Act of Union

Today in 1707, the Scottish Parliament of the day ratified the Act of Union with England. The English Parliament ratified the treaty in March of that year, and it came into effect on 1 May 1707. In effect, the 16 January - today - is the anniversary of the conception, not the birth, but the point stands.

It created what was, at the time, the largest free trade area in Europe; it joined the armed forces of England & Scotland together; while leaving the Church and the legal system distinct in Scotland.

Both England and Scotland had been important internationally not only in Europe, but also in the New World, before then. However, 1707 was the first time that the island which had been named Great Britain by the Romans (simply because it was larger in size than the other area inhabited by the people they identified as "Britons", in what is now Britanny in Northern France) was a fully united political entity.

A century later, in 1807, another Act of Union joined Ireland to Great Britain, creating the United Kingdom (though a little over 100 years after that, the bulk of Ireland gained independence as the Irish Free State, or Eire), though there had been several centuries of de facto, if not entirely continuous British rule in Ireland before that time, so it wasn't quite the milestone of Scottish & English Union.

Wales, alas, had been conquered much earlier, and was treated adminisitratively as simply a part of England for many centuries. Even the formal Union which happened under the Tudors had little real effect. Only devolution in the late 1990s formally recognised Wales as a distinct political entity entitled to some degree of independent government, though not as much as was devolved to Scotland at the same time.

Debate questions:

In the year of the Birthday of Great Britain, what are your birthday greetings and wishes for the future?

What things, good or bad, have Britain (as distinct from England, Scotland or Wales) given the world?

EDITED TO ADD: Supplementary, for those interested,

Does Scottish & Welsh devolution represent a threat or a strengthening of the Union? What are the implications of either scenario for Britain and for the wider world?

In the year of the Birthday of Great Britain, what are your birthday greetings and wishes for the future?

Well, to be honest I think that the union of Scotland and England has run its course and that my wishes for the future would be for the peaceful and amicable break-up and restoration of the nations of England and Scotland and Wales as distinct entities. Not very sure what would happen to Northern Ireland, but so long as it's all decided democratically, I suppose it doesn't matter.

What things, good or bad, have Britain (as distinct from England, Scotland or Wales) given the world?

Adam Smith, David Hume, JS Mills, Locke etc

I would name something like modern legal systems, or the concept of civil rights, except technically they evolved in England. Scotland first came up with the idea that people should be free to pursue their own religion in the 14th century.


Does Scottish & Welsh devolution represent a threat or a strengthening of the Union? What are the implications of either scenario for Britain and for the wider world?

Well, before the Conservatives (under Thatcher) in the 80s centralised government and neutered all the local councils, Britain used to have a good system of decentralised government, allowing economic policies to be determined at local levels. I felt that devolution was a way of restoring local government, however the English should have been given greater powers at local levels to match those of Scotland and Wales.

I also think that subsidies have had a detrimental affect on Scotland, as they have encouraged an over-reliance on the public sector so I have become a reluctant supporter of Scottish independence, as cutting off the subsidies seems to be the only way of revitalising the Scottish economy at this stage.

So, I think that devolution has become a threat to the union, but only because successive UK governments have tended to treat Scotland as a poor-relative to England and over-subsidise it. It could have worked very well and strengthened Britain, by adding a welcome element of localised decision making.

In the year of the Birthday of Great Britain, what are your birthday greetings and wishes for the future?

My earnest wish is that Britain become a socialist republic, and that the Royal family and the nobility be exterminated.

What things, good or bad, have Britain (as distinct from England, Scotland or Wales) given the world?

100 years of bloody war in France. The defeat of the French in North America. The steam engine and the Bessemer process. Maxwell's equations, Lyell's geology and Darwin's theory of evolution. The slaughter of innumerable coloreds. Colonial oppression and exploitation. The imprisonment of tens, probably hundreds, of thousands who strove for freedom in Ireland and the colonies, and the execution of many. Royal twits. Some excellent literature, beer and whiskey. Some good puddings and pies, but otherwise, very few dishes worthy of note. The English language.

EDITED TO ADD: Supplementary, for those interested,

Does Scottish & Welsh devolution represent a threat or a strengthening of the Union? What are the implications of either scenario for Britain and for the wider world?
[/quote]

Considering Britain's recent role in the Middle East, it would be a very good thing for the world if this country broke up. Its military power would thus diminish.

In the year of the Birthday of Great Britain, what are your birthday greetings and wishes for the future?

My very best wishes to a nation which has a special place in the heart of many Americans. May you continue to be a force for progressive thinking in the world.

What things, good or bad, have Britain (as distinct from England, Scotland or Wales) given the world?

It is important to read this question correctly, and not mention things, such as the works of William Shakespeare, which are not a result of the Act of Union.

The first thing that comes to mind is the increased political power of Great Britain, as opposed to England. It seems to me that this was one small step in the path which led to British domination of the planet. Obviously this resulted in a great deal of human misery. However, no matter how repressive the British Empire might have been, there burned a spark of respect for human liberty which could never be completely extinguished. Whether it be the elimination of the slave trade, or susceptibility to the methods of Gandhi, a core of common decency could always be found in the British heart.

The second thing which occurs to me is the Industrial Revolution, which would not have taken root so early without the aid of Scottish scientists and engineers. Although it cannot be denied that this resulted in immense suffering, as Great Britain was filled with "dark Satanic mills," it also cannot be denied that this was the beginning of a new era in technology which makes our modern lives so much better than they would be without it.

The third thing would be the contribution which Scottish philosophers made to modern political theory. This was entirely a good thing, as it represented a large step forward in the liberalization of government.

(If I seem to be slighting the contribution of the Welsh, it is only because, as noted, the union between England and Wales is so ancient. Because of this, their contributuions, to an American, seem to be mostly cultural, particularly in language and music. This is no small thing.)

Does Scottish & Welsh devolution represent a threat or a strengthening of the Union? What are the implications of either scenario for Britain and for the wider world?

I would say that granting Scotland and Wales a greater degree of political freedom, while retaining a strong bond with England, can only be good for all three lands.

In the year of the Birthday of Great Britain, what are your birthday greetings and wishes for the future?

Who are the British? These people on their islands who seek to lecture all and sundry as to how best to live one's life? This over crowded, dirty, socialist, land of delusion which claims to be a 'vibrant, diverse multiculture', as if it had a choice. As if the people of Britain had some how chosen to be the wonderful example to all the rest of us they seem to imagine they are. Take for example the soon to be (yet unelected) prime minister of the UK, Gordon Brown's recent comment about the UK:
Link.
What a load of rubbish! The UK is a hypocrite which says one thing whilst it does the opposite. It talks of peace whilst it wages war and its commercial interests manufacture weaponry. Offers consolation on the environment whilst its commercial interests exploit the Earths resources. It speaks of Britishness as being something other than race, or nationality, or ethnicity which in fact means being British means nothing. It is a political charade. A 300 year long scam to generate wealth and to exploit other people for all they have.

Gordon Brown also claimed:
But try reading the most popular comments on the BBC's Have your say page with regards to whether Britishness should be taught in British schools: Here are the top three:


The whole feed back page is full with similar sentiments.

The bottom line is, people need certain things and foremost amongst these is a clear sense of identity. For some people, this is easy enough and does not rely on ethnic, national or racial distinctions but for the majority of people, it does and the failure to understand this basic human condition is what has brought the British to where they are now. For the past first 250 odd years of the last 300 the sense of being British worked because the British people believed in it. Today though, all that being British was built upon has been eroded by moral qualms and the reality of post imperial Britain.

The Victory of the Battle of Trafalgar for example was for a great many years celebrated as a triumph of the British spirit. It was something to believe in. A source of pride. It was a victory of martial prowess and nationalist fervor. It did not galvanize the British through 'shared values' or a 'commitment to liberty for all'. It had nothing to do with any 'commitment to social responsibility or fairness'. It was simply about belonging. It was tribalism on a larger scale. It always was and always will be and without it there is no Britain. Multicultural diversity cannot replace it. Britain is heading down a trail already blazed by Yugoslavia. The imposition of political ideology over people's sense of who they are.


What things, good or bad, have Britain (as distinct from England, Scotland or Wales) given the world?

Britain as it is today has given nothing to the world and it continues to take far in excess of its right. Its interests lie all over the planet and are a serious stumbling block to any notion of a fair and balanced world community. No other nation for example has gone to war as many times as the UK since 1945, not even the USA which the British do so love to slag off at any and every given opportunity. No other country maintains so many remnants of empire either. Military bases scattered all over planet ensure that whilst the British at home chatter and pontificate about multiculture and diversity, their nation and its economy continue to benefit (and survive?) due to an extensive apparatus of third world exploitation.

Some people might argue that the British have given the world art, language and culture, but this is not so. Such things are not given. Shakespeare is not a gift bestowed on the world. Rather, Shakespeare's fame and popularity are the product of extensive British cultural domination and his place might just as well have been taken by Goethe had Germany been the dominant empire of the 19th century. There are many authors and artists of the non English speaking world who have been ignored because those who speak English, and only English are not interested in anything they do not understand, no matter what its merits may be.

This is not to say the British are not talented. They most certainly are. It is merely to point out that Britain has long survived and thrived by means of screwing other people's and nations and by ignoring other people's culture and even to this day where the British wax lyrical about 'multiculture', the truth is, British multiculture is a farce; merely a political point of view that has suddenly been granted political pre-eminance because the British intelligensia, having to deal with the rise of ethnic minorities from India and Pakistan have latched onto it as their new banner with which to ride forth once more on a moral crusade to tell the rest of the world how to behave.

Vicky. The Industrial revolution was not a gift either, nor was it a result of the Union, nor even the sole product of the British, though they certainly like to claim it so. The fact of the matter is the British industrial revolution was just a part of the European industrial revolution and just as many of the inventions of the industrial revolution were the product of other European nations.

What really made Britain so much stronger than England was the fact that the union kick started the British Empire for, lets be honest, it was the extensive land grab of the empire that gave Britain its serious clout and gave it the ability to dictate its terms to the rest of the world for so long, not its union with Scotland.

In my opinion the union gave nothing to the world. All the British ever gave was given by individuals and owes nothing to any political union. Darwin for example, or Newton. These people gave humanity the benefit of their insights, but whilst we consider them giants, they have only become so because they were British. There were other great scientists, politicians and natural philosophers whose contributions were equally important, but who have been largely forgotten, because they weren't British.

I went to school in Britain and all my life I've read books in English. One day however I wanted to read about the Baltic crusades and I searched high and low for good books on the subject. I found many, but they were nearly all in German, which I do not speak. As I searched I became aware that there is a great deal about European history, even important influential history, which I do not know about because I grew up a Brit. I came to realise that my whole world vision was formed by an Anglo Saxon perspective that permeates the whole western world and which grants no validity to anything which is not defined by the British perspective. The reason why I couldn't find any books on the Baltic Crusades is because the British do not care about the Baltic Crusades because these had nothing to do with Britain. In the United Kingdom, the word Crusade only refers to the wars undertaken in the 'holy land', most specifically those which featured the King of England, Richard I.

Take the Anglo/American perspective on the Second World War for another example. Even today, it is a source of never ending interest and story telling, but the truth is ignored by most British, that the war in Europe was largely fought by the Soviets and the British contributions were insignificant by comparison. Churchill is regarded as being one of the wars great leaders but the truth is he was a mere orator. His contributions to the war were largely ineffective, if not down right counter productive. The Battle of Britain and the Blitz are popular modern fantasies which would portray the British contribution as being more than the sum of its parts.
The truth is littered across the steppes of Russia, ploughed into the dirt of Poland and buried in the forgotten corners of Eastern Europe.

And it matters. It really does. It matters because this biased perspective ignores the truth in favour of self promotion and allows fiction to become taken as fact. It allowed the Balkans conflict to be viewed through a lens of disinformation. It allows millions of Arabians to colonize Europe in the name of a political ideology and it allows millions of people to live in a blissful ignorance that beggers belief. I'm not saying the French or the Germans are any better, but they have not had the impact on the global zeitgeist that the UK has had. German and French culture is marginalized, ignored, even demonized. The level of self imposed ignorance in the UK mirrors that of the USA, another English speaking country, and is no basis for a global perspective that cares about accuracy.


Does Scottish & Welsh devolution represent a threat or a strengthening of the Union? What are the implications of either scenario for Britain and for the wider world?

I hope so. I hope the Scottish destroy the Union once and for all and England atrophies back to being just England. Perhaps then the 'British' will finally come to understand their true place in the world and the rest of us will be spared the British always accusing us of immorality.

My wishes for the future of the United Kingdom are so far extreme that I would be labelled a racist if I were to write them here. Frankly I hate what Britain has become, what it is. It took me a long time to realise it, but today I feel like some one who has woken up to understand that they have suffered years of abuse at the hands of some one who was supposed to nurture them. Such is the effect of having 'survived being British'. Today I am no longer a 'Brit'. I am purged of all it meant to be British and I can see it for what it is. The British as an homogenous group are not a pleasant people and I have no love for them.

My birthday wish for the UK is to curl up and die ...and take the EU with you.