Does the monarchy still have any role to play in Scotland's future? Any thoughts? You may well ask what is the point of this message and this group and even answering? When you look around at different internet politics forums/fora most seem to descend into petty personality clashes and time wasting squabbling and don't do much in the way of actual concrete discussion. The internet if used effectively IMO however can still be used to bring people in diverse geographical locations and with diverse backgrounds and viewpoints in a positive intellectually stimulating think tank kind of way. This can work on two levels. Firstly it is an interesting way to bounce ideas off other people and get new insights in return. Secondly if the discussion is sensible enough given the ease of access to the interner through WWW browsers influential people may just pay attention every new and again.

My view on Ian Bell's article is that he talks too much in a politics of grievance way about what he doesn't like about the status quo way of doing things and not enough in a positive sense about what he wants to replace the monarchy with and why it would be greatly advantageous. He calls Scottish nationalists who disagree with him "stupid" which seems a bit juvenile and sweeping. Most people who would argue for the retention of the monarchy would as he says do so on pragmatic grounds. Is it stupid to take advantage of the fact that a major institution of the current constitutional order is willing to adapt to changing times rather than be a monolithic force reinforcing the status quo? I think not. Intelligent election winning politics is about building as broad as possible a consensus to acheive a set of attainable goals that may fall short of what people would want in an ideal sitaution but would still be an advance on the way things are right now. If open in your face republicanism is a vote loser is it worth being ideologically pure in opposition when putting up with the monarchy could make it easier to achieve a number of other goals?

I'm going to repost a message I sent to another mailing list that expands on this from a different angle. Ian Bell as he often does refers to Scotland as a colony which seems a bit absurd to me given Scotland's integral role in Britain's imperial history. A far better analogy is with Canada and the other former self-governing Dominions that have retained the monarchy long after independence.

Click here to access to the Scotia Discussion Forum