Cross-Culture

Independence or Union? Some cross-cultural reflections on the Scottish referendum debate

The dust may have settled internationally for now on the Scottish Referendum, even though some new debates have been created in the process. However, it remains striking how little specific attention was given at the time to the cross-cultural nature of the debate. As a Scot living in southern England, with a great interest in cross-culture, I followed the debate with keen interest. This led me to give a presentation on the topic at Riversdown House, Hampshire, in December 2013. I made a point then that those opposing independence were trying to persuade Celtic people with Anglo-Saxon arguments.

When interacting with people in other countries, Scots can be quick to point out that they are Scottish - and thus not English. They have a way of demonstrating a strong and explicit way of repeatedly reinforcing their national identity to others as well as to each other. For example, the world hardly needs telling that the tennis player Andy Murray is a Scot, despite him hardly ever playing for a Scottish team. Scots are an imaginative, passionate and romantic people, which the 'No' campaign (meaning ‘No’ to independence) seemed to have great difficulty to respond to. On the other side, the ‘No’ campaign epitomised an aspect of the psyche of Scots people that fits their Enlightenment tradition of hard-headed rationality and their quiet pleasure in being thought canny (shrewd) in financial transactions. The 'Yes' campaign (meaning ‘Yes’ to independence) failed to recognise that aspect sufficiently. In consequence, Scottish voters were obliged to choose between two rather polarised versions of their unique way of looking at the world. The websites of the two opposing campaigns gave ample evidence of this difference.

Little, if anything, was said in the speeches and debates leading up to the referendum that many Scots were most eager to be separated from the Welsh or the people of Northern Ireland. The nation that many Scots wanted to be separated from was England, and most especially that far-away, governing part of it called Westminster. Within England itself, London has continued to develop a cultural quality of its own. This is not necessarily of a kind that looks attractive to those living elsewhere in the United Kingdom, other than in its relative prosperity. For example, it has a very large ethnic population, but deeper friendships still seem to be substantially ghettoised within people’s ethnicity.

Personalities in a cross-cultural context can also be fascinating. In this case, the star personality was surely that of Alex Salmond the Scottish First Minister. The Lewis Model (described for instance in When Cultures Collide by Richard Lewis) analyses the world’s cultural types into three categories (and their combination), called linear actives, reactives and multiactives, Alex Salmond has shown himself to be a multiactive.

Multiactives are primarily relational: people are more important to them than facts, deals and processes. They can be talkative and impulsive, being ready to think aloud and do many things at once. They are not good at following pre-arranged plans. Their conversation can be animated and roundabout. They can be very creative, with the ability to think well spontaneously and out of the box, thus deliberately leaving the straighter path taken by a typical linear active (that is so characteristic of the southern English). The overall picture matters more than the details to a multiactive. The details can be worked out later. They admire and do their best to practise good oratory, show vision and do what stirs the heart. Alex Salmond’s waving of an outsized saltire (Scottish flag) at the moment of Andy Murray’s Mens’ Singles triumph at Wimbledon in July 2013 gave a memorable visual illustration of his unsquashable and multiactive bravura.

George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister), is a much more linear active politician. Linear actives like to do things sequentially and in an orderly manner. They are task-oriented and can be highly organised. Speech is for information exchange and direct communication. They tend to regard the truth as something absolute. They are ready to speak the truth even if that may involve distress and confrontation. They dislike discussion that appears to them to be going round in circles or, worse still, is disorganised or chaotic. For a linear active it is important to be realistic about facts and what is actually possible.

Within a speech given in Scotland in February 2014, George Osborne made it very clear that the Scottish people would not be allowed to keep the Great Britain Pound (GBP) if they became independent. His well intentioned message did not work out as planned, though, because many Scots took his sober warning as an expression of disbelief in their ability and potential to succeed as an independent nation. The gap in the opinion polls proceeded to close in the months after George Osborne’s speech. If there is one thing that most Scots are agreed on it is the quality of their people. This sassenach (a Scottish word for someone English or a Lowland Scot) had, in the eyes of many, seemingly dared to challenge that deeply cherished belief.

The ‘No’ campaign’s faltering share of support was changed substantially for the better by ex-Prime Minister Gordon Brown. He was one of the few prominent politicians who could present both linear active and multiactive oratory with the kind of passion that rivalled that of the ‘Yes’ campaign. Although the quest for Scottish independence was lost in the result of the vote, the cause of gaining more self-rule for Scotland was not. Multiactives can flourish in situations that they may regard as less than ideal, rather better than linear actives may imagine.

In contrast to Gordon Brown, the party leaders David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg did not finish nearly so well cross-culturally. Although maybe personally the nicest man of the three, Ed Miliband seemed the most uncomfortable in Scotland. While inwardly passionate to see the Union continue, all three did little to shift the campaign in their favour, while they did manage to appear panicked in the final stages. All this speaks much about the dangers of going into cross-cultural settings insufficiently prepared. Being a nice person displaying heartfelt reasoning, important as that is, is not nearly enough.

If there is going to be a United Kingdom in the longer term, the more linear active English need to develop more of the skills and approaches of the more multiactive Scots. This includes putting people, communities and relational thinking at the heart of public policy.

It is very difficult to see a warm rapport towards the English developing short-term in Scottish minds that were not already persuaded that way. However, some genuine efforts by the English to understand, value and embrace Celtic culture more would be one good place to start.

The people of northern England could be enlisted to mediate and establish stronger connections between all the people of England and Scotland, not just those living in the Borders (who did not want a division anyway).

A greater appreciation by the Scottish people of their very impressive reach and influence far beyond the bounds of geographical Scotland might help them to become a little less absorbed than previously with what happens ‘north of the border’.

Dr. Nigel Paterson

The Scottish Referendum – a View from the North of England

The months-long debate and analysis of the referendum concerning possible Scottish secession seemingly centres on class disparities between underprivileged, nationalistic Scots and a complacent, over-privileged, Westminster-directed elite often referred to as the “Establishment”. It is an easily discernible classification not necessarily closely-bound to the dictums of the Labour and Conservative parties.

It is no secret that the United Kingdom, since the social stress of the unfolding of the Industrial Revolution, has been a polarized society, unable up to now to rid itself of class questions that have been dealt with successfully in the 4 Scandinavian countries and to a lesser extent in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States. The divisions in British society are, however, not merely dual, but clearly multiple. It is worth noting, therefore, that the Scottish referendum was seen in a different light, perhaps felt in a more visceral manner, in separate regions of Britain and particularly the North. We are talking about the heavily-populated northern heartlands of Lancashire, Yorkshire and the North-East. During the campaign, the question was often, “Who are the Scots?”  Perhaps even more pertinent to this dispute is the question, “Who are the English?”

For decades the British film  industry, enriched by the talents of such actors as Alec Guinness, Peter  O’Toole, John Gielgud, Ralph Richardson, Alastair Sim, George Cole and  Charles Laughton, have put him on the screen for the world to see. The  BBC, in such admirable programmes as “Upstairs Downstairs”, “Yes,  Minister” and “Downton Abbey”, has reinforced the image. 

[These diagrams show how English and Scotish managers address their staff in very different ways.]

The Englishman dresses in tweeds or a three-piece pin-striped suit and  a Burberry mackintosh on rainy days. He wears a bowler hat, carries a  tightly furled, black umbrella with a cane handle, has a pink newspaper  tucked under his left armpit. He goes to church on Sunday mornings and  eats roast beef with Yorkshire pudding for Sunday lunch. He is a man of  principle, insists on fair play for underdogs, does things in a proper manner  and shows more affection for horses, cats and dogs than for children,  foxes and grouse. He probably went to Eton and Oxford (Cambridge?) and  frequents Ascot, Wimbledon, Twickenham, Lord’s and Wentworth. He  believes in the Monarchy, the Empire and the Conservative Party. When  not in his Club (no ladies allowed) he sits in the local (pub) with gardeners  and game wardens, with whom he sips warm beer called ‘real ale’. Often he  has tea with the vicar, with whom he discusses the Church of England,  farming, poaching, the village fête and his years with the Guards.

Englishmen are fond of cricket, croquet, rugby, sheepdog trials, detective  stories and queuing. When queues are slow, one does not complain, as  English people must never make a scene, not even if they have a doublebarrelled  name. The same applies to poor service in restaurants, railway  stations and that place where you get your passport. 

The antidote to such frustrating situations is the stiff upper lip. When  queuing or sitting in a train one does not enter into conversation with others  – that is the reason for carrying a newspaper everywhere. When a train  was derailed in a tunnel in the London Underground a few years ago, an  elderly City gentleman walked half a mile down the line to the next station,  where he proclaimed: ‘It’s horrible down there in the dark. People are  talking to each other!’ 

This powerful stereotype of the British character has been etched on  other nations’ minds by several generations of British films. Huge populations  abroad, including the Japanese, Indians, South-East Asians and  Africans, still subscribe to it and send their children to Britain to be  educated along the same lines.

[These diagrams show how English and Scottish managers lead in diverse ways.]

The majority of British people bear little resemblence to the stereotype.  Not only is the image one of an upper class personage of a former era, but  it does not take into account regional differences, which in the UK are  extremely marked. If you draw a latitudinal line through the city of Oxford,  it is questionable if you will find anyone north of it who behaves in the  manner of the stereotype. In the first place, nearly 10 million Britons are  Celts (Scots, Welsh, Irish, Cornish and Manx). These people are essentially  romantic, poetic and emotional. They, like millions of midland and northern  English people in the ‘wilds’ beyond Oxford, are extremely critical of  the archetypal Englishman existing in foreign minds. There is a type of  English person who roughly corresponds to the projected image, but he is  southern, upper class and almost extinct! Even in the south, we are talking  about a tiny, although often highly visible (and audible) fraction of society.  Foreigners, often laughing at the eccentric English stereotype, are unaware  that 50-odd million Britons laugh at him too. Northern, midland and  Celtic Britons feel much more affinity with some Europeans (Norwegians,  BRITAIN 179  Danes, Swedes, Finns, Dutch, Belgians, Germans, Swiss) than they do with  the braying figure in tweeds. Britons are supposed to be poor at learning  languages – this is a myth. Scots, Welsh, Irish and most people north of  Watford learn foreign languages well and often with a good accent.

What are real English people like? The ‘world image’ bears some  resemblance to the reality, but not much. The class system is still in evidence  in Britain – an unfortunate anachronism which North America and  most of Europe have dispensed with – but in fact most British people could  be called middle class. They do not have a strong political party to represent  them, although both Conservatives and Labour eagerly pretend to do  so. The absence of a moderate centrist party contributes, sadly, to the continuing  polarisation of British society.

Polarised or not, how do British people behave? Whatever the status, a  pattern can be observed. Yes, we are a nation of queuers and probably the  only time British people complain vociferously is when someone jumps the  queue. But the stiff upper lip can move – British people today hold nothing  sacred. While royalty is respected, the Royal Family is often ridiculed,  both in the press and on TV. If the British can laugh at themselves, so can  the monarchs – what could be more democratic than that?

Humour is a saving factor in British life – some say it is a product of a  fickle climate – and many English people feel that as long as there is  humour, there can never be utter despair. It is no accident that the BBC –  the most humorous television service in the world – is highly popular in  most countries fortunate enough to be able to receive it.

It is true that British people love detective stories. Agatha Christie is the  world’s most translated novelist and the British easily lead the world in  library book loans. Sherlock Holmes is one of the most famous and popular  Englishmen of all time. The fact is, the British have a strong conspiratorial  streak – they love plotting. The most beloved characters in the extensive  British theatrical literature are villains. Guy Fawkes, who was hanged  after failing to blow up Parliament, became an instant hero and the nation  still celebrates his anniversary every 5 November. The biggest heroes of  British naval history were Francis Drake and John Hawkins – both pirates.  Apparently polished and sophisticated in diplomacy, the British are masters  of intelligence gathering and political blackmail.

If we come back to the North – a fairly clearly defined region or even concept in British life (by contrast, there is no clear South) – there is little doubt that the proposed ‘Yes’ campaign found greater sympathy in the North than in England as a whole.  As we have discussed above, inhabitants of the North identify much more easily with Scots aspirations and characteristics, than do peole who live south of Oxford.  Apart from the century-old struggle for better living conditions, higher wages and more regional say, people in Lancashire and Yorkshire feel they share the following traits with their cousins north of the border.  They are straighforwardness, hard-headedness, taciturnity, modesty, under-statement, inventiveness, thrift, cosiness, friendliness, frankness, simplicity, openness, fidelity, reserve and sense of fair play.  Moreover, they consider themselves less diplomatic, less snobbish, less casual, less flippant, use less coded speech and are certainly less patrician than southerners.

This self-image of a reasonable, yet clearly focussed, sporty English Northener seems mirrored to a large extent in a kind of cultural Northern Dimension with our close European neighbours in colder climes – Norwegians, Swedes, Danes, Finns, Icelanders.  Scots, both mainland and insular (Orkneys, Shetland, Hebrides), clearly fit into this rather close-knit, democratic dimension.  The sea-route from Newcastle to Bergen is short, and well-travelled for centuries.  The Vikings bequeathed more influence than they perhaps are aware of in Northern Britain.

It remains to be seen to what extent the impetus and excitement of the Scottish Referendum will stir up aspirations and demands in diverse English regions, not to mention Wales and Northern Ireland.

Richard D. Lewis