Two competing narratives can sit side by side. Scotland is different – according to highly respected historians and political theorists. We may not always be better though.
We have a long history of Scot against Scot; and some aspects of history that many of us will not be proud of. Scots in America were part of the Founding Fathers, but Scots also set up the infamous Klu Klux Klan – an extreme form of racial hatred. Scots exploited Caribbean trade of sugar and tobacco. While not as heavily involved in the slave trade, as other countries.
We have our own Scots narratives – the narrative of Kenmore street, of close ties to Flanders, other Celtic nations, of Scotland’s long history of trade. Scots were also leaders in the European enlightenment. Scots scholars studied and taught in Paris and other leading European universities.
According to Scotland’s leading historian Tom Devine, Scotland is different to England in fundamental ways. Scotland has long been an outward looking nation, whereas England has been more inward looking. We’ve had centuries of trade and migration, by ship clearly before cars – to Scandinavia, Flanders and other north sea neighbours, were closer than London. Scotland’s auld alliance with France. Scots mercenaries who fought in Sweden or Italy.
After the union 1707 a lot changed – with the integration of the Dutch navy and Scots enterprise. At that time Scotland had a population of 1m and England of 4m. many Scots were well educated, since the Reformation.
** I read Steven Knights views on Britain in the Sunday Times recently – totally different to my own images. He is the creator of Peaky Blinders and now House of Guinness series.
He believes strongly in a Britain as England narrative – with the other three nations as mere appendages, with limited input or unique and important cultural identities
“I’m fiercely loyal to Britain, he states, the things we’ve created the inventiveness of the people, the way so much new stuff comes from here… “If you’re loyal to Britain. And what Britain has always been is a sense of humour, tolerance, getting on with it, and not glorification the divisions.” I don’t like this, they’ve terrible, they’re awful, they’re the liberal elite. I hate them thing.” His Britain/ England narrative is complete different to the one I hold.
Can these two narratives co-exist? Knight is angered people call union jack flag wavers fascists. ”We fought a whole war against fascist, so anyone who thinks the union jack represents something other than resistance to that is wrong. When fascism was all over Europe, there was only one place where it wasn’t and that was where the Union Jack was from.”
He advocates we should celebrate English/ British exceptional-ism in culture. “ Creative nationalism is something I would favour. Knight writes that the British are ‘aware of their absurdities’. Has this come about since the collapse of the British empire, since the second world war? – and the British/ English have to accept they no longer dominate – that English exceptional-ism is a belief of past glories. And the recent years of the destruction of Scots industries by Thatcher, of jobs and culture of recent decades. He forgets that the Scots were the workers of the empire.
Scots voices are fighting back, with innovative voices across our nation, of Scotland, with creativity in design, tech, arts, music, engineering, debate, political theory, renowned festivals, science, technology and more.
**My narrative around the Union Jack is totally opposite! History tells me stories of oppression and divide and rule across Scotland, Ireland and further afield across the British empire. After Henry VIII declared himself king of Ireland – supposedly to bring peace to warring Irish tribes. The British empire is not taught in English schools, which considering how important it was over many centuries is rather neglectful omission. The British oppressed in Africa with extermination camps and also in India.
We might ague the British empire brought increased trade and connections also. But with the slave trade there is also a lot to feel ashamed of. We have aggressive marches across Glasgow, and their banging whistles and drums. Its about the domination of one group over another. I think of the dreadful troubles in Northern Ireland – of the brick walls, knee capping, indiscriminate shooting and tanks in Dublin.
I think of Britain’s involvement with the slave trade and its imperial and now corporatism across the
globe. In my personal narrative Britain is not a country, but a landmass like Scandinavia. I highly recommend Tom Nairn’s book the break up of Britain, probably the best read on the subject of the collapse of the British state. And of the corruption of the monarchy’s enchanted glass.
Pakistani author Pankaj Mishra was writing about the two totally opposing narratives in the middle east – one of the Israelis (from the river to the sea) and the other of Palestinians (our Homelands) in his book After Gaza. It all made me think in Scotland we also have two opposing, irreconcilable narratives. In 2025 Scotland is stuck, so how can we move forward in love, in peace and in liberal thought?
Indy for Scotland’s self determination and improving democracy. Scots need a say over our own energy resources, immigration, climate, and infrastructure. We can still unite for good trade and security together. Unionism is for strength by being run by London, and being ‘together’ with the high centralization in London, of the Global corporate elites control. Westminster refuses Scotland another vote.
“Nationalism is both good and bad” wrote politician historian Tom Nairn. All Nationalisms are different. He claims Scotland’s nationalism is unique as Scotland jumped ahead to a modern state 1700s. By contrast European states moved to modern states 1800s, due to the uneven nature of capitalism.
.jpg)
