illformed quality of this article out of the way, I will first turn to reasons why I think, or suspect, Scotland should vote to leave Britain.

The strongest argument is one which understands the lack or perceived lack of Scottish autonomy. Regardless of the true extent of Scottishness and unity, Scottish people I have met have a strong sense of national identity and an understanding of a shared cultural heritage. Scots, who in substantial numbers do not associate with the British electorate at large, should have the ability to rule themselves and make the decisions they want undetermined by the scale and decisive nature of the current system.

If the Scottish were freed from the murky pool of British politics that has weakened its ability to forge real change through the polarity of the electorate, not only would a group of people be able to determine their own fate, but Scotland could achieve unprecedented change. The most recent general elections shows the Scottish to share a common left leaning outlook that could create a strong government. Free from the shackles of the middle ground, Scotland could work for progressive reforms in the same light as Portugal’s decriminalisation policies and Finland’s stunning education system.

Self rule is not simply an ideal, but an attractive practical prospect in another manner. Despite that fact that England’s imperialistic relationship with the Scots has forged the over-achieving per capita Britain we currently know, it has also marginalised sections of Scottish society. Within living memory Scottish children have been subjected to corporal punishment for speaking Galic in schools and as a result the 70 or so thousand speakers enjoy heavily subsidised schemes directed at promoting an ailing language. Whilst the official line now moves cautiously, our large, majority English parliament will inevitably tread on Scotland’s cultural toes creating guilt, increasing the marginalised and alienating swathes of the populous. The only way Britain’s dwindling minorities can prosper is through self determination.

These three reasons undoubtedly only scratch the surface of Scotland’s desire for self rule, but hopefully shed some light on the thought process of a growing number of Scots as well echoing the nationalistic rhetoric of Alex Salmond. I will now attempt to offer the counter position and suggest why the Scottish should vote to stay in the Union.

The arguments I have given above are all ones which hinge on the notion of a national identity. Whilst one cannot underplay its importance, regardless of the uncomfortably close relationship nationalism and bigotry seem increasingly to share, the notion of a distinct Scottishness is less and less tenable. Despite small, UKIP shaped hiccups along the way, Britain’s historic divisions are fading into curiosities as we begin to understand both the need and attractiveness of a unified country and unified Europe. The open borders of the EU have encouraged integration, promoted freedom to travel and job opportunities whilst allowing a place for the wide array of languages and cultural diversity that colour our society. There is no reason to suggest that a Scottish identity cannot flourish within a system that promotes co-operation, understanding and peace. Independence is a step back into an era of protectionism and isolation.

The practicalities of such a move would be devastating for both parties. For Scotland, a split from the union would signal a split from Britain’s international allies and trade partners. Aside from the overwhelming number it would swiftly have to form, as a new and small state it would likely be unable to barter the kind terms it has been used to. Healthcare, education and public spending would also, despite Scotland currently having a degree of determination in these affairs, have to be reconfigured. The domestic foundations of Wales, Ireland and England will similarly face structural reforms.
The political future of an independent Scotland is also potentially dubious. Allegations of careerism concerning Salmond aside, it is uncertain whether the Scottish branches of Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives would firstly separate from their British counterparts, secondly, survive if they did and thirdly offer significant opposition to the SNP. To add to Scotland’s growing to-do list, a re-application to an ailing EU would have to be filed. It is also worth sparing a thought for British politics if independence were to occur. Whilst my political leanings probably shouldn’t feature in another countries bid for freedom, a British parliament drained of Scotland’s trusted red and yellow seems frighteningly blue.

To offer one final what-if to the already sizeable heap, Scottish secession has the potential to act as the first in a long line of regional dominos. Baring in mind the dialogue of an independence of their own appearing in Orkney and other Scottish islands and the presence of Plaid Cymru and Sinn Fein , Scotland’s devolution may not be the last. For England, a country which struggles to find a unifying identity beyond the North/South factions, Scottish independence could signal a split beyond simply loosing our cousins to the north.

With that, my for and against is concluded. I realise that offering a bi-partisan picture in this manner is a feat best attempted outside of the spurious opinions of a comment section, but one I think is necessary. The independence vote is fast approaching and before we know it our home may be irreversibly changed. Recent polls suggest that many Scots are teetering on a fence of indecision and whilst many reading this will not have a vote, a dialogue is taking place and I can only encourage people to get involved. Whichever side you stand on, bordilally and politically, Britain is a cultural project too good to be determined by apathy.

One thought on “Scottish Decisions

  1. This is one of the most badly written and completely worthless articles I have ever read in Vision.

Comments are closed.