Great Britain and Historical Perspective: Episode III

Since I’m sitting quietly in the London Heathrow airport, I had just as well be productive, so posting the next essay seems a passable use of my time. Just as the legend of William Wallace is a valuable myth in Scottish history, I was tasked with finding a relatable tale from the United States that all Scottish visitors should be told.

Are American myths really worth retelling? Perhaps, but many of them might seem trivial to a Scot, so it might be prudent to share a story that holds relevance to their national socio-political circumstances. Everybody loves the story of the first Thanksgiving at Plymouth Rock and George Washington chopping down his cherry tree, but neither is a tale necessary to be told. A myth to be shared with a Scot should be one relating to a fight for independence from a perceived oppressive government.

Possibly the most pervasively damaging myth in American history is “The Lost Cause of the Confederacy.” Following the American Civil War, southern Confederate sympathizers began perpetuating it, claiming that slavery was not the motivation for their secession. They asserted that the states felt that the federal government was suppressing their rights to self government and that the only means of resolution of this grievance was dissolution of their relationship with the northern states.

This myth is notably comparable to the circumstances currently faced by Scottish nationals, with a central government in Westminster dictating terms that are contrary to their nation’s wishes. Like the Confederacy, Scotland is attempting to legislate a particular agenda, but supposedly intrusive oversight from the country’s government is hampering their efforts and negatively affecting their ability to manage their own budget.

Conflicts between North and South ranged from federal taxation on whiskey to the jurisdiction of federal law enforcement, and the myth was perpetuated that the southern states were under pressure from “Northern aggression” and were ultimately compelled to secede for the sake of honour and way of life. The tale casts the slave-owning South as chivalrous, charitable Christians wishing to pursue their divine right to rule their own sovereign nation.

In telling this myth to a Scot, it should be delivered as a cautionary tale. Two factors must be considered when comparing it to the current campaign for Scottish independence: the Confederacy was never authorized to leave, and the claimed justification for attempted secession in this story is a substantial departure from that which was actually declared by Southern leaders during the period.

When Scotland held their first independence referendum in 2015, the ballot measure was announced with the full support of the government in Westminster. Should it have passed, actions were to be taken to ease the nation out of the UK in a timely manner. Since the Brexit referendum, Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister, has been leading a public charge for a second referendum, given the British government’s disingenuous campaign that threatened a Scottish eviction from the European Union following departure from the United Kingdom. As of now, Westminster has not endorsed any future actions by Scotland regarding independence, which may be attributable to their perpetual scuffling over Brexit, so should Sturgeon’s campaign succeed with her nation’s voters, she will be leading her constituents into a (non-codified) constitutional battle with Westminster.

While the Scottish National Party projects a valiant intent with their drive for independence, their platform has shown little substance or variation from that, although their twelve years in power have started to change that. The motivations of most of the party leaders and MSPs may be just and true, but Scottish citizens can learn a valuable lesson from the South. Don’t allow national pride to cloud judgment, and don’t follow leaders who do.