In autumn last year, I posted a blog entitled “How to win a referendum?”, where I expressed doubts about the then frequent comments, critical of parts of the Yes movement, coming, not from unionist supporters, but from other independence supporters. At the time, I thought that unionists could come up with enough SNP-bad comments without any help from our side. Unfortunately, the practice seems to have been resurrected, though this time the targets are independence supporting media, such as National, iScot and Wings, and prominent indy supporters.
From my point of view, the last straw was the trolling of Mhairi Black by Caitlin Logan, new columnist on Common Space, to “prove” that Mhairi was supporting homophobes. Caitlin Logan was apparently encouraged by Angela Haggerty, the editor. I would have expected something like this from an idiot unionist, but from someone representing a supposed independence supporting platform, I was surprised and disappointed, to say the least.
The bad news is that the blog from last year is as relevant today as it was then. It seems there are still those out there who believe that the best way to get independence is to point out that everyone who disagrees with them is wrong and it’s even better if you can attach a label like homophobe to them. Just to prove that it’s true, here’s last year’s. What do you think?
Sadly, since Indyref1, there has been a significant upturn in negative comments by some Indy supporting groups about others.
It may have originally been prompted by feelings of disappointment at the result, looking for someone to blame, but it certainly increased in the run up to the Scottish election, when, of course, supporters of the various parties were trying to distance themselves from the rest to gather electoral support. Unfortunately, several groups chose to highlight differences by pointing out the perceived weaknesses in their opponents position rather than the benefits of their own.
Unfortunately, much of the bitterness generated over that period seems not to have gone away. Several indy supporting sites seem happy to publish articles which show other parts of the indy movement in a poor light, with the SNP being a common target, though by no means the only one. The recent attacks on the indy group who had crowdfunded a plan to put up billboards highlighting BBC bias being a recent example, not involving the SNP, which generated a significant amount of negative comment.
What is to be gained from such attacks by one Indy group on another? Obviously, the author will feel better for getting “something off his chest”, but will the Indy movement itself gain anything?
Negative comments are often picked up by the unionist supporting media and then relayed to their viewers and readers as yet more Indy-bad propaganda, often with an even more negative spin. What does the indy movement gain from this? Even worse, the comments are sometimes rehashed Indy-bad articles which have already appeared in the unionist media. What does the indy movement gain from this? Would it not be the case that negative comments that appear in both unionist supporting and indy supporting media are more likely to be accepted as true by ordinary punters? What does the indy movement gain from this?
Attacks on the Scottish Government are often justified as holding the Government to account. Laudable though the aim might be, when the vast bulk of the media are constantly on the lookout for any chance to rubbish the Scottish Government, the SNP and, by implication, the whole Indy movement, are we just giving our opponents a bunch of open goals? Do we really think it benefits the Indy movement to join with the unionist parties in asking the Scottish Government to do everything we want with its extremely limited powers and its ever decreasing pocket money budget.
At this time, with Indyref2 on the horizon, we have to decide what is really important to us. Do we want to continue to fight with each other over the minor changes we can hope to get from the application of the few powers we have now, or do we want to set aside our differences for now in search of the one big goal of independence. Yes, it means handing the Scottish Government a get out of jail free card, valid until independence is gained, but is that too much to ask for, given the importance of what we want to achieve?
Only with independence can we make our own decisions for ourselves. Only with independence can we argue for our government to spend money based on Scottish priorities, knowing that winning the argument in our parliament will mean it will happen. Only with independence can we stop the obscenity of half of Scotland’s budget being spent to benefit the citizens of another country. Only with independence can we restore Scotland’s rightful place among the nations of the world.
Can we do everything we can do to make it happen? What do you think?