Interview with Rachel Franchi, Resident of Worcestershire

Pearl of Tyburn:  Tonight I’ll be speaking with Rachel Franchi, a history and psychology student from Worcestershire. Hello, Ms. Franchi.

Rachel Franchi:  Hi.  

P.T.:  Could you talk a little bit about your background and any identities you see yourself as having?

Rachel Franchi:  I was born and live the West Midlands part of the country. I also have some Welsh blood in me from my Grandfather, who settled down in this area. I see myself as English and British, and I'm proud to be both.

P.T.:  What does being British mean to you?

R.F.:  Being British to me means feeling proud of the unity with the three other countries that make up Britain and taking pride in the history and the culture of these countries and the bond that we share. It make have been very shaky at times, but we've overcome it all, and I believe we're stronger together.

P.T.:  What are your feelings about the monarchy?

R.F.:  As a Brit, and a relatively poor Brit at that, I know it's quite easy to feel resentful towards the Royal Family for all the luxury that's placed at their feet merely because they happen to have been born into the right family. But I think that a lot of people tend to overlook the fact that being the monarch of a country must be incredibly draining, emotionally. The Queen rarely smiles- I mean really smiles- in public because she's been trained to keep her emotions hidden away. And, of course, there's plenty of way that Royals must never be seen to behave. They must always be seen as being respectable and in control of themselves- and rightly so- but it must be hard at times, especially if they are younger.

Many people nowadays feel that having a monarch is pointless and a waste of money. However, while I can see their point, I would be very sad to lose our monarchy, which, literally, gives the United Kingdom its 'crown and glory'. I think it's important for us to have an apolitical figurehead to represent our country, and I can't help but feel proud whenever I see our Queen doing what she does best, representing our country amid the rest of the world's leaders!

P.T.:  Could you tell me a little about your own personal aspirations/interests?

R.F.:  Most people who know me would describe me as a bit of an oddball, but I (for the most part!) take pride in being different. I’m a huge animal lover (excluding spiders!) and my cats are her most loved companions. I also sing a bit and have taught myself to yodel. I love the sound of the electric guitar, and one day might actually learn to play it. By far, my biggest interest is naval history, particularly 'Nelson's navy.' I hope to be a naval historian one day and help re-establish the connection Britain once so proudly had with the sea.

P.T.: Thank you for letting me interview you, Ms. Franchi!

R.F.:  You’re most welcome. Bye for now!

Interview with “Wyndysascha”, Legal Student from London

Pearl of Tyburn:  I’ll now be speaking with “Wyndysascha”, a resident of the great city of London, England, capital of the United Kingdom. It’s nice to have you on board!

Wyndysascha:  Thank you!

P.T.:  Can you give a little summary about yourself and your background?

W.S.:  I'm British, of English and Scottish ancestry. I was born in England, baptized into the Church of Scotland, and moved to Scotland at a young age. I now live in London, UK, where I attended university for a bachelor’s degree in history, and am now studying for a second degree in law. Although I haven't always lived in London, I do consider myself a Londoner (and I find it difficult now to imagine living anywhere else - a typical Londoner's conceit!). I am also a recent convert to the Catholic Faith.

P.T.:  Could you please tell me what your British heritage means to you?   

W.S.:  I've always seen my heritage as one of a thoughtful, measured, civilized, yet firm approach to tolerance, fairness, liberty, and the rule of law. We don't submit to tyrants; but we also don't have blood-in-the-streets revolutions either (although we do occasionally riot and decapitate our king!). Nowadays, though, we seem not only to fail to live up to our own image of ourselves, but we don't even know what that image is.

P.T.:  Why do you think “Britain” is such a good thing?

W.S.:  The reason why "Britain" is such a good thing is because, no matter what the cause of its inception, the history of conflict between the nations of The British Isles produced an authentically "British" idea of liberty. No matter how hypocritical we are in applying it, that is what the Union stands for, and why it should continue - above and beyond all other considerations, the Union represents how different nations can co-exist in one state and remain at liberty.

P.T.:  What do you think of the assertation that nations should, as a matter of necessity, have their own states?

W.S.:  The nations of Britain don't necessarily need their own states; they just have to love our liberty enough that they force the politicians of the Union to work towards it. Things like the European Union are bureaucratic exercises, and simply can't evoke that feeling of loyalty. The United Kingdom, as with the United States, represents an idea, and an ideal, of how people should live and what we should be willing to fight to preserve. That we've got to where we are now is a failure to hold faith to liberty.

P.T.:  Could you clarify what you mean when you say “liberty”, as opposed to “freedom”?

W.S.:  I say Liberty, and not Freedom, for a reason: "Liberty", understood as a British concept, is the God-given right to quiet enjoyment of one's private and family life and the state protecting us as we need it to; "Freedom" always seemed to me to be the running-around shouting, do-whatever-you-want thing.  It implies a positive effort of will, not simply a tendency to mobbishness and licence.

P.T.:  What do you think the active moral responsibility of the Union is?

W.S.:  The Union has an active moral responsibility to remind the nations of why the Union is a Good Thing and what it stands for. It shouldn't be forgotten that the Union was created in a shady politician's deal that the people, at the time, were overwhelmingly opposed to. But that didn't stop us coming to realize what the true character of the Union should be: a coming-together of equals established so that subjects could live their lives peaceably, free from undue interference.

That ethos came from centuries of intra-British wars, turmoil, and upheaval, and our common battles against monstrous tyrants that would make us slaves in our own country. The Union could be the fruit of all that, and prove that the world should draw closer together, find common ground, and agree on virtues to uphold instead of flying apart, with everyone trying to look out for themselves. We could just give-up and call it a few-centuries-old convenience and be done with it, but I think we'd all be the poorer for it.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on the monarchy?

W.S.:  The same historical connectivity applies to the British Constitutional Monarchy. It's very difficult to defend monarchy as an institution in the modern world (although not the need for a single strong leader of government, such as the US President). But the monarchy, traditionally, has been the source of authority for the law.  In The King's Speech, King George VI says that he's only the King if the people believe he speaks for them.

An overarching theme of British history is the reining-in of the Crown, so it didn't evolve into a Continental-style despotism but one rooted in the "ancient laws" of the people. People had to see the monarchy as a product of our ancient liberties: not as in-your-face as, say, the explicit American declaration that the government is the servant of the people, but rather an organic relationship where We were loyal to the Crown, and the Crown upheld the things that made Us, Us.

P.T.:  How do you think the view of the monarchy has altered in present times?

W.S.:  Now, because they have lost their sense of common nationhood and are ignorant of their history, people don't understand how the monarchy is a source of authority any more. That has a terrible impact on British ideas on Law, and so on the Union itself. Laws in this country derive their authority from the Crown, and because they are promulgated by the Crown-In-Parliament. If you don't think the Crown possesses authority, as the authentic voice of the ancient laws and liberties of the people, why obey the law?  We end up being a nation of laws obeyed purely through fear of compulsion, not one where laws are respected.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on the importance and meaning of history?

W.S.:  I believe that "History" as a cultural enterprise (not merely an academic one) is the set of honest stories about the past that we tell each other to reinforce our sense of self and community. Despite what some in the Eighteenth Century thought, life cannot be a purely rational exercise. That's not how people function. We are under a positive moral duty to make sure that our stories are true and morally good: when we stop concentrating on honest history and stop telling these stories to our children, we eventually lose our cohesiveness.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts on the Braveheart craze?

W.S.:  It’s easy to stick people in front of a TV playing Braveheart and then tell them it's the end of the story. But it's not the end. A simple look at British history would show that the heart of the Union is about nations fired by their own sense of liberty and independence being able to come together and work in common cause. I'm not unaware of the irony that the virtues associated with unity and liberty arose out of intra-British conquest, oppression, and struggle but, having fought and hated and brutalized, by the Grace of God we now have a higher standard to hold ourselves to.

P.T.:  What do you think might have made more Scottish people see the Union in a positive light?

W.S.:  Scotland's current generation might be more well-disposed to the Union if they saw how the original unification of Britain, though unpopular, became popular over time because of the mutually-beneficial nature of the arrangement. The Union forestalled Scottish bankruptcy after the Darien Scheme's failure. It brought a greater measure of peace to the Isles by excluding continental interference in Scottish affairs.

The Union allowed Scottish access to English (then British) markets.  In short, the Union allowed Scotland to punch well above its weight on a world stage. Not only this, but Scots have always been more than capable of holding the highest offices of state in a British Union; Scots are not the oppressed minority that Scottish Nationalists would like to portray themselves as, but rather are and always have been active participants in the Union at all levels. 

P.T.:  What do you think of the nationalist presentation that other people view Scots as having been disgraced or suppressed by the Union?

W.S.:  The peddled idea that "other people see Scots as brought low and wallowing in self-pity, and the Scots see themselves in a similar way" is the worst kind of rubbish: Scottish Nationalists get to present Independence as a solution for a perception that barely exists outside nasty right-wing media and pub loud-mouths, or gloss over that it's one implausible approach to dealing with something best dealt with within the Union anyway.  If self-respect and a sense of nationhood are so dreadfully lacking in the Scottish people, why not try to tackle this supposed problem within the Union, the institution that offers greater stability, greater opportunities, greater access to a world stage?!

Furthermore, the Union has never subsumed "Scottish" institutions beneath "British" ones. This flexibility is part of what makes the Union work. Constitutional protection has always been afforded to a separate Kirk, education system, and so on. Legislation, boards of control and state departments have been established in response to Scottish concerns over Scotland's needs. Development of devolved institutions continues today. If one believes that Scotland should become an independent, sovereign nation again then of course it is laudable that the process is peaceful, and through the political process. But that the process exists, has an historical presence, and is a viable route for future change - even if that change is independence itself - is a factual rejection of the idea that "Britain" somehow suppresses Scottish liberty.

P.T.:  What do you think are the main issues at the heart of the independence debate?

W.S.:  The true issue at stake in the whole Independence debate is this: unless there's some sort of complete, fundamental change in the governance, public morals, and general education of the people of the United Kingdom, then the Union is doomed to fail eventually. The pro-union Better Together campaign is fighting on the technical downsides of Independence. But people want more than that. I'd bet that any number of people voting For independence are sensible, sceptical people who don't believe the Yes Campaign's promises to give them everything they ever wanted without having to pay anything to get it - they're voting for independence because they've been presented with a vision of the world that makes them feel like they're part of a community again.

P.T.:  What do you think is “the best form of government”, if any?

W.S.:  I believe firmly that any state can only derive its authority from the informed consent of the governed.  This, obviously, doesn't necessarily imply either democracy or a republic, still less any inherent value to referenda.  However, I question what authority an independent Scottish state would have coming into existence via a brief moment of mawkish pseudo-patriotism.  There are nations around the world who are brutally oppressed by governments and regimes, who have a legitimate argument to make that they'd be better off with their own governors and states.  No-one oppresses the Scots, nor are the Scots lacking any opportunities within the Union.  Other independence movements elsewhere are similarly shallow. Who oppresses the Québécois, for instance?  What opportunities for localised government and international standing do they lack?  Like the Scots, they live in mature, rights-respecting states with civilized flexibility out of which they've done remarkably well and, when bumpy periods are passed, probably will do in future.

P.T.:  What do you think of the way individual politicians and parties affect the debate?

W.S.:  The manipulations of canny politicians lead people to forget their own interests and (not a popular opinion, perhaps) their just allegiances and duties. Governments you dislike aren't a reason to fracture one's country: they're a reason to stick it out, campaign for your point of view, and take an active role in the process.  I dislike many aspects of Conservative Party policy, their fairly cheap and nasty approach to the poor being foremost.  I'd probably have similar feelings towards any future Labour or Liberal Democrat government.  But pretending that the Scottish nation is so utterly, fundamentally divorced in its opinions from any policy these parties could implement is Fiction, pure and simple. 

 Scottish Nationalists draw the distinction between "Scottish politicians" and "Westminster politicians" to foster the "us-and-them" mentality necessary to break Scots from the Union but that's politics, not some fundamental character of the Scottish nation.  It's rare to find someone who identifies wholly with their elected leaders - we laugh at our MPs' supposed ineptitude regularly, Americans have their "clowns in Congress", and so on - and all the "Westminster politicians" argument does is piggy-back on this sentiment.

P.T.:  How do you think a lack of true patriotism towards Britain has contributed to the Scottish nationalist movement?

W.S.:  Our sense of Britishness has decayed to the point where the Union may be about to split. The past sixty years of British history have been the systematic dismantling of emotional attachment to one's own country. "Patriotism" is, apparently, something for right-wing thugs; the left/centre-left sneer at anyone who thinks that there's such a thing as "British liberty". Say what you want about the nationalists, they’re not stupid: they understand "History" far better than the Better Together campaign appears to (the fact is that they're cynically manipulating that history notwithstanding).  Again: although the Union provides tangible, real-life benefits to its citizens, its raison d'être cannot simply be measured in pounds, shillings, and pence.

I'm not naive. I know that "patriotism" is something that is used by the wicked on the gullible. But it's not a bad thing in and of itself, if it's attached to a good and noble cause. Love can warp easily into a greater, more general evil because it's an emotion, which is why love has to be married to reason and virtue to endure.  Love of one's country can warp easily into terrible things.  This is the line that Scottish Nationalists are skirting.  They're using Scots' love of the Scottish nation to foster division rather than unity, or a unity that is narrow and parochial, and encouraging self-pitying reactive chauvinism rather than genuine national character.  These things are being set against an authentic, British idea of liberty - something that emphasises common ground between different groups - in favour of a weak, ivory-towered concept of national freedom that isn't so much written solidly in history but slides greasily off its pages.

P.T.:  Could you wrap up this interview with a summary of the main problem as it stands now?

W.S.:  The sum of the problem is that we are forgetting our history, our unique sense of liberty, and our belief that our nations have a common centre that organically emanates authority but also derives its authority from us.  It can only end in division, and "suspect government" that has all the trappings of "rights" and "democracy" but enforces a deadening cultural uniformity on us.  Scottish Independence won't see some glorious rebirth of the Scottish Nation: it will say to the world that one of the foremost partners in the great, historical Projects of Union and Liberty has decided that it's just not worth the bother any more.  We don't have long to impart this on the Scottish people, and I'll be praying that it's a vision they can be persuaded to cleave to.

P.T.:  As an aside, can you tell me a little about your personal interests?

W.S.:  I maintain an interest in British and American History. My period of study is the Long Eighteenth Century, as affecting Britain and her empire (especially in North America). I've probably sucked up too much Eighteenth-Century pamphleteering, as I'm a big fan of the constitutional forms and theories of the time: whether the constitutional, parliamentary monarchy of Britain; or the federal, checks-and-balances American Republic ('The Federalist Papers' being one of my favourite works).

I also follow politics and consider myself to be a middle-of-the-road centre-right pragmatist with an attachment to ideas of individual liberty. I enjoy playing games, especially strategy ones, and I also love playing 'Minecraft'. I’m in the process of taking up blogging about his new Catholic life, politics, and gaming against the backdrop of ‘Minecraft’ (www.wyndysascha.com), as well as producing videos and vlogs on YouTube. I also try to deepen my newfound Catholic faith whenever I can.

P.T.:  Thank you very much for putting down so many excellent thoughts for this interview. I wish you all the best.

W.S.: Thanks; you too! 

Interview with Jonathan Robert Waddell, Student at the University of Aberdeen

P.T.:  Today I’ll be speaking with Jonathan Robert Waddell, a Student of History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen. Hello, Mr. Waddell.

J.W.:  Hello!

P.T.:  First could you tell me a bit about your background?

J.W.:  I'm from the north east of Scotland, studied at Aberdeen College, now North East Scotland College and moved on to study History and Economics at the University of Aberdeen. I'm president of the Aberdeen University Liberal Democrats and I'm campaigning for a Federal Britain through quite radical constitutional change post-no vote in September.

P.T.:  Could you please explain what type of constitutional changes you would be interested in seeing? And would the federalization be similar to that in the USA?

J.W.:  Starting with a full transfer of domestic policy to be handled by the devolved parliaments of the UK, the creation of an English parliament or maybe regional assemblies within England. From there I believe we can start to consider what we want our union to look like, how it will function on a constitutional basis and where we want to take it. I believe the model the Scottish parliament currently has is a great direction to take the other parliaments in.

P.T.:  How does this contrast with the situation as it is now?

J.W.:  As it stands, the current powers the Scottish and UK parliaments have in relation to each other, are defined by what are 'reserved' powers at Westminster, the Scottish parliament handles everything else. And then all of this to be embodied in a fully written, codified and entrenched constitution. I feel a system like this would give the Devolved parliaments the autonomy they deserve and need to run a success Federal UK. It's very ambitious and will require a lot of hard work, but I believe it's achievable if we work hard enough for it.

P.T.:  What do you think about the participants in the movement to bring about Scottish independence?

J.W.:  It's hard to say. In all debates I take part in and campaigns I respect my opponent and in many cases get on very well with them. Some of my best friends are Labour and Tories when I’m a Liberal Democrat.

In this debate I feel it's been so polarized that I’ve not had the opportunity to really make friends with them, and although I don't wish to make out that there has been no potential guilt on the Unionist side, I do feel that from my personal experience, the Independence movement has been much less accepting and much more hostile which has led me to find it hard to respect them while disagreeing with their campaign.

P.T.:  What are your reasons for being a unionist?

R.W.:  To me it's how we can use our resources to the best possible ends. I feel the various countries within the UK all have their various different strengths and all have very similar problems and very similar aims. If we work together, pool what resources we have, put all of our best minds together and work against our common enemies of poverty or homelessness, then we can do better to reach our common goals and eradicate these things.

I don't see what I have largely more in common with my neighbour in Scotland than my family in England or Wales. Ultimately, I feel the system we have is a good one, it's far from perfect and the policy isn't always right but the system itself has so much potential to work to the benefit of 63m people rather than just 5m. I want to make the best of that system for the benefit of everyone in the UK, including Scotland.

P.T.:  What would your consider your personal identities, national/cultural/religious/or otherwise? What do you think of the "crisis of identity" in Britain?

R.W.:  Well, this is probably the toughest part in the debate. Nationalists to me seem to be concerned with the Scottish identity and little else. But I don't really understand what that means. Cultural identity means so much more than the political boundaries you're parents were born in. My parents are from the central belt and I have a bit of that in me, but I was raised in the north east, in a town called Banchory, and then in Aberdeen. Hence, I’m a 'Taucher' and a 'Toonser' then I guess 'Scottish' and as part of that 'British' and of course, 'European'.

But all these things have so much to them they can mean whatever you want them to mean. I think the idea that you can be 'Scottish' is inherently not Scottish. As Scotland is made up of so many various, extremely rich cultural identities that to be Scottish could mean any number of things. As for the identity in Britain, we're in an increasingly internationalist and globalizing world and I feel clutching onto old ideas of Nationalism of any description is living in the past and we should start to expand our ideas into the modern world.

P.T.:  Do you believe that there is any place for a robust British identity, something along the lines of what is shown in America throughout the individual states?

R.W.:  I really hope not. I find both nationalism and patriotism quite futile ideals, the belief that your nationality is inherently good and others inferior and the idea that you can be proud of achievements you had no place in. I love where I live, and as an extension of that of course I love Scotland.

I want what's best for all the people who live here, but I want what's best for anyone living anywhere. Why wouldn't I want to extend a higher standard of living to anyone I can whenever I can? I consider myself an internationalist in that regard. I want what's best for the greater amount of people.

P.T.:  What is your view on the way history effects and informs the present? What do you think about the different "narratives" presented by nationalist and unionist camps in this debate?

J.W.:  Well, I'm a History student, and I would like to introduce the age old, over used yet under appreciated quote from George Santayana 'Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it'. I think we need to understand our past and the context to understand where we are today, learn from our mistakes and move forward from them.

I must admit whenever I bring history into the debate, nationalists like to tell me that 'this debate isn't about the past, the independence movement is about the future' before dropping into some narrative about some supposedly horrible thing 'Westminster' did way back when, completely contradicting themselves.

P.T.:  Being a student of history, what do you think of the referendum being held on the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and the whole connection with the wars of Scottish independence in general?

J.W.:  I think in a historical context, it's completely irrelevant. The wars of independence are not only so far in the past it can't be compared to modern day events and we can't allow ourselves to judge events of the past by today’s standards, but even if we could compare them, it was a very different situation that we were in.

However, I think it's very of the SNP’s outlook and tactics to make it this year. They are desperate to inspire an idea of Scottishness over Britishness. But we've already discussed the idea of identity. In short, I feel the SNP think they can inspire people to vote with their hearts and distract people from their flimsy arguments on economics and practicalities.

P.T.:  What do you feel about the monarchy?

J.W.:  Generally passive on the idea. I feel they don't have any divine right to rule, but they have no real power and exercise purely ceremonial powers. They contribute more to the treasury than they receive out of it and are generally favourable in public opinion as well as being hugely respected diplomats across the world. I see no reason to get rid of them, but they exist as a formality, if they exercised real power I’d be far more skeptical.

P.T.:  What do you think of them as they apply to the subject of unity? And what is your opinion on the Jacobite rebellions as they are being used in Nat propaganda? And with regards to them making the current Scottish monarchy "illegitimate"?

J.W.:  I think this moves us into a much broader debate that moves us away from the contentious issues that the referendum will be won and lost on. In general, I don't feel these historical events contribute to the context that we're debating in the run up to the referendum.

P.T.:  Thanks so much for the interview, Jonathan.

J.W.:  Sure! It's nice to get different questions for a change by the way. I've answered the same questions over and over, but these are bit different and I like that :) I've done so many debates and interviews. Same issues, same questions, over and over again. This is a nice change. I’m glad you're getting involved! :)

P.T.: Could you tell us a little bit about yourself personally?

J.W.:  I'm 22! :) I'm afraid I’m a complete nerd. At university I do a lot of debating and in my free time I like to go hill walking, rock climbing and cross country mountain biking. I also play guitar and drums, punk/rock etc.

P.T.:  Thank you for taking the time to be interviewed. I do hope everything works out well in the end for you and all of us.

J.W.:  Thanks; me too.

Interview with Jamie Scott, Royal Marine in Training

P.T.:  Now we’ll be speaking with Jamie Scott, Royal Marine in training. How are you doing today, Mr. Scott?

J.S.:  Quite well, thanks.

P.T.:  Could you tell us about your background?

J.S.:  I was born and raised in England with a strong military background. Every Scott in my family is a serviceman. The Scott's have always fought for the country, and my mother was also in the TA. I have just grown up around the forces and being in the Sea Cadets, and I wanted to challenge myself and see the world.

P.T.:  Do you identify yourself more as English, British, or both?

J.S.:  In the UK, I tend to identify myself as English but, when I am not in the UK, I am British and will display that I am proud of it.

P.T.:  What is your view of the Scottish Independence Referendum?

J.S.:  I did a summary of my point of view from an English perspective for ScotlandSayNaw. The fact is we work so much better together than we have done apart. We should stick together we have done for so many years and we have defeated powerful enemies. I think what the First Minister has done has ruined Scotland by dividing her in two, just because of a war 700 years ago.

P.T.:  So do you think that the nationalist effort to correlate the referendum with the 700^th anniversary of Bannockburn has helped their cause at all, or just made them look silly?

J.S.:  The fact they are trying to connect to something so long ago is daft. I love to remember history, but many people are not taking in the account of the 307 years of union, which has hit the no camp hard at first, but the mood of the people is slowly becoming the opposite of what the Nats wanted.

P.T.:  What historical achievements do you think Scots and English alike can look on with pride in the course of their union together?

J.S.:  One thing to be proud of is the technology we have came up with over the last few hundred years. Our tech is amazing. We started the industrial revolution, and as a result, Britain is the founder of the modern world. Also, the military we built up together is a damn good one.

P.T.:  What would you say are the main benefits Scotland continues to derive from being part of the UK today?

J.S.:  Well I'm not too well informed on what goes on in the government, but I think the defence is a big thing, then our combined economy, the positions the UK has in the UN, NATO and the EU, and the support we have for each other.

P.T.:  Do you think your military background affects your view of the union at all? How do you think most servicemen/women feel about this?

J.S.:  My military background does affect my view a bit, but I still try look at other facts. Most servicemen and women want to stay in the Union because their lives will be so much better.

P.T.:  What do you think about security and the armed forces, and the future of Scotland without the British army?

J.S.:  Well, I think an independent Scotland won't have fully trained armed forces more like a militia with really old weapons. Scotland would be easier to attack and their alliances would break down and maybe even rely on other countries for protection. The security of Scotland will be at great risk without the British Army may even be open to attack from larger countries or terrorists.

P.T.:  What do you think English people (and Welsh and NI people for that matter) should do to encourage Scotland to stay in the union without causing the opposite reaction?

J.S.:  I think they should try getting support for Better Together, and showing their support for what Scotland means to the rest of us. Scotland is a part of the British way, and in the social network we must try to defend pages against the Cybernat attacks and just show Scotland why the UK is better as one.

P.T.:  What do you think of David Cameron saying that English people should contact their Scottish family and friends and ask them to stay in the Union? I know he got some flack for that.

J.S.:  I agree with him. My uncle is Scottish, and so is my girlfriend’s family. They all have relatives in Scotland, and if there was to be a yes vote it would separate families and friends from each other. They have a right to speak out against it.

P.T.:  What do you think of the Commonwealth Games being held in Glasgow this year of all years? Do you think it would alter the referendum race in any way?

J.S.:  I'm not entirely sure. I'm hoping it would urge people to the union side like the Olympics did. The country became so patriotic on account of the Olympics, and hopefully the commonwealth games can achieve the same result.

P.T.:  What do you think of the monarchy?

J.S.:  I think it brings a lot to the UK, not just British Pride, but also our economy the government may pay for there living but they make millions on the Queens land and the tourism.

P.T.:  How do you think royal pageantry effects unity in the country?

J.S.:  It depends really on how they view things. During the golden jubilee, the country was united under one banner, but sadly that is no longer the case for some reason. I never heard much about Scotland at the Jubilee, so I don't really know how it effected the mood there.

P.T.:  In brief, what is reaction to the claim made by some nationalists that the Scottish monarchy has been “illegitimate” since the time of The Jacobite Rebellions and the overthrow of the Stuart Dynasty?

J.S.:  I'm not too sure about the Jacobite rebellions, but the Queen was crowned and the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and she gets her power from God.

P.T.:  As a young person yourself, what do you think of Salmond giving 16 and 17 year olds the right to take part in the referendum even though they cannot vote in regular elections?

J.S.:  It's good to have a say when it will effect Scottish teens more afterwards, and I think Salmond tried to do this so he could make sure he wins the YES vote which turned on him badly. That's why he said servicemen overseas can't vote.

P.T.:  What do you think about Scottish servicemen overseas being refused the right to vote in the referendum?

J.S.:  The fact servicemen overseas can't vote is a disgrace. The very fact that they could all come home to a different country that they were unable to weigh in on is appalling.

P.T.:  What do you think about the situation in which people from other parts of the UK living in Scotland can vote, but not Scots living in other parts of the UK?

J.S.:  If the people are living in Scotland long term, then I think they should vote, but if it's short term, not really.

P.T.:  What do you think might be the result if an independent Scotland is unable to use the pound?

J.S.:  If an independent Scotland is unable to use the pound, then it's all down hill for the Scots. They will not be accepted in the EU because they would need to bring something to the EU join, and they would need to reach certain requirements to join the Euro.

P.T.:  What’s your reaction to the Nationalist antipathy towards nuclear power and complaints about the “rape” of Scottish land?

J.S.:  Their views of nuclear power is a bit old technology moves on and we won't be left behind and the rape of Scottish lands when I visited Scotland I saw no rape of the lands

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on “Better Together” and how they running the “No” campaign, in contrast to the way Alex Salmond and the SNP are running their “Yes” campaign?

J.S.:  Better together are doing well but they do need more activities the Nats are getting in to people's face about it but they are doing something

P.T.:  Who do you think will win?

J.S.:  I think the NO vote will win as long as people vote.

P.T.:  To wrap things up, could you tell us a little about your personal interests, hobbies, and goals in life? Do you plan on attending University at some point? What type of career might you be aiming for? Would like to be a “career soldier”, or something else?

J.S.:  My personal interests are History anything Military and my main goal in life is to become a marine. I don’t plan on going to university, but I would like to start my own business.

P.T.:  Thank you very much for the interview, Mr. Scott. I wish you all the best in your training for the marines and future business ventures.

J.S.:  Sure thing; thanks. 

Interview with Rev. Ricky Yates, Church of England Chaplain of St. Clements’s Anglican Parish

Pearl of Tyburn:  We now have Rev. Ricky Yates coming to us from Prague, Czech Republic. Good evening!

Ricky Yates:  Good evening Pearl!

P.T.:  First, could you tell me a little bit about your background and work?

R.Y.:  I'm British man, born 20 days after H M the Queen came to the throne, so like Her Majesty, I celebrated my Diamond Jubilee in 2012 :) I've been an ordained Anglican priest for nearly 25 years & since September 2008, I've been the resident Anglican Chaplain in Prague.

P.T.:  Do you belong to any political party?

R.Y.:  I used to be a paid up member of the Liberal Democrats, but I have no party affiliation at present. I'm also not currently registered to vote in the UK.

P.T.:  Do you consider yourself more predominately English or British?

R.Y.:  Interesting question! I'm English in that I was born in England of English parents. But particularly here in the Czech Republic, I usually say I'm British, not least because I travel on a British passport & my Czech residency documentation says 'United Kingdom' (in Czech of course), as being my nationality.

P.T.:  So what is your reaction to the prospect of breaking up the union through Scottish independence?

R.Y.:  I think it would be very foolish. I strongly believe in the devolution of powers to Scotland & Wales, but I don't see any reason for complete separation. The SNP might argue otherwise, but the fact is that England subsidies both Scotland and Wales and there would be understandable calls for that financial support to cease should Scotland become independent.

P.T.:  What do you think of the concept of federalization?

R.Y.:  It depends what you mean by federalization. But if you mean each constituent country of the UK being self-governing but with defense, foreign affairs etc being the responsibility of a UK wide federal government, as in the USA or Australia, then I would be in favour of that. At the moment, you have laws for England & sometimes Wales, being voted on by Scottish MPs when English MPs cannot vote on laws relating to Scotland.

P.T.:  Do you consider yourself “European” and how do you feel about the European Union and the future of Scotland/Britain within in, depending upon the outcome of the referendum?

R.Y.:  I certainly regard myself as European - after all, my wife is German & we live in the Czech Republic. Whilst the EU isn't perfect, it has maintained peace post WW2, greatly assisted trade & economic development & made travel so much easier.

The UK would be shooting itself in the foot if it were to leave the EU. And I'm one of about two million British citizens who live in other EU member states & our situation would become very uncertain.

P.T.:  What do you think the difference would be (if any) for an independent Scotland in the EU as opposed to being within the UK?

R.Y.:  There is no guarantee that an independent Scotland would be part of the EU. This is one of the strong arguments against independence. For example, the Spanish would oppose an independent Scotland being allowed to join as it would set a precedent for Catalonia.

P.T.:  Ah. I wonder if Italy feels the same way about Venice, and France about Brittany....

R.Y.:  Exactly! The Spanish have been the most vocal on this matter but there would be similar concerns in Italy & France.

P.T.: How has living in the Czech Republic affected your views on unions and separation?

R.Y.:  What I did want to say is that I live in part of a country that also divided in two on 01/01/1993 when Czechoslovakia divided into the Czech Republic & Slovakia. I've heard from many Czechs & Slovaks as to how much they regret that break up. Relatively few Czechs live in Slovakia whereas many Slovaks live and work in the Czech Republic & in many ways, find themselves at a disadvantage because they are now 'foreigners' in what was previously their own country.

A similar situation would arise if Scotland became independent. Relatively few English people live in Scotland, but many more Scots live & work in England & might be left feeling like Slovaks do here in the Czech Republic.

P.T.:  Do you think there is ever a chance of Czechoslovakia being reunified?

R.Y.:  No - It would be very difficult to put the two countries back together & the same would apply to England and Scotland. Back to one of my very early points. The Czechs, in some measure, financially supported the Slovaks before the Velvet Divorce. That financial support went with the division into two. Slovakia is about the same size as the CR but with less that half the population. It is mainly rural & mountainous. I hope the parallels are clear.

P.T.:  What do you think about the monarchy and how it applies to the national identity and the union? Can you tell me about your experience with Prince Charles and The Duchess of Cornwall?

R.Y.:  My own opinion is that having a constitutional monarchy has served the UK very well, certainly for the past 150 years, & I see no reason to change it. HM the Queen is very strong about being the Queen of the United Kingdom. She is a strong unifying factor. As I'm sure you're aware, Prince Charles is a far less popular character, though attitudes towards him & the Duchess have improved markedly in recent years.

My own experience with meeting C & C and having to preach with them in my congregation was a little nerve racking but equally quite enjoyable. They were in Prague on a Sunday at the time and wanted to be at worship on a Sunday. Prince Charles also wanted it to be seen that he was at worship! You can read more about it here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7493322/Prince-of-Wales-and-Camilla-join-Prague-worshippers.html

http://www.dukeandduchessofcambridge.org/news-and-diary/trh-attend-church-prague?__utma=1.1299982778.1403553590.1403553590.1403553590.1&__utmb=1.4.10.1403553590&__utmc=1&__utmx=_utmz=1.1403553590.1.1.utmcsr=google|utmccn=%28organic%29|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=%28not%20provided%29&__utmv=-&__utmk=234216990

P.T.:  This is just out of curiosity, but did you just wake one Sunday and someone told you: "Guess what? The prince is coming to church!" Or was this prepared?

R.Y.:  I knew more than two months in advance. See http://rickyyates.com/a-forthcoming-royal-visit/ & my subsequent posts.

P.T.:  Well, I'm sure that saved you a panic attack, lol!

R.Y.:  Indeed!

P.T.:  What do you think of Alex Salmond vs. Alasdair Darling?

R.Y.:  I have to say that, being a little removed from the UK now, I haven't closely followed the debate between these two gentlemen. But I have to confess I am not a fan of Alex Salmond. I have always felt that he's rather full of himself - rather self-important & if I'm honest, not a good advert for Scotland.

P.T.:  What do you think of the way BT is running there campaign?

R.Y.: Their campaign has at times, been a little negative in its approach by only emphasizing the dangers of voting for independence rather that stressing the benefits of the existing union.

P.T.:  What do you think that Alex Salmond and the other high-ranking SNP members hope to gain for themselves in this push for independence? 

R.Y.:  I always think Alex Salmond is far too full of his own self-importance. He obviously wants to gain both power & kudos for himself. Many of those with him, I guess, are drawn by power & greater recognition. Or am I being cynical? :)

P.T.:  Delightfully so!

R.Y.:  LOL!

P.T.:  Among average Scots, do you think that post-imperial regret may have to do with the rise in Nationalism?

R.Y.:  No - it's more to do with the economic downturn & increasing disenchantment with the main political parties.

P.T.:  What do you think about the way that the referendum question is phrased, putting “Yes” for independence and “No” for the Union?

R.Y.:  What ever way the question was phrased, was always going to cause controversy. Hopefully, there has been enough publicity to ensure that only a few idiots will misunderstand & vote the opposite way to their intentions.

P.T.:  Or more or less be encouraged to think "positively" and hence, "YES"!

R.Y.:  No doubt, that's what the SNP hope!

P.T.:  Do you think it would work much?

R.Y.:  No - for the reason I gave a moment ago. By September, the publicity surrounding the referendum should have made it abundantly clear what voting 'Yes' or 'No' will mean.

P.T.:  On another subject, many nationalists claim the British government has abused the land pretty consistently through history, from the clearances to dumping nuclear waste in Scotland. What is your response to this?

R.Y.:  The clearances in the 18th and 19th centuries were usually carried out by wealthy Scots to the detriment of poorer Scots! In so many aspects of life, it is so easy to find a scapegoat, someone else to blame. Blaming a nameless group of people down in London makes an easy scapegoat.

With regard to nuclear waste - all governments look to remote places to store it. Whilst I believe there is some in Scotland, a lot is stored in NW England in Cumbria. In general, they have a somewhat idealistic view of history with very little grip on reality. That may be a little harsh, so I await any brickbats that come in my direction :)

P.T.:  Hey, it happens…;-)

What do you think about Celtic culture and its preservation (linguistically and otherwise) in contrast to nationalism?

R.Y.:  Independence doesn't necessarily help with the preservation of culture & language. The Irish Republic has been independent for nearly 100 years but despite Irish Gaelic being the country's official language, it still is only spoken fluently by between 5 & 10% of the population.

On the other hand, Wales has remained within the UK & with active government support, has seen the number of fluent Welsh speakers rise from 20 to 25% in the past twenty years or so. I think you can very easily preserve different cultures without the need for more small independent nations.

P.T.:  What was your personal experience in Wales and with the Welsh language?

And what practical ways do you think could be made to preserve that sort of culture within the union?

R.Y.:  I spent three years studying for my first degree at a small University College located in a predominantly Welsh-speaking town, even allowing for the College being an anglicising influence :) I enjoyed hearing Welsh being spoken and made some effort to at least understand the basics of the language, particularly how to pronounce it!

All children in Wales are taught Welsh until they are 16, there is a Welsh medium TV channel, both of which are financed by UK government money. The Welsh culture has been preserved within the UK, together with the delegation of powers to the Welsh Assembly just as the current Scottish parliament has it's local law making powers.

P.T.:  As an Englishman, what’s your opinion on David Cameron and his encouraging English people to call their Scottish friends and relatives to urge them to stay in the Union?

R.Y.:  I think he has every right to do so. Why should the Prime Minister of the UK be silent on the issue? He values the union & wants to see it preserved. And he's entitled to say what he has said.

P.T.:  To wrap things up, could you tell me a little big about what you see for yourself in the future, and your interests/hobbies?

R.Y.:  I hope to retire from full time ministry in less than three years time - Easter 2017. I then hope to spend more time writing & possibly undertake another long-distance pilgrimage either to Santiago de Compostela walking from Prague or Prague to Jerusalem!

P.T.:  Well, good luck with all these future endeavors, and thank you for taking the time out for the interview.

R.Y.: My pleasure.

Interview with Matthew Warwick, Student at The University of Aberystwyth

Pearl of Tyburn.:  Tonight we are speaking with Mr. Matthew Warwick, a native of Hampshire, England, who is currently studying at The University of Aberystwyth in Wales. Good evening, Mr. Warwick.

Matthew Warwick:  Good evening.

P.T.:  Could you tell me something about yourself and your upbringing? Also, do you have any particularly religious affiliation?

M.W.:  Well, I was born into a white middle-class family, and one that is rather nautical. My father is in the Royal Navy and my mother has done various jobs working with children. I have lived in Hampshire in southern England since I was 3 years old.

My Family is not strictly Christian, but we attended church at Christmas and Easter at least, and I consider myself to be both a Christian and have a Christian culture.

P.T.:  How long has your father been in the Royal Navy, and what is his rank? What sort of things does he do on a daily basis?

M.W.:  He's a Captain, and this is his 31st year of service. He joined in 1983, the year he graduated Britannia Royal Naval College. He has a new 'job' every couple of years or so. Depends entirely on his current job. He's done everything from navigating small patrol vessels to commanding a frigate to developing new tactics and running day to day operations.

P.T.:  Has he been involved in any ceremonial events, and have you been able to take part in them?

M.W.:  Sometimes, yep. I’ve been to the Christmas service aboard HMS Victory, most I can recall were when I was younger and father was in command of a frigate. There were several during that time surrounding her deployment and refit. It consists of singing, meeting senior officers, and drinking mulled wine.

P.T.:  Do you ascribe to any political party?

M.W.:  I do not belong to any political party in particular, but I do have a conservative/liberal type mindset, though. Too often these days governments try and tell us what's good for us. I'm more in favour of trusting people to run their own lives, providing you don't give everything to them on a plate. I'm quite traditional, prefer to spend within one's means, hold the idea of personal freedom and free speech very highly, etc.

P.T.:  What do you view yourself as being: British or English first?

M.W.:  I've always seen myself as British first and English second, however university in Wales and meeting more fellow Brits has made me feel more English these days. Still it's nice to have the choice of going to Scottish and Welsh universities and being in the same country. There’s no real difference than if I went to university in North England while I come from the south, for example.

P.T.:  What do you personally see as the main benefits of keeping the Union in tact in lieu of the Scottish Independence Referendum?

M.W.:  I think that the main benefits are cultural more than anything. Arguments can be made all day about the economic benefits or costs of succession, Scotland undoubtedly has more international clout as part of the UK but that is irrelevant if the people of Scotland aren't seeking international influence etc. However, the notion of being British is important in my view because I was brought up as British. Not as an Englishman - as a Brit.

P.T.:  What do you think about diversity within the individual nations?

M.W.:  Yes, both English and Scottish cultures are unique and should be treasured, but together as Britons we have achieved remarkable feats and are continuing to achieve such feats. Being a citizen of this union allows us to keep this extraordinary relationship intact, and allows it to further flourish in the future. The union generally works for both Scotland and England, even if there is some imbalance at Westminster. Scotland gains in many ways the strength of England, and England gains some of the vibrant culture of Scotland.

P.T.:  What are your thoughts about the position of the UK on an international level?

M.W.:  As part of The United Kingdom both Scotland and England have a significant international influence and key role to play in all aspects of international life. It is a case of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. I admit my case will be easily dismissed by many of those in favour of Scottish independence, but for those such as myself, the idea of the United Kingdom is hugely important.

P.T.:  How do you think the British military benefits from all parts of the union, particularly Scotland and Wales?

M.W.:  Scotland plays a significant role in our military. There are several Scottish battalions all of which have illustrious histories, there are key airbases and radar installations in Scotland, and our nuclear deterrent and larger ship building yards are all Scotland based. As for Wales, some army battalions, air bases and lots of RAF flight training is carried out there. But it is less significant than Scotland by a long way, at least currently.

P.T.:  What about defense?

M.W.:  Scotland faces no threat of invasion, so no worries there. There'd likely be significant cooperation between rUK and Scotland over security issues. In the slim chance that the Scottish government would get everything they stated in their White Paper. They’d probably have enough of a military to maintain their own interest providing they didn't want an overseas deployment option.

P.T.:  I guess the situation would be similar to the Republic of Ireland, which I never really think of as much of a military force to be reckoned with

M.W.:  Scotland would have a stronger military than the RoI, which isn't saying much at all. RoI's military is as close to non-existent as is feasible. Irishmen who wish to see active service join the British army.

P.T.:  With or without the threat of invasion, it sounds like Scotland will be considerably weakened if she “unplugs” herself form the Union. What do you think an independent Scotland will lose without "strength", which some proponents of separation seem perfectly willing to ditch in favor of an imagined Utopia?

M.W.:  International clout of all kinds and financial strength. If an economic crisis were to strike again Scotland would struggle - it would not be able to bail out Scottish banks. As for the international bit, it's their choice if they don't want the influence, but international influence is very useful.

P.T.:  What’s your reaction to the Nationalist antipathy towards nuclear power in Scotland?

M.W.:  I understand why there's reluctance to keep nuclear weapons, even though I think it brings several benefits as well as being strategically important.

P.T.:  What do you think of the currency issue that Scotland faces and the argument over Pound Sterling?

M.W.:  I think that independence while keeping Sterling would not be true independence. Fiscal union requires political to work properly. If Scotland want independence, they can't really expect to keep Sterling - if the other options aren't appealing, then that's just a cost of independence that must be considered.

P.T.:  What do you think about the monarchy, and the unifying role it purports to play?

M.W.:  You will not find a stronger supporter of the monarchy. I will take the embodiment of our history, tradition, values, morals, as well as the advantages of having a completely non-political head of state over an elected one any day.

P.T.:  How do you think Scots feel about the monarchy?

M.W.:  Depends who you ask as always. Less supportive in general than England, but the SNP says it'd like to retain the Queen as head of state.

P.T.:  Do you think they mean that, or just don't want to stir up controversy?

M.W.:  A few years back, I believe the SNP stated it'd prefer a republic. So it's hard to be really sure. Their current pro-Queen stance may just be a way of convincing the Scottish people independence wouldn't change everything about their lives

P.T.:  What do you think about this referendum trying to connect with the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and charges of “corruption” they use to try and discredit The Act of Union?

M.W.:  Cheap trick to ignite some Scottish patriotism and therefore gain more votes. Don't think it'll have much effect. I don't know enough about the Act of Union to comment properly, but I'd guess its lords and politicians being lords and politicians.

P.T.:  In brief, what do you think of the claim some Scottish nationalists bring up about the current Scottish monarchy being “illegitimate” because the House of Stuart was overthrown back in 17^th century?

M.W.:  I know nothing of such claims, but if we're going to start calling this monarch and that monarch illegitimate, we may as well attempt to trace the House of Wessex and name its eldest living descendant King or Queen. Something that is clearly a bit silly.

P.T.:  What do you think about the way that the referendum question is phrased, putting “Yes” for independence and “No” for the Union?

M.W.:  Another cheap trick to encourage people to vote yes, but I think people are cleverer than politicians realize and again, I doubt it'll have much of an effect.

P.T.:  What do you think about Salmond and the way he is running the “Yes” Campaign?

M.W.:  Salmond can only be described as slimy. I can't trust him at all - he has no chance of being a big fish in a big pond, so he's trying to make the pond smaller. I also suspect he likes the idea of being President Salmond, the man who liberated Scotland from their tyrannical English oppressors. Some of them up there are just a bit deluded.

P.T.:  What’s your opinion on “Better Together” and how they running the “No” campaign? Do you have any suggestions for them in these final months before the vote?

M.W.:  BT hasn't impressed me. It’s been far too negative about things. Scaremongering. My suggestion to them would be to focus more on the positive aspects of union.

P.T.:  As an Englishman, what’s your opinion on David Cameron and his encouraging English people to call their Scottish friends and relatives to urge them to stay in the Union? I know it was sort of controversial.

M.W.:  Well, I've been encouraging my Scottish friends to stay in the union for certain.

P.T.:  I personally applaud you :-)

How do you think people might be affected by emotionally, especially those with families and jobs that transcend the border?

M.W.:  If it were 'full' independence the effect might be more, but so much of what the SNP propose involves things continuing as normal so as not to make it seem too massive. I think it'll definitely leave a scar, nevertheless, and cause a divide in the minds of some people.

P.T.:  What do you think will become of the British identity throughout the UK should the Scots break away? Should the union remain in tact, do you think this experience will engender a deeper sense of unity?

 M.W.:  I think it'd remain intact, but slowly start to wear away over the course of decades providing the political independence remained. I don't think a deeper sense of unity will arise from an independence referendum, no matter the result.

P.T.:  What do you think would engender a deeper sense of unity long-term? Like the states have in the USA under a federal government? Or vaguely similar, you know what I mean!

M.W.:  If a federal system could be made to work, I think that would be a positive. More balance in political decision making and economics, as well as more nation wide events such as those of 2012 would be needed to engender a deeper sense of unity.

P.T.:  What do you think of the fluctuation in the polls, showing the “Yes” vote rising, and who do you think is more likely to win?

M.W.:  I'm slightly concerned about the rise, but not too worried. I still think “No” is more likely to win, especially with the currency issue.

P.T.:  To wrap things up, what are you pursuing in University and what type of career might you be aiming for? Also, what about your personal interests, hobbies, and goals in life?

M.W.:  Well, I'm a student of International Politics and Military History, and the type of career I'm aiming for would involve politics, the foreign office/civil service, or the military.

As for personal interests, I am a keen cricket fan supporting Hampshire and England, I enjoy sailing, reading fantasy, Sci- Fi, and historical fiction, and I take part in medieval reenactment of 12th century Britain. My general interests are reading, current affairs, history and cricket to put it another way. As for my life goals, I'd like to make a difference to my country's future, but if I die having enjoyed life and a nice home with a wife and possibly children I shall die content.

P.T.:  That’s lovely, Mr. Warwick. I hope you will be able to fulfill your goals. Thank you very much for taking the time out for this interview.

M.W.:  My pleasure