Briefly Noted

John Kay in yesterday's Financial Times (subs. req'd), essentially saying that an independent Scotland would be able to shed its "colonized by wankers" attitude that the 26 counties on the neighbouring island managed to do --

The economic case for separatism is that it removes the focus of grievance and the source of subsidy and makes Scotland again responsible for its economic destiny. The most relevant parallel is that of Ireland, although the implications are not simple. Ireland needed 60 years of independence to throw off the culture of victimhood. Only after Ireland joined the European Union did it turn its back on generations of politicians drawn from the stage set of Irish history, from the austere, romantic, impractical Eamon de Valera to the charming roguery of Charles Haughey. But, ultimately, Ireland did: and in the last two decades, it has been western Europe's success story.

Scotland starts in a stronger position than did Ireland. It should be easier to shed the baseless sense of victimhood of the Scots than the well-founded sense of victimhood of the Irish. With Scotland (unlike Ireland) there is an entrepreneurial history and (like Ireland) a diaspora ready to participate in economic revival. In the hope that hard-headed Scots would take much less than half a century to discard the culture of complaint and the romantic appeal of apocryphal history, I would be tempted to cast a vote for the Scottish National party on May 3.

Much to digest there, especially in the last paragraph. Clearly the man hasn't seen Braveheart (or maybe he did and wasn't impressed). Note also that the Republic joined the EU in 1973 but the worst of Haughey was yet to come.

Interestingly, to the extent that people used to think that Ireland did have an entrepreneurial history, they would have located it in Ulster, now (for many reasons) an economically depressed part of the island (both sides of the border), whereas other parts of the island, supposedly distracted by Papacy, now boom. Which maybe just goes to show that the line from culture to economics is rather jagged, as Henry at Crooked Timber was explaining in another context. Nevertheless, Kay's argument -- that independence ultimately enforces "ownership" of national destiny -- is one that is likely to get ever more prominence as globalization erodes other sources of cultural difference.