This essay is by Dean Frank H. Wu, who is Chancellor & Dean of University of California Hastings College of the Law. It was originally published on LinkedIn.
I have no opinion about Scotland seceding from the United Kingdom. But I have an observation to offer about the importance of opinions. I happen to be acquainted with not one but two law professors who are experts on sovereignty. Their work should be supported.
It is a common sport to mock academics for their research. Faculty are criticized for their dedication to obscure, specialized fields. Their work might appear to be theoretical. Since their salaries are paid in part by tuition revenue, the public wonders about the social utility of what they end up producing.
A subject such as secession is an example, however, of the need for independent, neutral, and knowledgeable sources of information. There is no shortage of commentators chattering away about Scotland from near and far. But some of them are aligned ideologically or otherwise have a stake in the outcome, while others are all-purpose pundits who should not automatically be deemed authorities.
Press coverage makes apparent the complexity of the Scottish issue. It dates back to 1707, when the Acts of Union passed in the Parliaments. History, economics, culture, and politics all factor into the situation.
A journalist who is writing on Scotland likely is a generalist. She will contact sources for guidance. A reader who consults Wikipedia depends on the contributors to the online encyclopedia. Data does not create itself.
That is why scholars must be trained. An individual cannot become informed instantly. An undergraduate pursues these possibilities as she is encouraged to join an intellectual community. That occurs by reading books, written by earlier generations of teachers; discussing the material, under the guidance of additional teachers; and writing papers, evaluated by the same teachers.
She then enters a graduate program, learning further regardless of whether the topic is the most timely. Eventually, she is invited to become a colleague to her mentors. She repeats the cycle.
There are myriad branches of study that fall out of fashion only to come back to favor. They are intrinsically valuable, inasmuch as they form our shared heritage. They also are instrumentally worthwhile, because they inform public policy decision-making.
It is likely that we will continue to see the formation of new states and the disintegration of old states. Scotland today, another nation tomorrow. Change can be orderly or not. We hope the rule of law is established, to enable civic society to flourish.
One of the professors who is a friend has another area of investigation. He is a leading author on piracy. A generation ago, that would have been dismissed as, at best, a quaintly idiosyncratic diversion from more serious matters. Given the resurgence in robbery at sea, not to mention the geopolitical effects, he turns out to be useful for the most practical purposes.
In 1964, the Richard Hofstadter won the Pulitzer Prize for his book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. What he said fifty years ago remains true: experts are disliked not because they are unimportant, but just the opposite — because they are influential.