How can we understand the rise of the SNP in Scotland? This essay is focused on proving that rational choice theory is the approach that best explains the rise of the Scottish Nationalist Party in Scotland.

Authors Avatar

Abstract

This essay is focused on proving that rational choice theory is the approach that best explains the rise of the Scottish Nationalist Party in Scotland. In order to prove this claim this essay divides the rise of Scottish Nationalism into three distinct periods and then assesses how comprehensively rational choice theory, structuralism, and culturalism explain each period. The essay goes on to conclude that whilst a synthesis of the three approaches is most appropriate for understand the rise of the SNP in Scotland, the sole approach that most extensively explains the rise of the SNP is the rational choice theory.

Student number - 110118471

Which of the three explanations of nationalism best explains the rise of the Scottish Nationalist Party in Scotland?

With the competing explanations of nationalism we see on one hand approaches which are methodologically holistic, focusing on structures and cultures, marginalizing the actions of individuals. On the other hand we have methodologically idealistic approaches, centering their theses on the ability of rational individuals to mould their future. Whilst there is much overlapping between a number of theories on the topic of nationalism, the three approaches that shall be assessed are rational choice theory, culturalism, and structuralism. In order to assess the value of the three schools of thought, I will firstly define three distinct periods in the development of Scottish nationalism, from 1800 to 1934, 1934 to 1965, and 1966 to 2011. It is critical that each approach sufficiently explains all of these periods, and predominantly the period 1800-1934 when generally nationalism in Europe was rising, but arguably was in terminal decline in Scotland. Secondly, I shall go on to use the synthesis between the schools of thought to conclude that whilst all explanations of nationalism can to differing extents be valid, the one that best explains the rise of the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) in Scotland is rational choice theory. 
 
Some may argue it is of little importance to analyse the period pre 1934 when discussing the rise of the SNP in Scotland, as it preceded the existence of the SNP. However, I would argue this period is crucial in understanding the significance of why the SNP was created in 1934, and not earlier, and why it took another 35 years for it to have any considerable success. It is evident in this period that there was a decline in the distinctiveness in Scottish culture, with Gaelic declining in use in favour of English, yet importantly this threat to cultural identity did not lead to increased nationalism. This suggests that far from the culturalist explanation propounded by Seyssal (quoted in Hastings, 1997,p.114) that “all nations…prefer to be governed by men who… share the same language…as them”, that in fact there must be something more important to individuals that dictates the desire for nationhood. In the case of Scotland this is economic factors.. The failure of the culturalist explanation which states that rises in nationalism are determined by a threat to the shared culture of a nation, is further exemplified by the fact that there was no significant movement against the increasing number of Scottish MP’s who were English public schools products. This suggests a lack of commitment to traditional Scottish values of self governance, and instead a willingness to be governed from Westminster due to the economic benefits that this entailed. The period up to 1934 and in particular the 19th century was marked by industrialisation and a highly successful British Empire, and it was because of this that there was little evidence of Scottish nationalism. That is because it was of clear benefit for Scotland to be part of the British Empire. These events align extremely well with the rational choice theory of nationalism which states that nationalism is determined by the potential benefits or drawbacks of seeking independence. According to Archer (2006, p.165) this period is seen by a number of Scottish historians as being a “epoch of profound crisis for Scottish nationhood”. The reason behind this judgment being that Scots witnessed other nations in Europe rediscovering their identity whereas in Scotland identity was being submerged with England due to “the economic benefits of Union and Empire”. Devine (2000) disagrees and states using a culturalist argument that  it is difficult to argue that there was a crisis in Scottish culture and that “it was possible for a strong…sense of national identity to exist within the union”. Such a view is supported by the fact that there was not only publicised successes of Scottish regiments, but also coverage of Scottish history in the Peoples Journal leading to a feel of ‘Scottishness’. However this counter argument seems unimportant when assessed alongside the decline of the native Scottish language, which should be seen as the significant factor in defining culture. This is a point which is reinforced by Herder (Quoted in Anderson, 1983) who argues that within people “national culture is expressed through its own language”. Therefore the importance of language to culture should not be underestimated. Accepting then that language is culture, it is logical to say that the Scots accepted a decline in their cultural identity in order to secure economic prosperity. This is later reflected in the rise of Scottish nationalism in relation to the decline in the British Empire after World War 2. Consequently, in the period 1800-1934 the rational choice theory should be seen as to a large extent ideal for explaining Scottish actions since as individuals the Scottish concluded that the benefits of remaining loyal to the Union far outweighed the costs associated with a decline in unique cultural identity. Thus there was little evidence of a considerable nationalist movement. A structural approach such as Marxism which sees that nationalism can be explained as a tool of the ruling classes also holds much weight in explaining the lack of nationalism in this period. In this period it is clear that Scottish businessmen and upper classes would rather reap the benefits of alliance with the Union than risk economic instability associated with an independent Scotland. Whilst it may be argued from a rational choice perspective that Marxism focuses too much on class based structures and does not account for the importance of the individual, in this economic context it seems an adequate way of explaining why Scottish nationalism was minimal. A Marxist approach holds weight in this period since it is evident that it was in the interests of the Scottish ruling classes to maintain alliance with the Union. Nairn (1979, p.123-4) adds an important dimension to this class based structuralist argument by stating that the immigration of the Scottish middle class intelligentsia to England due to the economic opportunities, whose function in his theory is to educate and arouse the masses into action, was a factor in the absence of Scottish nationalism in this period. This again gives strength to the Marxist structuralist argument that both the economy and class dictate the nature of society.  As has been shown with reference to the period 1800-1934, the reasons why Scottish nationalism was minimal at this point can be explained using a synthesis of both the structuralist and rational choice arguments, which both act to discount the argument from the culturalist perspective.

Join now!

The period from 1934-1965 is one that is distinct because it sees a rise in nationalist sentiment, but crucially no significant rise in support for the SNP which was created in 1934. In explaining this period the rational choice approach is the most encompassing as its stance that sees individuals as rational and calculating actors explains why the disorganized SNP failed to gain momentum. Despite the economic depressions that followed both World Wars there was little support for the SNP largely because, as Devine (2000) argues, they offered no coherent alternative economic strategy. The desire for economic assurance in determining ...

This is a preview of the whole essay