Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
If the Scots Secede, Who’s Next?
In yesterday’s New York Times, Scottish actor Alan Cumming, argued in favor of an independent Scotland as follows:
This is not about hating the English. It is about democracy and self-determination. Scotland is weary of being ruled by governments it did not vote for.
A question for Mr. Cummings and — for that matter — for my pro-independence friends here at Ricochet:
If the Scots secede from the United Kingdom, on what principle could they prevent the Orkney and Shetland Islands from seceding from Scotland, and taking with them the roughly a third of the active North Sea oil wells that lie within their waters?
Ruled by various Scandinavian dynasties until the sixteenth century, the Orkneys and Shetlands have undergone a very different cultural and political development from that of the rest of Scotland and — while most of Scotland now leans to the left — politics in the Orkneys and Shetlands are more centrist. Why should the people of those scattered islands be ruled by governments for which they did not vote, as they almost certainly would in an independent Scotland? Shouldn’t they also be entitled to democracy and self-determination?
Why, I repeat, shouldn’t the Orkneys and Shetlands secede from Scotland if Scotland secedes from the UK? Or Catalonia and the Basque country from Spain? Or Flanders from Belgium? Or Milan and the Po Valley from Italy?
Is there a limiting principle? Can you name it?
Image Credit: Eric Gaba (Sting – fr:Sting) [GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Published in General
The Orkneys and Shetlands should definitely secede from an independent Scotland. They are by no stretch of the imagination Scottish. They are Scandinavian, through-and-through.
(In much the same way, if Quebec ever tries to secede, the Cree are going to claim most of the land north of the St. Lawrence River.)
I have already suggested this in a couple of the Scotland threads. The Orkneys and Shetlands do not so much need to secede as independent nations as to vote to remain in the United Kingdom. Kind of like West Virginia did during the American Civil War.
Should that happen, and the Scots oppose it, I suspect a very brief confrontation between the Scots Navy and the Royal Navy would settle the issue quickly. At least, based on the strength of the Scots Navy, and what Britain did the last time another nation tried to alienate a part of the United Kingdom through military force. (For those youngsters among us – those 35 and under – look at the major events of 1982.) I doubt there would be much more shooting than occurred during the 1972 Cod War.
Seawriter
That wouldn’t do much for their EU membership application, now would it?
It’s not a perfect analogy, but there’s certainly precedent for it.
Why should there be a limiting principle?
You interviewed Prince Hans from Liechtenstein. Why should there be a country of 35K people? Why is that more legitimate than say the Shetland Islands having a go at it?
I would say:
– Geographically contiguous
– Culturally Homogeneous
– Culturally distinct from the prevailing culture
– An existing hierarchy for the preservation of order
I think the 21st Century will be known for the break-up of the nation-state in general, and Scotland is just the first of many salvos in Europe pointing to that direction.
Europe will return back to the fiefdoms of years past.
The sustainability of which will depend on the continued strength of pan-national organizations like the EU.
Have the trends not gone in both directions since time immemorial, and are they not two sides of the same coin? So long as there is conquest there will also be at least attempts at secession. I don’t think limiting principles have much to do with the matter except as those principles are about facts on the ground, i.e., whether the particular part can succeed on its own.
While I think Scotland is better off in the UK I think this debate has lost some perspective. If Scotland leaves the UK it will be outsourcing national defense and foreign policy to the EU. The new nation will be large enough to provide domestic services to its citizens. Costs will certainly rise and that reality, much as in France may be just the tonic the good people of Scotland need.
I wouldn’t say that. I would say that we are witnessing the end of multiculturalism as a coherent organizing principle. It is entirely fair to say that multiculturalism, and the unitary state (basically progressive social democracy) is an utter failure (as in mutually exclusive features), and breeds nothing but discord and unhappiness. Thus the dissolving of the UK, the Mid-East conflicts, various African conflicts, various movements in the US and Canada, Tibet, etc.
You have to have common social expectations to have a coherent government. Without common expectations, you can’t have cordial and peaceful administration. Assuming a social contract from slim majorities and using that as a healing moral salve to justify injustice (in the terms of the people who dispute the terms of the majority) is corrosive.
You have to have high social trust and common background expectations to have a functional democracy. Multiculturalism eviscerates both.
Does Alan Cumming want membership in the EU, then?
If so, they are about to trade bureaucrats who might have a hard time understanding them for ones who just won’t listen.
The Scots are already citizens of the EU. I suspect many look at this vote as a way to cut out the middleman in Westminster.
To Peter’s question; the next likely new EU states may be:
1) Catalonia
2) Wallonia
3) Flanders
4) An Italian divorce creating a new state in the north of that country. The Veneto, Milan and Savoy possibly joined by Tuscany and the Emilia-Romagna.
No, there isn’t. National boundaries are imagined by interests but drawn by power. They are as close together or as far apart, as straight or as squiggly, as consolidated or as scattered, as a military or economy has influence to establish and to maintain.
Who’s next? That answer lies wherever both loyalties and the balance of power have significantly shifted.
And what does Nessie think of all this? She should have voice in the discussions as well. I for one, extend the hand of friendship to her and offer Lake Superior up as her new home. Monster, Come to Duluth!
During a semester in the UK, I had two Italian suite mates: one from Padua, another from Messina. The shouting matches were epic.
No one shouts as well as Italians, unless maybe it’s Sicilians, but they do have to keep in practice.
As their vernacular would have been nearly incomprehensible to one another, what language did they argue in?
One was Sicilian, from Messina, where Patton humiliated Monty.
Italian, as far as I could tell, but do see your point. Isn’t there a Italian version of RP?
It used to be that you needed a minimal size and population to defend against an invader. Would an independent Scotland be part of NATO? After Putin gets bored in eastern Europe, he may in theory “take Glasgow in two hours” and the Shetlands too. I am sure Russians like whiskey as much as vodka. Oil too.
As Conservatives I see two competing principles here:
1) Deference to tradition and existing institutions.
2) A desire for government to be as small, and local, as possible.
I think in this case Conservatives should value principle 2 more highly. If the Scots wish to be represented by a government more closely tied to their interests shouldn’t we be cheering that?
My problem is with the identities and politics of the people leading the charge and jockeying for positions in the new government, not necessarily with the core concept itself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_Scotland#Participation
I know. I’m half Sicilian, the noisier half.
Say, that gives me an idea! I just happen to have a piece of chalk in my pocket, and I’m drawing a 3-ft-radius circle on the floor around my feet. I’m naming this new, sovereign nation “Fredönia.”
Note to prospective tourists: marijuana and prostitution are like totally legal here. Just sayin’.
The limiting principle is the Bear and the Dragon aka Russia and China. Someone mentioned fiefdoms earlier. Ask yourself why the fiefdoms allied to become the nations they are today. In some cases it was less an alliance and more a conquest but mostly it was alliance for defense against a larger stronger foe.
Whether smaller and more local is better all depends, as they say. If we do support #2 over #1, or over the principle that the West is best defended by a United Kingdom that includes Scotland, we should also let them boil in what’s left of their own oil when they discover the downsides of small in this vale of tears.
Yes, I have had similar thoughts for some time. Scotland could be a tipping point making the global map look very different in 10 years time. This is the natural outcome of the death throes of the social welfare model which has been hegemonic for the past century.
The caveat is that this presupposes a Pax Americana or similar enlightened global policeman (men). China and Russia are not. As we have seen the Pax Americana has been severely weakened, and is now in open question with myriad displays of contempt by various bad actors around the world. If the world continues on its trajectory of becoming a more dangerous place then fiefdoms will have to band together again for security.
Excellent point.
Recall that the country Italy, in the modern sense, has only existed for 153 years. Germany is slightly younger.
Update: Now that I think about it, the Germany that was united in 1871 included much of what is now Poland. The boundaries were redrawn after WWI reconstituting the state of Poland, but Germany retained control of East Prussia. After WWII Germany lost East Prussia to Poland and was divided into East and West.
The US has added two states in the last 55 years.
I guess what I am saying is borders are anything but static.