Barry Bright: Scottish non-Liberty

While earning my last three credit hours from Western Kentucky University in the late 80s I spent five weeks in their study abroad program which took me to London, England. Even with 130 plus credit hours I was still very ignorant of the ways of the world.

While there I read a newspaper article, which I’ve recounted before on the original version of this website, that detailed a robbery. Some Londoners were having a party and some other Brits decided to crash it which might have been bearable until the crashers started carrying the host’s stereo and other valuables out the door. What is so memorable to me is that according to the newspaper report no one lifted a finger to stop them.

Now I’ve never been much of a physical fighter, but I can’t imagine allowing someone to carry my stuff right out my own door in front of me without putting up some kind of resistance, armed with fists, a gun, or whatever was handy.

Here in Amerika, the land of the not-so-free and rarely brave, we have our own records to be ashamed about. But at least in recent years we have tried to make amends for our cowardly ways.

Now we have, and I’m ashamed to admit it though I’m not in the least surprised, a Kentuckian, native or immigrant I’m not sure, posting a partly tongue in cheek column on the commie news network’s website suggesting we should take Scotland’s place under the crown if it’s ‘sovereign people’ vote to declare their non-independence.

I hadn’t paid a great deal of attention to this movement, other than to surmise a few months back that it’s leadership is probably another bunch of socialist scum who just want to run their own little police state the way they see fit. After a little research this morning I see I was right.

Their ‘independence’ is to be nothing like ours, unless one ascribes to the theory that the United States never really surrendered its subservience to the English throne. On the proposed Scottish Independence Bill they really gain much of nothing:

Under ‘Head of State’ –

(1) Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth is to be Head of State, as Queen.

(2) Her Majesty is to be succeeded as Head of State (and as Queen or, as the cas e may be, King) by Her heirs and successors to the Crown according to law.

(3) Her Majesty, and Her successors to the Crown, continue to enjoy all the rights, powers and privileges which, according to law, attached to the Crown in Scotland immediately before Independence Day.

Under ‘Rights’:

Respect for human rights

(1) Every person has the rights and fundamental freedoms set out in the European Convention on Human Rights.

(2) Scots law is of no effect so far as it is incompatible with those rights and fundamental freedoms.

(3) The Scottish Government and public authorities must, in carrying out their functions, respect and comply with those rights and freedoms.

And way farther down there’s more:



Section 24 maintains the position of European Union law in an independent Scotland. It provides that directly effective EU law forms part of Scots law which, in turn, must not be inconsistent with EU law. This is the same as the position of Scotland at present as part of the UK and as part of the EU, and reflects the effect of the European Communities Act 1972. This section ensures that when Scotland, for Independence Day, changes its status within the EU from being part of a Member State to being a distinct Member State, the effect of EU law and all the rights, powers and obligations flowing from the EU Treaties will seamlessly carry on from Scotland as part of the UK to Scotland as a Member State of the EU.

So much for ‘independence.’ But maybe it’ll be sort of like Brit independence.

This after a cursory scan of the huge document, which we can be sure most Scottish voters, for or against, won’t bother to read. I did check out the official European Convention on ‘human rights’ page and without wasting years analyzing decades of socialist legal patina that amounts to another form of human bondage I can declare they seem to care about ‘democracy’ and the ‘rule of law.’ How nice.

Democracy is of course just another form of manipulation. It is the opposite of Liberty. The rule of law is a myth, until those who make the rules send their black-suited Nazis to your door.

I saw no sign of a real Bill of Rights such as we have here, as ignored as it often is. But it’s ignored because the people and the sheeple ignore it. One has to be seeking an awakening, often a lifelong experience, to be a ‘people’ in my not always so humble estimation.

Of course they won’t allow their people or their sheeple to arm themselves against possible tyranny or to protect their ‘human rights’:


Section 26 is the first of three sections dealing with human rights and equality. Most modern constitutions contain human rights and equality provisions which set out the fundamental rights and freedoms enjoyed by everyone in society. These provisions reflect universal principles established by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (UDHR) and further developed in subsequent treaties and conventions.

The UDHR proceeds from the fundamental principle that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Sections 26 to 28 of the Bill safeguard and guarantee Scotland’s existing progressive approach to equality and human rights and place Scotland firmly within the mainstream of contemporary European constitutional thinking.

Over here ‘progressive approach’ means commie. Most likely it’ll mean the same over there. That Universal Declaration of Human Rights has a few good points until we get to the end:

Article 29.

  • (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
  • (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
  • (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Definition: You have the rights we say you have. And of course no where in any of these European or Scottish documents is the recognition of the most basic right any creature possesses.

So whatever the Scots are voting for, it sure ain’t Liberty. And however cheeky the trashy Asbury professor/propagandist seems it doesn’t belong here. Tell it so. Tell its employer what you think as well.

England has some nice people and great beer but they are slaves mentally, like most Europeans, like many amerikans. In WWII lots of ‘nice’ sheeple shot lots of other ‘nice’ sheeple into ditches because their superiors ordered them to. Most of the sheeple who were shot into ditches died stupidly wondering “How did this ever happen to me?”

England and Scotland share a beautiful island, but they aren’t free and won’t be any more ‘free’ regardless of how the vote turns out. Endless economic and bureaucratic wrangling notwithstanding.

Most advanced tool-using primates planet wide have a sorry understanding of what ‘free’ is. Many in fact would rather die than be free and would rather kill their neighbors, either down the street or on other continents than allow them to be really free.

Mankind has a long way to go in understanding that until it stops choosing between various forms of authoritarianism it will not know Liberty. I don’t expect to exist long enough in this realm to see that happen.