Before the First World War the arguments from London against Irish Independence was that
"The fact the Irish wanted Independence from the British Empire the "Greatest Empire in History" meant that they were unready for Independence,Then in the 1970 when the SNP emerged as a political force partly due to the "Its Scotland's Oil"
the argument was that Scotland was being selfish in wanting to keep oil resources for itself.
Then the argument made during the Scottish Referendum was that the oil was running out and Scotland was now "Too wee and too poor for independence".
Here in Wales we are always being told we are to small and poor for Independence an argument that seems to have been accepted in some Plaid Circles.
So now we come to the Catalan Referendum and this tweet from Rhondda's MP Chris Bryant:
I disagree. The referendum is illegal. And this is all about the rich abandoning the poor. Better solidarity is a united Spain rico y pobre twitter.com/OwenJones84/st…
As Nation Cymru puts it
The ‘it’s illegal’ argument is clearly daft. As a politician Chris Bryant would know that what is legal isn’t necessarily right in many instances, otherwise he would never have voted to change a law.Is there a Goldilocks principle at work here? Where Nations are not too poor or rich or poor for Independence but the conditions are just right.
This line of thinking is deeply worrying, however. It’s worth remembering that the first Scottish independence referendum got the go-ahead largely because neither side thought that ‘Yes’ had a hope of winning.
Catalonia’s treatment raises the spectre that if Scotland does call a referendum in the wake of Brexit – with perhaps more favourable polling – the country would face similar treatment.
After all, these arguments against a vote in Catalonia show that British politicians are happy to argue, when it suits them, that the people shouldn’t be allowed a democratic voice.
They can simply outlaw a vote and then claim ‘it’s illegal’, and so wrong.
But more revealing is the argument that Catalonia is too rich to be independent, and that it has a moral duty to stay in the union to help poorer nations that are part of Spain.
This is deeply ironic because one of the most consistent unionist arguments against Scottish and Welsh independence has been that they’re too poor to be independent.
Presumably, if Wales or Scotland were ever to pull themselves up by the boot-straps and become prosperous parts of the UK, the argument would suddenly flip the other way.
From being too poor to be independent, they would be too rich to be independent. We can’t win, I suppose.
The argument is especially galling because the London-centric, trickle down British economic model means that the UK includes both the richest and poorest areas in western Europe.
It’s not a union per se that creates equality but the fair distribution of wealth within in, something these same politicians lecturing Catalonia haven’t been able to, or don’t want to, achieve.
Don't bet on it the new argument would be everything is
Perhaps the only argument for Independence should be
"Just Right at the moment" so why change things"?
"We want it"
No comments:
Post a Comment