The Neverendum Referendum - Scotland is Bigger than the Winners

 

 

It's impossible to be living in Scotland and not have an opinion on the question of Independence. Anyway, even if you don't have one, you'll soon be told the one to have! Most people have come to their view from a mixture of personal history, social location, political commitments, moral judgement, and issues of self-interest. That view is also influenced, adjusted, hardened by other people either shoring up that view by agreeing with it, dismantling that view by attacking it, or questioning it by debate and discussion. The last of these is the most creative and democratically coherent approach, - open, healthy, respectful, informed, passionate but fair exchange of views, opinions and prejudices - and this is what both sides say they wish the other side would respect.

I have never known my country more divided, not only in opinion, but in spirit. For all the disclaimers to the contrary, that this is only healthy and forward looking debate, there are powerful passions and high expectation visions and desperate hopes out there, on both sides. But only one side will win this Referendum - and in winning, whichever side wins, we are in serious danger of all being losers.

Those who wish to remain a United Kingdom will feel desperately let down and thwarted, because their sense of nationhood and self definition has been changed against their will; those who wish to be independent and no longer part of the United Kingdom will likewise feel desperately let down and thwarted, because their sense of nationhood and self-definition has been changed against their will. There are few passions more dangerous and volatile than thwarted nationalism understood as a people's sense of nationhood. Both Better Together and Yes Campaigners are arguing for the future of the nation to which we belong. The argument is about identity, belonging, history, cultural integrity, a nation's sense of self, as much as it is about economics, social justice and defence which are currently the levers used to push towards independence or pull back from it.

My main concern, and I mean concern, in this post, is the reality that the debate, however refreshing, exciting, unprecedented and historically significant, will nevertheless leave a legacy of deep discontent for almost half of Scotland's population. Whethere and where such disaffection, anger, anxiety, resistance and sense of powerlessness in face of a fait accompli can be safely channelled and creatively redeemed into generous hopefulness and constructive commitment to the common good, is quite another question. And it is the one to which the leaders on both sides should be paying more attention. The use of the word 'Celebration' by the First Minister, should it be a yes vote is understandable, some would say obvious and natural, but it is politically immature and unnecessarily provocative, and threatens to expose the partisan over-againstness that has characterised the Yes campaign.

And on Friday morning, if the supporters of whichever side wins forgets the other side which has lost, then it's hard to see in what sense we are either better together or better apart, because the loser will be Scotland. Dancing in the streets when the other half of the population feel they have lost something that defines who they are is not the way to bring about consensus around a shared and better future. There are powerful subterranean forces in a nation's consciousness of itself and it is dangerous and naive for any group that represents only half a nation to ignore these, or assume the winner's rostrum with a champagne bottle surrounded by the like-minded as if they are the only ones whose passions, aspirations and decisions matter.

One of the tests of a mature democracy, is learning to use power wisely - and whoever assumes such power on Friday would be wise to speak in the chastened tones of those who know the family have come through serious differences, and what is needed before Friday is a recognition that Scotland is bigger than the winners.

Comments

[Colin Strong]

A very good piece. However, I would not want to deny anybody their celebration, but my concern is that it will not be measured, and will not take what you have said into account. I'll not be celebrating either way. Voting no has in effect become a vote for Devo max, which I believe will be seriously detrimental to the future of Scotland. I'll be voting no for damage limitation.

[Jason Goroncy]

Timely wisdom, Jim.

[Bob MacDonald]

I was in Quebec when the front de libération de québec was active and when our PM invoked the War Measures Act to control the bombings, one of which exploded in the mailbox outside my apartment. I was in the west of Canada when my own Quebec birth was on the verge of being denied in 1995. A French colleague from Quebec said he did not want to be a minority in his own country. Being an English québecois I did not understand though I knew the isolation that my family practiced in their rapidly diminishing local English enclave.

None of this seems to apply in Scotland. As you know, we toured Scotland last year searching out the ancestry of our fourth child (adopted first nations) from the Orkney Islands all the way back to 1798. It was a great joy to be there in the country of my ancestors - clan MacDonald. But I am not a nationalist. I would vote noo if I had a vote.

My daughter's choir from Selwyn has sung in all the parts of the Islands, Scotland, Ireland, and England of course. So I hope you all continue to sing together.