Why I'm voting no

I have written here before that I'm going to vote in this referendum, unlike some friends of mine who say that that's a matter for the Scots. What I didn't say was in what I was voting... Well, the title is very obvious.
There are many reasons why I'm voting no: some economic, some political, some even sociological... No, I don't think it will be the end of Scotland if it becomes independent, it will just be worse for the Scottish and the other British, but that doesn't really matter because the main reason why I vote no is an ideological one. I believe in a more cosmopolitan world instead of an increasingly divided one by ethnic, national or religious divides. And, as foreigner living in this country, I look at the United Kingdom with joy because it represents the very model of state I want to see all over the world.
The United Kingdom is a multi-national state that has been developing to become:
- a Democracy where all of its citizens, be them Scottish, English, Welsh or Northern Irish, have the same participatory rights, civil liberties and access to political positions (the ex-PM was Scottish, for example);
- a state under the rule of law with the same fundamental laws to all its composing entities but that still respects different legal traditions;
- a state that promotes the cultural and religious rights of its different nations and encourages its diversity.
Basically, a state where it doesn't really matter which of its components you come from. And this is what a cosmopolitan state should look like. Just compare it to what happens south of the channel. There you have a state that has been promoting a single French republican identity since the bloody French Revolution and where there is no space for regional and cultural differences.
A yes vote will tell the French they are right. It will tell them that the uniform citizen from Brest to Nice is a good thing. That if you allow your different nations to develop their differences, they'll end up splitting the state (with all the economic and political costs attached to it).
Well, I say "non" to the French republican ideal of a uniform citizen and I say "no" to the SNP's plan to destroy this United (diverse) Kingdom. I say yes to cosmopolitanism, therefore I vote no.

A new social Scotland?

I love to debate politics and in Scotland I particularly love to debate the coming referendum. As such I do it quite often with anyone who is willing to do it (surprisingly, many people aren't). Now, as I wrote before, most people here do not give the nationalist arguments one in more hot-blooded countries might expect.

I came to realize that the most common argument is that of a “social Scotland”. So, people look at what they grew up knowing was the reality in the Nordic countries and they want the same for Scotland. The reality as they perceive it is a good welfare system, with great free education, good free public health system, etc.. This is actually a great objective in my humble opinion. The question is how to do that?

Nordic countries adopted a welfare state in a time in which the economy in the Western world was growing rapidly. That was also a time when the population was growing so it was expected that the then babies would contribute in the future for the maintenance of the welfare state and would have more babies doing the same… World without end, amen! 

Problem is... That's not reality in Scotland nowadays. Nor is it in those countries anymore. It's an economic joy if the economic growth gets to 2% in one year. And as for babies: where are they?

Now, the money to finance this new social state will need to come from somewhere and it's not merely the savings of not having a nuclear armed country that will do it. Petrol is not the solution, like in Norway, because not only it was never as abundant here as there, it's becoming even more scarce now. There might be a huge raise of taxes but that would bankrupt the economy... 

Basically the Scottish social state is the new Panama. It's generally a good idea (as at the time it was generally a good idea for every European nation to have its own colonies). The Scottish want it as much as they wanted Panama. And now, like then, they prefer to ignore the obvious consequences of their actions and that will bankrupt their economy. That could be OK but... What they have to think is that the rest of the UK is not living a golden era of colonial expansion and world trade as it was three centuries ago. Like most countries in Europe, the rest of the UK is also just making ends meet. As such if by pursuing this new Panama the Scots bankrupt their country, the rest of the UK will not welcome them back open-armed as the prodigal son of the Union.

Scottish referendum through the eyes of a “local foreigner” II

It has been great to live the referendum campaign from the inside! The experience has almost been a sociological / political science study. I has allowed me to notice that some well-known differences between British (be them Scottish or from the rest of the UK) and their Mediterranean European brethren also extend to politics. One of them is the rational V emotional discourse.

As a Mediterranean, I would imagine that a campaign of this kind would be very emotional. The separatists would be appealing to the patriotic feeling of the Scots by showing how different their traditions and character are from the rest of the British. They would appeal to the patriotic history of wars against the English (and the Irish, by the way). Unionists would be appealing for the same patriotic feeling but on the reverse, showing how much the four nations that form the United Kingdom have in common. They would be appealing to the sense of common history and heritage.

In this patriotic dialogue, both sides would have a lot to present. In fact, Scots and the rest of the Brits do have differences and similarities. However, instead of this emotional patriotic discourse, both sides provide very rational and technical arguments: membership in the EU, the common use of the pound sterling, petrol, gas and fish reserves in the Northern Sea, the permanent seat in the UN Security Council, the education and social security systems, the amount of contribution and benefits to the common budget, etc..

This is an interesting approach. It certainly helps us, foreigners, better understand the technical issues at stake and get an overall view of British political system. And it confirms our judgement that British prefer not to show their emotions publicly (which is not to say, as many Southerners think, that they don’t have them). But I certainly would prefer a more patriotic campaign. So an appeal to both separatists and unionists: spice it up!

Scottish Referendum through the eyes of a “local foreigner” I

I am a foreigner living in Scotland. Well, to say the truth I’m not totally a foreigner: I am an EU citizen and the UK is in the EU, so I’m a citizen of this greater union I live in. Because of that I’m given the right to vote in the referendum.

And here I find two different opinions among the other “foreigners / not so foreigners” on this respect. On the one hand there are many who say they will not vote because this is a matter that concerns only the nationals. There are many others who see voting in the referendum as part of the duties towards the country they live in. I am much inclined to agree with the later ones.

There are many reasons why the treaties of the EU established EU citizenship and a right of all citizens to vote for some elections in the other member states. If there is freedom of citizens to establish themselves in other countries (and therein pay taxes), it is only fair that they should be able to hold local politicians accountable for their decisions. Besides, it is considered that the future of the territories they live in is also of their concern.

I add another one. This is a less political or practical reason and more emotional one. We, foreigners, may very well love the country in which we establish ourselves and to want the best for it. For this reason, we may want to share the responsibility with the nationals for important political decisions.

For these reasons, I chose to vote in the UK for the EU elections. With this, I lost the right to vote in the same elections in my own state of nationality. For the same reasons I will vote in the referendum on the 18^th of September. And I will vote with the best interests of this country at heart… Just as any national should.

Future of the UK and Scotland

Yesterday around 200 people got together in the Old College to talk about the white paper made by the government of Scotland. It's already impressive that this amount of people would choose to spend most of its St. Andrew's day talking about politics. But even more impressive was how well the debate went and how obviously interested people are in reflecting on the issue before making a final decision in 10 months time.

I know that's how Democracy should be like. Unfortunately, it's so rare that it really is like that. So often people don't care about getting to know more about the consequences of their vote. That, of course, when they do decide to vote... So this event was refreshing and gave me confidence on Scotland's future: in or out of the UK.

In the morning we had five academics' thoughts on five different questions. Would Scotland be wealthier? A fairer more equal country? Safe in the world? Greener? And what kind of Democracy would it have? In the afternoon we had five other academics who, assuming a yes vote in the referendum, reflected on dividing assets and debts, EU membership, role in the international community, currency union and constitution.

Both panels were followed by debates with people with different opinions and from distinct professional and political background. In the morning there was also a period of audience discussion. Unfortunately, the gadgets they provided for the audience to vote were not working very well but the discussion was still very lively. Another unfortunate fact was that there was a fire alarm in the afternoon that made us all freeze outside for one hour and loose the time for audience discussion. These two technical malfunctions still could not cast a shadow over how great the exchange of ideas was.

Congratulations to the organization and to all the participants! (uops, this last one also includes me...)