Will the Union see its 300th birthday?

The Telegraph ^ | 10/25/06 | Alan Cochrane

[Vanders9]

Well, I agree in principle with the statements made on this board that there is little point in refighting the battles of the past, especially as the reasons for fighting said conflicts may very largely have disappeared, or at least radically changed. Nonetheless, the past MATTERS. All modern nations are, after all, the sum of past events, both good and bad.

As to the original question, my own personal thought is that the Union is indeed tottering. I am sure it will see its 300th birthday but I also think it very likely it will collapse in my lifetime. On the one hand, I can accept that with some "sang froid". 300 years is a long time for a country to exist. There are not that many nations, especially modern nations, that last that long, even those we think of as being "old". The French (who in all senses are a pretty revolting lot) are on their, what, fourth republic since 1795? Norway is only a century old, Italy only a little more.

On the other hand, I live on the borders. I'm very conscious of the past history of England and Scotland. The border wars were not pleasant, in any way. The ultimate lesson of the low-level conflict that we had to live in prior to the Union was that this island is too small for two government, or at least it was in the 16th century. We can only hope things can be different now.

Personally if Scotland does gain independence I'd want to come with them. My impression (and I may be very wrong here - the Scots of a nationalistic persuasion on the board may correct me) is that Scots Nationalists are not so much against England as against London, an attitude most in Northern England would share.

[bobjam]

I don't see England and Scotland ever truly being separated. The fact of the matter is that what happens in the south invariably affects the north, and vice-versa. Perhaps the Union could evolve towards a system where England, Scotland and Wales each have their own parliaments, but work together in regards to defense and foreign affairs. Queen Elizabeth II or perhaps King Charles III could be titular head of state of all three (wouldn't it be ironic if England and Scotland split under a king named Charles?) If the two do actually split, there would almost immediately be a movement to bring them back together.

[bruinbirdman]

"Queen Elizabeth II or perhaps King Charles III could be titular head of state of all three "

Three? From Wikipedia:

The Commonwealth comprises 53 countries, almost a third of the world's countries, and has a combined population of 1.7 billion people, about a quarter of the world population.[4] The total GDP is about US$7.8 trillion (about 16% of the total world economy). The land area of the Commonwealth nations is about 12.1 million square miles (about 21% of the total world land area).

The four largest Commonwealth nations by population are India at 1.1 billion, Pakistan at 159 million, Bangladesh at 141 million, and Nigeria at 137 million.

The three largest Commonwealth nations by area are Canada at 3.8 million square miles, Australia at 3.0 million square miles, and India at 1.2 million square miles.

The four largest economies are India at US$4,300 billion, the United Kingdom at US$2,000 billion, Canada at US$1,220 billion, and Australia at US$700 billion based on purchasing power parity analysis; see List of countries by GDP estimates for 2007 (PPP)

The largest military spenders are the United Kingdom at US$48 billion, India at US$21 billion,Australia at US$10.5 billion, and Canada at US$10.5 billion. The Commonwealth of Nations is not a military alliance. see : List of countries by military expenditures

Tuvalu is the smallest member, with only 11,000 people.

Membership is open to countries that accept the association's basic aims and have a present or past constitutional link to a Commonwealth member.

[bobjam]

I was thinking of a union that is a little more binding than the Commonwealth but not as binding as the what currently exists... perhaps a common currency and unified military.