Thursday 10 March 2011

We're all in this together....Scottish Version

Those who have read my profile on this blog will know that one of my great regrets is the fact that the SNP has split the progressive vote in Scotland. I know a number of nationalist activists and voters who are good people, well intentioned and generally left leaning in their politics, but they have swallowed whole the idea that all of our problems are caused by being part of the UK and if Scotland was "independent", all of our problems would be solved. Magically. Over night.

The result is that we, people who should be on the same side in delivering better solutions to the people of our country, are wasting most of our political energy in fighting each other. It's most frustrating.

I was reminded of this attitude when a blogger called McGonagall expressed a similar view from a nationalist perspective here. Then I came across a much better argued post by Stuart Winton on Planet Politics. This led me to a post by Lallands Peat Worrier, one of the more cerebral bloggers (at least he uses long words) who is, I believe, of the nationalist persuasion.

Stuart Winton eleoquently makes the point that nationalists tend to see independence as an aim in itself, with no clear picture of what will follow, what the problems of transition will be, how they will be addressed and how independence will make a better society. LPW uses language which I find interesting. He asks:
"Some might well suggest that SNP claims that we're for Scotland lacks ideological definition. Surely the vital question is, what sort of Scotland are we for?"
Which is where I find a real difference in my approach. If I was posing the question it would be;
"Surely the vital question is, what sort of society do we want to deliver for our people? And what is the best way to do that within existing resources and within a reasonable time frame"
The real difference in emphasis here is not on the type of society we wish to deliver, (I don't think that there is much difference beween the society I would wish to see and the society your average SNP voter would wish to see), it's on the fundamental thinking used as expressed in the language used.

I find it interesting to look at how nationalists frame every question around the concept of "Scotland". What they mean by "Scotland" is never defined. "Independence for Scotland" "A better Scotland" and too often, I'm afraid, their opponenets are "traitors to Scotland". Whereas I would rather that politics concentrated on the people. "A Scotland which is better for the people to live in" is for me a much better objective of politics than vague ideas about an undefined concept. After all what is "Scotland"? It's a plastic concept, it means different things to different people. Its very vagueness is a strength for those who wish to emotionalise debate and shrink from argument and evidence, never mind hard decisions.

I would rather work for the people, a simple and recognisable entity. And I would rather work for them now. When you do that, it becomes much clearer: no need to wait for "independence" before we deliver Utopia. Indeed no need for any Utopia. We can work together, in the here and now, to deliver real solutions in the real world. Of course it won't be perfect, but neither will "independence", if it ever comes. But at least we will be working now, and addressing real problems now. We might fail or be only partially successful, but at least we will do it now, not in some unspecified period of time, after god knows what sequence of events, or the costs of those events.

And we will do it for ourselves and our people, not for some undefinable entity called "Scotland" which means anything, everything or nothing, depending on how you feel at any particular time.

17 comments:

  1. Have you ever wondered how many people might have become SNP sympathisers as a protest against Labour's betrayal of it's roots?

    For example, some genuinely left minded individuals might have thought that Scotland's natural resources could be better used than to pay for the Trident abomination?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Since I was the person quoted by Stuart Winton I think I am entitled to point out the rest of what I said when I said that the case for independence does not rest on defining what kind of country Scotland will be post-independence. The case for independence is simply that we believe Scotland will be better governed and more successful as an independent nation. No-one cares as much about Scotland as the people who live here. No-one will prioritise Scotland as much as a Scottish Government. That is not an intellectual argument or an ideological argument but it is, I would suggest, a common sense argument.

    You are perfectly free to disagree with that and I know you do.

    But what I would say to you is why do you bemoan the fact that the SNP has "split" the progressive vote in Scotland. What difference does it actually make to you? As you say, there is not much difference beween the society you would wish to see and the society your average SNP voter would wish to see Whether Scotland elects an SNP or a Labour Government in May it will have broadly the same agenda on devolved matters such as the NHS, education and so on. Perhaps we fight a lot about what other people see as little points of difference for that very reason.

    So why does it matter so much to you? If I was a Labour unionist my priority would be trying to tackle the Tories and their Lib Dem Lapdogs, it wouldn't be fighting the SNP.

    Since I am a nationalist however I see things more simply - or perhaps simplistically from your point of view. I think it would be a lot easier just to have a Scottish Government elected by the Scottish people working for Scotland than the arrangement that we have at present which allows the Tories to have a say even though people didn't vote for them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jim, a lot of assumtions there. E.g. the oil is in UK waters...* and there's no guarantee that an independent Scotland wouldn't do a deal with the UK to shelter under its nuclear umbrealla. Or even rent Gareloch to the UK...


    * BTW, most of the gas is in he southern sector.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "The case for independence is simply that we believe Scotland will be better governed and more successful as an independent nation."

    Some people believe the world is flat. It's the evidence we need to see, not the belief.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting that you go straight to the Oil argument - and I understand that given how much we've been lied to over it's worth and long term viability since the first drop was extracted.

    I think you'll find though that there is an awful lot of evidence out there which clearly identifies the oil fields as 'Scottish' - however that's not the point of your post.

    You lament the SNP splitting the progressive vote - without addressing the failures in Labour that have led to so many people looking elsewhere for a party of natural justice which espouses and delivers on social democrat values.

    Trident being just one of those issues.

    Are you really unable to identify Scotland? It's here
    http://www.scotland-map.com/

    I suspect we agree on the aims -
    The resources within the boundaries of the country easily identifiable as Scotland, should be managed for the betterment of the lives of the people who live in Scotland.

    70 years of Labour hegemony in Glasgow has not delivered the social utopia we might have hoped for though. Labour have failed here! People need an alternative either to take power or to focus Labour minds (Actually I don't care which it is, I just want better!)

    IMO Labour take Scotland for granted and work best for us when there is a surge in SNP poularity. Essentially the SNP had been a way of protesting Labour inadequacies before, but now we are in the position where they are the only 2 viable parties in Scotland. Why it should be so partisan - I really don't have the answer, given that the aims of both parties should be so close.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jim, you raised the oil question.

    As for Trident, Labour was never an anti-nuclear party, in fact Labour developed the first UK atom bomb, so there's no betrayal there.

    The waters around the UK are legally UK waters AFAIK. If you know differently, please give details.

    I identify Scotland as the Scottish people. I note that you have not addressed that, the main point of the post.

    "Essentially the SNP had been a way of protesting Labour inadequacies before, but now we are in the position where they are the only 2 viable parties in Scotland. Why it should be so partisan - I really don't have the answer, given that the aims of both parties should be so close. "

    True. But protest doesn't build schools or hospitals or roads... it's not much use to the people....

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Jim, you raised the oil question."
    Where?

    I said natural resources - which includes fishing, farming, fresh water, relatively benign environment and people as much as it means the oil which lies within Scotland's Internationally recognised waters - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Adjacent_Waters_Boundaries_Order_1999


    "I identify Scotland as the Scottish people. I note that you have not addressed that, the main point of the post."

    I don't really understand what you're saying here.

    As far as I'm concerned, Scotland is the country (geographically). The Scottish people are the people who live in that country or have an identifiable connection with that country through their own history or their family history.

    Protest certainly does serve to sharpen the minds of those who fail to build schools, hospitals or roads - It's the only thing truly available to the people.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jim
    "Scotland" is an abstraction, a construct, a temporary legal entity . It is a piece of rock and earth, part of the island currently called Great Britain.

    The Scottish people live talk and breath.

    You want to work for the piece of rock, I want to work for the people who live on the piece of rock.

    Politics, IMO, should be about solving the problems of the people. "Independence", if it ever comes, will solve nothing that couldn't be solved without independence.

    If you can name one problem, e.g. housing, that will be solved by independence, please do so.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Braveheart

    At which point on this or any other thread have I said that independence will solve a social issue?

    At which point did I say on this thread that I worked for the piece of rock - indeed the only place I see where I even sailed close to such a thing was when I said

    "The resources within the boundaries of the country easily identifiable as Scotland, should be managed for the betterment of the lives of the people who live in Scotland."

    I suspect you're reliving an argument with someone else through this thread.

    I also suspect that you're trying to paint the typical picture of SNP sympathisers as some misty-eyed, Brigadoon types.

    The very reason I posted was to point out to you that the current set of people willing to vote SNP are far from a bunch of bekilted, ne'er do wells seeking Independence for Independence sake - I believe Jeff Breslin's SNPtacticalVoting was such a popular blog in it's day just because he so well represented or at least tapped into the psyche of of young, well educated and talented Scots, tired of Labour's failings and willing to give the SNP a chance.

    Labour have never managed to address that, as far as I'm concerned, preferring partisan confrontation to co-operation and you're doing a damn fine job of continuing that tradition.

    Jim

    ReplyDelete
  10. You haven't really addressed the issue Braveheart.

    In what way has the SNP "split" the progressive vote? Or are you saying that the only option for progressive voters is the Labour Party?

    There are a number of problems if that is what you are saying. I don't think many people would find Labour's crime policy very progressive, for example, nor their shameful and wholly opportunistic opposition to minimum pricing. But leaving all that to one side, to try and claim that the Labour Party is the only proper vehicle for progressive voters is just plain undemocratic. Never mind the SNP - what about the Greens? What about the SSP? What about individuals like Margo MacDonald? Do you want to squeeze them out too?

    And even if that happened - and there were no inconvenient rivals to "split" the progressive vote in Scotland - what then? What difference would it make in a UK context?

    Because you kind of got your wish at the last UK election when Scotland rallied round Labour to stop the Tories getting in. And the Tories got in.

    So I ask again - what difference does it really make whether the SNP or Labour win the election from your perspective? It is not voters in Scotland that you need to persuade to support left of centre policies and parties. They already do. Your issue is with voters in England so why do you care so much who wins in Scotland?

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Jim
    "At which point on this or any other thread have I said that independence will solve a social issue?"

    You never did, probably because it won't: that's my point....

    But if you are "progressive" as the SNP claims to be, then solving social isssues should be a high priority for you. It's my priority. Which is why I don't waste my energy chasing independence which, as you seem to admit, doesn't solve anything importan.

    "I suspect .....that you're trying to paint the typical picture of SNP sympathisers as some misty-eyed, Brigadoon types"

    Not at all. I'm asking the question: What's the point of independence and why do nationalists seem to care a great deal about "Scotland" and a great deal less about "the Scottish people".


    "...tired of Labour's failings and willing to give the SNP a chance...."

    ... isn't "supporting independence".

    Or are you saying that many of the people who vote SNP, don't support independence?

    "Labour have never managed to address that, as far as I'm concerned, preferring partisan confrontation to co-operation ...."

    We can call each other names if you wish. It gets us nowhere. And Alex Salmond, he hates confrontation.... am I wrong?

    Anyway, how could Labour cooperate on independence?

    ReplyDelete
  12. @indy... I explained in the post...

    "...I know a number of nationalist activists and voters who are good people, well intentioned and generally left leaning in their politics, but they have swallowed whole the idea that all of our problems are caused by being part of the UK and if Scotland was "independent", all of our problems would be solved. Magically. Over night.

    The result is that we, people who should be on the same side in delivering better solutions to the people of our country, are wasting most of our political energy in fighting each other..."

    You ask: "what difference does it make?"

    It makes a difference that we keep arguing with each other and the real issues get relegated.

    If I met you face to face, we would probably get on ok, and agree on the problems we face. But the fixatation on independence means, for one of us, we have to put off the solutions until we have indpenedence. Seems sad to me.

    I asked Jim which issue would be solved by independence. He couldn't or wouldn't answer.

    Can you?

    ReplyDelete
  13. "I know a number of nationalist activists and voters who are good people"

    Can you elaborate as I have never seen a unionist who eluded that physco other than pure embitterness against others who are not indoctrinated in Britishness as being so pure that Daz cannot get them any whiter.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "can you elaborate"

    How? "I know a number of nationalist activists and voters who are good people" needs no elaboration.

    As for "pure embitterness against others who are not indoctrinated in Britishness as being so pure that Daz cannot get them any whiter. "

    Pure bitternes, I'm afraid. Did you write the comment while looking in a mirror?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Braveheart

    You do make me laugh. I often read your responses and wonder just what the hell it was I must have written that inspired them - then I read back and realise this lark of communication isn't as easy as it looks. I've written exactly what I thought I had - but you've read somethnig very different.

    Anyway, let me reiterate - I don't care about independence. I've said it here, there and everywhere. There are large numbers of voters in Scotland who don't really care one way or the other about independence. I can take it or leave it. I'm not convinced (and here's the key) but I'm open minded about it.

    The difficulty Labour seem to have at the moment is that the SNP offer a decent alternative and have proven over 4 years in exceptionally difficult circumstances to be more than capable of delivering on the sort of social democrat values that appeals to many Scots.

    On the other hand, addressing the point you seem so het up about, there is one issue that Independence would address immediately. Indy touched on it earlier. The overwhelming majority of Scots are centre left in their outlook (although I would concede that some probably do vote Labour based on their current actions rather than their historical roots). Despite this, we are currently governed from London by an ideologically driven, right wing cabal of public school boys. Surely you can imagine a more satisfying solution than that?

    Surely the thought of us managing our own resources in a way that benefits and suits the people who choose live here, rather than treating it as a commodity for the benefit of faceless multi-National tax dodging corporations would be better, non?

    Jim

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jim,
    I'm glad I make you laugh. The world needs laughter and I'm always on the lookout to help my fellow man.

    It's interesting that you vote SNP to get a Labour government. I think that makes my point....

    ....so you make me glad also.

    What a wonderful world!!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sorry I'm a bit late to the party - not sure how I missed this one - but since the discussion seems to have fizzled out I've done a related post on my own blog.

    But thanks for the complimentary remarks, Mr Braveheart!

    ReplyDelete