Issue 44, October 2014

No. 44, October 2014 Editors: Professor Dr. Horst Drescher † Lothar Görke Professor Dr. Klaus Peter Müller Ronald Walker Table of Contents Editorial 2 Referendum Results 4 Comments on these Results – Stefanie Brenneisen, "About Freedom and Taking a Stand" 5 – Romina Meffe, "A 'Naw' for Scottish Independence – 6 How a Foreigner Experienced the Referendum" – Andrea Schlotthauer, "Scotland Said No. Federalism Instead of Dissolution?" 7 – Melanie Sommer, "Which Way To Go, UK?" 9 – Ilka Schwittlinsky, "A Chance for the Entire UK" 10 – Miriam Schröder, "A Referendum for Europe" 11 – Lothar Görke, "A Victory for Grass-Roots Democracy, Civic Participation, 12 and Self-Determination" – Ron Walker, "A Stark and Unsettling Choice" 12 – J. M. Y. Simpson, "Rational Difficulty" 13 – Ian Campbell, "Beautiful Country. But You Have a Problem!" 13 – Ian Duncan, "The Nation without Nationalism" 14 – Gerard Carruthers, "The '45 and Now What?" 15 – Deirdre Forsyth, "How How Do I Feel About the Result?" 15 Deirdre Forsyth, "Edinburgh Festival in Referendum Year 2014" 15 Alan Bissett, "Vote Britain" 17 Comments on Bissett's Text – Katharina Leible, "Does the End Justify the Means? – Yes Vote: Key to Self- 19 Determination?" – Sherry Ishak Bakeer Abadeer, "Scottish Independence in the Political Game" 21 David Greig, "To a Yesser" 23 Klaus Peter Müller, "What an Achievement! Now Change Is Due – 24 Fast and Essential Change, or: Let's Support a Common Weal Scotland" Martin Shovel, "David Cameron vows…" 33 David Schneider, "A British Bill of Rights" 34 New Scottish Poetry: Vicki Husband 35 (New) Media on Scotland 36 Education Scotland 61 2 Scottish Award Winners 64 New Publications May 2014 – September 2014 65 Book Reviews Dauvit Broun on Fresche Fontanis 78 Cathryn Spence on Miscellany of the Scottish History Society 79 Conference Report (Miriam Schröder on 81 'The First World Congress of Scottish Literatures', Glasgow 2014) Conference Announcements 83 Send in your comments, news, etc. to lgoerke@uni-mainz. or [email protected], please. Editorial Dear Readers, Now we know what the Scottish people, i.e. those allowed to take part in the 2014 referendum, think about whether Scotland should be independent or not. This edition of the Newsletter will, therefore, have a special focus on this result. You'll find foreigners' comments on the outcome by some of our students, Stefanie Brenneisen, Romina Meffe, Andrea Schlotthauer, and Melanie Sommer as well as by some of our staff, Ilka Schwittlinsky, Miriam Schröder, and the editors. Ron Walker, of course, is not a foreigner, he is Scottish, but could also not vote, as he lives here in Germersheim. Ian Duncan provides a US-American opinion, whereas J. M. Y. Simpson, Ian Campbell, Gerard Carruthers, and Deirdre Forsyth speak from Scotland itself. There are two more Scottish voices on the referendum in this issue, very important ones: Alan Bissett's 'Vote Britain', written some time before 18 September, and David Greig's 'To a Yesser', created a few days after the result. Both creative writers have kindly allowed us to reprint their texts on this occasion. Two further students, Katharina Leible and Sherry Ishak Bakeer Abadeer, have written comments on 'Vote Britain', expressing their different opinions about this text, where Katharina Leible speaks as a Bavarian (which is an outsider's opinion in Germany, but for Bavari- ans all Germans are outsiders, sometimes almost foreigners, too), and Ishak Abadeer writes as a person now living in Germersheim, but originally coming from Egypt. There are two equally important and intriguing voices from England, providing views on an unexpected but vital issue resulting from the referendum and its consequences: the threat of the abolition of human rights in the UK. The cartoonist Martin Shovel and the actor and comedian Da- vid Schneider have generously granted us permission to reprint their creations in this Newsletter, and we are particularly grateful for this, as they not only highlight an essential current problem but do this in a medium we have so far not yet been able to employ. In this way, we have a great variety of voices and opinions, and the discursive discussions of the referendum result are highlighted by four texts expressing the views, ideas, and emotions of four well-known creative people with regard to this enormously relevant event in Scottish history. We are grateful for the generosity of Alan Bissett, David Greig, Martin Shovel, and David Schneider, and see their contributions as wonderful examples of what has developed in Scotland during the referendum campaigns: more and more people working together in creating a more humane and equal society, everyone contributing as best as they can. The political awareness and involvement of the people have evidently increased significantly. What has happened in Scotland and is still taking place there possesses an enormous relevance beyond that nation's borders and once more concerns not only Britain but all of Europe, even the rest of the world. Some of the key questions that have been asked and need to be answered are: will Britain become more federal, more democratic, too, or will it dissolve in a few years' time after all, perhaps precisely because it has been clinging to its past for too long and in a too narrow-minded way? That a fairly strong movement called 'The Common Weal' has developed in Scotland is, of course, partly connected with that country's religious and social past. But it reflects ideas and de- sires shared by many people around the globe today, the yearning for greater freedom, more democ- Scottish Studies Newsletter 44, October 2014 3 racy, i.e. the concrete involvement of the people and not just politicians in all decisions, the creation of a more open, transparent society. These have been key elements of the development in Scotland, brought into the limelight not by politicians but by the people themselves. There is more information on all of this in the '(New) Media on Scotland' section, where we have some particularly intriguing sub-sections, especially the one expressing the ideas of intellectuals, artists, Journalists, and scholars on Scottish independence. You'll find stimulating ideas there by very different people, such as Noam Chomsky, David Hare, David Greig again, Irvine Welsh, Neal Ascherson, Ian Bell, and Seumas Milne, two of Peter Müller's favourite Journalists, as well as the one he has not quite sifted yet, Simon Jenkins, but who has very sound opinions in his texts mentioned there. Whenever possible, we have made the names of the authors in this section explicit, as they are, of course, pretty relevant. We briefly thought about arranging this information alphabetically, but then left the chronological order that normally determines these sections. In all of the cases, it is interesting to keep in mind 18 September as the day of the referendum, in order to compare opinions and ideas expressed before with those after this day. Directly following the sub-section by intellectuals, artists, etc. is the one with the financial sector speaking about independence and its attitude to it. The contrast between these two groups is very illuminating and simply confirms Noam Chomsky's immediate response to what he thinks about Scottish independence: "Capitalism won't like it." Do you have any good reasons for this? Is it perhaps connected with what the Common Weal and many other grass root organisations stand for? Just the fear on the part of business and finance of too much transparency and democracy? You'll certainly have better answers. Tell us what they are. The cut-off date for including material in '(New) Media on Scotland' was 31-9-14. It is, however, very intriguing to see how fervently the discussions go on and on. For excellent reasons, of course: nothing has been solved with the referendum result, which is why Peter Müller claims the need for fast and essential changes in his comment. Seumas Milne, one of the really good Journal- ists mentioned in 'Intellectuals, artists…' has illuminatingly described the enormous danger England is now in: "Cameron's Conservatives are replaying Thatcher and Blair. But it's a past we need to escape from" (Guardian 2-10-14, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/02/tory- tax-cuts-war-iraq-cameron-thatcher-blair). He is absolutely right. The 1.6 million Scots who voted Yes and many more in Scotland, even many saying No, as well as millions of people in many other places (Hong Kong and Germersheim are Just two small examples) have reJected a nostalgic and distorted view of the past and have a better future in mind. The forces against creating this future are, however, enormously strong. But didn't little David do something big, great even, against an overpowering Goliath? This requires a strong will, pertinacity, and endless struggles, but the obJec- tives are worth it. And Scotland has been setting a wonderful example. In this ongoing discussion, Iain Macwhirter, the columnist, writer, and Rector of Edinburgh University from 2009-2012, is as good in his descriptions of the current situation as Milne etc. He repeats David Hume's warning "We can't leave Scotland's future in the hands of the politicians" in the Herald article on 28-9-14 mentioned below, and he is sometimes as forthright as is necessary in these struggles: "The F word can achieve a lot of good in powers battle" (Herald 2-10-14, http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/the-f-word-can-achieve-a-lot-of-good-in-pow - ers-battle.1412238401 ). See also his posts at http://iainmacwhirter.wordpress.com/. He describes how the Tories, Labour, and Liberals are already reneging on the promises they made, "politicians who promised a qualitative change in Scotland's relations with the UK; home rule, not Just the phasing out of the Barnett Formula and its replacement with income tax." This will not be tolerated in Scotland, where "Public discontent is very real and should not be ignored.

Load more