It is annoying that the standard of the independence debate remains low. Such an important issue deserves better.
For example, we are told that most
people agree with the proposition "decisions about Scotland
should be taken in Scotland". What a surprise. Surreptitiously
sliding emotional bias into surveys is a standard method of
distorting results.
Suppose we consider a
few other questions formatted in a similar way. For example, do we
agree that "decisions about banks should be taken in
banks"? Is it purely a matter for bankers to determine whether
our deposits should be invested wisely or repaid on demand? No?
Thought not.
Perhaps the Northern
Isles might care to claim that decisions about the Northern Isles
should be taken in the Northern Isles? How would Edinburgh respond to
the assertion that "It's Shetland's oil"?
Let us pursue the logic
further. Can anyone think of any reason why decisions about me should
be entrusted to anyone but myself? What's all this nonsense about
having to obey laws?
It should be fairly
obvious that it is almost impossible to take decisions affecting one
part of a community that do not affect other parts of that community,
sometimes very seriously. For any society to be viable, its members
must sacrifice some of their individual freedom to the greater good.
The real question is therefore whether the value of the greater good
is more than the value of the sacrifice.
Now let's think. What
would be a good example? How exactly did Scottish banking get bailed
out during the financial crisis? Who is placing the warship orders that could keep
the Clyde shipyards open? Who decided to give Scotland a bigger share
of UK public spending per head than England?
Or perhaps these are
the sort of decisions about Scotland that should be taken in Scotland?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Would you like to comment on this post?