The Scottish Government

#20. Stewart from Stirling sums up exactly why it is more mature and sensible in the 21st century for Scotland to continue its engagement within the UK as a means of ensuring a better deal for Scots rather than become a small high tax so-called "independent" state. Global companies have more power than small countries such as an independent Scotland so lets not kid ourselves any more. Only through a united UK voice in Europe can we have any real and significant influence on how our future prosperity can continue to improve as the far east economies grow ever stronger. (The alternative would be to become something like the 52nd state of the USA - cringe!)

I believe that Scotland is already well on her way to full independance, when the day comes it will be an endorsement of the completion of a long process rather than a political act or event.

I do not believe that we should rush to become members of the EU. There are countries who have suffered no disasters as a result of operating alongside the EU. Norway being the most obvious and successful.

The opposition parties in Scotland will now have to become more Scottish, ensure greater representation of Scottish interests in the future if they are to ragain the seat of governance of Scotland. The process continues. The independance of Scotland is not a question of 'if' it is a question of 'when'

Unionis - from loathsome toadying, through to the deeply psychotic !!!

I have read with interests a number of the missives from unionists - from the old adagge 'we couldnae manage on our own' through to the deeply psychotic views of Stewart of Stirling - that 'we can beat the best in the world, but only if give up our political rights and are governed from Westminster'. Oh, if only Stewart had been around in 1946, India would still be part of the Empire.

Apologies to Gavin Roberts, missive 75. I made a mistake - my last missive was in fact intended for Stewart of Stirling, missive 86.

In answer to Gavin Roberts, missive 75

I agree wholeheartedly with much of what Gavin Robeerts have to say. He is absolutely right that the Scots only have themselves to blame fo a lot of our current problems.

However, the drive towards independence is all part of that re-essertion of our spirit - not somehow separate from it. If we can and have achieved great things despite being part of the Union -how much more we could achieve as an independent nation, able to freely express our talants within a forum we ourselves have framed.

It is a strange knid of patriotism indeed that thinks we would do better being governed by others, that have little interest in our success.

If that were the case we would still have one big British Empire - and here is the shocker, Gavin - are you ready -WE DONT!!!!!!!!!!.

Us nationalists don't hate the English, or think that they hold us back. If we aspire to independence, we will get it. Nobody will hold us back.

The point here is that we don't think we are better than anyone else, we just crave to be teated as an nation equal with other nations.

This fles in the face of the 'British is best' philosophy peddled by the establishment, which is why so many English people come up here and vote Nationalist. They just want to be free to treat everyone with respect again, rather than be judged by the tie they wear, or other class trappings associated with being British.

#33 Stewart in Stirling says:

"Nationalism is a scary belief that has borne apartheid in South Africa, Nazism and the Holocaust in the 1930s and 40s, and segregation in the United States."

Stewart, what you are describing is racism or racialism, not nationalism. In any given Nation State the two may sometimes be conflated and lead to xenophobia, chauvinism or jingoism, as happened at the peak of the British Empire in Victorian Britain. However, in its usual benign form, Nationalism is simply an aspiration to seek improvement for one's own nation ... not some aberration of the human condition to be despised.

The question before us is whether a greater degree of self government would enable Scotland, as a Nation State, to so govern herself as to give all her people greater freedom and opportunity to pursue their own happiness, whatever they conceive that to be.

This vision has never been achieved in all of human history. The aspiration is ever present and many have sought to create forms of government to give it manifestation but have always failed.

The best articulated effort to do so was the Constitution of the United States but their inability to eradicate the racism practised in the Southern States, and by the Federal Government itself against the indigenous inhabitants of the continent, ultimately sounded the death knell of a noble experiment.

Another such effort is underway in Europe but with a very different motivation and modus operandi. The experiment in America was founded on the belief that government was intrinsically coercive, should be limited to prevent tyranny, and only act with the consent of the governed. The European experiment sees government as good, as an enforcer of good practices amongst nations and individuals, and seeks to implement its vision incrementally and, dare I say it, surreptitiously, without the consent of the governed.

Can Scotland achieve what mankind has failed to do over the many millennia of its existence? There is only one realisitic answer, no. However, she can extricate herself from the dying clutches of the British experiment and from the growing aspirations of the ignoble European experiment and seriously try to achieve the impossible on her own.

In answer to Craig Crich's missive 79

In answer to your first question Craig -no, the spelling of your name was a simple 'typo', no hidden meanings, probably my inadequate Scottish education.

As to your next question, no I don't believe the English as a whole see Scots as a joke, just the establishment and unionists like you. You need to promote this view to your fellow Scots, to undermine their self belief and your own emotional attachment to being British.

What underlies your Unionism I feel is fear - fear that all the benefits you and yours have enjoyed from the exsitng system would somehow be threatened by independence.

It's this fear that independence would lead to a 'bunch of burly socialists stealing all your gold' that obsesses you.

I think the only personal change you would see from independence would be a system that promoted success based more on merit and ability than at present - so what do you have to fear ?

In answer to your third question, no I don't think the English as a whole see themselves a better than us, I think unionists like yourself and the establishent see the Scottish identity as inferior to the British...

How else can you justify that it is somehow better for a Westminster government to retain powers over Scotland in preference ot Holyrood. Is there some quality of 'altruism or intelligence' that makes Westminster intrinsically better at governing Scotland than the Scots themselves ?

The truth is that I think it is time the unionists better explained their emotional attachment to the Union. Are we just not grown up enough as a nation to take on the responsibility of self governement ? Are we, as a nation, just not ready ?

The problem for you Craig,is that we already have devolution, and are on a path guaranteed to deliver ever increasing powers - do you believe that is right ? Where would you draw the line and why ?

You see what comes across, perhaps wrongly, is a contempt for your fellow Scots, and their abilities at least in relation to government.

I think you believe that there is a huge threat to your personal interests and this fear I think clouds your vision.

I'm glad you found my last entry amusing. I think there is still room for gentle banter around the whole argument - I trust you can agree with me at least on this. PS - the crack about the IQ was just for dramatic effect, nothing personal.

England, Scotland, Ireland (whether in part or in full) and Wales are stronger together. I love the country we live in, and the differences together we share. I can be who I want to be.

[75] Gavin Roberts, Glasgow

I am not surprised that there are many people who have a dislike for the English, and I would agree that it is not just the SNP who peddle this xenophobia. This can take many forms, such as the anti-English/anti-British march through Stirling every year, or voting for Labour (although this has disastrous consequences not just for the English but the Scots as well).

What is becoming very clear is that arguments of "they're holding us back" and "we can do better without them" are reminiscent of the nationalism of the 1930s. "The Jews are taking our money" and the like, seem all too similar.

It is time for the Scots, of which I am one, to remove the great big chip on their shoulder. If Scotland is doing badly, it is not because of the English, it is because of ourselves. There is only so much blame that can be placed upon other people. I believe that Scotland is a great country, and we have huge potential, but I do not accept the argument that Scots are being held back by being part of the Union. I would take the opinion that Scots, if they are so great will do well whether they are part of the Union or not. It is not the political settlement, but the skills of the Scots that will carry us forward to greatness.

We only have to look back through our history to see that the Union has given us great advantage, something that would not have been possible without it.

Here are two examples:

(1) The Scottish Enlightenment could most probably not have occurred had it not been for the Union. The economic wellbeing it created in Scotland allowed Scots and others to commission and invest in Scotland's universities and education networks, to provide the perfect environment with which to achieve academic greatness.

(2) Glasgow would not be the economic powerhouse it is today, had it not been for the Union. Scotland would not have had access to the huge trading power of the rest of the UK or her empire.

So what has changed? Have the English become so economically strong that they strangle us?

It is wrong to look across the southern border, but rather look at ourselves. Scots have forgotten what it is like to do a hard days work. If Scots became economically ambitious and started working hard, as they did in the past, then Scotland will do well. It is time to end the civil servant fuelled, non-value-for-money work ethic, non-productive state-controlled market, and economic stranglehold we put on our economy by voting for Socialists (whether they be Labour, SNP or Socialist).

Independence will not bring about greatness for Scotland. Hard work will and the sooner Scots wake up to that, the better.

National Conversation Contributions 2007




I welcome this national conversation and hope it is a new stage in our progress towards a genuinely participative democracy. Responding to Alex Salmond's challenge to think about what Scotland could and should be, I tried to formulate the principles on which I would wish a Scottish Constitution (preferably a written one) to be based. I started from the Claim of Right's sovereignty of the people, and the CSG's four principles already accepted by our Parliament, and developed them for the 21st Century:



PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR A CONSTITUTION FOR SCOTLAND

This Constitution asserts the sovereignty of the Scottish people in respect of the governance of Scotland, including its natural resources, and their right to determine the form of government and relations with other nations best suited to their needs.

The Scottish people recognize the equal worth of all human beings, and their right to pursue equal opportunities for the well-being of themselves and their families, within the recognition of the same right of all others. Human well-being encompasses health, education, economic and social, cultural and spiritual life, and a balance of rights and responsibilities.

The Scottish people claim the right to a representative and participative democracy, in which the Parliament is fairly elected and power is shared between the elected legislature and the people.

The Scottish Government is subject to the Constitution and accountable to the Parliament, and both the Government and the Parliament are accountable to the people.

The Scottish Government and Parliament must be accessible, open and responsive, providing means for the participation of the people in the development, consideration, design, scrutiny and assessment of policy and legislation.

The Scottish people recognize global inter-dependence and the necessity of co-operation at all levels of society and require their government and legislature to promote a culture of justice, tolerance, non-violence and peace in local, national and international relations.

The Scottish people recognize the necessity of ecological integrity and sustainable policy and practice in all areas of life and all parts of the Earth, and require their government and legislature to protect and restore the integrity of Scotland’s ecological systems and support ecological integrity in international negotiations.

These principles could be summarised as:

LIBERTY, EQUALITY, DEMOCRACY, ACCOUNTABILITY, PARTICIPATION, CO-OPERATION and SUSTAINABILITY.
Marion Ralls
Edinburgh, September 2007.