Loving England Again

Scotland wouldn’t be what it is today without England. That much is obvious: England is our neighbour on the largest of these islands; we’re more or less the same age; a northern branch of their ancestors, the Angles, are among the four peoples who founded Scotland.

It’s nigh impossible to live in Scotland and not have some sort of regular encounter with England. Our public broadcaster is primarily focused on England, with English opinions and interests and accents on the main news, the continuity announcements, all the way to the soap operas and property shows; we elect MPs to a Parliament in Westminster which controls a great number of our laws, frequently against our own representatives’ wishes; the vast majority of newspapers are owned outside Scotland, and regularly headquartered in England. While most folk in England can live their lives largely untroubled by Scottish opinions and interests and accents, we in Scotland cannot avoid England and the English even if we wanted to.

That’s our lot as part of a United Kingdom of England Plus Three.

Advertisements

Ending On A High Note

These memes just keep getting more and more apocalyptic.

Jings, it’s been a year, hasn’t it?

It’s been a quiet year in the Wilderness, but there were still some fond memories and popular enough posts. I aim to do better next year, as always. For now, I’ll take a look back on the most popular blog posts of each month from the year that was.

Irrevocably and Forever

#ECJ: UK is free to unilaterally revoke the notification of its intention to withdraw from the EU – Case C-621/18 Wightman #Brexit pic.twitter.com/KUOI2eQ48C

— EU Court of Justice (@EUCourtPress) December 10, 2018

“Irrevocably and Forever” is a curiously emphatic phrase which turns up in otherwise dry legalese. United States law not only waives “the performance and discharge of any and all obligations and restrictions” in the cases of amendments to bylaws, but does so “irrevocably and forever.” On 25th November 1802, Count Ferenc Széchényi donated his collections “for the use and benefit of my dear homeland and people, irrevocably and forever.” The phrase crops up in all sorts of discussions, from secession to forbearance agreements to international treaties.

Forever is a long time for something to be considered irrevocable, and according to the European Union Court of Justice, Article 50 is not something which can be issued “irrevocably and forever.” It is, it seems, something which can be withdrawn by the United Kingdom, should it wish to do so between now and the 29th of March next year.

So the question becomes not if the UK can do it, but if the UK will do it.

And Even Her Very Name!

So a lot of folk in Scotland are quite angry just now, and I’m rapidly running out of patience for those who deliberately refuse to see why.

I’m going to do my best to explain why people like me are angry. Normally this would be the part where I say “I understand if you disagree, but please try to see it from our perspective.” Because in this case, I don’t think I can understand. The Phoney Union is reaching its breaking point, & the endgame for the Union is approaching close.

Patriotism vs Nationalism

Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism. Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism. By putting our own interests first, with no regard for others, we erase the very thing that a nation holds dearest, and the thing that keeps it alive: its moral values. https://t.co/w9AltyvMDw

— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) November 11, 2018

It’s funny: in many dictionaries, Patriotism and Nationalism are treated as synonyms. Yet for some reason, I keep seeing people arguing that they are different – opposites, even.

When did this distinction between Patriotism and Nationalism arise?

Desperate to be Proven Wrong

Ever since the wee hours of the 19th of September 2014, I’ve been desperate to be proven wrong on some things.

After a few weeks of recovery, I attended The Big Debate at the Beacon in Greenock in the later months of 2014. Stuart McMillan, then-MP Iain McKenzie, and Mona Siddiqui were present. When discussion of the Smith Commission came up, Ms Siddiqui warned us that we shouldn’t “go into something expecting to be betrayed,” that we should have good faith that the parties of Westminster would listen to Scotland. I knew then that we shouldn’t, because how many times has Lucy snatched away Charlie Brown’s football before now?

All through the referendum campaign, I didn’t think about what would happen with a No vote. Then I had to deal with what happened, and all the things that were lurking the back of my mind came flooding out. And in every single case, I was desperate to be wrong.

No True (King of) Scots(men)

An addendum to yesterday’s post: it’s illuminating to read the reactions of the story.

Here’s what some people say:

And here’s what others say:

It’s almost as if some people think that supporters of Scottish Independence will think less of one of their greatest historical figures if* it was revealed he was born in England. That the party whose first president was born in England will have a meltdown. That the people who march with the flags of many countries – including St. George’s Cross – will have a canary.

Why would people think that?

Like I said. Illuminating.

*The jury’s still out on that, of course.