Scotland’s big decision

A Sept. 18 referendum on independence raises questions about diversity and democracy.

|
Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters/File
Volunteers hang campaign signs before a "Yes" campaign meeting at the Fenwick Hotel in Kilmarnock, Scotland, in March 2014.

Some may think of Scotland as little more than a place of photo-op castles, colorful kilts, droning bagpipes, and a shy lake “monster” always just out of sight beneath the steel-gray waves of Loch Ness.

But on Sept. 18 Scots will do something with worldwide consequences: They will hold a referendum on whether to become an independent country.

Polls have consistently shown voters in Scotland saying “no” to independence. But the “yes” vote has closed the gap recently, and some argue that the emotion and enthusiasm of the “yes” forces might be enough to swing the vote and confound pollsters. 

“No” means keeping the status quo, in which Scotland has a degree of independence, including its own parliament, but in important ways would still be part of a “united” kingdom run from London.

The Scots have a long, tumultuous history in their dealings with their southern neighbors. But to see it as all “Braveheart” bravado – an oppressed people under the thumb of a foreign ruler – vastly oversimplifies the relationship, which since formalized in 1707 has greatly benefited both England and Scotland. Scots have played an integral and important role across British society, including the arts and sciences, and in defense of Britain in times of war.

Polls show that many in Scotland see themselves as Scottish, but also as British – and as “European,” too, for that matter. Many already feel fully “Scottish” without the need for full political independence.

Voters will encounter a number of tricky and crucial questions. What would be Scotland’s currency? Scottish pounds? British pounds? The euro? Is the Scottish economy strong enough to stand on its own? Would trade with England suffer? Would the European Union and NATO agree to admit an independent Scotland as a new member?

The vote may become a psychological test for Scots: Are you a risk-taker with a confident, independent bent? Vote “yes.” Or are you a careful “look before you leap” type? You may be more comfortable saying "no."

The referendum will offer the world a positive example of how to seek independence. A long period of open, vigorous, and largely thoughtful and articulate debate has taken place since the referendum date was set in 2012. The expected high turnout of 75 to 80 percent of eligible voters will ensure that the will of the people is done. Should Scotland vote “yes,” there is no question that Britain will peacefully accede.

People from the Catalonia region in Spain to Canada’s province of Quebec to Tibet and Chechnya will be watching to see how a peaceful and legitimate decision about sovereignty is made. If “yes” should win, Northern Ireland may decide it should test the waters.

Perhaps most important the vote asks a big question about identity and democracy. Is devolution into smaller and smaller ethnic entities the only way to ensure full expression of a culture? Or can democracies sufficiency protect the rights of minorities and exist as multicultural states, finding strength in their diversity?

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Scotland’s big decision
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2014/0812/Scotland-s-big-decision
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe