Scots Independent
November 1995
Owned, Edited and Printed in Scotland - First Published in November 1926
Cartoon - by Macdonald
Return to the index
Opinion - Know Your Enemy
It is of course no accident of fate that Scottish
schoolchildren have been kept in ignorance of
their history over the generations since 1707. The
technique of depriving people of their sense of
separate identity, by denying its existence, is as old
as the bible and as modern as China's treatment of
Tibet. What is different in Scotand is that the rape
of our nationhood (every bit as brutal in the years
following the Union, as elsewhere) has been largely
overseen by Scots-on-the-make themselves whose
patriotism was the expendable price for comfort and
preferment as agents of a powerful and acquisitive
neighbour. The spiritual representatives of these folk
still control us today and almost two and a half centuries
after their predecessors' sell-out the measures
used to ensure Scotland's continued membership of
the Union have barely changed - except in degree
of sophistication.
First of all the principle of divide and rule must
be applied unabatedly. Scotland was, and still
remains an exceptionally soft target for the successful
prosecution of this classic imperial doctrine. First
it was the organised encouragement of clan against
clan, family against family and Highlander against
Lowlander. The menu from which Unionists so
zealously draw today reads like a source list from
some Machiavellian library, viz: Glasgow v Edinburgh; West v East; Central Belt v the rest;
Republicanism v Unionism; Scottish mainland v
Orkney and Shetland; "Scotland's hard-headed
business community" v romantic nationalism; Gaelic
v Scots; Scots v English; socialism v nationalism.
Of course harmless trappings that pose no political
threat may be encouraged and indeed emphasised
as a means of transference of loyalty to the surrogate
state. Under these headings may come local legal
procedures, religious preferences and such extras
as tartan flammery and the long standing tradition
of delineating Scottish culture as a single strain of
inheritance worthy only of music hall levels or
recognition and indulgence. The combined effect of
all these pressures is to produce a nation uncertain
of its place in the world and whose nationals thus
become completely cowed by, and dependant upon,
government exercised from without. Any hint of
resurgence of national sentiment, in a political
context can now readily be countered by playing on
already entrenched senses of inferiority, insecurity,
and inadequacy stressed, as necessary by the use
of ridicule and the deliberate inculcation of fear.
Unionism is thus as base a moral and political creed
as any in the civilised world - and the strange thing
is that the contemporary English are only just waking
up to its existence. Why should they worry about
Scotland's problems anyway - as long as the oil remains
firmly under their own government's control?
To them 'the UK' means England.
It was the notorious Jock and Paddy basher, Dr
Johnson who said "Patriotism is the last refuge of
a scoundrel" but his biographer, the cringing Scot
Boswell, was at pains to point out in his diary that
Johnson was referring to aggressive and overbearing
patriotism and not to the natural and proper love
of one's country. Today we can witness manifestation
of the nastier brand in the strains of 'Land of
Hope and Glory' and the flourishing of Union Flags
on Europe's sporting battle fields. The protective
and domestic patriotism embodied in 'Land of My
Fathers' and 'Flower of Scotland', and even 'Scots
Wha Hae', is an incomparably nobler brand and
its raison d'etre' worth defending from predators
however ancient and powerful, by every legitimate
means - whatever economic consequences (so feared
by faint hearts) may befall.
Return to the index
London's Cultural Imperialism - by Colin Campbell
Scotland's dynamic input into the origins of broadcasting
and television is internationally acknowledged; and it
was only through the accident of historical events,
occurring at about the same time, that the main beneficiaries of
these developments were national governments who
recognised their full political significance. From the earliest
days Westminster governments have kept very tight reins
on broadcasting both of a direct nature, by Act of Parliament,
and indirectly by exercising patronage in the appointment
of controlling governors and their boards.
As the sense of national resurgence has grown in
Scotland, Wales and Ireland so too has the determination
of the Unionist establishment to maintain control of access
to broadcasting and to ensure that political direction still
reflects the One Nation ethic so precious to our
predominantly English governing classes.
The constant preoccupation with preventing the 'break-up
of the United Kingdom' is indulged on two fronts -
the political one just mentioned and, equally importantly
but more subtly, the cultural front where the aspirations
of 'national regions' are kept in check by a mixture of
condescension, trivialisation and side-lining from main stream
coverage. Radio Scotland fulfils this role admirably.
Changes in the last fifteen years to the broadcasting structures
in Scotland all reflect an intention to play down
Scotland's sense of national identity and cultural diversity.
London's output on radio and television, beamed into the
'national regions' reflects an almost Victorian sense of
where these nations fitted into the Great British scheme of
things during the heyday of Empire. Scottish airs for regular
token inclusion in London's musical output are still stuck
in the mould of 'My Love is like a Red, Red Rose' and
'Annie Laurie', and the National News still comes from
London while we peripheral natives have five minutes of
provincial news tacked on at the end 'where we live'. There
can be no other explanation of this derisory treatment of
an equal partner in the Union with England than that of
consciously applied cultural and political imperialism.
Of course there are token nods in the direction of a Scottish
input into broadcasting structure and operation,
predominantly through the Broadcasting Council for
Scotland; but its terms of reference and powers are so ineffectual,
in anything other than marginal issues, that it exercises
no more than a window dressing role. In any case
its membership is determined once again by government
patronage and only those who fit the Unionist bill are given
executive powers.
The question we should all be asking of ourselves and
others is: how much longer are we going to tolerate this
insufferable treatment? The dangerous position has now
been reached where every democratic means of securing
a broadcasting structure befitting the nation that is Scotland
has been used to no apparent effect. Organisations such as
Broadcasting for Scotland, the Andrew Fletcher Society and
countless representations from individual listeners and
viewers have been treated with the disdain so familiar to
us from the responses made to complaints in such places
as the Radio Times and TV's Points of View. What do the
authorities expect us to do next? One possible course of
action is for all interested parties to get together and consider legal applications to appropriate international courts
- for what is happening to us in Scotland is an abuse of
human rights, whether it is yet officially recognised as such
or not.
Return to the index
CONTACT:
Scots Independent, 51 Cowane Street, Stirling, SCOTLAND, FK8 1JW
Tel: 01786 473523 (24 hr), FAX: 0141-427-4030
If you have any comments (good or bad) on these pages contact
hamish@rmplc.co.uk.
Previous page
Return to Ham's Homepage