Sometimes you can't see the wood for the trees... you find yourself too close to a thing to see it clearly. I'm guessing that's what it's been like living in Scotland recently. I say that because pretty much every time a 'No' voter discusses the referendum, they talk about a "rejection of nationalism". I find that bizarre because from outside Scotland both campaigns have had roughly the same amount of nationalist rhetoric... in fact, while the 'Yes' campaigners often felt obliged to exercise some restraint on the issue (certainly when appearing on the political discussion shows I've encountered), the unbridled British nationalism that often emanated from the 'No' camp was unsettling. I guess it's easier to not see something if you're more comfortable with it.
The 'No' vote isn't a rejection of nationalism; it's a preference for British nationalism over Scottish. How can it be otherwise when it's a question of which nation you wish to be part of...? when the bulk of the campaign has been driven by right wing and centre-right British political parties...? This is a campaign fronted by tories, by Miliband and UKIP; a campaign endorsed by the US government, the banks and the captains of industry.
And yet the 'No' camp point at Alex Salmond as though he's a major liability. You're standing next to Nigel Farage and complaining about the company others keep? Really? You don't see even a smidgin of inconsistency there?
And I had to laugh when George Galloway came out as a unionist. Suddenly people were falling over themselves to insist that "while I'd never usually give credence to the man, what he has to say about independence is worth listening to". You could almost hear them nod sagely.
But I guarantee those very same people - had Galloway put forward an equally reasonable argument for a 'Yes' vote - would have been howling with derision... calling the man a lunatic and damning the 'Yes' vote by association.
There are very good arguments against Scottish independence. But standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the tory party while calling the SNP names is so obviously inconsistent it's just bloody weird. But so many people are doing it. Similarly, when the 'No' campaign includes UKIP and David Cameron waving a Union Jack, the notion that it represents a rejection of nationalism makes no bloody sense to me.
It was best summed up on a recent radio show which included a German couple living and working in Scotland. They were both voting 'Yes' and their reasoning was very simple; they found British nationalism far more problematic than Scottish nationalism. They wanted closer ties with Europe and felt that Britain was moving very firmly in the opposite direction and didn't want Scotland dragged with it. These people saw their 'Yes' vote as a clear rejection of nationalism. Weird, eh?
Anyone who suggested that Scotland would have become some left-wing paradise after independence was talking shite, but Britain as a whole is moving very noticeably rightwards. It's being dragged there by UKIP, with the Tories and Labour doing their best to help. There's no way to know which way an independent Scotland would have gone, but so long as it's joined to the rest of Britain, it's heading rightwards.
Ultimately it's irrelevant. If the 'Yes' campaign get as much as 40% I'll be surprised. People are terrified of change and won't choose it unless they perceive no other option. That's not a Scottish thing, or a British thing. It's all of us.
|
