Three hundred years to the day after the Scottish parliament signed the Act of Union, the issue of what form the UK state should take is high on the current political agenda.
Both Labour and the Tories are rattled by the prospect of the Scottish National Party emerging as the largest party in the Holyrood elections later this year. If it is victorious, the SNP is promising a referendum on independence.
And an independent Scotland would be a disaster for the labour movement in England and Wales. The majority of electorate here in England votes Tory, remember.
Until the fifties, that was true of Scotland as well. Not any more. In a poll in 2001, 45% of Scots describe themselves as 'to the left of Labour', up from 32% in 1997. It’s hardly surprising that, prior to its implosion, the Scottish Socialist Party was able to build a genuine base of working class support.
In Scotland, there is both a class dimension to the national question and a national dimension to class politics. Workers and youth tend to be the most in favour of independence.
Pro-independence parties including the SNP, SSP and the Scottish Greens have the firm support of half the electorate, while substantial numbers of Labour and Lib Dem supporters also attracted to the idea.
Take away the Scottish MPs from Westminster – and there are more of them than the electoral arithmetic strictly justifies - and we in England may be faced with the prospect of never seeing a government to the left of a Tory-Lib Dem coalition, ever again. Not good.
Gordon Brown has played the Britishness card in several speeches and articles in recent months. He has many reasons to do so.
In addition to Labour’s absolute dependence on Scottish representation, Brown’s very Scottishness is seen as detrimental in terms of New Labour’s pitch to Middle England.
Some of his rhetoric is borderline loopy. A few days ago, the chancellor warned of the dangers of ‘a drift towards Balkanisation’. Surely nobody really thinks we could face a re-run of Srebrenice on the streets of Stranraer?
And following Cameron’s flirtation with English nationalism, Brown has also accused the Tories of playing ‘fast and loose’ with the unity of England and Scotland.
In a move probably partially designed to refute the charges, Thursday will see the entire Tory front bench head north of the border for a shadow cabinet meeting in Edinburgh. Cameron speaks of the need to make a ‘positive case’ for the two nations to stay together.
Leftwing opinion on the ideal relationship between England and Scotland is divided. Most leftist currents take a de facto left unionist stance, arguing that it vital to preserve the unity of the British working class. That strikes me as a cop out, designed to excuse the terminal inability of the English left to raise its game.
Others, most notably Tom Nairn, argue that the break-up of Britain will decisively weaken the UK state, and maintain that alone is reason enough to positively advocate Scottish independence
I’m in the latter camp. An independent Scotland has every possibility of emerging as a successful social democracy within a federal Europe, and probably a rather attractive country in which to live.
Ultimately, Scottish independence is a matter for the Scots themselves. Let the SNP have the referendum. If a majority votes in favour of the split, so be it. It’s not for the London-centric left to try to hold them back.
Posted at 16:32, 16 January 2007
Comments (16)
Well no one is a greater supporter of Scottish independecne than me, but I wouldn't go this far:
"An independent Scotland has every possibility of emerging as .... probably a rather attractive country in which to live"
I had no luck with the slogan "an independent Scotland, with a generous immigration policy" among the English or Welsh left, but I rather liked it, so it is hereby open source to the community in the vague hope that someone else might do better.
Well said, but the imperialist left will always want to have their say and that means this ludicrous confection of "defending the unity of the British working class" as if a Polish plumber, a London cleaner, a Derry bank worker and a Gwynedd quarry worker were exactly the same.
The economistic Marxist reply will be that they're all workers but across the world there are workers - the English left has to get it into its head that you can be pro-Welsh or Scottish independence and still be an internationalist and a socialist.
Was Connolly breaking up the "British working class" in 1916? Is working-class struggle in either Ireland or the UK weaker as a result?
No. The coming break-up of the British state will be a huge advance for progressive politics.
[Was Connolly breaking up the "British working class" in 1916?]
Or to take it to ludicrous extreme, was Gandhi breaking up the British working class? :-)
Yes, and wasting the working class' time into the bargain. We can't and shouldn't try and stop indpendence, but at the same tim we can and should argue against it, and a for a greater lack of independence and furthering of European federalism while we're about it.
But what about the infringement of my right not to live in a state with a structural Tory majority? I've not been consulted about this!
I can't see how an independent Scotland will advance the cause of either socialism or democracy.
First of I suspect that a referendum will create a political atmosphere not unlike that around recent Catalan demands to be recognised a nation. That is, it will dominate political debate around the national issue, throw up a whole raft of prejudices and parochical concerns, and will never never raise socialist demands. Anyone who followed the Catalan referendum closely will remember that it swamped the Spanish media, and Radio Nationale de Espana led on it day after day - completely overshadowing such minor events as the burgeoning civil war, and US-UK presence, in Iraq.
The myths about Scotland being 'a' nation, when it is in fact made up of distinct cultures (Lowlands, Highlands, central belt, Isles, East)and the cringe-making comparisons with the (genuine) national oppression of Ireland, have resulted in a peculiar chauvenism whose dead-end is the belief that 'national liberation' is at stake. Since there are only political subjects called 'nations'in this mythology (by definition privileged against the 'oppressor' nation) we can further expect the nationalist Scottish left to abandon socialist demands to achieve this goal.
Secondly, apart from reinforcing the positions of local politicians, and forming a profitable possibility for new legislation, I fail to see how it is inherently more democratic than the existing system to have a bourgeois state in Scotland taking over all the functions of the bourgeois state in the UK. Holyrood has already demonstrated the ability of a political elite to adapt to the interests of professional politicans and civil servants, without notably expanding the participation of ordinary people.
I have not noticed that the break up of any European country has increased democracy helped the labour movement, or increased the chances of a left breakthrough. More specifically, from a socialist standpoint, their existence (former Yugoslavia on), has resulted in greater domination by the vastly superior resources of international capital - and Dutch auctions on taxes and social commitments to attract investment. They have also resulted in unpleasant disputes about individuals' nationality. To those who see smaller and smaller units as progressive look at Beligum. There is no more slyly vicious conflict than between French and Dutch speakers, seeping into everyday life, so close to hand.
Finally, Tom Nairn is very far from being a socialist these days. See, for example, the Break up of Tom Nairn? by my good self, in What Next? http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk Like Red Deathy I think the way forward is European federalism, in fact a European social republic. Not backwards to waving the Saltire.
the fact that I keep hearing the argument on tv in favour of the union because "it break it up would greatly decrease britains influence on the world stage" is enough for me to support the breakup of the union...
Thanks for that Nairn reference Andrew. I'm studying EP Thompson's polemic against Perry Anderson and Nairn in 'Peculiarities of the English'. It's a shame Nairn has moved so far right since those days.
If Scotland isn't really a unitary country and hasn't suffered the national oppression that Ireland has experienced, what about Wales and - at the risk of being trivial - Cornwall? To this outsider at least, these appear much more unified entities, seem to lack the strong indigenous bourgeoisie of Scotland, suffer underdevelopment and the effects of exploitation of primary products by outsiders, and seem to have experienced a fair bit of national oppression (even if this oppression is perhaps located too far back to count for much in the case of Cornwall).
I'm not very keen on any kind of nationalism usually - but I saw that Newsnight programme and I think now I'd favour Scottish independence simply becasue it would mightily piss off that chauvinist dickhead Kelvin MacKenzie.
Hmmm, but one may as well be in favour of "civilisation" on the same grounds.
Anyone who followed the Catalan referendum closely will remember that it swamped the Spanish media, and Radio Nationale de Espana led on it day after day - completely overshadowing such minor events as the burgeoning civil war, and US-UK presence, in Iraq.
Well, I'm far from sure this is true (a resident of Spain writes). TVE hardly devoted all its news to the Catalan referendum, not did it neglect to mention events in Iraq. Besides, aren't they very different things - one a domestic constitutional issue, the other an overseas war? What should one do, not raise domestic or constitutional issues lest the news devote less time to the war?
What is at stake is not just the break up of the British state, but the defeat of British national identity, and an opportunity to dump all the imperial pomp and baggage.
there are all sorts of questions that wuold be radically different, Could England afford nuclear weapons? Why should England or Scotland maintain a union with the 6 counties? How would the English labour party reshape itself?
Of course we should all recognise our debt to the Tories who abolished so many british institutins, like british Rail, the NCB, British Steel, etc :o)
Reckon if the Union did break up Yorkshire'd forthwith declare UDI and join the Geordies in ethnically cleansing the Mackems out.
[To this outsider at least, these appear much more unified entities]
That would very much be to the outsider in the case of Wales. All you need to know about Wales can be summed up in the fact that the Australian state is called "New South Wales". Not "New Wales". I bet that the bloke who named it would have called it "New South West Glamorganshire But Not The Bit Along The Coast" if he thought he could get away with it.
EJH, obviously if you're in Spain you're m,ore accurate than I can be. I am going, however, on the lead items on the various stations of Radio Nationale de Espana which I can get on the medium wave radio band, night-time (though can't hear the Catalan one), and El Pais, which is sold here and is available, like El Mundo, on the Web. I am absolutely sure that during the weeks around the Referendum this dominated the news - as the whole subject of Spain's constitution and nations, has been at the centre of Constitutional debate. My point, referring to Iraq is just an illustration not a proof and I'm happy to admit that I may be misjuded, is that this kind of conflict focuses attention away from the type of social conflicts and campaigns in which socialist ideas have some purchase.
I think there are a number of problems about the Catalan demands, not least the latent (and not so latent) sense of superiority many Catalans have towards other Spaniards, particularly Southerners (and yes, I have been there, even visited the old CND HQ in Barcelona). It's a hard one this, since the left would sympathise with their heroic role in the Civil War, suppression by Franco, and I would agree with their language demands. Personally I feel that federalism is all the more urgent when there are languages at stake. Catalan is a significant one, not too difficult to learn for other Romance speakers (though the fused prepositions-articles are rather more complicated than a mica). But in any case Catalan nationalism has a strong bourgeois component and I would be very wary of it (despite what the Catalan left republicans say).
I've been thinking about this issue in relation to the lead up to the Socialist Party's conference. I was schooled in "left-unionism" as Dave calls it, but would no longer consider myself as such.
I know it's a bit cheeky to ask comrades on one blog to come to another, but I would be interested in input from pro + anti-independence comrades on thinking this through.
It is at the time of writing my most recent post.