Small states > Big states

In 1957 in his classic book The Breakdown of Nations economist and political scientist Leopold Kohr persuasively and rigorously argued that small nations are the natural order having been throughout history the engines for enlightenment, innovation, mutual aid and the arts.  The large nation state, he argued, is not a reflection of improved efficiency but of superior force.

This passage is taken from “Should Large Nations Split into Small Nations?” by David Morris. The article reflects what seems to me an obvious reason to support disunion. I can appreciate that the idea is repugnant, or at the very least sad, to many of my fellow countrymen. But that response calls for reflection. Why are you so keen to keep the Scots with us? The desire that the union should not be broken is sometimes voiced by people who say that ‘nationalism’ is no just cause for decent people, that the independence vote is giving rise to ‘nationalist fantasy’ or some other risible facet of ‘nationalism’. But what else beside nationalism is behind the desire that the union must not be torn?

I will be pounding out several posts tonight on the referendum, hopefully covering:

and more.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Small states > Big states

  1. Tim says:

    Keep em coming Scott!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *