I HAVE been in a long-term relationship with the European Union for a few years now. It all started off very romantically, with it outwardly promoting peace, and the well-being of its peoples. However, the longer I’ve been with the EU, the more I’ve began to notice its flaws.
I was willing to forgive its terrible treatment of my friend Greece, as well as its dodgy connection with the European Central Bank. However, ignoring my pal Catalonia being beaten up by Spain is a step too far for me. I want a partner that is going to stand up for my beliefs and my friends.
I must also confess to having unfaithful thoughts about the European Free Trade Association. I keep telling the EU not to worry about EFTA, but I think deep down it knows how I feel. What makes the whole situation so terrible is that I’ve told everybody how much I love the EU, and that I fully expected us to spend the rest of our lives together. I’m really worried I’m going to look foolish if I tell them how I really feel now. Do you think people will understand if I tell them I’m having doubts about our future together? I’m not saying it’s over between us, but I am worried. Maybe I’m being too dramatic about things? Maybe I should just trust that the European Union knows best. Sometimes I think it’s not EU … it’s me.
Nicola,
DEAR Nicola,
When it comes to healthy relationships, you often have to feel comfortable being on your own before you can make it work with a partner. If you are relying completely on somebody else to make you happy, and for them to give you the future that you want, the second they start to let you down or make mistakes, it can be catastrophic in your mind. Knowing that you are strong and confident in yourself before entering into a long-term relationship is the way to go.
Recently, the argument for Scottish independence has been almost entirely centred on the European Union. So much so that we seem to have forgotten the reason we want independence in the first place: the principal of self-determination.
As much as we would like to be in a loving and caring relationship with the European Union, it is ultimately more critical that we are firstly able to decide our own destiny and make a success of our own freedom. If we are relying on the EU to make Scottish independence work, the minute the organisation does something we don’t like; it puts our entire movement in jeopardy.
Moreover, the notion that everybody who voted Yes and everybody who voted Remain are in the same camp is simply untrue. There are parts of Edinburgh that held some of the highest Remain votes, but also the highest number of No voters. For the SNP to charge forward with an independence strategy that could be incompatible with the views of some Yes supporters is deeply flawed. Instead, if we simply focus on the message of self-determination, the ability to govern ourselves away from Westminster, we present a case with broad, universal appeal.
By confusing SNP government policy with the arguments for Scottish independence, the inevitable consequence is that many voters feel pushed out of the movement altogether. Those on the right won’t necessarily agree with the SNP’s agenda, nor will those on the far left. So, rather than risking losing socialists to Corbyn’s UK or libertarians to whatever Mad Max version of Britain they’d live in, we should aim to centre the argument on the one thing we can all agree on: self-determination.
Promising a land of milk and honey and guaranteed membership of the EU might all sound great in the short term, but the second things don’t look so rosy, the whole train comes off the tracks.
By acknowledging that Scottish independence could be a difficult and challenging process – but a process that is ultimately centred on a righteous principal, we never risk lying to the electorate. Additionally, we don’t risk acquiring floating voters who might only believe in independence if it leads to a more left-wing government – the second it looks like we’ll have a centre-right one, they could bail on us.
In the end, we need people who will believe in independence on principal not policy, and that is where the SNP should be considered separate from Yes. I think it’s time that those having doubts about the EU should feel free to speak up in this movement without feeling that they are somehow damaging our cause, or making fools of themselves. If we want Yes to be truly diverse, it must first have diversity of thought, and making it a Remain-only club simply won’t achieve that.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here