theriskyshift.com

Comment & Analysis

The Contradiction Of Scottish Independence, The Disunited Kingdom

April 23, 2012 by Miles French in UK Affairs with 4 Comments

Secession would ignore the many triumphs these small isles have achieved in creating a world that is free of dangerous European dictators and ideologies.

On the 24th June 1314, the Scottish Army defeated the English at the Battle of Bannockburn, which is still heralded by nationalists today. The Scottish National Party (SNP) want to hold their referendum on independence on the anniversary of this event in 2014. Clearly then the SNP put their focus very much on history to back up both their desire for independence and their decisions. By doing this however, they have appeared to ignore hundreds of years of history in between. Even if the SNP look at the Battle of Culloden in 1746 as the last expression of Scottish Nationalism then 250 years of British history have passed since then. The shared history of the United Kingdom is completely ignored by the SNP, and is something that should be used by Pro-Union politicians to show regular Scots that we are united.

The point here is that by using events such as Bannockburn as significant events now, all the history between now and then that has brought the United Kingdom together seems to be ignored. Scots, Welsh, Irish and English have all fought against the tyranny of Napoleon, Kaiser Wilhelm II and Hitler. Together these isles have fought off invasion after invasion from the most formidable enemies in history where other nations crumbled. The men and women who fought and died for the United Kingdom must be remembered, something the SNP appear to forget when they merely talk of Scottish victories from the 1300s. Where is D-Day in their rhetoric? Where is the Battle of Britain? Where is Waterloo? It appears Alex Sammond and his party are prepared to consign these brilliant representations of UK unity to the forgotten history books, when they are so happy to champion Bannockburn.

Of course, this is not to say Scotland should not have its own history. Scotland for example has a proud history of fighting the tyranny of English Kings and that should be remembered. However, this should all come under the banner of UK history rather than purely Scotland. A classic tactic of nationalists is to glorify history in the nations favour, which can be seen in the many African nationalist creations during decolonisation. However this would be unrepresentative of the wider history of the United Kingdom, which as described above, has achieved more together than it ever achieved apart.

More recently, Scottish and English men and women have fought and died for the United Kingdom in the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan to protect the freedom of these isles and its sovereignty. They fought not for their individual nations but for the collective union and freedom of our United Kingdom. Whilst Scottish autonomy is something to look towards in terms of devolution, independence seems to attack this shared heritage.

It would seem that Alex Sammond and the SNP need to take a lesson in history. Their one track, tunnel vision version of history, misses out huge swathes of shared history, disregards the lives of those who have fought and died for the United Kingdom and ignores the many achievements the UK has achieved in the past 250 years and beyond in defending liberty and freedom. Of course this defence of liberty should allow Scotland its right to self-determination, this is merely a plea to remember that the United Kingdom is just that, united, and not disunited. Secession would represent a sad end to a brilliant history of these isles, and ignore the many triumphs these small isles have achieved in creating a world that is free of dangerous European dictators and ideologies.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this post

avatar

About Miles French

Miles is a Final Year BA History and Politics student at the University of Sheffield with a keen interest in International Relations and domestic UK politics.

View all posts by Miles French →

4 Comments

  1. avatar

    RichJune 3, 2012 at 7:14 pmReply

    No one is forgetting the history of The UK. When The USSR split up, they had acheived a lot as The USSR but each individual country is better off now. I’m sure none of the countries would like to join up again. Same with Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. When these nations split into smaller countries, the majority of people were for it. Change happens. Why is it so wrong for us to become independent? We aren’t disregarding history, we’re making it. If you look into the history behind The Union of the Crowns and the creation of The United Kingdom, you’ll see that it didn’t go to a public vote. It was decided for us. This time we will have our say. Isn’t that the whole point? We should decide what is best for us. We’d be a very wealthy country. We already scrapped tolls, prescription charges and tuition fees and none of that has backfired. Why can’t England do the same? Because they have a massive population compared to us. There are roughly 80 countries with a smaller population than Scotland and they are all thriving. This isn’t about hating England or hating the UK, this is about fulfilling our potential. Why can’t people understand that all we’re asking for is a chance to rule ourselves. You’re all for Iraq ruling themselves but not a country in your Kingdom? Something about that just isn’t right. We aren’t fighting with anyone yet the country that is is being pushed towards governing themselves. That is the contradiction.

    • avatar

      Miles FrenchJune 7, 2012 at 4:32 pmReplyAuthor

      By asking for secession it certainly seems our unifying history is being ignored. And would Scotland be a very wealthy country? The second largest expense after the NHS for the taxpayer is Scotland. Scotland can only have free tuition fees as it is subsidised by Britain as a whole. Obviously Scotland has its own economic policy to some extent so can decide this but it is definitely not the case it would be rich. Also comparing Scotland and Iraq is somewhat flawed, as Iraq was already an independent state despite being under a dictatorship, rather than seceding from a nation.

  2. avatar

    The Pink PantherJune 4, 2012 at 7:42 pmReply

    Scotland would, without a shadow of a doubt, be far far worse off if it declared its independence. Fortunately, the majority of Scots realise this…

    • avatar

      Miles FrenchJune 7, 2012 at 4:33 pmReplyAuthor

      I absolutely hope you are right that many scots realise this!

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Search
Sign up to our newsletter!
Vote on the latest poll…

Do you agree with the U.S. military's decision to open more combat roles to women?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Social