In many vexed situations there comes a time when you’ve got to lay your cards on the table, so to speak. Observing today’s flurry of interest in the question of Scotland’s independence I felt moved to pen a few lines during tea break. I’m all for localisation and for power being devolved as far down the food chain as possible. However, unless and until the Scottish National Party’s push for Scotland’s independence becomes a push for total independence (own head of state, own parliament, own currency, own central bank, own fiscal and monetary policies, own armed forces etc), then what on earth’s the point of it all?
King Alex the Salmond and his henchmen want the best of both worlds. They want to be able to strut about the place, pipes skirling, kilts swirling declaring themselves to be an independent, sovereign nation (= fantasy; see picture above) whilst (in reality) being tied to a foreign head of state, a foreign currency, a foreign central bank and with foreign involvement in public spending plans whilst being defended by foreign armed forces and presumably with foreign subsidies needed to prop up the nation’s economy … and on and on.
Like I said, what’s the point of it all? It’s difficult to avoid seeing what’s going on here as being much other than a monumental waste of effort, time and money; Tony Blair’s got one hell of a lot to answer for (as usual). As the UK rockets towards hell in a handcart, tied (paradoxically) as it is to the lunacy that is the European Union (what happened to Scotland joining the euro then Alex?), the economy on the verge of basket-case status and faced with the prospect of, to all intents and purposes, an invasion by hundreds of thousands’ more immigrants over the coming years (check out the scale of the problem in the link below) … the Scottish National Party fantasises about winching Scotland back to the 18th century (sort of).
And politicos wonder why (do they?) ordinary citizens are disengaged from politics these days.
Of course the amusing thing is that if a referendum on Scotland’s union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland was put to all the citizens of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland (why not?), then Scotland would be out on its ear. Now that wouldn’t do, would it? It’s crazy isn’t it, when you think about it (for just under a microsecond).
You can’t help thinking that right now the British political class might have more important and urgent things on which to spend its time and our money. As ever the political class moves about effortlessly in its own alter-universe.
PS Scotland has a fine and enviable history of independence: independence of thought leadership (think David Hume, Adam Smith, William Paterson [co-founder of the Bank of England, no less], Adam Ferguson, James Watt et al); independence of military performance (think of fine Scottish regiments throughout the ages); independence of history; independence of culture; independence of spirit; independence of education; independence of religion; independence of national costume; independence of dialect (or even language if enough Scots wanted to speak Gaelic); independence of sense of humour; independence of territory; independence of legal system, and so on. After more than 300 years of union with England, it’s hard to argue that Scotland has somehow lost its identity and character. Long may it continue, but please not in some hybrid pastiche of faux-independence, ruled by King Alex the Salmond loafing on a throne somewhere in Holyrood, lording it up at our expense …
‘Alex Salmond spends £370,000 on entertaining’: http://tinyurl.com/cumj2xg
‘Migration Watch – What is the Problem?’: http://tinyurl.com/c2rcn3x