• Home
  • About
  • Reading Lists
    • Egypt
    • Great Books
    • Iran
    • Islam
    • Israel
    • Liberalism
    • Napoleon
    • Nationalism
    • The Nuclear Age
    • Science
    • Russia
    • Turkey
  • Digital Footprint
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • Pocket
    • SoundCloud
    • Twitter
    • Tumblr
    • YouTube
  • Contact
    • Email

Chaturanga

~ statecraft, strategy, society, and Σοφíα

Chaturanga

Tag Archives: UK

Fàilte gu Alba!

15 Mon Sep 2014

Posted by Jaideep A. Prabhu in Europe, United Kingdom

≈ Comments Off on Fàilte gu Alba!

Tags

Alex Salmond, Britain, Calman Commission, Delaration of Arbroath, economy, England, EU, European Union, Kilbrandon Report, nationalism, NATO, North Sea, nuclear, Scotland, Scotland's Future, Scottish Covenant Association, Scottish independence referendum, Scottish National Party, SNP, Stone of Destiny, UK, United Kingdom

For those who believe that the European project is over and a success, the Scottish independence referendum and the 1.8 million man march for Catalonian freedom in Barcelona last week should serve as a rude wake-up call. Even as the intellectual descendants of Jean Monnet seek to make their Union more perfect, fissiparous tendencies persist in pockets. Europe has dozens of separatist groups and though few of them are of concern, many have a long history.

United Kingdom

The strength of the Scottish independence movement has caught many by surprise. If polls are to be believed, the referendum, to be held on September 18, may just result in the reemergence of the Scottish nation after 307 years of English rule. Those old enough, however, will remember that this is no bolt from the blue – while preparations for this referendum have been going on since 2011, the minority government of the Scottish National Party put forward a similar bill in the Scottish parliament in 2007 but withdrew it on account of little support from the Opposition. The bill suggested four avenues along which to proceed: 1. maintain the status quo, 2. devolution of power from London to Edinburgh as per the Calman Commission, giving Scots greater but not complete fiscal autonomy, 3. greater devolution, leaving only foreign and defence policies in the hands of Westminster, and 4. full independence.

Even before 2007, the Kilbrandon Report of 1973 had put forward the idea of a devolution of powers over education, health, the environment, social, and legal services to Scotland; a referendum held in 1979 had supported the devolution of powers to Scotland but was overturned on a technicality. It was the 1997 referendum that allowed the Scottish parliament to finally reconvene after 290 years and gave it some powers over taxation, transportation, and unreserved matters.

Perhaps most famous are the exploits of Scottish Covenant Association, who stole the Stone of Destiny, a block of seat associated with the coronation of Scottish – and later British – monarchs, from Westminster Abbey on Christmas, 1950. The Stone was left beside the altar of Arbroath Abbey, a significant venue known for the famous declaration of Scottish independence, the Declaration of Arbroath, in 1320. The SCA supported total independence for Scotland when even devolution was talked about in hushed tones. Although a fringe group in its day, the SCA made great efforts to spread awareness about Scottish home rule in a postwar era when nationalism was held to be particularly abhorrent.

The slight swing towards the ‘Yes’ campaign – the referendum has one question and is worded, “Should Scotland be an independent nation?” – has already chased $27 billion out of British investments and raised threats from the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Bank that they would move their headquarters to London if Scotland secedes from the Union. Furthermore, senior officers at BP (Bob Dudley) and the Deutsche Bank (David Folkerts-Landau) have cautioned against an independent Scotland, citing uncertainties in their currency and their role in the European Union.

Responding to the threat by UK Chancellor George Osbourne that England would not entertain a currency union with an independent Scotland, Alex Salmond, Scotland’s first minister and head of the SNP, has dismissed the economic fears and capital flight as bullying. Interestingly, it was the discovery of oil in the North Sea that first gave legs to the Scottish home rule movement. While any new government or nation generates uncertainties in the short-term, it is difficult to argue that Scotland will be an economically unviable state.

However, the referendum is not about economics, something most opponents of Scottish independence fail to acknowledge. Scotland’s disagreements with England over nuclear power or reduction in welfare payouts hardly seems serious enough to warrant a secession and can be easily resolved at the local level. Economics, social policies, security, nuclear power, and the geopolitics of NATO, the EU, and beyond are convenient justifications for what is at the core a nationalist yearning.

It is ironic that Englishmen who wish to see Scotland remain in the Union are asking the Scots not to be nationalistic when they themselves are considering a referendum with a nationalistic flavour on joining the EU in 2017. To add to the irony, the SNP, though nationalistic, is best described as a centre-left party than the expected, typical right-wing party. One of the wedges the ‘Yes’ campaign has used is the fear of a long Conservative reign in Britain with irregular support from the UK Independence Party. Scotland’s Future, the 670-page document released by the SNP explaining its agenda for an independent country, is closer to the social democratic ideals of continental Europe than Tory England.

For those whom it matters, the history between Scotland and England has not been all pleasant. As much as many would deny it, there is a sectarian component to this difference; it is telling that the largest rally organised in favour of staying in the Union was by Protestants from all over the United Kingdom. Pride in Scottish identity is not dead, however muted it might be. Scotland has its own sporting identity, one of the more popular sports t-shirts reading, “I support two teams – Scotland and anyone who plays England.” They also have a fine sense of humorous self-deprecation if their official song for the 1998 World Cup – Don’t Come Home Too Soon – was anything to go by. Anyone who believes in the universalising power of the English language will be flabbergasted by a trip north (though outside London will probably suffice). Admittedly, their cuisine is an acquired taste, but their whiskey has conquered hearts and minds worldwide.

Should Scotland be an independent country? There will surely be a few smirks in former colonies like India, Ireland, and Palestine that went through partition themselves (which were a lot more violent than the Scottish referendum), but ultimately, this is a question for the Scots. There are as many good reasons for Scotland to leave the Union as there are for it to stay. Economics can be mended, security negotiated, and relations renewed but identity, however nebulous, is persistent. Are Scotsmen comfortable with being a distinct region within the United Kingdom – at once Scottish, British, and (maybe) European – or is it Alba gu bràth?


This post appeared on Daily News & Analysis on September 16, 2014.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

W(h)ither Right?

07 Thu Mar 2013

Posted by Jaideep A. Prabhu in Opinion and Response

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Bharatiya Janata Party, BJP, Conservative Party, Cornerstone Group, cultural Right, democracy, elitism, France, India, Left, Parti chrétien-démocrate, populism, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Republican Party, Republican Study Committee, Right, RSS, UK, Union pour un Mouvement Populaire, US, welfare

So what’s wrong with the Right? Despite a steady diet of expanding government, foreign debt, and runaway welfarism from the Left, the Right finds it difficult to excite the electorate enough to be voted into power. Failure breeds internecine conflict, further weakening the Right. In India, for example, despite nine years of criminally poor governance by the incumbent party, the Right does not yet have an assured victory in the upcoming general elections and even that chance seems based more on an anti-incumbency sentiment than a genuine embrace of the Right political platform. Describing the woes of the Right, as a friend put it, the issue is not that the Left is so powerful but that the Right is not loved.

Why is this? Part of the reason lies in the agglomerated nature of the Right. More than a coherent and uniform ideology, the Right is fundamentally a reactionary political movement. As Thomas Sowell argued in Intellectuals and Society, it is “simply the various and disparate opponents of the Left.” These opponents of the Left are bound by nothing beyond their common disagreement and can come in all hues and colours, from Islamists to libertarians. In the cacophony of ideologies, a clear and unified platform is lost.

From this Right jumble, two broad themes emerge: a Right motivated by economic ideals, and a Right grounded in cultural certitude. Economic conservatives have not been able to capture the electoral imagination; their message is too abstract for the average voter. Preaching long-term fiscal responsibility to an impatient electorate not used to institutional stability and good governance is like lecturing an obese person on his way to a triple bypass on the benefits of yoga. Furthermore, quotas and entitlements are an emotional argument, not an economic one. It is difficult to argue against feeding a hungry man, or providing medical aid to sick child. The misery of an individual moves one far more easily than lofty principles of governance and economics.

It is for this reason that the economic Right has usually had to seek allies among the cultural Right. Such partnerships are quite common – the Parti chrétien-démocrate and its association with the Union pour un Mouvement Populaire in France, Republicans and their Christian fringe in the United States, the Cornerstone Group within the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom, the and the revolving door relations between the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in India. However, social conservatives are not necessarily fiscal conservatives; whether due to their cultural mores, national pride, or religious beliefs, many on the cultural Right have greater sympathy for socialist policies than their fiscally conservative allies. This dissonance creates an ambiguous political platform that leaves the centre of the political spectrum confused.

Language, religion, ethnicity and all those other strands that make up the web of life are just as tangible as government dole. The average voter can relate as easily to soft loans and subsidies as the razing of a nearby temple or a gradual change in the lingua franca due to the influx of outsiders into his/her village. However, cultural protectionism militates against socialist practices, making the cultural Right natural foes of the Left and pushing them into the arms of the free-market libertarians. The social conservatives offer the economic Right not only the advantage of their mass appeal, but also the benefit of their well organised cadre at the grassroots level. The cultural Right thus becomes the base of the entire Right. As a result, most economically right-of-centre parties find it difficult to jettison their cultural agenda and still remain a viable political force.

Unfortunately for the Right, cultural protectionism is an inherently divisive message that can mobilise the excluded as easily as those included. Be it the Ten Commandments in government buildings or a ban on beef, such issues guarantee fierce opposition as much as rally the base. The economic Right loses ground among their own, who may otherwise have been persuaded by a fiscal argument but are forced away by the cultural agenda. The wisdom of the political pundits so far, however, has been that people moved primarily by fiscal conservatism are less likely to vote and wooing the social conservatives is a electorally more rewarding tactic.

Beyond the fissiparous difficulties of the Right, the Left has one more advantage – they understand humans better. While the free marketeers repeat the mantra of self-interest incessantly, the Left seems to understand human beings in context. One interesting term psychologists use that may apply to quotas and entitlements is “social trap.” It is a situation in which a group of people act to obtain short-term individual gains that leads to a loss for the group as a whole in the long term. Given the uninspiring institutional integrity in India and an environment of lack, people are understandably tempted to seek advantage when possible rather than invest in a future. Another way of looking at it is, as Prospect Theory explains, how people understand risk and reward – the outcome of an entitlement is guaranteed immediately while the benefits of the market are in the future and probable at best. Other selfish and self-serving beliefs and behaviour such as psychological entitlement feeds into these traits as well.

So is it the end of the road for the economic Right? Perhaps, if they cannot package  their beliefs in a more enticing cover. Fiscal prudence must supercede narrower personal, regional, or communal sentiments.  This is easier achieved when the state is stable and impartial in the dispensation of services and justice. As the powerful story of the 9-year-old boy from Fukushima illustrated, people also have a capacity for remarkable fairness and generosity if they trust the system. Yet it is difficult to reform the system if one is not in power, or if one is bogged down by socialist impulses within one’s own ranks…and power is difficult to achieve if one is viewed merely as an anti-incumbent alternative. It is a pretty little vicious cycle the economic Right finds itself in.


This post appeared on FirstPost on March 25, 2013.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Chirps

  • RT @FrenchHist: A little French girl with Sikh soldiers in Paris, France in 1914 during World War I https://t.co/22jTsVDnF7 37 minutes ago
  • Trump and Netanyahu - the disagreements beneath the surface: bit.ly/3bjT4tk | No doubt; loyalty to our tri… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 37 minutes ago
  • Outgoing Mossad deputy chief slams government's handling of Iran and the pandemic: bit.ly/38e8vS2 | Follow… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 hours ago
  • Pakistan's influence in the Gulf is waning: bit.ly/3kRF9OC | But India needs to offer a benefit, Pakistan… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 hours ago
  • Reopening Israel's borders is stupid and irresponsible: bit.ly/3t5CCmT | Balancing between two difficult c… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2 hours ago
Follow @orsoraggiante

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 213 other followers

Follow through RSS

  • RSS - Posts

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • The Mysterious Case of India’s Jews
  • Polarised Electorates
  • The Election Season
  • Does Narendra Modi Have A Foreign Policy?
  • India and the Bomb
  • Nationalism Restored
  • Jews and Israel, Nation and State
  • The Asian in Europe
  • Modern Political Shibboleths
  • The Death of Civilisation
  • Hope on the Korean Peninsula
  • Diminishing the Heathens
  • The Writing on the Minority Wall
  • Mischief in Gaza
  • Politics of Spite
  • Thoughts on Nationalism
  • Never Again (As Long As It Is Convenient)
  • Earning the Dragon’s Respect
  • Creating an Indian Lake
  • Does India Have An Israel Policy?
  • Reclaiming David’s Kingdom
  • Not a Mahatma, Just Mohandas
  • How To Read
  • India’s Jerusalem Misstep
  • A Rebirth of American Power

Management

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com
Considerate la vostra semenza: fatti non foste a viver come bruti, ma per seguir virtute e canoscenza.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×
    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
    Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
    To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
    %d bloggers like this: