Posted on 09/17/2014 12:11:23 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Scotland’s drive to independence has been interpreted by many as a throwback to ancient identity politics – but many of the trends on display in the Scottish referendum have more to do with the politics of the future than those of the past.
The polls show that this week’s vote is too close to call. There is still a chance that the “No” campaign will ultimately prevail – something that I dearly hope will happen both for the sake of the Scots and the rest of the Britain.
But whatever the result of the vote, I think we must recognize that the “Yes” campaign has done more to shape the agenda of Scottish politics. And it is the forces it tapped into that will also change politics around the world.
So far, the commentary has focused on whether a Yes vote in Scotland will have resonance among other minorities in search of statehood – from Catalonia and Flanders to Taiwan and Quebec.
But the truth is that the political trends in Scotland are also reshaping many nations that do not face imminent break-up – from America to Zambia.
I would point to four trends in particular:
1. SELF-GOVERNMENT WILL INCREASINGLY TRUMP ECONOMICS
The Unionist ‘No’ camp have stressed all of the economic benefits of being part of the union as well as the uncertainty about the future of a Scottish currency as well as Scottish membership of the EU and NATO. This week has been full of talk of dangers to Scotland’s financial services industry from independence (several banks just announced that they would relocate their headquarters to London). The UK treasury estimates that Scots received between 14 percent and 16 percent more in public spending per head than people in the rest of the UK.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.reuters.com ...
I guess we’ll know by this time tomorrow.
They left the socialists behind.
Scotland has over 90% of the fresh water AND oil.
I see a war of reclamation in England’s future.
Blame the E.U. — or in Quebec’s case, the NAFTA.
When you add a supra-national organization (E.U. NAFTA, etc.) to the mix, sub-national organizations have less affinity to the nation. For instance, Quebec separatists argued that being in NAFTA gave them access to a continental market (and the attendant economies of scale), and thus diminished the importance of having access to the Canadian internal market. Scottish independentistas argue the same about belonging to the E.U. They have a point. The supra-national organization could indeed provide market economies that make independence economically feasible. What they forget to mention though, is that they might actually be less free culturally, politically, and socially, without the buffer of the nation they want to separate from.
Ironically, while independentistas value freedom over economics; if “independence” leaves them subject to the rule of a “supra-national” body, their economy might flourish, while their liberty is diminished.
The odds favor independence.
The Scots ARE British. Britain/UK isn’t England. Common mistake.
Honestly if just having a referendum on secession is all it takes to break away from Great Britain, then that gives me hope that the Red States can break away from the USSA.
When the Southern States tried this all Hell broke loose. Can’t the Brits just tell Scotland that they won’t recognize their independence and then flood the country with Lobster Backs like they did in 1775?
“Negative: A Balkanized Europe would make things easier for the Islamonazis to take over it...”
Not necessarily. Increased nationalism - or regionalism - can easily work against Muslims because they are the “other” in those regions too.
[ “Negative: A Balkanized Europe would make things easier for the Islamonazis to take over it...”
Not necessarily. Increased nationalism - or regionalism - can easily work against Muslims because they are the “other” in those regions too. ]
That is true too, I hadn’t thought about it...
I would say if the breakaway vcountries left the EU they would CERTAINLY have a better chance than if they stay in the EU...
RE: The odds favor independence.
Not sure about that, the odds seem to be on the NO side.
See here:
“I would say if the breakaway vcountries left the EU they would CERTAINLY have a better chance than if they stay in the EU...”
I think you’re right. Aren’t the Scottish independence supporters big EU supporters as well? They have been very welcoming to Muslims in their independence movement. I don’t think that is a coincidence.
I wonder what would have happened if we hadn’t fired on Fort Sumter. If we had just surrounded all federal installations, letting supplies in but not letting them out unless they were going home. What would have been the justification for attacking the South? I’m sure they would have found something, but I wonder.
RE: “Quebec didn’t have North Sea Oil Income.’
Scotland doesn’t have Quebec hydro electric income.
The Scots are an intelligent, inventive people with a lot of resources. If they have to be self-sufficient, they'll decide what's worth having the gov provide and what isn't.
I'm all for independence movements. Globalism and international banking hurt us "little folk". If Scotland goes independent, lots of other people across the globe are going to want their freedom.
The per capita value is more than 8 times greater for Scot’s oil versus Quebec’s hydro.
Hydro Quebec has ~36,000 MW generation capacity, last year produced 177,858 GWh, Exporting price averaged $50C/MWh or $8.1 Billion USD total generation.
Scottish waters produce 1.2 million barrels a day or 438 million barrels a year. Brent oil at the same time averaged over $100, call it $44 billion.
Quebec has 8 million people, Scotland 5.3 million.
Scotland’s Natural Gas alone would exceed the value of Quebec Hydro, oil would be in addition to that.
Seems to me they can't be all that intelligent (the majority anyway who vote socialist) if they favor the Gov't programs.
It doesn't take much inventiveness to invent Gov't. That's more about laziness and dependency.
If you look at who would be running an independent Scotland—hardcore socialists who make British Labour look like Ayn Rand—the energy numbers will be meaningless. The Chavez regime in Venezuela started out with enormous oil wealth too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.