On Sept. 18, the Scottish referendum on independence failed to pass, with 45 percent voting for independence and 55 percent voting against it. A collective sigh of relief could be heard in elite circles throughout England. Considering the forces aligned behind the "No" campaign, this was a narrow margin of victory. Politicians from the main parties in Westminster were overjoyed that their campaign - which combined fear mongering with promises of a significant extension of devolved power - won over enough voters to keep the United Kingdom intact.

The night before the vote, with everything on the line, former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown made a last-minute impassioned speech. At times he appeared on the verge of bursting into tears. Brown made wild claims about the wonderful nature of the United Kingdom and warned of the terrible dangers it would face if it were to break up. It would be fair to say it was the speech of his life.

Brown said, "From each according to his ability to contribute, to each according to his needs, and that is the best principle that can govern the life of our country today." This demagoguery met with rapturous applause. But Brown failed to inform his audience that Karl Marx used these very words to describe the highest phase of communism, by which he meant a world where everyone lives a life a plenty, doing what they like, without any external compulsion. Brown continued to use socialist rhetoric throughout his speech. He claimed that Britain stands for "a world of social justice." He said, "We, the people who found a way of cooperation across borders; we, who pioneered a partnership between nations; we, who have stood as a beacon of solidarity and sharing," must stay united at all costs.

As this is the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I, Brown dragged the ghosts of the conflict's fallen victims into the referendum debate by the hair. He claimed that British soldiers died fighting for social justice and solidarity. But British soldiers did not fight in the World War I or World War II for solidarity and cooperation. Rather, they fought to maintain the largest empire in history and to stop other countries from threatening it. The United Kingdom did not pioneer a "partnership between nations," but it did pioneer new methods of repression and oppression around the world. It conquered the trans-Atlantic slave trade and industrialised it. It seized colonies by force in India and throughout the continent of Asia, as well as in North, Central and South America and in the Middle East and Africa. The British Empire starved people into submission. It tortured them, shot them, bombed them, gassed them and incarcerated them in concentration camps. In Brown's eulogy of all things British he seems to have forgotten these historical facts. Perhaps they slipped his mind in the heat of the moment?

Britain's current Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron also promised more rights to the Scots during the referendum, but after the results came in he swiftly changed his emphasis to focus on extending the powers of England - a policy he has termed "English votes for English laws." However, the structure of British state power and institutions means that any such votes by English MPs would impose policies on the subordinate and weaker parliaments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Their MPs would no longer have any meaningful say in decisions that directly affect them.

As Philip Stephens pointed out in the Financial Times, "Follow the logic of English votes for English laws, and it leads to an English parliament and government. Such would be the dominance of these English institutions that the Commons would be reduced to a foreign policy talking shop."

Cameron claimed that Britain has upheld its "ancient democracy," evidently unconcerned that this "ancient democracy" only granted votes to those who owned property. Now, in the name of democracy, Cameron's Conservative party wants to impose its will by means of the English majority.

The author is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit: http://china.org.cn/opinion/heikokhoo.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)