Independence for London and the Home Counties?

This is a tongue-in-cheek proposal but one which raises an important issue:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13661001

Why should the most prosperous region of the UK not declare its independence? Resentment is rising about the apparent injustice of south-eastern taxpayers funding benefits for Scotland and Wales such as free prescriptions, hospital parking and university education, while we have to put up with second-rate public services, not to mention the foreign aid budget (the UK's £70m donation to fight poverty in Uganda recently allowed the Ugandan President to spend £30m on a presidential jet).

Over the last 100 years, the number of nation states has increased as empires have fallen apart. Presently on the agenda, is the prospect of "independence for Scotland" and there is also the prospect of Belgium separating into its linguistic regions. These are simply the latest in a long process of separation to which no end is in sight. Any region which can claim a distinctive identity could claim the right to self-determination and a distinctive identity can easily be created where they do not really exist, as people in different regions turn to libraries to rediscover long dead languages, flags, anthems and numerous other traditions.

Yet these so-called "independent" states are not really independent as nineteenth century nation states were independent. An independent Scotland will want to be a member of the European Union, the IMF, the World Bank and about 200 other IGOs (International Governmental Organisations). While more and more "independent" countries have been created, more and more power has been given away by nation states to international bodies.

So we have the paradox of a rise of "identity politics" causing pressure for regions to want their own "identity" but also of globalisation requiring common solutions to common problems in a wide range of policy areas. After all, the most independent state in the world is probably North Korea.

What Alex Salmond probably craves is the title of President (or Prime Minister) of Scotland, cementing his place in history. This would mean that he could get to join a number of world leaders' clubs (how he must have wished that he too could be filmed playing table tennis with Barack Obama).

There is a valid concern that there is a fine line between celebrating identity and diversity and the more intolerant right-wing variety of "nationalism" which fails to properly recognise a common humanity. Modern identity politics increasingly emphasises difference based on arbitary factors of language, ethnicity and borders.

Furthermore, we have to recognise that as the nationalists seek to create smaller and smaller national units, the role for supranational bodies increases as issues such as immigration, the environment, international crime and the need to regulate the activities of multinational businesses make national borders an increasing irrelevance. Yet too often these IGOs have a serious democratic deficit, leading to problems of legitimacy and accountability. How can democracy be made to work internationally when it took about 2,000 years for democracy to make the transition from the city state to the nation state?