Scotland: The decisive argument?
I have always felt that for Scots (or more accurately the inhabitants of Scotland) the decisive argument (in the Independence Referendum debate) is not going to be economics, but some form of belief. It will be a leap of faith for those with the courage.
Chris Hume concludes:
The main motive, if Scots opt for independence, will be their desire to shake off the incubus of English conservatism. The natural centre of gravity of Scottish politics will be more leftwing than that of the UK. Scotland could be a successful, liberal-minded and social democratic nation on the Scandinavian model. Nothing wrong with that, except for English progressives who will have to contend with a centre of gravity that has moved to the right. For England and Wales, politics will adjust. The Labour party would become more rightwing to ensure a competitive system.
In the end, it seems to me offensive on the part of both sides in the debate to concentrate so slavishly on the economics, when realistically the economic outlook cannot and should not be decisive. It is as if they have both leased their campaigns, in the old adage, to people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. It is the heart that will decide the future of our island, not the pocketbook. That is surely right.
The Guardian 3 August 2014 : For Scotland, the independence debate is about more than the economy, stupid
A commenter IvanBunin77 comments:
It’s about political systems, representation and responsibility, not money. Do we want to continue the way we are, sending 10% of the total MPs to a large parliament 500 miles outside Scotland’s border, which is often governed by a party with very weak support in Scotland, or do we want to govern ourselves, in a parliament in Edinburgh, 100% of whose MPs are voted for by the people of Scotland, and represent ourselves directly in the EU (which the UK may be leaving in 2017…)? It’s also about a break with what many people on both sides of the border see as a broken, self-serving system. A country of 5 million with a parliament elected by PR is a wonderful prospect.
IvanBunin77 03 August 2014 8:13pm ibid
I find myself agreeing, with dread. I live a few miles outside Scotland’s border and about 300 miles from a government and parliament that seems just as remote to me as it does to the commenter above.
If I was in Scotland, I think I would vote YES for these sorts of reasons. Whatever you choose, there is risk. In the end do you find the courage to grasp the opportunity offered because you have a “national identity”? The opportunity to embrace the benefits of self-determination at the cost of giving up the dubious benefits of being part of a “Great” Power?
I dread being left, for any “national identity” I have is chained to London and Westminster. With the progressiveness of the Scots lost, reform will be so much more difficult and the attitudes and outlooks that so many Scots detest will become more entrenched.
I am resentful that I have no say and that I will be rendered ever more disenfranchised. But that is the fault of the Westminster system not of the Scots. They have carved out an opportunity and barring a loss of nerve they will take the decision that I would take if I had that opportunity.