If We Have a 'Scottish Government', Why Don't We Have A 'First Minister Of Scots'?
My opposition to the Scottish civic nationalists' unconstitutional appropriation of the title 'The Scottish Government' for the Scottish Executives they have formed is well-known.
However, given that one of their philosophy's shibboleths is that pre-Union Scotland was governed with the consent of the people (an assertion which to my mind suggests that if you are willing to believe that, you really will believe anything), then if they really are engaged in some kind of Wilsonian struggle for national self-determination it seems odd that the leader of that Executive should choose to style himself 'First Minister of Scotland' and not 'First Minister of Scots'.
After all, if they are prepared to assume one title for themselves against both the letter and the spirit of the law, it seems odd they should be unwilling to adopt another; and if the title 'Queen of Scots' is good enough to describe one of our most famous monarchs, why hasn't the politician who seems determined to drive us into a division from the Union taken the title 'First Minister of Scots?'
Doesn't he think he needs our consent in order to govern?