Do We Have to Polish Our Jackboots?

An English Facebook friend who is pro union posted a link to this piece they liked in Politics.co.uk yesterday: "That" kind of nationalism - nudge, wink. (I may have retitled it.) It’s one of the most vile, ill-informed pieces I’ve seen outside of the Daily Mail (though very like the Daily Mail in its scant regard for research or truth and its blatant bias).

The sad fact is that this is genuinely how Alex Salmond is perceived by many in England and by many in the Better Together camp – granted, usually because, like the author of the piece, they haven’t bothered to do any actual research and just buy whatever the unionist press feed them as truth. And this is how nationalism is seen – it’s seen as “that” kind of nationalism – you know, the kind that wears jackboots.

It’s easier to ignore the fact that many voting for independence are not actually SNP supporters and have never voted SNP in their lives. That kind of truth just doesn’t fit the desired narrative. It’s easier to ignore the kind of nationalism actually espoused by the YES campaign and, indeed, by the SNP: the kind that wants a constitution to protect the vulnerable in society, no matter what party is in power; the kind that votes for gay marriage and that the LGBTI community plans to work with to ensure greater equality; the kind that plans to bring in skilled immigrants to help make up the shortfall in contributions so as to protect our aging population, whilst celebrating the diversity in our society.

Pro immigration? Pro equal rights for all? Pro constitutional rights? Yep, sure sounds like “that” kind of nationalism to me. I’ll start polishing my boots and practising my salute.

And Salmond is always portrayed as this power mad individual, out for himself at all costs, wants to be King/Emperor/God of Scotland.  Hmm - that doesn't quite fit with the fact that he was the one who wanted devo-max on the ballot, does it? If he was only out for himself, was power-crazy, then he'd have hated the idea of devo-max. But he did want it on the ballot - he wanted Scots to have the full range of choices: 1. Stay as we are. 2. Extra powers. 3. Full independence.

Westminster vetoed the devo-max option. Why? Well, maybe because they were so confident of a NO vote, they didn't see the need to give up any power.

MacLean also mentions the fact that no one even blinks when they hear the phrase 'Salmond's Scotland'. Well, I've certainly never given it any thought because the first time I'd ever heard the phrase was in this article. Funny that, eh?

The author of the piece was described in The Scotsman as: Charles Maclean – an Eton schoolboy with a family seat in Argyll, future clan chieftain and scion of one of the best-connected families in post-war Britain.

Not massively surprising that his opinions were fairly outrageously biased then, eh? No self-interest there at all – nope, not a bit of it.

And, of course, his lack of research caught him out again when he spouted that line about Salmond praising Putin – is there really anyone left who hasn’t read the whole interview that gave the Better Together campaign that quote? I mean, obviously, apart from Charles MacLean? Well, just in case you have any interest in how Salmond came to, apparently, randomly praise Putin, here’s the link to the full article: Salmond and Putin, up a tree (I may have retitled that as well.)

If you can’t be bothered reading the whole thing, the gist of it is, Alastair Campbell tried to get Salmond to say something positive about various politicians/political leaders. Salmond obliged. The only time he genuinely couldn’t think of anything positive to say was when asked about George Osborne. Yes - he could think of something decent to say about Putin - when pressed to - but not about George Osborne, which seems fair enough. .

This is when I start to crave honesty. The truth about Salmond, the truth abut the YES campaign is all out there for anyone who wants to take the time and just do a wee bit of reading. It still irritates me when I hear someone say they’re voting NO because of that Salmond. It’s just not a credible answer and does a huge disservice to the person who says it as well as to the whole campaign.

There are plenty of reasons for voting NO and I genuinely believe that people need to start being honest about them instead of just trotting out the tired old SNP/Salmond non-argument.

For example, “I’m voting NO because, despite the fact that Westminster have lied to us many times over the years, I believe that this time they are telling the truth about oil and that all of the figures they have presented on the economy are, this time, the truth. I believe that they will give us more powers, I understand their reasons for not stating what these powers will be, and I trust them to deliver.”

There you go – not that difficult, is it? If you really feel that you can still trust Westminster, just say so.

Or, “I’m voting NO because, while I appreciate that there are foodbanks and attacks on the weakest in our society for as long as I stay with an increasingly right wing UK, me and my family are currently doing very well and I’d rather take my chances with whatever government England votes for, and sometimes that government will, by chance, be the government I wanted, so that’s enough for me. I'm not right wing, but I'd rather put up with right wing policy than take a chance at changing things without cast iron guarantees and absolute certainties about how independence would work. I appreciate that I have no idea how things will pan out in the UK, but those uncertainties are okay with me.”

See? You can say that if it’s how you really feel. It’s far better than just parroting the media’s view on Salmond and nationalism. 

Or, “I’m okay with the right wing – I want out of Europe, I want an end to immigration, I’m not really that interested in the poor in our society (they always get by somehow), I’m happy that the rest if the UK is veering further to the right wing and want Scotland to follow suit, so I’m voting NO.”

There are at least 500,000 Tories in Scotland – it’s okay to come out and say you’re one of them.

It’s okay to have any reason to vote NO that’s based on actual research and personal ideology and there are lots more than the few I’ve mentioned here. It’s not okay to cling to, ‘I hate Alex Salmond, therefore I’m voting NO to the chance of independence for my whole country based on my dislike of one man (a man I’ve never actually met and don’t really know anything about).’ That’s just silly and lazy and nonsensical. Stop it.