You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Britain
Historian now backs Scots' independence
2006-10-02
Scotland's most pro-British historian has performed a remarkable about-face and declared his support for Scottish independence.

Michael Fry, a former Scottish candidate for the Conservative and Unionist Party, says the break-up of Britain is essential if Scotland is to thrive.

His conversion is a symptom of the growing support north of the border for a separate Scotland, with more people now saying they would back independence rather than the status quo in a referendum.

Fry's epiphany came as he was writing a book on the union between Scotland and England, with the 300th anniversary falling on May 1 next year.

The tercentenary comes two days before Scottish parliament elections due on May 3, in which the Scottish National Party is expected to make its strongest challenge for power so far.

As a Conservative candidate in the 1980s and 1990s, Fry was a staunch defender of the union with Britain - but now he is a nationalist. "I have changed my mind," he says. "I believe in an independent Scotland. I will do what I can to bring it about."

His change of heart was brought about by the failure of the devolution of power from London to Edinburgh, he said. "Devolution has proved to be completely hopeless, if anything making Scotland a worse country rather than better. You can do more, and do better, under independence than you can by basically rattling the begging bowl at the British Government, saying, 'Can we have some more money'."

Fry, one of Scotland's most prolific historians, caused outrage last year with his revisionist claims about the Highland clearances, when Scottish crofters were driven from their smallholdings by big landlords. He said this was an inevitable product of economic change, and that critics were romanticising a culture in which the Scots were portrayed as victims.

Fry now says his conversion to independence is in line with his Conservative philosophical outlook, and points to Estonia and Ireland as two thriving independent countries that Scotland could learn from.

Public opinion north of the border is at its most nationalist for years. A YouGov poll for The Sunday Times showed the SNP capable of winning power next year if it formed a coalition with the Liberal Democrats and the Greens. In the poll, 44 per cent of Scots backed independence, 42 per cent opposed it, and 15 per cent were undecided. SNP leader Alex Salmond was preferred as first minister, beating Jack McConnell, Labour leader of the current administration.

Fry's announcement follows a similar conversion to independence by Scottish historian Niall Ferguson, professor of history at Harvard University.
Posted by:.com

#13  Um... no. Ireland got its wealth by initially sponging off the EU. Don't think the EU will fall for it a second time. Even they aren't that stupid.

Don't know about that, Pappy.
Ireland lived too long under the Agrarian socialist policies of De Velara. At one time it was the most socialist country outside the USSR.
His demise and the rise of a new breed of politicians coincided with the entry of Ireland into the EU.
The subsidies it received were a pittance compared to what it achieved by adopting a pro-market/pro-business philosophy. This led to a massive inflow of US investment into the old sod.
Ireland accounts for only 1% of the EU market, but it receives 30% of the US investment in the EU.
Posted by: tipper   2006-10-02 23:50  

#12  Fry... points to Estonia and Ireland as two thriving independent countries that Scotland could learn from.

Um... no. Ireland got its wealth by initially sponging off the EU. Don't think the EU will fall for it a second time. Even they aren't that stupid.

Estonia, well... let's just say Scotland hasn't learned that Socialism is a failure.
Posted by: Pappy   2006-10-02 21:36  

#11  Why does "Divide and Conquer" ring so strongly in my mind?
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2006-10-02 19:31  

#10  The EU oligarchs are after nothing more than continental power through a bloodless, legalistic, take over.

Sort of like the Byzantines exhusting themselves getting back a good portion of the old Roman Empire just to have the muzzies then come screaming out of Saudland to conquer the lot up to Tours. Twice is going to be a farce. Goodbye and thanks for all the fish!
Posted by: Gling Whamp5942   2006-10-02 16:22  

#9  I should think they'd devolve into smaller groupings rather than simply redo the borders.

Redoing the borders is fascinating. It reminds me of the movie Amerika about the occupation of the USA by the soviets. The soviets redrew the whole thing to remove the connection to states and nation and unto the "new" states. Sort of colonialism's next step.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2006-10-02 15:16  

#8  I can't find the link but I've seen an EU regionalization plan that basically does away with national borders all together.

Southern England and parts of France (Normandy?) become one region. Scotland winds up with part of Scandanavia I think and so forth and so on.

The EU oligarchs are after nothing more than continental power through a bloodless, legalistic, take over.
Posted by: AlanC   2006-10-02 15:10  

#7  If everyone joins the EU then there is no point to having the UK. Some regions in Europe will be cast off so the rest of the EU can help with the welfare payments, others will want to keep more of their wealth rather than dealing with an additional level of taxation.

For example Bavaria is the economic engine of Germany yet they are frequently disrespected. What is to keep Bavaria from joining the EU seperately and cutting German power/prestige off at the knees? Same with the industrialized Northern section of Italy.

I'm less familiar with the poorer regions but I think Scotland and Wales might see more cash coming in from the UK than they add.

I imagine the EU project will die when people start to realize that and national pride starts to reappear.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2006-10-02 11:37  

#6  Ugh. Morons. Gee, devolution didn't work - our own socialist bullshit didn't thrive under partial independance. What we really need is total freedom to piss our sorry dung-hill of a decayed backwater down the drain!

Hope the rump UK steals the North Sea wells from them when it comes time to divvy up the family silverware.
Posted by: Mitch H.   2006-10-02 11:11  

#5  If the Scots declare independence and then join the EU, isn't that kinda a exersice in futility?
Posted by: DarthVader   2006-10-02 10:24  

#4  Yes but is the Scottish separatist movement an EU Scottish separatist movement, too?

From what I've been reading you can probably trace 75% of Scotland's "troubles" of the last 10 years to the EU.

These buffoons probably think that they'll join the EU and have power. Hah. The EU regionalization scheme will break up all of the UK in the not so distant future.
Posted by: AlanC   2006-10-02 10:20  

#3  I have some distant cousins on my mother's side in Scotland. When they were visiting one summer about fifteen years ago or so, I made the mistake of referring to the U.K. or the royal family or Maggie Thatcher as "you guys" or words to that effect. Oh boy, were they ever upset about that! "That's nae us, laddie; ye're talkin about th' English." A few apologies and a couple of Johnny Walkers later, peace was restored, and I was careful to never again underestimate the passion of the Scottish separatist movement. I'm not all that sure my relatives aren't more typical of Scots public opinion than is generally appreciated.
Posted by: Mike   2006-10-02 09:30  

#2  The posterior salute image from a few frames earlier probably would have been more appropriate :)
Posted by: Glitle Grenter4308   2006-10-02 09:26  

#1  May I direct your attention to the extreme upper right hand corner of the graphic... isn't that our man Fred???
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-10-02 07:25  

00:00