Positives for a Free Scotland II

Recently I’ve had a health issue, and had to have various procedures and scans to access the problem and now another wait. Then a pre-op. As I read of the consultants and junior doctors continued strikes in England over pay and conditions, and the NHS there being eroded and under-funded. I am very grateful to live in Scotland and that I don’t have to worry that consultants or doctors are on strike here. Its bad enough waiting a week for test results.  

I’m glad my three grown-up children don’t have huge levels of student debt to pay off. I’m glad that Scotland is at least trying to protect health care for all and the NHS. I’m glad that under Alex Salmond, Scotland developed it’s renewable potential. I’m also grateful that Sturgeon prioritised babies, nursery and childcare - with baby boxes and a child payment uplift, because she recognised that you can forget the next fifteen years at school if children get off to a bad start in life. 

 

I’m glad Scotland wants to protect food safety (but worry we won’t be “allowed” to).  Yes the Scottish government made errors over the ferry procurement – but at the same time the Queensferry crossing was a success story. I’m certainly grateful to live in a Scotland where most people prioritise a well being economy, where all children deserve fair opportunities; where people value equality and a greener Scotland. The trouble is Scotland doesn’t have the levers to achieve this or a modern democracy - all it can do under the devolved settlement is to tinker at the edges.

 

In a federal state the central government has clearly defined roles – federal roads, foreign police – and they don’t have to “allow’ the states to do anything! This confusing and unworkable devolved UK system is a mess and not used anywhere else. In a federal state the central government doesn’t “allow” the states broadcasting rights, immigration laws, or vat rates. Each state has its own laws for starters. I lived several years in Chicago and it surprised me greatly, that major decisions were made at the local level. (while things in the US are not perfect by any means). I also didn’t realise back then I should be a proud Scot. So many Scots are ignorant of our own heritage and history. 

 

The UK system is like a parent/ child – where Whitehall will only 'allow' the Scottish people certain rights, over our own lives if it so chooses. The British state since inception, has been fixated on centralized control, of supposed “stability” of the Crown in Parliament.

 

I’m proud Scotland has leading universities and innovative scientists, I’m proud Scotland has major international festivals and a successful creative community of artists and musicians. I’m proud Scotland has a wealth of resources – whisky, quality food, and the potential to be a world leader in renewables. 

 

Even while most Scots want better equality and democracy, we don’t have the devolved levers tover the economy o achieve this – and sadly Scotland is one of the most unequal and exploited nations in the developed world. Like many Scots I wasn’t taught to be a proud Scot at school - but to feel second rate to London and its history. Just as in Northern Ireland where children are taught about English rivers, but not about their own Irish rivers!

 

The union believes in a mono-global culture. In the 1800s European countries realised to harness their real potential they must have national renewal and national aspiration and the map of Europe changed from huge empires to the small nations of today. Scotland must join this Europe of sovereign, free nations. In order to shape and control our future destiny.

 

We can still share security and co-operate on defence with rUK, independence just means that Scots voices have a say and not just a tiny Tory elite.

Tom Nairn why Scotland missed the European national revival 1800s

 

 

Tom Nairn why Scotland missed the European national revival 1800s

 

Scotland’s greatest political theorist of the modern times. 

Tom Nairn’s brilliant Break Up of Britain (1977), is one of the best reads on how and why the archaic institutions of the British state and its pre-democracy are failing us. How Scotland lost its way and its literary voice over the 1800s and of the fake tartanry of Walters Scott’s novels, of a Scotland that’s lost and can never return - “the heart regrets, but never the head.” Of the destructive and false nature of the Labour party. 

 

He writes on why Scottish nationalism is different to the rest of Europe. 

“All I’m arguing for is nations, minus the dratted “ism”; democratic natural, independent, diverse, ordinary, even boring rather than the museum pieces, or dictatorship or hustlers like Blair of Berlusconi.” Tom Nairn, Free worlds End, opendemocracy, Dec 4^th 2004. 

 

Nairn writes of the misfit of the British state to the modern world and not from the express of romantic tartanry, which the author excoriates – and the centrality of the nation in political change. 

That the Scottish Enlightenment was very much a Tory project. While Scotland prospered during the 1800s with manufacturing, its literary voice became bereft. He sees Walter Scott’s work of a mythical Scotland and Scots heroes, as very much glorifying a past that was gone and to be forgotten. Scotland became north Britain. While Scott’s romantic and mythical novels were highly successful across the world. 

**Those Myths of Blood and spirit, such as Jacobites, Rob Roy, Robert the Bruce.

Nationalism, Nairn argues is always both good and bad. ’ And originated from that derived in – the impossibility of escape from the uneven development of capitalism.’ Nationalism is not a question of simple identity, but rather of something more – a catalyst. Nearly all modern nations have a myth – a key to their nationalism and regeneration. But not England… :with an astonishing resistance of a fossilised and incompetent political order.  

“England’s peculiar form of nationalism  hopelessly stultifying inheritance of the state.…The main character of English history since 1688 “of which English ideology most proud is, her conditional and parliamentary revolution. “

“the mobilising myth of nationalism is an idea of the people … an emotive notion anchored in popular experience of love” – the revolution, war of liberation.”

 

He writes, “What counts is later mass beliefs. These are amplified into an inheritance, broadcast in ballads, written into documentary history text-books, novelized, sermonised and institutionalized into street-names and statues. From the process there derives an always latent conviction of popular will and capacity. That the people could always do it again.” 

 

**By contrast in Europe 1800s, nationalism took hold with the demise of empires, and the rise of nation states. “Only one country “stepped over before the Europe of 1800s – Scotland politics and culture was decisively and permanently altered by the great awaking of nationalist consciousness – Scotland or north Britain …due to the uneven development of capitalism. “

 

“After the black the unspeakable 17^th century was 1688 which marked the real dawn of Scotland, after the dark bloodshed years of religious conflicts across Europe. – William Robertson, in his book History of Scotland. When the Scottish bourgeoisie exploited the results of the English revolution. Scotland progressed from fortified castles and witch burning, to Edinburgh new town and Adam Smith in only a generation:”

Highlander Adam Fergusson, saw this contrast around him. “The Highlands were under-developed and didn’t have pre-requisite for nationalist existence. The Highland life was destroyed after 1745. The Scottish Enlightenment ended early 1800s. The Scottish literary tradition paused 1825 – 1860. Instead there was the Industrial Scotland of Glasgow-Edinburgh- Dundee – engineering, shipbuilding and iron stone. 

Scotland reverted to being a province in the 1800s Victorian times, while prosperous and imperial.  Why – because of the absence of political nationalism and a literary voice. The Scottish bourgeoisies pre-possessed the country’s distinctive and proto-national features – they believed in a universal and enlightened civilization .Therefore Scotland remained stuck betwixt and between - too much a nation to be a mere province, yet it could not develop into a nation-state on the basis either via nationalism. 

Nationalism, Nairn argues is always both good and bad. ’ And originated from that derived in – the impossibility of escape from the uneven development of capitalism.’

There is a duty to progressive England to positively urge Scotland onto independence in Europe.

England-Britain where, perhaps because Westminster no longer has a genuine interior life that links to public self-belief, almost everything that is political is unauthentic.

 

”national-democratic character of the need our self-government to ensure meaning on self-belief.”

Nairns approach is both international and rooted in Scotland and he wrote for the new left review London. He explores the nature of nationalism. In UK more confused by the overlay of British-ness, a nationalism without a nation. His case of Scottish independence advocated becoming LIKE other countries. The self-abasement of the union.

A Future???   A British isles or federation, confederation or modernised multi-national states.’

**DONATE to the conference to celebrate the work of Tom Nairn, organised by Peter McColl (Scottish Greens) , Janice Maxwell (co-editor), Pat Kane, Joyce Macmillan, Anthony Barnett (English democracy activist)

 

His most famous BOOK Tom Nairn’s brilliant The Break up of Britain 1977, is well worth reading and one of the best reads on the archaic nature of the British states’ pre-democracy. https://www.thenational.scot/politics/23475146.impact-tom-nairn-great-let-slip-quietly-away/

The most influential book on British politics to be published in the last half century,”  writes Anthony Burnett

Scottish Nationalism for a Progressive modern state

It’s a strange thing, I’ve been reading Tom Nairn ‘s excellent book the Break up of Britain (1977) and he makes many profound insights into the archaic nature of the British state – one being that unionists view all the supposed benefits of the state of Britain, and that some view Scottish nationalism as a backward-looking project. I’ve been told too that I should move beyond the Battle of Bannockburn (1314).

He writes, ’Nationalism is not a question of simple identity, but rather of something more – a catalyst.

 

What’s strange really is in my view the British state is the total opposite of unionist’s world view. I see Scottish nationalism and Scottish independence as a progressive, modern project to bring a more authentic democracy for progressive socialism and fair opportunities alongside a healthy capitalism, that encourages and protects small businesses, we need both. 

 

And I have longed viewed the British state as archaic and as a pre-democracy – as does Nairn and many other commentators. The British state as established 1688, of the Crown in Parliament, well before universal suffrage, Nairn writes, is a political cul-de-sac, unable to reform itself under its two party system and its first past the post voting system. 

 

Because of this Britain “is stuck in the past and not a modern state. Crucially FPTP voting means Bills at Westminster don’t get proper scrutiny. (New book, How Westminster Works and How it Doesn’t by Ian Dunt  how Westminster is not effective at governing). 

 

Nairn writes, “Although not of course an absolutist state, the Anglo-British system remains a product of the general transition from an absolutism to modern constitutionalism: it led the way out of the former, but never genuinely arrived at the latter,…..it is basically an indefensible and inadaptable relic, not a modern state form.” 

 

Perhaps it’s now time we stop hiding behind nationalism, but view it as the positive, progressive project it is. Nairn views nationalism as both good and bad, and as a process that happened across Europe in the 1800s. Scotland is only now trying to catch up. 

 

He also writes Scotland became bereft of a literary voice due to the false romantic myths of Walter Scott – of a Scotland gone forever – and due to emigration and the Kailyard school. Nationalism is also viewed as anti-globalization.

 

Nationalism, Nairn argues is always both good and bad. ’ And originated from and derived in – the impossibility of escape from the uneven development of capitalism.

The reason is that when the nation states in Europe were transitioning in the 1800s, due according to Nairn, to the uneven nature of capitalism, Scotland was the only nation state to have previously jumped across during the enlightenment and the Edinburgh new town. 

 

But now today Scotland has been left behind, in the 20^th century, There has been no revolution, and the absence of change. 

By contrast in Europe 1800s, nationalism took hold with the demise of empires, and the rise of nation states.  As a nation Scotland jumped, ahead in the 1700s, with increased trade, the enlightened thought,  when Scotland moved very fast from a place of superstition and tribal warfare.

“Only one country stepped over before the Europe of 1800s – Scotland politics and culture was decisively and permanently altered by the great awaking of nationalist consciousness – Scotland or north Britain …due to the uneven development of capitalism. “

 “After the black the unspeakable 17^th century was 1688 which marked the real dawn of Scotland, after the dark bloodshed years of religious conflicts across Europe. – William Robertson, in his book History of Scotland. When the Scottish bourgeoisie exploited the results of the English revolution. Scotland progressed from fortified castles and witch burning, to Edinburgh new town and Adam Smith in only a generation:”

 

***Tom Nairn’s book The Break Up of Britain

“The most influential book on British politics to be published in the last half century,”  writes Anthony Burnett

 

 

Walter Scott’s fake nationalism and false myths of Scotland

“pervasive, second-rate sentimentalist, associated with tartan nostalgia.”

 For Walter Scott - “the past is gone, beyond recall.” ….it evokes a national past never to revive it.”

.... no part of political or social mobilization of present by a mythical emphasis on

 

Walter Scott’s novels were read across the world, and his contribution to the rising tide of national romanticism, was a great one.  – “however it was great everywhere but in his own nation of Scotland.” Scott wrote of a  “romantic national culture and the rise of a kitsch Scotland.”

 

Tom Nairn, leading political theorist, denounces Scots novelist Walter Scott- ..”the destruction of Celtic Scotland was to haunt Lowlanders or the Scotland of Sir Walter Scott. He showed us “how not to be nationalist during an ascendant political nationalism. Its the language of Tory unionism and of progress”/ 

 

“From Ossian to Walter Scott played a large part in generating and defining romantic consciousness for the rest of Europe while degrading his own nation. Which led to rootlessness, a void, which cultural and literary historians deplore.  The continuity between (heroic) past and present.”…....  The heart may regret but never the head.”

 

Nairn writes of the failures of Scottish Nationalism, during the 1800s under the false romantic myths such as the writing of Walter Scott and of a bereft Scottish literature at this time.  Two examples – cultural emigration and the Kailyard school of vulgar tartanry.”,,, 

 

Scotland reverted to being a province 1800s, while prosperous and imperial. Why? Scotland became void and rootless. 1. Absence of political nationalism 2. Absence of a mature cultural romanticism. The poor Highland's world and comparatively prosperous Lowland world, and the total repression of Highland culture and social structure. The highland were once half of the population of Scotland.

Scott monument Edinburgh

By contrast the real purpose of romantic history was different – cultural nationalism was the mythical resuscitation of the past, to serve the present and the future. 

 

Scott caused disintegration of a great national culture. Elsewhere in Europe, “the middle classes felt the development for people was impossible without rapid mobilization of their own resources and rejection of alien rule.”

 

Nairn claims Scotland is unique in Europe, where nationalism struggled with its national identity and along with the rise of nationalism 1800s and the rise of nation states across Europe, as the "result of the uneven development of capitalism."

 

That the Scottish Enlightenment was very much a Tory project. While Scotland prospered during the 1800s with manufacturing, its literary voice became bereft. He sees Walter Scott’s work of a mythical Scotland and Scots heroes, as very much glorifying a past that was gone and to be forgotten. Scotland became north Britain. While Scott’s romantic and mythical novels were highly successful across the world. 

 

The real interests of Scotland diverge from the auld sang

Saving the Scots Language

Iona Fyfe

There’s the issues of Russia’s recent imperialism invasion of Ukraine, is this cultural genocide or fear of the economic successes of a more democratic Ukraine, or both? Does Putin want to erase Ukrainian culture, language and arts?

In Ireland one of the biggest issues is the Irish language which - unionists are fiercely against. In Scotland its not so long ago that children were belted in class for speaking in Scots, and teachers here were told they would sound ignorant if they spokein Scots! Its about the imperial domination of one culture over another. This is totally fake as Scotland was and is a world leader. Its a disgrace the way Scotland is usually portrayed in films as an ignorant or backward country, when this is a lie.

Why can’t we have both a common language and also celebrate our differences? In Switzerland they have high German in university lectures but speak Swiss German in their breaks.

 

Billy Kay recently gave an address to the Scottish parliament in Scots. to which there was a backlash by Labour politicians, claiming Scots is not a language. He is the author of the book, The Mother Tongue, published in 2006?

 

After the Brexit failures, it is British or English nationalism that is the problem. Suppressions of your culture has a devastating effect and left Scots feeling second class and inferior. I had hoped the days of imperial vandalism and repression were behind us now. 

 

 

**Scots Language recognised

Scots singer Iona Fyfe campaigned recently to have Scots language added on Spotify.

She had noticed on Spotify that there were all other living languages – Welsh, Cornish, Gaelic, Irish,

But no Scots. She contacted Spotify, asking to have Scots recognised also, but was ignored. 

 Then she met a Spotify executive at a music event in America and told him of her request and within a few days Scots had been added. 

Result. Well done Iona!  I took photos of Iona at Celtic Connections and was impressed with her voice. Check her out here –  https://ionafyfe.com

 

 

**Scottish nationalism - doesn’t want a superior voice just an equal one. Its inclusive or civic and about all who want to make their home in Scotland – its about places, unique Scottish geography surrounded by open seas at the edge of Europe and close to our Nordic cousins. 

 

Shetland is a mere 140 miles from Norway -. Orkney is home to the Brognar of Ness – which was an ancient temple, visited by people from all over Europe. 

And also Scapa Flow Orkney, where the naval fleet was stationed in the war. 

Sadly though the Homecoming Scotland excluded Jamaican Scots 2014, we importantly need to reconsider our vast Scots diaspora. 

 

 By contrast the words ‘all in England’ or the English or viewed as more ethnic and doesn’t include all who live in England. According to leading psychologist Stephen Reicher, at St Andrews university.

Its important indy supporters make it clear Scotland’s independence Is not about ‘ethnicity’ but about all who live Scotland.    #¥esScots

The nature of nationalism and internationalism: Tribalism is not Nationalism

When the European nations expanded and travelled by ship to the Americas, Indies and the far east, they settled, plundered and developed empires: often violently suppressing the indigenous peoples and taking over their lands. In Europe 200 years ago in 1800, there were four imperial powers - Holy Roman, the Habsburg, Russian and Ottoman. Europe had far fewer nations then - a look at the map of Europe is striking; now instead there are 25 independent national states. There were national campaigns against efforts by imperial powers to suppress indigenous languages, when the heroes didn’t lead armies but wrote dictionaries. For the Czechs, Slovaks, Croats and Serbs they believed that if their language disappeared, so would their identity.

Imperialist domination led to great strife, violence, wars, cruelty, starvation and exploitation. In the 20^th century the movement has been away from empires and towards smaller, independent nations. History tells us that when one people dominated in this ‘’survival of the fittest culture (beginning with the Roman Empire) they eventually collapsed due to corruption and greed. Improved interconnectivity and communications should mean we don’t need central hubs anymore. 

The fear of national oblivion and the need for survival, is clearly deeply rooted. In 1848 revolutions and national movements began campaigns for independence. However high prices have often been suffered for the creation of nation states and the post war idea of self determination: for instance the collapse of the Hapsburg empire was a catastrophe for European Jews and there was genocide wars between Bosnian Serbs and the extremist Croats. Perhaps the words extreme and domination are crucial here, which I would describe as “tribalism’ rather than nationalism. After all immigrants and different cultures can happily co-exist safely side by side. Tribalism (along with misguided socialism) often led to top/down, centralized and controlling dictatorships. 

Early last century tribalism took over under these racist dictators, with an extremist, inward-looking and narrow view of what being a nation state means. Tribalism makes me think of sectarian divides and matters a lot for some people. This is the nasty, narrow, ignorant and meaningless side of any nationalism: as seen in the dreadful wars of the Baltic states or the Northern Ireland troubles. Scotland’s Rangers fans mostly support the union, this is about past religious affiliations and class. Why do they continue? Sadly our sectarian divides still seem to matter greatly, and when religion matters less we really should all try to move on.

Germany has developed a federal system of government with autonomous states. In America also each state runs its own affairs (tax, vat, immigration). Also in America, a land of recent immigrants, there are celebrations and acceptance of different cultures side by side – China town, St Patrick’s day parades, German beer festivals, Robert Burns suppers, Hanukkah and more. Also, crucially, while these different identities and cultures are studied in schools, no one religion dominates: that is no one religion is a part of school curriculums or in politics. Yes there are far right or far left extremists, but these views are hopefully on the margins. While many rural areas have been seriously left behind. 

And what of our different identities, languages and cultures in these British isles. In Ireland many fight to keep the Irish language. In Scotland, the Gaelic language and song survived on the Western islands,. After the 1707 union, many Scots writers worked to keep the Scots songs and poems alive. After the 45 however, there was violent suppression of highland culture by the British state. In Scotland we have the National art gallery, the National Scottish orchestra, the National stadium – that’s okay. We can be both proud of our nation and international too

Most would agree that a union with a much bigger state is in fact a take over and not a union in any sense – think China / Tibet, Russia / Lithuania. After the Indy Ref 2014, Scotland must have looked foolish to the outside world. I’m not a particular fan of David Cameron, but at least he was a team player and had some regard for democracy. There are now forces aboard and at home who have no idea what democracy actually means. Boris Johnson and his team appear to want to dismantle any remnants of democracy left in the UK: they are false opportunists, who want to limit both the courts and the press. They look to the likes of Trump, who also claims he’s restoring democracy and the voice of the people!. That’s the model of rule (or supposed freedom) that dictators such as Hitler and Stalin used. (Farage is a mate of Trumps after all). 

Nationalism is not about whose tribe is dominant or best. It can be about shared histories, stories and songs, sense of place, our values. Religion, which in the past created great divides, must be a personal choice and not part of education or politics. Most countries are melting pots of many diverse people, and our very differences can make us stronger if we value them. People have always moved, or had to move, from enforced migration, from climate catastrophe or wars. Studies show that tribalism, or being part of a tribe, is a powerful motivator. But it can also be blind and ignorant. Scottish nationalism however is not narrow and welcomes all who live here.

Are people voting against the rapid advance of A1, tech businesses, globalization, and the rich getting richer - do they believe some strong man can stop this? I hope and believe there is another way through finding our own voices.

The late, acclaimed journalist Ian Bell, wrote in his Herald article, Scotland and the Easter Rising, that James Connelly seemed to assert that, “Internationalism without an acknowledgement of national identity is a forlorn, empty gesture…The willed amnesia inflicted where he is concerned is part of a wider forgetting. "When we had our vote a misrepresented nationalism colluded with a Labour party defending (so it said) an international ideal. In September 2014, Scotland was the poorer for forgetting.”

In Scotland, our great poet Hugh McDermid wrote: ‘To be international we must first be national.’  The Scottish independence and national movement was not born out of violence but out of the arts. We must now urgently vote to save our right for democratic voices.  

#protectdemocracy

Globalization versus identity

There is a significant struggle going on between remote, soulless, faceless, one size fits globalization – and our need for a sense of belonging and our roots, stories and identity. 

Many misunderstand what they term ‘Identity Politics’, as something harmful and isolationist. 

This is not the experience here in Scotland. Here it has nothing to do with race, and it is inclusive and about all who want to make a home here. Its about appreciating place, heritage and difference as positive things. The stories that make us who we are – our values, culture, 

Its also crucially important for Scotland to be international in out look and our major festivals are centred around welcoming the world to our doorstep.  

There are good aspects about globalization: ease of communication, progress, travel etc.

But there are many negatives too: giant exploitive corporations, reduced workers rights, pollution, its being characterless.  Our world has become so fast speed and automated and many of us spend so much time online interacting with a machine. 

I see young people returning now to valuing the real, authentic, local and the independent – hardback books, vinyl, traditional music, vintage clothes – something tangible and real to hold on to.

Also those posh socialists simply want to replace one elite with another. This is no answer. I want to se progressive, co-operative answer is to reform from within – by offering decent childcare, co-operative education, fair opportunities, improved healthcare. 

I want Scottish independence, because I believe in progressive and fair democracy.

Historian Tom Devine

“Scots suffer from “virtual universal historical illiteracy’ , says Tom Devine, “ perhaps that’s why they’ve struggled to engage with Referendum campaign.

Historian Tom Devine, Scotland's foremost academic and intellectual, once favoured a "devo-max" but he changed his mind for Scottish independence.
He believes that the purpose of the union on both sides have now crumbled. Scotland is now uniquely placed with top resources, top research and a more diverse economy.

He believes Scotland is competent and strong in a business and cultural sense with a more diverse business model.  Importantly Scotland has reserves of power. Scotland has four universities in the world’s top 200. In the 50s we were second rate but since then Scotland’s R & D has flourished.

Devine spoke of the ‘victimhood’ of Scots put forward in the best selling novels by Canadian John Prebble in the 1950s. Devine calls them works of 'faction’, making Scots feel downtrodden victims.

Do we have a shared myth and history with England?
There has been a gradual disintegration of confidence of Scotland in union. He believes the union once served a purpose, but has been in decline for many years now. That it is only through that a harmonious relationship between Scotland and England can be achieved.
"When you put all of these together, there's very little left in the union except sentiment, history and family."

**BOOKs by Tom Devine - Scottish Trilogy – a comprehensive study of Scottish modern history, which we didn’t have before 1780.  Also The Scottish Nation 1700 to 200. As well as some 36 other books.