The Early Days of a Better Nation |
Ken MacLeod's comments. “If these are the early days of a better nation, there must be hope, and a hope of peace is as good as any, and far better than a hollow hoarding greed or the dry lies of an aweless god.”—Graydon Saunders Contact: kenneth dot m dot macleod at gmail dot com Blog-related emails may be quoted unless you ask otherwise.
Emergency Links
LINKS
Self-promotion
The Human Genre Project
Comrades and friends
Colleagues
Genomics
Edinburgh
Writers Blog
Editor Blogs
Publisher Blogs
Brother Blogs
Skiffy
Brits Blog
' ... a treeless, flowerless land, formed out of the refuse of the Universe, and inhabited by the very bastards of Creation'
Amazing Things
Faith
Reason
Evolution
War and Revolution
Mutualist Militants
Democratic Socialists
Impossibilists and Ilk
Viva La Quarta
Communist Parties
Other revolutionaries
Radical Resources
Readable Reds
For the sake of the argument
|
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Within the left Yes camp there are plenty of choices and voices: the broadly progressive, the Scandinavian-style social democratic, the artistic and creative, and the radical. There are others linked to on my sidebar, and at these sites yet more links. Uniting the political and cultural nationalist left is Bella Caledonia, a site difficult for me to evaluate because I can't read much of it without feeling sick. There's a conservative case for the union of Scotland and England, ably articulated by (e.g.) Adam Tomkins and more plangently by Simon Schama. For those of us to the left of these scholars there's a lot to disagree with or question in their arguments, and much to consider -- depending on how much importance you attach to the mere material condition of the working class, which on any reckoning will take a big hit from a split. The official Better Together campaign argues along likewise conservative lines. It gets a lot of flack from the Yes side for being negative, a good indicator that being negative works. There are also radical, left-wing arguments for a No vote. The pro-independence left has high hopes, stirring rhetoric and uplifting visions. Its radical wing is a raft lashed together from the wreckage of three (at the last count) far-left sects. The anti-independence left has page after page of dry facts and figures about ownership, finance, manufacturing, EU laws, employment patterns, energy production, and political and social attitudes. Its radical wing comes from the mainstream left of the labour movement. The Red Paper group of academics, activists and trade unionists has gone into the details of Scotland's political and economic situation, and published a substantial body of evidence and argument that an independent Scotland would have even less 'control over its own affairs' than it has now, for the obvious reason that the big economic and political decisions would continue to be made outside it. The argument is concisely put by Tom Morrison in today's Morning Star. More of the broad (and some of the narrow) left case along these lines can be found at Socialism First. The sociologist and media analyst Greg Philo has investigated social consciousness and attitudes north and south of the Border, and found little to cheer about. The prospect of a decade (at least) of bickering and blaming between a newly independent Scotland and an embittered and inward-looking rUK, with national differences deepening by the day, is a grim one for left or even liberal politics. Ben Jackson, editor of the social-democratic journal Renewal, has published a fascinating analysis of The Political Thought of Scottish Nationalism (PDF), and a cutting and critical account of Alec Salmond's political journey, one that should give pause to those who've turned to the SNP in disappointment with Labour. All this may be irrelevant to the outcome. Labour lawyer Ian Smart argues (from hard-won experience as an election foot-slogger) that debates, speeches and public meetings serve to enthuse your own side, not to convince the other. All the No campaign has to do, he says, is keep hammering away at the inadequacies of the SNP/Yes campaign, and get out the vote. As he also likes to remind us, there is no room for complacency. I agree, but like him I still think the outcome will be No. If I'm wrong I'll accept that I'm living in the early days of a worse nation, and continue to work as if I lived in the early days of a better one. 22 Comments:I'm hardly original in saying this, but as a resident of one of the saner parts of the U.S. I might dream a bit of what we could do without the Confederates, but don't want to abandon my fellow citizens (of all races) who don't want to live in a Confederacy Triumphant.
Just give up and spoil the ballot. I can't imagine voting for the existing British system in itself (Queen, Lords, militarism etc), but a new Scottish state could come with all sorts of hideous EU terms and conditions. Rather like a choice between dogshit and birdshit.
The question on the ballot paper is: Should Scotland be an independent country?
Ken, certainly voting no doesn't imply a vote for the existing system, but that is how it will be treated by those in power and their followers. True, just as a Yes will be treated as a blanket endorsement of the White Paper and its commitments to the EU, NATO, a currency union and the monarchy.
Should Scotland be an independent country? Oh dear, if there's a No vote, they might take away its legal system as well. Scotland might be also barred from joining the EU - or at least according to the definition of "independence" in my dictionary. This referendum is never going to get very far with such an absurdly worded question.
an independent Scotland would have even less 'control over its own affairs' than it has now
But what do YOU think? You say "There are also radical, left-wing arguments for a No vote" but what is it? Was it in one of the links you posted? I tried a few but they were just more of the fear-mongering, negativity without any substantive argument in favour of the empire.
In what way does a no vote endorse 'all the present and past of the British empire'? I can't see that on the proposed ballot paper. If it's "fearmongering negativity" to point out that the openly-stated goal of the SNP is to make Scotland subject to the EU's self-obsessed mess, then so be it.
I think that if you consider scots to be perpetrators rather than victims of the british empire then you could also consider that of india, or any other now independent nation in which some benefited from cooperating with their brothers' oppressors. Sure, you could make that case.
Oh and my phrase was "self-obsessed mess" not ...mass. This misreading somewhat changes the meaning you may have picked up.
Sorry, but your link to Class, Nation and Socialism seems to be broken. I get 'connection refused'.
Some good points there eddie. Can't say I'm a regular reader of Bella Caledonia Ken, but to my knowledge I've never found anything there that would make me ill. However, your attaching credibility to the charlatan lefty Ian Smart nearly gave me the dry boak. Following his now infamous outburst on Twitter last year his own brother had this to say about him...
Eddie - the link is not broken, so I suggest you check your settings or try on another computer.
Ian Smart's 'infamous outburst' was to say that when indy fails to deliver (which would not surprise me) we'll see a rise in racism and scapegoting (which would not surprise me either).
What are we to infer from his Twitter bio where he describes himself as a "lefty lawyer" then?
icmac -
|
I see your point, but there is so much possibility for change in a free Scotland.
By
Neil McDonald, at
Wednesday, May 14, 2014 7:16:00 pm