Iain Macwhirter - The Union Finally Lost It Last Week. I’M Voting Yes. - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Iain Macwhirter - The Union Finally Lost It Last Week. I’M Voting Yes.


Recommended Posts

http://iainmacwhirter.wordpress.com/2014/09/17/the-union-finally-lost-it-last-week-im-voting-yes/

Scotland stands on the edge of history. 4.2 million of us, the largest registered electorate in Scottish history, are weighing up the arguments, considering the implications, calibrating the risks.

There has never been a political debate like this in my lifetime and I’ve been covering politics in Westminster and Scotland professionally since 1979.

The UK financial and political establishment has already been rocked to its foundations. A 22-point opinion poll lead evaporated and the referendum is now too close to call.

Last week, we saw an exercise in constitutional panic as UK party leaders, past and present, stumbled blinking across Scotland, making improbable promises of federalism and protestations of undying love, while behind the scenes the UK Treasury tried to engineer a state of financial crisis.

Number 10 rounded up supermarket bosses and tried to get them to spread forecasts of inevitable price rises in the shops. UK civil servants briefed the press on RBS’s relocation before the bank’s board had even made the decision to go public.

The UK media descended on Scotland as if upon a foreign country and demonstrated its ignorance of a mature debate that has been going on in Scotland, not just for the past three years but the past three decades.

The BBC managed to shoot itself in both feet. It over-hyped the “more powers” that were being offered by the former prime minister Gordon Brown in his road map.

Then, the BBC’s Nick Robinson told the 10 O’Clock News on Thursday that the First Minister had refused to answer his question on the banks, unaware that fully 100,000 people on the internet had already watched a viral video of Salmond doing exactly that, to apparent applause from the international press corps.

The level of ignorance about Scotland in the metropolitan media was a revelation, even to me.

I spent much of last week appearing on UK BBC radio and TV programmes, repeatedly being told by interviewers that “11,000 jobs RBS jobs were to leave Scotland” when the banks themselves had said there were no implications for jobs.

Numerous outlets reported that Lloyds was to leave Scotland, even though it has been based in London for decades; that BP was going to reconsider its investments, as if an international oil company was going to opt out of the current boom in the North Sea.

Of course, large firms moving their registered offices is news.

But so many of the stories, such as Sir Ian Wood’s gloomy oil forecasts and Standard Life’s threat to move head office functions, were old news in Scotland. There may be tax implications of bank departures, perhaps even some job losses at the top. But the brass plaque transplant could also be positive.

Not having RBS and Lloyds on the books relieves an independent Scotland of much of the responsibility to bail them out in the next financial crash. Since one of the main indy scares has been that Scotland would be like Ireland in 2008, and likely to drown under the debts of its delinquent banks, you might have thought this at least worth a mention.

The press recycled alarmist stories about “mob politics”, “fear and loathing”, and “savage racism” – even in sober journals like The Spectator magazine which is edited by a Scot.

Yet, this campaign has been one of the most peaceable independence movements in history. So far, not a shop window has been smashed, not a punch thrown.

The only missile hurled has been one solitary egg, thrown at Labour’s Jim Murphy’s shirt, which he paraded around for days as if it were a ­sucking chest wound.

The secret weapon of the Yes campaign has been its discipline.

Those journalists writing of mobs seem to have forgotten what real mobs are like – the poll tax riots, the anti-capitalist demonstrations in London, the student fees takeover of Parliament Square, the miners’ strike.

Laced through these accounts of mob behaviour were dark hints that the ugly face of nationalism and racial hatred was appearing.

Better Together’s George Galloway tried to evoke images of fascism at the debate at Glasgow’s Hydro before 6000 young voters, and was ­righteously booed for his efforts.

Who now says that these intelligent 16 and 17-year-olds are too young to vote?

The UK state threw everything it had at the referendum campaign last week – “shock and awe” it was called – but if anything the Yes vote grew stronger.

Friday’s ICM poll showing another surge of support for independence was conducted on the very days that David Cameron was pleading with Scots not to give the “effing Tories a kicking”.

The front page of every paper last week and every news bulletin, was leading with stories about the banks leaving, food prices rising, Scottish stocks falling.

Yet somehow, the Scottish voters – around half of them it seems – have already discounted the scare.

The Daily Record’s front page on Saturday, quoting Deutsche Bank’s claim that independence could “spark the next Great Depression”, took Project Fear to another level.

So, why isn’t it working?

Why have so many Scots refused to heed the warnings of press, politicians and banks?

This has been a truly bottom-up movement, that rose from obscurity in drafty halls and internet chatrooms; ignored by the establishment and ridiculed by the press; dismissed by polling gurus like Nate Silver who said a Yes was “almost inconceivable”.

It has been mediated through new-fangled social media and old-fashioned word of mouth.

The internet has given anyone with a computer the ability to correlate, often in real time, what they are being told is going on with what is really going on. This may be the first election in which the mainstream media ceased to be the mainstream.

Perhaps the atmosphere before the 1945 Labour election landslide was similar to this.

That was the last time that ordinary people in this country took charge of the political process by the scruff of the neck and demanded radical change.

Certainly, 1997, the year of the Labour landslide and the devolution referendum, was a non-event by comparison.

There was none of the optimism, engagement, cultural and political – the fun.

The Scottish people have entered history, not to pick a fight with England, but to have a party.

Yet, if Scots take the momentous step of voting Yes on Thursday, the shockwave will be felt across the world.

In Europe, governments will look at regional movements like Catalonia in a new light.

America will watch in amazement as the old country disintegrates, concerned about the strategic implications for Nato of Trident moving elsewhere.

In England, social democrats, who have felt excluded from British politics for that last 30 years of neoliberal economic hegemony, will gain renewed hope that it is possible for people to challenge the political and economic establishment.

No-one will be able repeat the old lie that voting never changed anything.

Scotland has moved toward self-government over 25 years, not by taking to the streets but by using the ballot box peacefully, incrementally, tactically.

First, it eliminated Tory MPs in 1997; then it voted by a margin of three to one to establish a parliament with tax raising powers; and then, appalled by the poor quality of Labour administration, Scottish voters handed a landslide majority to the SNP in 2011, ensuring that this referendum, the most pregnant constitutional moment in 300 years, will take place.

I am still of the view Scots could have been satisfied by federalism.

It’s what the vast majority of Scots have said they want.

But David Cameron made it a condition of the UK signing the Edinburgh Agreement in 2012 that there would be a binary referendum splitting the Scottish consensus into boxes labelled independence or the status quo.

Even then, most Scots were still minded to vote No.

So what happened?

Well, in a nutshell, George Osborne happened.

The shock announcement in February that Westminster would rule out any currency union after independence – not even think about it, not even discuss it – was a key moment in the disintegration of the old Union.

That was the moment many Scots realised that the Union they thought was a partnership of nations was not a partnership at all. London was claiming exclusive rights to the common currency of the UK.

It was as if the whole history of the Union had suddenly been rewritten as an afterthought to the British imperialism.

I never say how I will vote in elections. It is not my role as a journalists to tell people how to vote or promote the interests of any particular party. The only party I’ve ever been involved with is Labour and that was an eternity ago.

But this isn’t an election; it is a referendum on the future of the country I live in, and I will be voting Yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may I add Ian Bell's last piece this week...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/end-this-dislocated-sense-of-being-homeless-at-home.25336826

Sometimes the big world takes heed of stateless people.

Out there, the condition is understood. It falls, inexactly, not far short of homelessness. The person without a country is reckoned to be alone, a waif and a stray, lost.

I have a country. I can see bits of it from my window, green and gold in the September sun. Some of what's out there is beauty enough to fill any heart. Some of it is brutal enough, bad enough, to cut a heart into bleeding pieces. One fact sits beside the other. The beauty is permanent; the rest is man-made.

There's plenty of history out there, a lot of what was, what used to be. In five minutes I could walk a fishers' track reputed - though who's counting? - to have moulded itself to trudging feet for a thousand years.

Go up the road and the land rises around an ancient church. Here the dead in their mounds push upwards. On some of the stones there is one of my names. It's common enough in these parts.

If needs be, I can find the usual sources to remind me that this portion of an island group amounts to 78,387 square kilometres. That's little enough. Three languages are spoken within the patch. Close to 5.3 million people live upon it. Here's a next-to-nothing country on a planet in thrall to the big and mighty. So we live in a providential place that ceased to be a state 307 years ago.

That's a kind of homelessness. Or rather, the fact imposes a weird, dislocated sense of being homeless at home, a refugee abroad, one of those forever submerged in nostalgia for a place that has not been alive in centuries. This Scotland is spectral, an after-image. Ours is, persistently, a sentimental attachment to a footnote.

Landscapes and history do not qualify as argument. You need to reckon with four categories: country, people, nation and state. We can map the first, count the second, and remember that no-one argues now about the third. Statehood is Scotland's phantom limb. Tomorrow, for the first time since country, people and nation earned their names, we get a vote on our loss.

Objections, well-rehearsed, are instant. One goes by the name of the United Kingdom. After 307 years we are enmeshed, they say, within a web of relationships banal and profound. To hear it told, I couldn't disentangle myself if I wanted to. That's true and obvious. Besides, I have no such desire. You do not shrug off three centuries like an old, tattered coat.

You would need to become speechless. You would need to surrender to amnesia. You would need to sever bonds and roots. You would need to ignore the organic reality of economies. You would need to forget affections, art, shared suffering, mutual endeavours. No-one in their right mind attempts such a thing. But Britain, the familiar name, doesn't answer. What have we heard time and again in this argument? We have heard people boast of the pride and comfort they take in a conjoined identity. Identity politics, once damned as divisive, is back in vogue now that Britain is at stake. For this voter, though, the identity insisted upon, the home strip and away strip, is peculiar. It doesn't fit.

The Union's defenders have homilies by heart. To be Scottish and British is to be a partner in something bigger, better, and - though the word is not dared - more civilised. Scotland does nothing but gain. If not, all is a challenge to be met, as the glowing word reminds you, together. No loss is never mentioned.

A second claim runs that in a globalised world statehood is an affectation. The nation-state, that 19th century notion, is redundant. You can't buck the markets, or the big and mighty. Power and ownership, like a state to call your own, no longer signify amid the universal brands, the imperial software, and the war-fighting coalitions of the willing.

I dissent. I neither agree nor accept. Statehood matters. Dozens of small nations on every continent have suffered more than Scots will ever suffer to claim the right. Once achieved, it is not surrendered. Why? How many of Britain's colonies have volunteered to return to mother's embrace? Are the Irish in the queue, the Indians, the Jamaicans, the Canadians?

Most of the countries in the world are small. Most do better for their people - and for people everywhere - than the big and mighty. Most do better than a north European island group still lost in dreams of days when it, too, was big and mighty. Why break up the United Kingdom?

Because, in this 21st century, such things must be broken up, for the common good. The only thing worse than Great Powers are those with pretensions to stay in a murderous club.

Even the biggest pay lip service to the ideal of self-determination. After all, who'd dare meddle with their right to choose? Try that at home, however, and Her Majesty's Government will send round her trans-national enforcers. Statehood for those who are not big, mighty, and bent on empire is the last, best weapon against the feudal conspiracy called globalisation.

No matter. I can keep it simple instead. The British state, its nuclear weapons and its perpetual wars, is hideous. The conviction that Dickens was the greatest novelist to have breathed is no counterweight. The behaviour of that state over the past fortnight has been proof enough of bad faith. The only idea has been to harry an electorate into submission.

To the charge sheet you could add endemic, institutionalised corruption, the self-perpetuating Oxbridge elite, the fealty to the City, the brutality towards the poor, the veneration of stolen wealth, the local military-industrial complex, the decadence of the Commons, all the media stooges, and a contempt for - because they mean you - "the provinces".

In this, promises of a renewed Union barely pass as decent fiction. Ground through the Westminster mill, those meaningless, last-minute vows will be dust before the year is over if Scotland votes No. The British state is managing a problem, not renewing a rotting democracy.

Anyone who does not admit to knowing as much does not want to know. They should ask themselves a question instead. Why is a referendum happening, 307 years on? Why is there agitation still? Surely by now, in the 21st century, the benefits of Union would be so obvious, and the bonds of affection so tight, as to make dissent ridiculous? That's not the case. Scotland, as an argument, refuses to disappear.

Where questions are concerned, the country that votes tomorrow is granted an equivalence. Simply this: it might be the last chance. The hope and memory of statehood have endured for three centuries, but they won't grant another ballot.

Be sure of it. If the vote is No, Scotland will fade, slowly and surely and finally, from the community of nations. It will disappear like a bleached, inarticulate photograph of by-gone times, a curio for tourists, a lost thing.

The past has made us. Our future can only be heard in the shout of a single word. Aye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


×
×
  • Create New...