TUESDAY, the Honorable Alex Salmond, First Minister of Scotland and a leading proponent of Scottish independence, spoke to a gathering of University students, staff and community members on the special relationship between the United States and Scotland. He emphasized in particular the intellectual strains of government to which he suggested that both the Scottish people and Thomas Jefferson subscribed. Predictably for a proponent of an independence movement, he focused on the rights of the people to determine their own system of government and to change it when it ceases to serve their ends, hearkening back to the Declaration of Independence and to a fourteenth-century Scottish document, the Declaration of Arbroath. His emphasis on the importance of self-determination left me wondering what lessons the nation and the University community could glean from the heritage of both Scottish governmental thought and Jeffersonian tradition.
One issue Salmond spoke about with pride was the system of universal public education which he claimed the Scots implemented in 1697. He argued that this was the basis for the many contributions Scots have made to the world, from the ingenuity of James Watt to thinkers such as David Hume and Adam Smith. He also spoke to its importance in fostering "human capital" and "democratic intellect." This speaks directly to the function and purpose of the University: to raise up leaders in all fields and to prepare them to participate in American democracy.
In some ways the University parallels Scotland here. It is a public University, and while not free, it remains one of the better bargains in American higher education. It also provides students with opportunities to train for potential roles in wider government. Salmond suggested that one way that the Scots already rule themselves is through control over their legal system; at the University, students control the trial and punishment of their peers. Similarly, he claimed that Scottish control over their internal finances has helped prepare them for independence; in much the same way, student control over CIO funding and other discretionary spending helps train leaders. Salmond discussed the Scottish institutions as examples of their preparedness for autonomy and an end to English interference. While obviously students are not training to establish an entity separate from the University, the methods of preparing leaders reflect well on our University's commitment to civic training by creating functioning models in which students can participate.
Another lesson to be gleaned from Salmond deals with the nature of self-determination. Self-determination does not mean that one has the right to change government if it does not work specifically for one's self-interest. A self-determined government functions on the will of the majority while protecting the essential rights of the minority from oppression. Salmond had to deal with a similar question when asked if he accepted the result of a referendum determining Scots did not want independence. He responded that his doctrine mandated that he do so, and he is right to say so. Thus, the idea of self-determination also involves bowing to the will of the majority so long as fundamental rights and basic well-being are protected.
How does this apply to the University? Taking, for example, an issue like internationalization, toward which the majority of students are either indifferent or opposed to, the principles of self-determination suggest that a change only ought to be made when a majority of the students are behind it. Self-determination predicates that within a united body, such as the University, majority rule holds so long as rights are protected. Minority viewpoints are absolutely free to campaign and seek to change the culture of the University -- to restrict them in doing so would violate their rights of expression -- but not bowing to their will is not the same thing as repression. The price of living in a self-determined democracy is living according to those principles established by the majority, no matter what one's personal preferences may be, so long as the majority upholds rights. The right to pursue happiness does not guarantee the possession of one's every desire, nor total concurrence with government. Additionally, by Salmond's premise, which I happen to agree with, by the principles of the self-determination of the people, the only proper way to determine their will about anything is through an official referendum. If the University were to seek to make changes to something, like internationalization, it ought to utilize an official referendum to determine the opinions of students. But self-determination suggests that the majority must rule so long as it is not tyrannical or oppressive.
Salmond's visit allowed the University community to take a look back at some of the more obscure and ancient roots of the concept of self-determination. As one which our founder espoused, and in which our University is steeped, we ought to leap at such opportunities to explore the principles on which our government is based, and to examine how they can best be adhered to within our community.
Robby Colby's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at rcolby@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
