HUNTER OWEN NICHOLSON: The Morality of Scottish Independence (Under the direction of Dr. Eric Weber). In September 2014, Scottish citizens will have the opportunity to vote for Scottish independence from the United Kingdom. This research uses the work of philosopher Allen Buchanan to assess the moral arguments for and against Scottish independence.
Scots' preferences were gathered through interviews with two Professors of Politics and Government at the University of Edinburgh, as well as members from each main party in the Scottish Parliament and over sixty citizens from across Scotland. The interviews were qualitative in nature and were analyzed using Buchanan's assessment of the arguments for secession.
INTRODUCTION
This research also recognized some of the weaknesses in a traditional understanding of secession because Scotland's case requires an understanding of what the cumulative effect of very small is. I reached this conclusion by comparing previous understandings of the morality of secession and union with extensive interviews conducted over the summer of 2013. I was first introduced to the Scottish independence movement during a 2011 autumn internship in the Scottish Parliament.
I worked for Stewart Maxwell, a member of the Scottish Parliament from Glasgow and a member of the Scottish National Party. It was his convictions that inspired me to stick around sometimes well after the Scottish Parliament closed to hear him explain why Scottish independence was necessary. Although nationalists were and are in the majority, many of my fellow interns worked for pro-union members who felt just as strongly about Scotland remaining a member of the United Kingdom.
In order to fully understand the issues surrounding Scottish independence, I wanted to speak to the citizens and leaders who were there, a task that would have been impossible without the benefactor. Interviews with political leaders included six members of the Scottish Parliament who supported independence and nine members who supported continued union with the United States.
LITERATURE REVIEW
I will also discuss the recent history of the founding of the Scottish Parliament and the upcoming Scottish independence referendum. One of the most unique arguments for secession is the limited goals of the political association argument. Thirdly, I will look at the nature of Scotland's relationship with Britain since the formation of the Scottish Parliament and the current push for independence.
Constantine ruled in the first half of the 10th century AD; a time when the factions fighting for the country of Scotland included Norsemen, Northumbrians and Britons. He adopted many of the ways of the South, including the idea of chivalry and the. The Union of the Crowns of 1603 by no means made Scotland and England an assimilated nation.
With the union of the crowns in 1603, Charles became King of Scotland and England at the same time. Keating says that by the end of the 18th century those in the intellectual class of the Scottish Enlightenment were almost entirely in favor of the union. This assimilation continued until Scotland reasserted itself in the union at the end of the 19th century due to a rising government.
Perhaps the most unexpected turn in the Scottish Parliament to date is the victory of the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 2011.
SURVEYING SCOTTISH CITIZENS, LEADERS, AND SCHOLARS…
I intended to use these justifications as part of my analysis of the morality of secession in Scotland. Four respondents said that they did not think enough about the referendum or showed a lack of interest in it. Of the four major parties in Parliament, the Scottish National Party has the majority of seats with 69 members.
In light of this I emailed around one third of the Scottish Parliament at the beginning of July. Interviews were conducted by telephone or in person, based on the preference of the interviewees. Excerpts from the interviews appear below and the recordings of the interviews were kept.
There was, however, a considerable degree of agreement on a set of the main justifications for independence. It is even possible that no single argument in the leader's mind would be enough to justify independence. For most of that time, I would suggest, it was based on a backwards view of the world.
Several of the interviewees were asked if there was a sense of wrongdoing from the UK. Adam also defined the economically problematic relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK in terms of economic priorities. Pro-independence members of the Scottish Parliament tended to argue for independence on the basis of Scotland's inherent.
On the whole, the pro-‐union questioners approached the question of independence with a different measure of the justifications for independence. He went on to say that “we are much stronger together as part of the United Kingdom. Leaders believed that Scotland would benefit more from remaining part of the UK than becoming independent.
McCrone was also a member of the Scottish Parliament Advisory Steering Group in the late 1990s, which was formed to recommend a system of governance for the Scottish Parliament. McCrone mentioned another problem in the discussion of the morality of independence, which is that independence is now very difficult to define, especially with Scotland. Two pro-union leaders also used the nationalist argument, but in support of Britain and more.
Indeed, having so little power in the Westminster Parliament was a major problem pro-independence politicians had with joining the UK.
