MICHAEL Fry seems to be living on a different planet (An independent Scotland will without doubt be a capitalist nation, The National, September 22). Perhaps the arguments are around what kind of “capitalism” he means – I hope not the exploitative kind?
I would argue unchecked, reckless capitalism leads to extremes of poverty, exploitation, ill health, crime and drugs and dreadful pollution – that we cannot afford!
I notice in a later article, Fry does acknowledge the need to discuss what is meant by the term “equality”. As a good example, Germany pursues a competitive business model that invests in apprenticeships and protects indigenous business. They do this with careful legislation that asks whether the business will benefit the local people.
Scotland compares very badly to Norway, who set up their national oil company’s sovereign wealth fund in 1990, now worth a trillion. They invest in renewables and pursue socially responsible investments. As George Kerevan suggests, an indy Scotland might have invested in a renewable hub to develop high expertise levels over 10 years ago.
I agree with parts of both capitalism and socialism. We should take what works from both theories and discard what doesn’t. We need new labels and words for our aspirations for a new Scotland and for “socialism” itself – lets call it “democratic opportunities”. I am sure that Fry believes all children deserve an opportunity for a good education and job potential. But it is no level playing field in the UK: our many private schools offer privileged networks. Scotland also has the most unfair land ownership. Does Fry acknowledge that both the UK and Scotland are among the most unequal nations in the world?
The definition of the term “equality” must be examined. Equality does not mean we are all the same. For me, it means that we look after the most vulnerable, offer quality education, decent healthcare, childcare and infrastructure. And do away with private schools. Most Scots are not against free enterprise and business opportunities, but they are against exploitation, tax evasion and crime.
I’m sure Fry would agree that we need to improve business knowledge here. Scotland boasts first class and innovative research and development, and universities, but we then often lack the skills to take these forward.
I agree with some of Michael Fry’s analysis, in that a top-down control of business activity will not work. Who is to decide anyway? It’s inefficient.
But that doesn’t mean that a government cannot create a healthy level playing field, so that people have a chance to decide for themselves, and also, crucially, to protect a greener future. We need to think over the kind of language we use: by “equality” do we mean fair life chances, or wealth redistribution?
Since the 1990s, the UK’s tiny privileged elite have tripled their wealth, while the poor have suffered. Many have simply had enough. Something has to give. This wealth gap means more ill health, crime and drugs. Fry should visit some of these deprived areas of Scotland to see for himself the awful situation some of our most deprived children live in. Many years back, I spent a couple of weeks in Finland and I wondered where the slums were. I never saw any. We should look more to our Nordic cousins.
We need new labels for both capitalism and socialism urgently. Both have failed us. Scottish independence is now an imperative for our futures and to save our democracy, from not only global threats, but from Westminster’s destruction, corruption, elitism and incompetence. We are only as strong as our weakest link and we can’t simply ignore the vulnerable.
P Keightley
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel