I've been really enjoying the timeline so far Powerab! I think writing it is a far harder needle to thread than your previous timeline, given that we are 'missing' 30-40 years of history rather than only a few years as was the case in your previous work. Nevertheless, I think you've done a really good job and the timeline thus far is a fun and interesting read.
However, I have some problems with the Scottish section of chapter 5. In it, you state that there is a desire by the body politic in Scotland to see a united Scottish parliament but that Westminster politicians overrule this and instead grant protections to previously violent groups and grant rights and protections for Scottish Gaelic including '
mandating the Scottish Gaelic be taught in Scottish schools'. In reaction to this announcement, you state that although the body politic in Scotland presumably isn't overjoyed, '
SNP national leader John Swinney hailed the result as a “historic day for Scotland’s native tongue”.' You also said that the suggested that the Scottish extremist groups were operating out of the Highlands and were Gaelic in nature.
Okay, so there are five problems with this:
- It is factually wrong to call Gaelic Scotland's historical language and John Swinny would never say that
- It would exacerbate the situation to announce language rights but fail to address political rights
- The current debate around the Gaelic language in Scotland is the result of very specific political circumstances that would not be replicated in TTL
- Thinking the body politic in Scotland would be happy with cultural rights without political rights shows a complete misunderstanding of the Scottish mindset and
- Scottish extremist groups are far more likely to be city-based than rural-based.
John Swinney is factually wrong when he calls Gaelic Scotland's native tongue and I don't think he'd ever say that because it would piss off Scots and Doric speakers who are far more common than Gaelic speakers.
Secondly, if the UK gov in this TL did announce that Gaelic language rights were the main/only measure they were taking to address Scottish desires for self-determination and cultural expression you're going to get folk doubling down on extremism rather than rowing back from it. It comes off as a token measure (as you said, Gaelic speakers make up a tiny percentage of Scotland's population) and it also harks to a kind of divide and rule mentality, giving a small subsection of the Scottish population additional rights and mandating the learning of that language while ignoring the desires of the majority of the body politics and, by extension, the population is not going to go down well. Unless of course in reaction to the Junta the notion of what being 'Scottish' means changes to include fluency in the Gaelic language, but I think that is extremely unlikely.
Thirdly, the current debate and reinforcement of Gaelic speaking in Scotland comes from the fact it's one of the few areas left that the SNP can attempt to reinforce an aspect of Scottish identity with the powers the Scottish government currently has. Basically, they've done almost all they can do to reinforce a distinctly Scottish identity with the powers they have and it's the last wee thing they can do. It's not a massive vote winner, only really mattering to folk in the Western Highlands and some of the more hardcore Nats.
Alright, your references to the Scottish political mindset is unrealistic. I suspect this is because it's hard for folk from large nations (England, France, US, etc) to imagine what it's like to be from a small nation with large neighbours. Where did the desire for Scottish self-determination in OTL come from? The collapse of the Empire and the rise of the English conservative state, as exemplified by Thatcher's government. Scotland is a small nation of roughly 5 million people. Like all small nations, we have two routes to survival, international cooperation with others or for the state to maximize the use of the minimal resources available to allow for the defense of their interests. The collapse of the Empire led to Scots being unable to rely upon international cooperation, while the rise of the English conservative state resulted in the desire for a Scottish parliament to maximise Scottish state power.
In the past, the empire represented the way in which Scotland could use international cooperation with others to prevent its domination by a foreign power. Okay, so in present-day England makes up 84% of the UK population and so Scottish folk feel in the minority and threatened, but back in 1900 or 1800 you could be British and live in Australia, Canada, Kenya, etc. So England made up a far smaller proportion of the UK's population in 1900 than it does now and therefore was less of a big, scary neighbor for Scottish folk. Fast forward to the present day and you get the main reason Scotland wants to rejoin the EU. Just look at the political clout EU membership gave Ireland during Brexit. Right now Scotland's stuck next to a neighbor 10 times its size and is fearful. I see no reason why this attitude wouldn't also exist in TTL and in fact be even more prominent given the fact there was an English-dominated military dictatorship conducting military operations in Scotland. You can bet your arse the Scottish body politic are going to be desperate to join the EU ITL. Hopefully, this will be useful for you when writing your TL.
This brings me on to the second part of understanding the Scottish (or any small nations) mindset. If you have a big neighbour who you're afraid of and you can't rely upon international cooperation to temper them then what can you do? You can use the state to maximise the resources available to allow you to better defend your interests. Why do Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Estonia have conscription and large states? Because they're right next to Russia. If you're the United States you can afford to be inefficient because you're the top dog but if you're Canada you have to have a larger government presence to ensure that you look unappetising should your large neighbour look North. It's the same with Scotland, the rise of the English conservative state in the 1980s produced the Scottish parliament in 1999. It's why Scotland has a larger state than England and
why some Scottish MPs have called for Scotland to have a form of national conscription post-independence. Now OTL's 1980s English state scared Scottish folk and produced OTL's Scottish parliament. What would this TTL's English military dictatorship result in and what would it take to keep Scots in the union and from violent succession? That's what you need to be asking yourself. I think if Scotland had been through an English military dictatorship but was still at the point where you have people who remember the 1960s welfare state around then a fully fiscally autonomous Scotland might do it but obv it's up to you.
Last point, whatever most Americans might think Scotland is an urban society and we're not all highland teuchters running around in kilts. If you're going to have an insurgency against an English military dictatorship in Scotland it's going to come from Motherwell, Glasgow, Dundee, and the like. Look at those areas with the largest pro-indy support in OTL, those are where your insurgencies will be based. Also, my last point on this is that it'd actually be really easy to pacify the Highlands. Most of the forests are gone so there's nowhere to hide, you can have the collaboration of large landowners, there's good infrastructure in the region precisely for this reason (see road and canal building in the Highlands post-Jacobite rising) and the area is massively depopulated (thank you Highland clearances). The British state spent a lot of money in the 1800s to ensure there'd never be another rising in the Highlands and they did a really good job. If you want to occupy Scotland it's the inner cities and ex-industrial areas you need to worry about.
One last final, final point. I imagine there's been even more emigration from Scotland in TTL and you might want to comment on that. As I love to point out '
Scotland's population decreased in size by 150,000 from 1971 to 2001'. On the upside in TTL, there will be less deindustrialization than OTL but on the downside, you know...military dictatorship. Actually, it's worth noting that Scotland's population only started to grow again once the new Scottish parliament was established. It does however make one sad when you read the debate in
Hansard on the Scottish Home Rule Bill on 1913 and see William Cowan, the MP for Aberdeenshire and Kincardineshire Eastern, state Scotland needed home rule because '
Scotland has become a reservoir for the filling up of Canada.' How little changes.