In conversation with some people the other day, I brought up how Scotland is voting on whether to become independent or stay as part of the United Kingdom. The response I got was; “Is that actually a thing? No way! I haven’t heard about it. It’s funny how Ireland has been trying to be independent for years and Scotland just decides to go and vote.” Despite that being a bit worrying, it does raise a good point. If it is this civilized for Scotland to gain independence, what has changed from the years of struggle against colonialism?
To gain a broader understanding of the voting process and the reasons behind the move for independence I searched the web and found many European sources. As a broad overview I found the BBC’s article, (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29238890) to be a very helpful resource. It has information about when, where and how the voting will happen and when the results will be announced; by the chief counting officer Mary Pitcaithl who will release the final results to the world at GMT ‘breakfast time.’ The flaw with this article was that it did not report on any of the motivations or details of this referendum. As some Scottish newspapers are calling a ‘British Bais’, I found a Scottish website (http://rt.com/uk/188404-scottish-referendum-live-updates/). Here I found speeches and interviews from both sides, both with very valid and interesting reasoning behind their YES/NO votes. Tommy Sheridan, a socialist campaigner referred to the “Yes” campaign as a “revolt against austerity”, whereas the Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond took his stance quite strongly with his referral to British government as the ‘Westminster establishment’ and “So the Westminster parties cobble together separate, contradictory proposals for more powers – none of which offer any answers to the real challenges we face.” My eagerness to learn this world changing result is ever growing since the final pre-vote polls statistics have changed from Yes – 45%, No – 50 % and Undecided – 5% to Yes – 51% and No – 49%, but it also made me consider the numerous other countries that have had to claim their independence over the past few centuries.
In History 103, my Professor has been talking about the independence of colonies like British Honduras (1981), Puerto Rico (1898), and Suriname (1975). The one main example that interested me was the independence of Brazil. Although many of the colonies that formed the Brazilian Empire were made up of Indigenous peoples, Brazil became a nation state as the population was built up by settlers and slaves. Now I consider slavery the main, albeit abstract, link between the Brazilian Empire’s independence and Scotland’s new attempt for independence. According to John Geipel in his article on Brazil’s African Legacy in History Today Volume: 47 Issue: 8 1997 (http://www.historytoday.com/john-geipel/brazils-african-legacy ), he says, “… Over the four centuries of Portuguese involvement in the Atlantic slave trade, an estimated 10 to 15 million Africans were transported to the European colonies in the Americas. Of these, over 3.5 million were taken to Brazil…” Even though the last Brazilian monarch Pedro II ended slavery in 1850, Brazil was the last country to abolish slavery, and it was because Britain was putting a great deal of pressure on all countries to abolish slavery during that time.
This is a perfect example of Global Capitalism and how despite each country having its own political power, one country can hold enough power to influence the decisions of all the others. That is why I believe that although Scotland may believe that gaining independence from the United Kingdom will give them more governmental power and allow them to take control of things such as currency, oil and postage, the British government will always have a sort of looming influence over their decisions. Through the geographical proximity, historical and existing trade and economic ties, cultural linkages and membership in the European Union, British influence will be maintained.
The global to local link that comes to mind is Quebec’s quest for separation. It has been an ongoing issue even from before Canada was formed, and continues to be one of the most controversial topics in Canadian politics today. Even though they want complete separation from Canada in terms of government and status, they want all the goods that come with having their economy and borders linked to ours. Therefore no matter how much they try to separate from Canada, Canada will always have that historical overhead of power over Quebec which would linger on throughout their newfound independent state.
With the results of the Scottish referendum trickling in and the official results to be announced in an hour or so, I cannot wait to see what is going to come of this vote and how it will change the way we view national identity. Just as September 7th 1822 is an important date that marks the separation of Brazil from Portugal, September 18th 2014 is going to be a date our children will see in their history textbooks. The question this referendum has brought to mind is, as our world becomes more globalized and countries are becoming reliant on trade with other countries to sustain their economy, how will borders be defined in the future, and is there really such a thing as a truly independent country?
–Meghan Cheung