Dual Identity is a Massive UK Positive that Nats want to Negate
- Alistair McConnachie
- 1 day ago
- 6 min read
Updated: 13 minutes ago
The choice to have a dual identity which is both Scottish and British is another positive benefit of the UK; and it offers the best of both worlds. However, a separate Scotland would, inevitably, make it harder to be British, and might ultimately remove the choice, says Alistair McConnachie. The following article was originally posted on our Legacy Site in November 2012, and has been updated appropriately. Pic from our Show, "Good Evening Britain", broadcast every Wednesday from 7-8pm on our YouTube platform.
Support for keeping the UK together involves a diversity of identities advocating and voting Yes to the UK, and No to a separated Scotland.
This diversity includes people who consider themselves British only, or more British than Scottish, or equally British and Scottish, or more Scottish than British, and also by Scots who don't consider that they have any "British" identity at all. [At Holyrood, and Local Elections, it also controversially involves people who are simply "legal residents" in Scotland from anywhere in the world – regardless of how they identify themselves.]
We've looked at some of the advantages of a British identity here.
However, in this article, we're pointing out that the United Kingdom offers us the choice to be Scottish and British. It offers us the benefit of a dual identity. And we're pointing out that a Scotland separated from the UK would tend, over time, to complicate and, perhaps, even remove that choice.
We're saying that the debate about Scotland's future is not only a technical one about the economic ability of Scotland to go it on its own. It is also about the continued existence of our very own personal identities and allegiances.
This debate cuts deep!
"SCOTTISH NOT BRITISH" is also an ARGUMENT FOR THE UNION
Occasionally we hear Scottish nationalists say that they are "Scottish not British". Well, we're sorry to hear that they don't understand and appreciate the benefits of a British identity, but that's their choice.
Perhaps what they don't appreciate is that they're also making a case for the UK.
That is, within the UK, an exclusive Scottishness can co-exist relatively harmoniously within a wider Britishness.
If they want to be "Scottish not British", they can be that!
They can forgo all connections with Britishness if they choose. [Although we would suggest that if they want to be consistent, they should only ever live and work in Scotland, and if they go to live or work in another part of the UK – while continuing to disdain the Britishness which makes their new lives possible – then they should, at least, keep quiet about it.]
People who want to be "British not Scottish", can be that too, as can everyone in-between.
We can all rub along together, or avoid each other, as the case may be.
We can all swim about in the big UK pond. That's a very big "positive" of the Union.
But here is the thing.
Within the UK, the Scottish nationalists can be as Scottish as they want, but if they were to separate Scotland out of the rest of what remained of the UK, then those of us with a British identity – whose personal identity and national allegiance extends to all of these Islands – will find it harder to be British.
That is, in a Scotland within the UK, everyone gets to keep their present identity. But in a Scotland outside the UK, we are in danger of losing our British identity!
Andrew McKie made this point in an article in The Herald:
It is worth remembering that independence is not, for those who oppose it, a step into "the early days of a better nation", but the forcible removal of their existing nationality. One doesn't need to scaremonger about border controls or freedom of movement within the UK – though possible, it doesn't seem very likely in the immediate future – to point out that people will lose something if the Union ends.
Convinced Nationalists will be glad to be shot of it, of course, but there will be very many people who will feel that they have been robbed of their chosen nationality.
Scots living in England will have to decide, for example, whether to apply for a Scottish passport or not. English people with Scottish ancestry will have part of their inheritance rendered foreign. And neither group will have a say in the matter.
It is natural for the SNP to paint independence as an opportunity, and canny to characterise all opposition as timidity. But as things stand, it is the opponents of independence who have the choice to define their nationality; they can be Scottish and British, each to the degree they feel, or choose. They can attend Burns suppers and choose between St. Andrew and St. George.
It is the status quo which is flexible; independence is not a liberation, but a restriction of the options.
Andrew McKie, "Independence could rob us of our sense of nationality",
The Herald, 23-4-12 at p13.
IT'S A BENEFIT TO BE BRITISH. SO WHY REMOVE THAT?
The opportunity for a dual identity is a massive benefit, and a huge positive of the United Kingdom.
Why take away something which is only a benefit?
The separatists are asking us to become "Scottish not British! Even if they do not put it in quite those terms, that is what they want us to accept. "Scottish not British" is, very likely, what we'd all have to become if we wanted to fit in, and we'd all have to either like it or lump it.
This is because time would pass, and circumstances would move in such a way as to make the public expression of Britishness difficult, if not illegal.
Don't believe us?
Firstly, some of them are trying to remove the British identity while we are still in the UK.
For example, the SNP has removed the Union Jack from the buildings it controls, except for one day a year; they want to get rid of the British Transport Police because it has the word "British" in it. All of this is being done within the Union.
They don't want us to be British right now, but they'll tell us "you can still be British" if they got their way! Well, we don't believe them!
Secondly, we have the example of the Republic of Ireland – note "Republic" not "Kingdom".
After their revolution, the Irish who had British sympathies and identities were driven out, or had to keep their heads down and shut up. If they didn't shut up, then they were in trouble. It's the same today. Ask any British supporters in the Republic how "free" they feel to openly express their Britishness!
Of course, if such a thing came to pass, we'd do our best to uphold our British identity, but it would be harder because that's what happens after revolutions!
TO CONCLUDE
Thankfully, the United Kingdom offers the wonderful choice to have a dual identity and to enjoy the immense benefits which flow from that.
As pro-UK people, we don't bother if some people want to describe themselves as "Scottish not British". However, if they got their way, would they allow us to retain our dual identity "Scottish and British"?
If you want it, a dual identity is there for you. Remember to vote for it!
POSTSCRIPT
The following letter appeared in the Scottish Daily Mail of 22 August 2014 and it summed things up well:
UNIQUE UNION
LET'S thank the separatists. They have given us an opportunity to examine not only the history of our Union but also to consider its future, our place in it and what we intend to bequeath to future generations.
Nowhere on Earth has there been such a lasting, mutually agreeable political and social Union of nations – who also, incidentally, have a shared language and history. Indeed, the United Kingdom is not just a nation but a nation of nations.
We have the unique ability to have two nationalities within our psyche running in parallel and almost indivisible.
The profound outcome of this is that we can indulge in our Scottish identity yet have a secure bond with a united and more diverse group of nations, where difference is celebrated and common cause recognised.
Surely this is something worth preserving! Why would we wish to break this incredible Union, which has evolved over centuries with tolerance, respect and common humanity? Yet the separatists would happily cast this precious relationship aside in order to satisfy their craving for a pompous parochialism.
Allowing them to break up our Union would be like handing an axe to a pathological criminal. I see the referendum as being a unique chance to bring about a renaissance of this nation of nations, and for a future that dares believe we are better together.
IAIN G. RICHMOND
Monikie, Angus
We develop more pro-UK points in One Big Country: A Big Book for the Union, Volume 1 or by searching Amazon for "One Big Country".
SUPPORT A FORCE FOR GOOD
If you think our comprehensive and educational research and publications, and our colourful physical activism is worth supporting, then please help us to keep up this good work!
Comments