The Scottish Vote & Us | National Catholic Reporter

The Scottish Vote & Us | National Catholic Reporter by MSW.  MGB: I am not sure subsidiarity and solidarity have anything to do with us - although oddly subsidiarity won the election, precisely because it sent a message that people wanted it (not because it is a good working principle - remember, Scotland is a mostly Presbyterian and Anglican nation).  It was an attempt at ethnic solidarity (with the exclusion of the English - I don't thing anyone ever considers the Welsh) that makes this a perennial issue - as there is quite a bit of history from before Union - indeed, it goes back to fighting off the Romans and continues to the Scottish wars resisting some of my English ancestors, from Longshanks on down.  When it becomes a matter of family history, it is about the heart and not the head.  The head did win, however - it saw the logic of Union - but no one's heart is in that.



Oddly missing from this discussion was talk of the monarchy, probably because the late Queen Mum was a Scot.  Indeed, had there been disunion, there is an argument to change the House of Windsor to the House of Balmoraugh and find an English king descended from an older line than the House of Orange.  Indeed, there are millions of us with the requisite DNA.  Of course, there is also a group who are matrilinielly descended from the Stuarts and Tudors who could claim that Scottish throne.  The fact that no one was put forward means that the yes forces were not willing to go all the way.  Nothing appeals to the heart like a king.



Does this have anything to do with America?  Not really.  High turnout comes from organization and, well, solidarity - which comes from more choices. In Puerto Rico, which has multi-party democracy and proportional representation, almost everyone votes.  Its not cultural, its structural - and the powers that be behind the parties don't want to share power with real socialists, nor to do they want to give voice to the far right sentiment that is hinted at in the Tea Party.  In many multi-party democracies in Europe and Israel, the ugly voices do get heard and sometimes heeded - although structure has not kept the Tea Party of the Congress or the old one party South segregationists out of control.  That control, however, comes from lower turnout due to voter suppression - even when it is not active the habits of non-voting are hard to break.  This is not a failure of subsidiarity, of course, but of solidarity - as conservatives are willing to do anything to keep power.  Only work will put those excluded into the main stream - only then will those who wish no solidarity with them will be forced to acknowledge through the head what they refuse to accept in their hearts, unlimited solidarity.



Back to Scotland, it is ultimately irrelevant what happened in this vote.  As Dante observed, the best government is a world government - and one that is entirely secular (no wonder they banned his books).  While we certainly can't enfranchise every Chinese voter just yet, or even Israel while it keeps a second class citizenry in their gun sights, we should unite all those nations with a similar commitments to individual economic and political freedom and justice.  Such a Union would make national (now regional) boundaries more fluid, drawing lines by shifting provinces from one region to another and back again.  In such a world, lower England and Wales may be one region and Ireland and Scotland and northern England might be another.  In the US, the same math gives us seven regions - of course the number changes depending on how large the United legislature is.