Independence for Essex!
Posted by Patrick Clibbens on January 20th, 2007
I thought I’d weigh in on the debate over Scottish independence. Despite the hackneyed plea that we must learn lessons from history, the simple truth is that it is never clear what history is supposed to tell us: some people choose to cite Britain’s imperial past as proof that the countries are stronger in the Union; others try to prove the Union is obsolete with evidence of Scottish economic decline.
When people try to express their identity, they choose aspects of their history, culture, beliefs and other factors that they feel define them. Nationality can be discarded in this process, and one may choose to feel part of an international working class, or community of believers.
My fear about nationalism is that it places great importance on narrow and indefinable features of identity, more concerned with categorising people than improving their lives. The stereotype I often come across in England is of a Scottish identity where Bannockburn, tartan and Kenny Dalglish loom large; but Liz seems to manage to be Scottish without mentioning any of them. My sister was born in Amersham, grew up near Leeds and works in Edinburgh. Why is she better represented by an independent Scotland? Or do Scottish Nationalists not really have her in mind? Newsnight did an interesting debate on these sorts of questions, which can be found here (according to Newsnight, the first time they had ever presented it together).
Identities are always being redefined, superseded or subsumed under others. I could fight for my home county to become once more the independent Kingdom of Essex, which was conquered by Wessex aroundd 825. Arguably, the county even has its own language, it can be that indecipherable to outsiders. But why be so divisive? That identity has been forgotten, and you would all just laugh. Britain’s constitutional situation is confused and undemocratic, and probably needs to be rethought; but we must remember that the co-operation of minorities is an essential part of democracy. Without this, we would all end up by ourselves in a polity of one.
Filed under: identity, scotland, uspolitics on January 20th, 2007
I think that the increased likelyhood of devolution stems from the increasing attraction and power of the European union over the member states. The scottish (that I knwo) are far more inclined to become Eurocentric and resent English nationalism which prevents this happening. Your argument against the devolution of scotland works against England’s refusal to let Scotland and the rest of the UK do what we should have ages ago and take the european economic environment seriously. Scotland, in the wake of Ireland’s success, would join the Euro tomorrow and have tonnes of Polish people let in to inject its industry with a much needed labour boost.
It is interesting though that with Scotland out of voting in westminster the conservatives would win with an unprecidented majority. So, if we go SNP and Tory in the next couple of elections it might be in both their interests to take steps towards independence.