caltonjock

An analysis, of the outcome of the 2014 independence referendum suggests that Alex Salmond employed the wrong strategy.

He should have insisted that any unitary council area that voted “Yes” to independence would be permitted to leave the UK.

In other words, the secession movement should have been decentralist and piecemeal.

Consider the following:

The referendum question posed to voters was: “Should Scotland be an independent country?”

The term “Scotland” was defined to include the existing Scottish territorial and maritime boundaries.

The final vote result was “Yes” at 44.7%, and “No” at 55.3% with 3.6 million votes cast.

As required by the Scottish Independence Referendum Act 2013, those votes were cast and counted within 32 unitary council areas around Scotland.

With all 32 of 32 council areas declared, the results showed that four council areas (Glasgow, Dundee City, North Lanarkshire, and West Dunbartonshire) voted for independence.

Voter turnout in those three areas ranged from 75% to 88%.

The “No” vote prevailed in eight other council areas with slim majorities that ranged from 51% to 54%.

Voter turnout in those eight areas ranged from 84 per cent. to 89 per cent.

The final vote results revealed the impossibility for “Yes” Scotland to obtain a majority vote for independence from 3.6 million voters spread across all of Scotland, and illustrates why the push should have been for the secession of Scottish cities/territories. A situation that remains unchanged in 2024.

But there is a way to employ progressive secession that ensures success and minimises conflict with the Westminster government. Alba and “Yes” Scotland should adopt a strategy which:

1. Recognizes the fact that the potential for a “Yes” vote for unitary independence is distributed unevenly across Scotland. A piecemeal strategy renders secession less threatening politically, socially and economically.
2. Pursuing this strategy at several locations throughout Scotland would render it difficult for the Westminster Government to organise public opinion to oppose popular support for the committed secessionists.
3. Implementation of “free territories” would be negotiated with the Westminster Government and whilst its right to future taxation and legislation concerning anyone and anything within this territory would be removed it would be assured of its property rights over its buildings, land, etc.
4. The authorities of the newly formed “free territories” would inform their voters about the economic success histories of small and independent city-states like Hong Kong, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and others which adopted free-trade policies to thrive.

Summary

De-centralized and localized secession would bring far greater prospects for both political and economic success throughout Scotland, both in the short term and long term.

http://mises.org/daily/6508/How-to-Fight-the-Modern-State

https://mises.org/library/scotland-and-hoppean-blueprint-secession

http://store.mises.org/Democracy-The-God-That-Failed-P240.aspx

Hoppe suggests a means of employing secession to minimize conflict with central governments and maximize success.