I recently spent about two and a half weeks in England, where I finally got an opportunity to photograph the elusive E II R cypher. As I
noted earlier, the Scots don't allow any E II R cyphers on their post boxes because the reigning monarch, Queen Elizabeth II, is not the second monarch called Elizabeth to reign over Scotland. In fact, the "Virgin Queen" Elizabeth I never reigned over Scotland, and it was her lack of an heir that led to
King James of Scotland simultaneously taking the English throne upon Elizabeth I's death, making him King James VI of Scotland and King James I of England. This historical development led to the case of
MacCormick v Lord Advocate and the
Pillar Box War - the latter essentially being a campaign of vandalism - following Queen Elizabeth II's ascension to the throne in 1952. As a result, it took me nearly a year of residence in the United Kingdom before I saw a post box featuring the E II R cypher.
Ginger Magic found the whole thing particularly fascinating as I was explaining it to her back in July.
It's a difficult controversy for me to understand. As much as I value the Scots' independent spirit, my study of more than two hundred years of American history have taught me that unified countries are stronger when they embrace their commonalities, rather than emphasizing their differences. As much as I want to sympathize with the Scots on this, and encourage them to honor their history as much as the history of the United Kingdom itself (of which they are currently an integral and important part, despite what the Yes(!) campaign's claims), the idea that they can't accept post boxes with Queen Elizabeth's cypher on it seems sort of ridiculous to me. Then again, I have yet to meet a Scot who can wrap their head around the Second Amendment, so I guess we all have our cognitive challenges to overcome.
At any rate, that completes my collection. Or does it? Perhaps there are a few more tidbits... Stay tuned.
you know I have my reservations about using the internet for such things especially considering my current situation...not to mention the fact that anything other than the spoken/written word is a piss poor medium to discuss such issues on a good day...but a couple of points on this...
ReplyDeleteThe act of Union was the worst event in our nation's(not province or state or region or whatever other patronising term you'd care to call it NATION) history so why the sam hell would we want to celebrate it?
Of course Scotland is an integral part of the UK that is precisely the problem we bleed blood and treasure for it and get piss all back-we are simply North UK end of fuckin story
I have great admiration for Federal Systems and many things about America not least the fact that you are a Republic, that said the recent debacle over Obamacare (which I place largely on the GOP's shoulders by the way)demonstrates why my preferred system is a small nation with a big government as opposed to the US with its big nation and a small government. If Texas or Arizona doesn't want Obamacare then why should those who do in DC and New York be able to dictate otherwise?If they were separate states there wouldn't be this problem.
Am proud to be a jock and can wrap my head around the second amendment without any problem,I completely disagree with it however, but this doesn't prohibit me from understanding it. Maybe back when guns took 3 minutes to load and King George was knocking on your door it was a great idea but an unarmed civilian population with a largely unarmed police force is the way to go in a modern society. Can't see that happening in the next 200 years(or indeed ever) in the states but in the mean time you could have background checks(as Regan supported) and reasonable restrictions many of which(such as the restricting the sale of fully automatic weapons)you already have in place. Police officers and armed forces personnel have to go through psychological tests and qualifications before they can carry firearms,so why should Joe the plumber be able to buy one in a matter of minutes?
Will happily continue this in person :)
Best,
Bob
Ohhhhh, "Bob"... Sorry, can't do it. I'll settle for CNHB, deal? A few thoughts.
ReplyDelete1) Per usual, I see a lot of hyperbole and very little substance. The closest you've ever come to explaining why the Acts of Union were so horrific was a really poor explanation of the "poll tax", which you didn't even witness. When we last conversed about this, you cited Bannockburn and Culloden. The American Revolution and War of 1812-'15 happened well after both, but I don't hold grudges that go back two centuries. Neither should you. If Scotland is to be independent, it should be so based upon tangible reasons in 2013/'14, not perceived grievances from centuries ago. I have yet to see any such justification from you, the SNP, or anyone.
2) "Whatever other patronising term [I]'d care to call it"? You forget that I love Scotland. Of all of the places I could choose to spend a year of my life, I chose here. That cheap shot was unjustified and unbecoming your gentlemanly nature, sir!
3) "We bleed blood and treasure for it and get piss all back". This statement is absurd. The SNP argues that Scotland can maintain its high standard of living, exceptional national security, and strong economy as an independent nation. They have yet to explain how this can be achieved, but history has shown that these conditions emerged as a result of the union, not despite it. They did not exist prior. Scots enjoy an idyllic existence, all while maintaining their own culture and being represented in two different democratically-elected parliaments (the English only get represented in one), as a result of the Union. If you disagree, then support your disagreement with facts, not diatribe.
4) "the recent debacle over Obamacare (which I place largely on the GOP's shoulders by the way)" I have yet to meet anyone from the United Kingdom who understands American politics. Having read your thoughts on current events, that record stands.
5) "my preferred system is a small nation with a big government as opposed to the US with its big nation and a small government" That's because you're not an economist. Big government is unsustainable in big nations, like America or Britain; and it's less sustainable in smaller nations, like a notional independent Scotland or an American state. And if you disagree with Obamacare being foisted on the states that don't like it, then you agree with the GOP, not with President Obama. Thus, my point in Item #4 stands.
6) "can wrap my head around the second amendment without any problem,I completely disagree with it however, but this doesn't prohibit me from understanding it. Maybe back when guns took 3 minutes to load and King George was knocking on your door it was a great idea but an unarmed civilian population with a largely unarmed police force is the way to go in a modern society." So no, you don't understand it. And we'll have to agree to disagree on your preference for policing style.
7) I remain ready for the SNP to justify sececession from the United Kingdom, or to provide plans to administer Scotland upon the eve of its notional independence. Neither you nor the SNP has done so. As you've been part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and (Northern) Ireland for more than three centuries, I still think it's immature that Queen Elizabeth II can't have her royal cypher on post boxes in Scotland for fear of terrorism by Scottish vandals. Even so, you remain one of my favorite people, and we'll have to meet for another cuppa the next time I'm down south!