Happy St George's Day!
Happy St George's Day. How has it been for you? Are you in commemoration mode?
Celebrating Shakespeare's birthday, perhaps? Or lamenting the tragic lack of contemporary dragons to slay?
I must confess I hadn't noticed the significance of the date at all until I caught up with Commons questions to the Secretary of State for Scotland.
Such neglect, I suspect, I share with most Scots and, according to surveys, most people in England too where the pugnacious saint's national day is little known or noted.
Des Browne, it seems, feels this should be redressed. Having wished compliments of the day to fellow MPs, he pondered aloud why the good and sensible people of England didn't make more of Shakespeare's birthday.
One reason could be that the Bard of Avon is also reckoned to have died on the 23rd of April.
Perhaps, like T.S. Eliot, in very different circumstances, they have seen both birth and death but had thought they should be different.
Over-exercised
Perhaps, more probably, there remains confusion in England about English/British nationality which transmits itself to the National Day.
Of course, the SNP piled in. Angus MacNeil, MP for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, wished the chamber a "Happy St George's Day".
His colleague, Angus Robertson, the party's Commons leader, made the matter more explicit still. Marking the day, he looked forward, he said, to England's independence.
Maybe it's me but I can't get over-exercised about saintly days, including Andrew despite my fondness for the town and university to which he lends his name.
Burns' Night, yes. Never happier than when consuming haggis or memorialising, immortally.
And I yield to those nations, such as Ireland, which happily mark their sanctified day. Just not sure you can extrapolate that easily.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~45~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
I'm always interested in the ability of Ireland to have their Saint's day celebrated across the world and what lies behind this.
In many ways the Scottish and Irish diaspora have similar experiences, although perhaps you can argue that Irish emigration was larger and in greater concentrations.
It's possibly as a result of this that the Irish faced greater oppression in many of the places they went to (shown in the infamous 'No Irish need apply' signs in America) and as such they felt a greater need to protect their heritage, leading to the massive St Patrick's day events we still see in the USA.
America is hugely important in this, as is the Guinness brand. America's central role in the world clearly helped create the massive event that St Patrick's Day now is (if most people fleeing the potato famine had instead gone to Sweden it's doubtful St Patrick's Day would be as big).
Guinness is important too. Guinness spends a colossal amount on branding each year with St Patrick's Day right at the heart of this. Whilst this didn't create the mystic that goes with the day, it certainly helps perpetuate it.
The lesson here is that you can't simply tell people to celebrate an event and have it happen. It has to (at least initially) have a significant meaning for people and then throughout the years it will grow in stature.
Anyone looking to have a similar St George?s or St Andrew's day would have to work out WHY it should matter to people, before they do anything to try and just MAKE it matter.
Complain about this comment
If Labour MPs don't fancy slaying the big Scottish dragon we'll be happy to do it for them at the next general election.
Complain about this comment
The only dragon that needs to be slain around here is the UK constitution.
Once that is out of the way the English will probably be as confused as ever about nationality and sundry other matters, but at least that will not matter so much to us then.
Complain about this comment
I thinbk you are mistaken on English not celebrating.
Over recent years we have taken to celebrating our nations day.
This year for the first time ever sales of St George flags and bunting has out sold the sales of Irish memorabilia.
As an English guy who lives in Scotland works in works in london.
I am proud to be English,
and do indeed look forward to English independence.
I do so with trepidation not for the English, but for my house price in Scotland.
Once Englands subsidisation of Scotland stops I may see my hard earned house start to lose money.
Complain about this comment
Of all the national identities of the UK the English one is the least clearly defined, no national dress and no bespoke anthem. For years St George's day has passed by without a whimper. I'm glad as a Scot that the English are re-discovering their own identity. Even so its rather ironic that "Scottish" politicians including the PM are championing the cause of St George. I wonder why.....?
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Is it not time that the good English people were freed from being shackled to the Scots and could celebrate their own freedom, thereby releasing St George's Day to an entirely new kind of celebration??
I have to confess my sins however!
In the past week, I succumbed to temptation and read the blog on a Sunday newspaper (it can be known as the Sunday T........) where 9 out of every 10 posts was quite strongly anti-Scottish and, to be honest, I was quite taken aback.
Aside from mis-information, bias and general grumpiness, there was an overwhelming (and seemingly independent) feeling of 'Let those whingeing Scots go, who needs them??')
So on this day of celebrating all things English should the Scots not gather together and claim 'Independence for England'!!
Complain about this comment
Literally 30 seconds after this blog post appeared in my RSS reader, my boss asked the room, "Why does Google have a dragon on it today?" Of course, this was the first I'd heard of it.
As for Burns' Night, I received such a comprehensive education of the man in primary school that I now harbour a thorough hatred of him, his poetry, his day and even a slight dislike of Clydesdale Bank fivers.
Complain about this comment
The only dragon I want to slay it that of petty nationality. Is this a case if the SNP dragon-ing us down to their level.
Here?s a random thought Was not the brightest period of Scottish history the 19th century when for a while Glasgow was the richest city on earth at the height of the British Empire.
Complain about this comment
A few years ago, I agree St George was hardly celebrated in England. But since the Euro '96 football championships, the flag of St George has largely supplanted the Union flag at English sporting events - a good thing for most Scots who disliked the English 'hijacking' the Union flag for themselves.
Now St George's Day itself has emerged from the shadows. The pub down the road from me in Romford, for example, is festooned with England flags today, outside and in. I've not seen this in previous years.
We also have a party standing in the London Mayoral elections called the English Democrats, whose logo is a form of the St George's Cross, and whose policies seem to be solely anti-Scots, in both the sense of Scots MPs running the country, and, they claim, of London/English taxes subsidising Scotland.
Whether the rise of English nationalism is a welcome discovery of self-awareness or a knee-jerk reaction to immigration or having a Scots PM I don't yet know (but I have my suspicions).
Ken, Romford (ex-Glasgow)
Complain about this comment
It's not wishes for a happy St George's Day that I want from Scottish MP's at Westminster - I want them to have the honour to stop voting on all matters that don't apply to Scotland. Like the vast majority of English voters, (and probably Scottish ones too) I don't want independence, but I do want a fair and democratic system of government in which the MP's who enact legislation are accountable to the electorate who are affected by it. If the pathetic government that we currently have in office refuses to address the iniquitous situation created for England by its botched devolution arrangements, those members sitting for Scottish seats could rectify the inequality by simply abstaining on devolved matters, forcing the government's hand. Those of us south of the border might then have some respect for them, but the words "honour" and "politician" do not sit easily in the same sentence. Never mind, the English are stirring at last, and the present anomaly will not last much longer! Then it will be a Happy St George's Day.
Complain about this comment
In 2008, saints? Utter nonsense the lot of them! At a time when the Act of Succession is topical, it might be appropriate to extend the ban on Catholics to include anyone whose life is guided by myth and superstition, and who expresses their beliefs in mumbo-jumbo terms about saints, Trinity, magic, etc., regardless of background.
Complain about this comment
The only cross-border subsidization that I am aware of is Scottish subsidization of England. The sooner this comes to an end the better. There are much better things we could be spending our money on.
They take our oil and then say they are subsidizing us. What a charming people. The sooner we are free of them the better.
Down with the Union. Happy St George's Day!
Complain about this comment
To mcjbrown: Glasgow circa 19th century-richest city on earth? Define rich. Glasgow has historically (and contemporarily) the worst housing stock in Europe and record levels of poverty, urban squalor and chronically poor levels of public health.
An Empire where the sun never set?. how fabulous, but it couldn?t house, even to the lowest standard, the working people upon whose broken backs it was built.
Complain about this comment
How can English nationalism and a pride in being English be sustained when the very symbol of that pride has been smeared with hate and drenched in blood?
The lament is that the English have had their nation?s flag corrupted by the right-wing, barbaric faction through hundreds of running football street battles. I am an Englishman and proud of it and yes, I flew the flag today. The looks I got said it all, Nazi, racist, thug; all because I had a piece of red and white material. This was from people who had known me for a long time. The comments such as ?I never knew you were like that!? ?British Bulldog? (?) and ?What is that for?? show what is seen in the cross of Saint George today.
The English are paying for the past sins committed. The modern day barbarism across the cities of Europe and for the sins of Empire; we are not allowed to forget the nations ground under the Imperial heel. We are still the British Empire, although no empire is left. We are still Marshal Wade suppressing the Jacobites, remembered in an anthem used for an English Team not a combined British Team.
I am glad that the Scots, Irish and Welsh can fly there national colour?s with pride. It is good to belong and to know that you belong. I ask the question though, for how long must we pay? Can we not have our own national anthem to ring out along side Flower of Scotland or Land of my Fathers? Can we not have a flag crowned in pride, not smeared in mud? Can we not have a day that allows us to say ?I am English and I am proud of it!??
Complain about this comment
Segrave (#14), your wish will come true, I dare say, only when the remaining subject nations are free. Regrettably, England is unlikely to let go of Scotland willingly no matter how many English people tell us day in and day out that they are fed up with us.
As a Welsh academic I was once acquainted with was fond of saying, the English don't have roots . . . they just have branches.
When Scotland is no longer a branch of England, England's sins may be forgiven. Not before, I should imagine.
Complain about this comment
I am inclined to agree with You Brian.I do not really see the point in any National Day unless it is a Public Holiday,and niether the UK nor the Scottish Government is very likely to annoy the Business Lobby by adding another one of those.
It speaks volumns that the Tricentenial of The UK took place last year all but unnoticed and without a Public Holiday . Imagine that happening with such a Historic anniversary in any other Country in the World .This suggests to me that nobody cares much about "British" identity North or South of The Border.People seem to regard The UK as no more than a convenient ,or inconvienient ,political arrangement rather than as a "Nation ".
Complain about this comment
Personally I find all displays of nationalism rather distasteful. I like having been born in Scotland and living here, but it doesn't make me or us better than anyone else. Or much different.
One of my kids has been bullied at school for being born in England.
National pride and chauvinism takes second place to religion in the cause of pain, war, death and trouble in the world. The sooner we dispense with such trappings and grow up, the better for humankind.
I'd build a big bonfire and burn all flags tomorrow.
Complain about this comment
JohnHancock79 I hope that one day you can gain your wish but I belive it has less to do with the English and more to do with the Politics. Even if it did happen we are all being driven to set aside the things that make us what we are and embrace European "harmony" - that is to no-one's advantage save the buaracrats.
akginty We stand as clans, tribes, cohorts, teams - remove the nations and people will join under another banner. It is the very nature of humanity to bond and join with your own people, whoever those people are, and however they may change. To wish for us to put this aside, is to wish away the very core of being human. It is this very drive that has brought humanity to the heights and tragically the depths that it is at the moment. To lose it will be to assign the race to mediocrity and the grown up human race will wither and die. I would rather harness it than to despise it.
Complain about this comment
The sins of the English and the Scottish are the same. Both countries joined in a union, industrialised and formed and empire. In both there where/are those who profited and those who suffered. Both countries are equally guilty for all the good and bad Britain has caused. Both communities must look to our shared history with mixed feelings of pride and shame.
Living in England I don?t like the idea of a national day because it seems false and like I would be accepting a myth that is basically untrue. Something modern that is made to be old and ancient. Maybe I?m wrong and it is just an excuse to have a good drink down the pub but then again maybe others have their own agendas and see the rise of ?me too? nationalism as a way of shaping our future.
I think nationalism is about creating the myths of a nation and getting these accepted as truth. From reading these postings one myth that seems to have legs is the English are bad barbaric people while the Celtic Scots are good people sadly subjugated by those nasty English. I think this idea/myth is nonsense. Most people in the UK have a good life and I think the UK is worth preserving.
Complain about this comment
All nationalists are delighted at the rise of Englishness.
I actually like the flag of St George which I regard as wholesome whereas that rag, the Union Jack, I associate with all that is unwholesome whether at home or abroad.
Complain about this comment
Seagrave - the nature of bonding I've observed is all to often about gathering together, ignoring our own faults and finding easy targets to blame - the English, Americans, Russians, Catholics, Jews, Muslims - take your pick. The current level of political debate in Scotland is a case in point.
To say that the alternative to nationalism is mediocrity demonstrates a lack of ambition for humanity. If it's all right with you guys, I'll remain optimistic.
Complain about this comment
Nezavisimost: My mum was born in Glasgow in 1929, her dad worked in the shipyards and on the railways as a coppersmith. She talks about Glasgow with great affection and we all enjoy are selves when ever we visit. Also off and on over the years I have spent much time working in Glasgow.
This post is not to say you are wrong. I?ve read all the stats and know you are right about the housing and poverty. My point is Glasgow is a great city with a glorious history that also has a lot of problems. Modern Glasgow is the result of its past and in common with many cities in Britain its poorer areas suffer for inner city / post industrial blight. But also in common with the rest of the UK most of the population are doing fine.
If I?m wrong please tell me? What uniquely bad problem does Glasgow have? How does the present constitutional arrangement specifically blight Glasgow and say benefits Birmingham or Manchester?
Complain about this comment
Instead of having a St. David's Day, St. Patrick's, St. George's, and St. Andrew's Day?
Lets make Remembrance Day a Public/Bank Holiday?
This will allow everyone equal opportunity to celebrate true diversity.
Off-Topic ... the Gurkhas? pension rights still unresolved?
Come on press, run with this story until it is resolved.
bye the way!!!! loved! loved! loved! your interview with Wendy, kept her on her toes. lol ...
Complain about this comment
National celebrations are determined by the history of that nation, a browse through English history will explain why the celebrations are muted. I spent the day in England's capital city and was unaware of the occasion until I read this blog.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
There is no place in either the UK or the EU for petty nationalism.
It is the SNP, the BNP and Plaid that are past their sell-by dates. They are a throw-back to the tribal bigotry that tore Europe apart.
The EU is committed to an ever closer union, not an ever more divided one. It is a farce to invoke European unity as an excuse to carve Europe up.
We fought a devastating war to put an end to the worst kind of nationalism. I am for a united Britain within a united Europe and I care nothing for St George's Day or any other national day. I care about Remembrance Sunday, and all the millions who gave their lives so that we could build a new world without strutting nationalists.
So it saddens me to read the small-minded comments of various separatists on this blog. But a vast majority of Scots and English support both Britain and Europe and I am encouraged by that.
Complain about this comment
I am a Scot living in London and I have to say that there was a very obvious increase in the number of Cross of St George flags to be seen flying from cars and buildings yesterday and flying this emblem of England is a trend that has been increasing in recent years, particularly when the England football team is playing.
But so what? If I was in the USA the appearance of the Stars and Stripes would cause no comment what so ever.
Most unpleasant comments about the prospects for Scottish independence stem from a feelings of insecurity and fear. The more self-confident and self-assured the English are then the more likely is the smooth transition to mutual independence.
Complain about this comment
Segrave:
"It is the very nature of humanity to bond and join with your own people, whoever those people are, and however they may change. To wish for us to put this aside, is to wish away the very core of being human."
So much for individuality, intelligence and compassion, then. The purpose of life is to be a flag-waver, says the flag-waver.
Complain about this comment
Born in England, raised in Scotland, lived in London, stay in Fife. Keep those flags flying: it helps me remember which country I'm in.
As for Georgey boy - well, by all the saints these are still Christian nations I think. God may have a few surprises for us yet I reckon. God is love.
Red, white and blue. Green, pink and yellow. Who's to say who's right? One thing that we can be pretty sure of is that suffering and injustice and all the usual human traits will go on. So let's find our fun where we can. Bring on the dancers; that's what I say.
Complain about this comment
In fact, that's what should be done: we should have a dancing competition. Scotland vs. England, traditional and contemporary events. In Berwick-on-Tweed. The winner decides which country the town is to be in. Get Tiesto as impartial MC; and Michael Flatley as one of the judges. If it's a dead heat then just run the whole thing again next year. How does that sound? It might be a winner.
Complain about this comment
I think the reason for not celebrating some saints over others is more to do with twhat else they are saints for.
St. George is the patron saint of Aragon, Catalonia, England, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Palestine, Portugal, and Russia, as well as the cities of Amersfoort, Beirut, Ferrara, Freiburg, Genoa, Ljubljana, and Moscow, as well as a wide range of professions, organisations and disease sufferers, but most importantly skin disease and syphilis.
St Andrew however, is merely the patron saint of Scotland, Russia, Romania, Greece, Amalfi, and Luqa in Malta. He was also the patron saint of Prussia.
St Patrick is the patron siant of Ireland and thats about it.
Georges problem is definitely the syphilis thing.
Complain about this comment
I am always amused by the comments on this blog about the history of England, as if it was all bad, whereas of course, the history of Scotland is all harmony and light.
The sins of empire (if you accept such a thing) were not exclusively English; indeed on a population, pro-rata basis the sins of Scotland, which exploited empire to the full, may even have been greater. Not every tragedy visited upon Scotland was the fault of the English either. The Highland clearances were the result of greedy Scottish landlords evicting their northern bretheren for profit. The massacre at Glencoe was one Scottish clan, egged on by a Scottish Secretary, happily butchering another. Ancient rivalries are still alive and well in Scotland to this day, and if independence removed the unifying target of England for the grievances of Scots, then it wouldn't be long before they resurfaced: Highlands versus Lowlands, Islands versus Mainlands, clan versus clan. England meanwhile would continue to give voice to ancient rivalry by playing the Roses cricket match!
The main reason that the English have not traditionally exhibited strong shows of nationalism is not a lack of pride, or a feeling of historical shame, in the nation, but rather a feeling of being comfortable in their skin, and simply not feeling the need. Devolution, and the iniquitous settlement visited upon them by an uncomprehending and arrogant government, is starting to change that. Traditionally slow to anger, but obdurate and unbeatable once aroused, the English are waking up fast to the unfairness of their situation, and it would be a foolish politician who does not take note of their rising fury. 10 years is long enough to sort out the mess that devolution created. It would be a mistake, however, to interpret that as a display of anti-Scottish resentment; the resentment is towards the unfair constitutional settlement, and would be much more stridently expressed north of the border if the boot were on the other foot.
Complain about this comment
I think to suggest that clan rivalries would resurface to marr and blight an independent Scotland is ridculous.
Complain about this comment
I hate nationalism in all its forms, the most devastating wars of the last century were fought over petty nationalism. It makes me sad to see people driving each other apart by promoting "their" national day.
St George - As far as I'm aware he lived in Turkey, and what did he actually do? Slay a dragon?! How did he end up patron saint of England?! If England were going to choose a saint, surely St Augustine would be a better choice? At least he actually went to England
Celebrating St Andrew's day in Scotland is just as strange. he never made it beyond Syria, and I seriously doubt that St Regulus actually carried his bones all the way to Fife! A better saint for Scotland would be St Columba whose legacy can still be seen in Iona.
My choice for a national day though would be VE Day at the end of World War 2, when Hitler's despicable nationalist tryranny was brought to an end and Europe breathed again. A day Scotland and England can celebrate together.
Complain about this comment
As a Scot, I resent contrived comparisons between our country, with its embodiment of social justice - particularly our social-democratic and civic nationalism - with the kind of the far-right and 'exclusionist' politics that prevail in certain territories elsewhere.
This kind of subject matter, indeed, always seems to draw out those who, devoid of an effective response to the SNP's popular and socially just objectives, seek to damn all forms of 'nationalism' in a desperate bid to 'gain the moral high ground' for their brand of 'unionist' politics ? as presided over by London.
By such reckoning, every action in the name of London ? the aftermath of Culloden, through the Highland Clearances, the smash-and-grab of the British Empire, to modern illegal wars ? is inimpeachable by comparison with a vote for the 'damnable' SNP!!
The pathetic notion that Scotland?s democratic nationalism is inherently divisive, while any opposing action taken in the name of the Union Flag is above reproach, exposes its own reprehensible use of manufactured and cynically exploited fears in a threadbare attempt to shore up the out-dated hegemony of centralised London control.
As most informed Scots, at least, are aware, the SNP's values and core objectives are for a smart, successful, confident, healthy and socially just Scotland which plays a full and positive part in global affairs ? in stark contrast to the 'beggar region' status which is evidently the best prognosis offered by unionists on either side of the border.
As for hate-fuelled narrow-mindedness, one need look no further than the disgusting and poisonous front pages of the unionist tabloids on the morning of May's election day ? which in some cases were paraded in front of voters inside the actual polling stations.
Or are we expected to applaud such stunts in the name of the 'preservation' of the United Kingdom?
Complain about this comment
Why don't we all celibrate mid summer's day. What a fantastic day for a public holiday. The sun might even shine.
Complain about this comment
Dougie-Dubh:
"The pathetic notion that Scotland?s democratic nationalism is inherently divisive, while any opposing action taken in the name of the Union Flag is above reproach, exposes its own reprehensible use of manufactured and cynically exploited fears in a threadbare attempt to shore up the out-dated hegemony of centralised London control."
I'd certainly not say that any opposing action is above reproach. Brown's peddling of Britishness is as pointless as it is unwanted.
The fact that you see opposition to Scottish nationalism as 'in the name of the Union Flag' speaks volumes. Not everyone thinks that way. How is your nationalism democratic when you can't even accept that people can have legitimate non-national worldviews?
Complain about this comment
It is a shame that the English do not celibrate their Saints day or even Shakespear. It seems overtime most English have lost their national identity.
I am sure that if they made Beckham the national patron or perhaps even Saint Blair himself then perhaps the English will be more inclined to celibrate.
Either way once the UK breaks up i wont care less what England celibrates.
Complain about this comment
Re- Edin Chris.I hate nationalism in all its forms
Although i respect your opinion i feel you have been blinded by the nationalist/fascist assosciation.
The fact is that Hitler ran an autocratic dictatorship hell bent on taking over the world and arridicating what he felt was subhuman people.
Now there are lots of countries with national pride during that time that did not want anything but peace. Take Norway and belgium for examples. Are you comparing these contires to Nazis just because they have a national identity and proud of it. Hmmm i sense your argument is weak.
Also, say for example if Hitler took over the whole world and made everyone speak German and essential wiped away everyones national identity. What you would have is a world with no borders and only one identity. Surely that would be the end of nationalism.
Maybe you would be happy then since you hate nationalism.
The sad thing is with the formation of European union and globalisation Hitler has kind of got his wish not to mention a single currency. And our Government will not even allow us the freedom of a referendum.
People no matter what country can coexist peacefully whilst also respecting each other NATIONAL identity.
Ultimitely if we give this up without being given freedom to chose then this is a greater crime than believing in nationalism.
Nationalism is far from being petty it is necessary to preserve culture and being different is ultimately good.
Complain about this comment
So much of this kind of discussion is marred by misconception. So much misconception results from the language of the debate.
The key word here is nationalism. I do not think that it is particularly nationalistic to expect one's country to be self-governing. The French would give you short shrift if you suggested that they surrender control of their country. They lost that, of course, in 1939, and the UK and its allies spared no effort to get it back for them. The Nazi attempt to unify Europe in their fashion was defeated, as was the Napoleonic one before it.
Nationalist Germany in the 1930s and 1940s most certainly did not stand for the rights of all peoples to be self-governing. Here in Scotland in the present day the governing party does believe in the rights of all peoples to be self-governing. It has no plans to invade Poland.
The independence movement in Scotland is precisely that. It is about autonomy. It has nothing to do with narrow nationalism. Within the UK England is effectively self-governing. As for Scotland, however, even the present improved constitutional arrangements do not provide it with the means to be truly self-governing. All that the SNP wants is to make Scotland as self-governing as it believes that it needs to be.
The SNP believes strongly in the European Union, furthermore, as do I. In order for Scotland to be represented in the EU in its own right and to play its part in the affairs of the European community independence is required. In order for the Scottish Government to look after the interests of Scotland as it would like to do independence is required.
I make no apology for advocating independence for my country, because I have nothing for which to apologize. Patrick Henry, a distinguished advocate of American independence, declared in 1775, " Should I keep back my opinions
at such a time, through fear of giving offence, I should consider myself
as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty
toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings."
He also said,"I know not what course others may take;
but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" The independence movement in Scotland, like the one in the American colonies, is about liberty, the right of a people to govern themselves and determine their own destiny. This is a perfectly respectable cause. Indeed, as First Minister Salmond said in his keynote speech to the SNP's spring conference, it is a "noble cause".
Complain about this comment
Several readers believe that the SNP's brand of nationalism is noble.
One has only to spend a little while in Scotland to encounter SNP inspired anti-English prejudice. There have been notorious examples of it, like a child from New Zealand being beaten up by a passer-by for wearing an England football shirt.
Years ago when the SNP was only a fringe party with 2000 members, such behaviour was unthinkable. The generation of Scots who won the war were proud to be British.
A reader compares Scotland to the American colonies. Scotland is not a colony and if the Americans had enjoyed the same democratic parliamentary rights as we do the revolution would never have happened. There is no comparison and Mr Salmond is no Patrick Henry.
A New Zealand PM once commented that there were 1000 reasons why Australia and New Zealand should not be a single nation, and 999 of them were miles.
By contrast, Britain is a single island, with a single language and culture. Dividing this nation would be idiocy.
And I can think of more than a million reasons why it would be immoral also. They are Britain's war dead. They died to save Britain and Europe from the same toxic nationalism that now threatens to tear this island apart.
It is outrageous for the SNP and its supporters to wrap themselves in the mantle of 'nobleness.' Real patriotism transcends nationalism, and a multicultural and inclusive Britain is far nobler.
Finally, several readers speak of 'when' independence happens. A large majority of Scots are still opposed to independence. In whose name do these SNP separatists speak? Not in our name.
Complain about this comment
Vfor Victory (#40), I am very proud to be British in the same way that a Norwegian is no doubt proud to be Scandinavian. Just as the Norwegians chose independence in the last century it will be perfectly reasonable for the Scots to do so now in the confident expectation that our relations with the rest of the British Isles will be as amicable after independence as have been relations between Norway and Sweden.
My father and all his brothers were proud to participate in the conflict against Nazi Germany and afterwards equally proud to vote for Scottish independence until their dying day, those of them who survived the war, that is. To suggest that there is any incompatibility between pride in the war dead and support for independence is as indefensible as it is dishonourable.
As for anti-English prejudice, I do not believe that I have ever witnessed any. As for anti-Scottish prejudice, on the other hand, that is only too apparent at the present time.
There is nothing toxic about the desire to bring independence to one's country. What may be as toxic as it seems to me to be manifestly perverse is the desire to prevent one's country from becoming independent.
Freedom is indeed a noble thing. The right of nations to be independent was upheld by those who fought in the Second World War. I do not see why Scotland should not have that right. The way to settle the matter is to hold an independence referendum. That would be democratic.
It may be worth reminding ourselves that democracy is something else that was fought for in the Second World War, in case anyone had forgotten. Scotland has never been allowed a referendum on independence. It is time for unionists to stop opposing one. It is time.
Patrick Henry was an elected representative in the assembly of one of the colonies. We have a legislative assembly. We too do not have independence. We too have no plebiscite in which the people's will can be expressed. The issue is indeed liberty, as it was then.
Complain about this comment
I am not suggesting that there is a direct link between Hitler and Scottish nationalists, of course not!
My concern is that there is only a small step between saying "I am proud of my country" and "my country is better than yours!" And that is where the danger starts.
Some people here have made comparisons between Scotland and the American independence movement. I do not think that is a fair comparison. The Americans war cry was "No taxation without representation!" Which was true. The Americans did not have a vote, and when George III put taxes on them, there was no democratic way for the Americans to oppose it. Scotland does have a vote, and Scotland has representation. The British Prime Minister and Chancellor are Scots!! We are more than represented!
What then is the point of independence? To have more say over our affairs? Hardly as we will hand over most of our sovereignty to Brussels! Small countries count for nothing in the EU. The decisions are made by Italy, France and Germany.
Economic reasons? The oil will run out in 15 years and the truth is that even before that happens, we get more of s subsidy from Westminster than the oil is worth!
Countries work better when they work together. 150 years ago, Germany and Italy were just a collection of states. Now, no one would suggest that Bavaria or Venetia should be independent. We are better off as part of Britain.
Complain about this comment
#40 VforVictory.
You are quite wrong.
Such acts of thuggery and personal assault are no more connected with political nationalism than the frequently observed prospect of hordes of England ?fans? running amok through a city after a defeat at football counts as a political movement.
Such invariably senseless and random acts of violence have occurred throughout civilised history.
Moreover, it is often argued, with much justification, that political frustration tends to erupt into violence only in the absence of effective democratic expression.
The movement for Scottish independence has many outlets, some more ?politically correct? than others. Even the most ?extreme? of these groups have been occasionally guilty, at worst, of little more than a lack of ill-considered rants and lack of political realism.
Still the SNP has always properly distanced itself from the more ?free-spirited? elements of the wider movement, and proving itself more than capable of successful government, as well as the most effective representation of independence aspirations ? further proving most of its critics and wilful denigraters entirely wrong.
Political commentators are frequently warning us of a threatened ?English backlash? as a response to increasing Scottish confidence and aspirations for greater autonomy. Details of this ?backlash? are scant (although images of rioting football fans, burning cars and looting spring to mind) ? although a glance at some the blog sites of the English-media is enough to sample the shockingly ill-informed and often poisonous attitudes towards Scottish autonomy, which are in marked contrast to the generally well-informed and positive blog posts on Scottish sites in support of the SNP.
The clear fact is that there is a vast gulf between Scotland?s democratic nationalism and the stark dangers represented by kind of wilfully specious nightmares so often constructed by the unionist media for their own desperate political ends ? just as the recent case of ?Scottish liberation terrorists? turned out to be two twisted characters from Manchester, with no connection to Scotland, whose malignant schemes were fortunately quashed before they could render much service to the unionist cause.
True democracy must allow people to pursue their legitimate, democratic aspirations without being baselessly demonised.
Thugs or extremists of any kind will never speak in my name.
With their upstanding historical record, their outstanding performance in government, and as a force for my country's aspirations, the SNP have my faith, trust and support.
It is high time for the ill-informed, or agenda-driven muck-spreaders to put up or shut up.
Complain about this comment
Edinchris (#42), your argument is, of course, a familiar one. As my perspective is quite different from yours, I can agree only to disagree with you.
As for references to American independence, I consider them to have validity, although there are, of course, aspects of the two cases which are not identical. How could it be otherwise?
It is worth bearing in mind that the American colonists, although not represented in the Westminster parliament, did, as I understand it, enjoy representation in their own bicameral legislatures, which consulted and negotiated with the British ministry. Does anyone believe that the Americans would not in time have become at least as self-governing as the Canadians have become even if the British government had adopted a different approach to them in the period leading up to the war of independence?
Patrick Henry spoke in favour of both personal and national liberty as an inalienable human right as well as something which would have to be grasped rather than obtained by negotiation from the British. He spoke of it in a way that I find to be reminiscent of the 14th-century poet John Barbour's evocation of freedom in his poem The Bruce.
Anyway, I would not suggest that the cause of Scottish independence is likely to be opposed by force of arms. I am concerned, however, about the problem which the country will be faced with if unionists persist in opposing a constitutional referendum in which the option of independence is included, as their position appears to be opposed by a large majority of the people of Scotland. The question of personal democratic right thus becomes an issue as well as the question of national freedom or independence, just as in America.
The issue of liberty that is before us concerns: (i) the question of the right of the people of Scotland to choose the constitutional future of our country in a referendum; (ii) the freedom that an independent as opposed to a dependant country has by virtue of its independence to govern itself in accordance with the will of its people without any external intervention not authorised by its sovereign democratically elected government.
Unless and until the option of independence has been formally considered and rejected by the electorate in a referendum, it cannot be correctly claimed that the people have freely decided that their country should not be independent. If, despite the fact that the people indicate by a large majority, as they appear to do now, that they wish such a referendum to be held but one is still not held, then the people are being prevented from expressing their will on the matter. This is not liberty.
The suppression of the right of the people to choose to make their country free is a denial of liberty twice over. The issue at stake, then, is most emphatically liberty, as it was in America. It has, of course, nothing whatever to do with the numerous and various obnoxious unionist red herrings with which we are all too familiar and which have now been around for so long that they are beginning to stink.
Complain about this comment
What if Scotland gained independence but lost influence and control of its affairs? The scenario would be post independent Scotland having to renegotiate with the EU and having to accept the EURO and unified tax. So for example interest rate and corporation tax will be set in Brussels and not London. My point is there are a lot of Scottish MPs in London with the leverage to vote on English affairs looking after Scotland?s interests. Will the extra revenue form oil compensate to the lost of control?
Also what will happen to the BBC? Will it be broken up and replaced by a SBC, EBC, CBC and NIBC? And how would they stand against SKY, Disney and all the other global media companies. What if a result of independence was that no significant TV programmes get made in Scotland? How would Scottish culture cope is all the children spend all their time watching Disney as there was no ?Singing Kettle? for them to see.
What if Rupert Murdoch found the Scottish Premiere League football inconvenient and decided to merge all his soccer assets in to one European supper league with just one spot for Scotland?
My point is the UK has a lot of influence in the world. OK we are not the power we once where but we still do count for something. And Scotland is a full partner in the UK and hence has a lot of influence on its affairs that we be lost if the UK breaks up.
Complain about this comment
johnhancock - I am not at all opposed to democracy, in fact I think in many ways a referendum would be the best way to settle the question of independence for Scotland. I would lend my services to the Unionist campaign, I would cast my vote to keep the Union, and I believe (as the opinion polls show) that around 65% of Scots would vote the same way as me.
However, what I have heard about the SNP referendum is an attempt to muddy the waters. Their referendum as far as I remember would go something like this:
Do you think we should:
1) Keep everything the same
2) Give Scotland more powers within devolution
3) Have independence
With people marking their preferences 1,2 or 3. I think a far better referendum would be simply:
Should Scotland be independent? Yes or No.
However, I think that if people choose independence, we will have no more say in our own destiny than we do now. The big decisions that are affecting us now and will affect us in future are made in China, the USA and Brussels.
In Scotland, we cannot hope to influence those decisions. As part of the UK, with a place in the G8, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, as well as being a major player in Nato, the EU and the Commonwealth, we still have some influence in the world, and maybe make a difference in helping to rebuild countries like Afghanistan.
Complain about this comment
There are good reasons to oppose a referendum until there is a clear democratic mandate for one (not just opinion polls). It would cause an investment freeze, stock market turmoil and capital flight. This happened in run-up to the Quebec referendum, to the extent that the Canadian government had to prop up their currency.
The overwhelming majority of Scottish people want to be rid of faith schools, whilst the nationalists want to build more. Education and/or religion could be considered more important than nation; why aren't we having a referendum on that?
Complain about this comment
I note and take account of the points that Anaxim (#47) makes.
The problem concerning personal democratic right remains, however, it seems to me. If the people actually wish to have a referendum in which they are free to express a preference for independence but are prevented from having one, what then?
They just forget about it? I doubt that.
The unionist parties should take care not to lead us very far into uncharted territory of this type. The trouble with uncharted territory is that you never know where you might end up.
The point concerning referendums on matters other than constitutional ones is interesting. If there were a demand for referendums to be held on such matters, it would have to be considered, no doubt.
Complain about this comment
I am a Scot who grew up in the heart of middle England. The idea that Scotland has any influence domestically or internationally as part of the UK or even within the UK is a nonsense. The debacle of the CFP negotiations and the pathetic way in which Scottish interests were represented goes some way to proving this. The UK is run by Westminster for the benefit of the Southern English electorate and economy.
Scotland is retained by Westminster (note: not "the English") because we are a useful satellite to milk whether it be our exports, oil or world class soldiers, that great military training ground known as the Highlands, a compliant if relatively devastated economy and people, or simply fleshing out the UK and therefore allowing the UK some credibility on the world stage (see Jack Straw's infamous comments on this some years ago). Any other analysis, and certainly one that suggests Scottish interests are served by membership of the UK, is IMO sentimental delusion of the worst kind.
Scotland has a real chance to emerge almost phoenix-like as a modern and confident independent EU country. Wealthy but redistributive, proud yet internationally inclusive and embracing. The future for Scotland as an independent country is extremely exciting and all power to Salmond et al in pursuing and achieving what is for most other small EU countries a simple independent normality. And in our wake I hope a happier and more settled, less angry and reactionary and certainly a better informed less-ignorant England will surely follow. So yes indeed, a belated Happy St Georges day to all our English cousins!
Complain about this comment
Brian:
Happy St. Georges Day [belated].....
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS