YOU may think it difficult for JK Rowling to surprise us with her Unionism by now ... but she's achieved exactly that.
It all started with one of The National's quote puffs on social media.
We like to give people a taste of the columns coming in tomorrow's paper, and Rowling was very annoyed by one for Lesley Riddoch.
Crunchy Nut Nationalism.
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) July 5, 2018
Warning: may contain traces of bigotry. pic.twitter.com/hDOOqo2bJ7
By the time Rowling posted the above tweet, that article was available on our website. In it, Riddoch actually argues against being too vocal in our support for Anyone But England.
Basically, the article Rowling was attacking as an example of Vile Nationalism broadly agreed with her stance. It seems she just hadn't bothered to read it. That set the tone for things to come.
Someone asked Rowling: "What makes you think Scottish nationalists are xenophobic, racist or anti-English?"
She decided case studies would be the perfect response. And presented a devastating total of ... three.
When an 'inclusive' movement includes people like this, you can count me out. pic.twitter.com/kmzWPrEXnO
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) July 5, 2018
When blood and soil ethno-nationalists are marching with your supposedly 'civic' marches, your nationalism doesn't look too different to any other country's. pic.twitter.com/bo5LohrFNQ
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) July 5, 2018
Nor does this kind of talk, from a self-proclaimed Scottish nationalist, quite square with the proud boast that 'our' nationalism is purer and better. pic.twitter.com/1APkzm3SlV
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) July 5, 2018
Rowling concluded: "Happy to take your word for it that such people aren't representative of the entire movement. Happy to accept that the bulging folder of xenophobic and anglophobic screenshots I have on my laptop aren't the whole story.
"But some of us are getting mighty tired of Scottish nationalist insistence that their nationalism is nothing like the other, nasty kinds, in the face of considerable evidence to the contrary."
Of course, we condemn all the views in those tweets, but the idea that such a tiny sample size is representative of the Yes movement is staggeringly wrong – particularly in the face of so many representing the opposite view.
And yet, even in that tiny sample, two of the three sources don't seem to check out.
Aside from anything, why is @jk_rowling citing anti-SNP British nationalists as 'Scottish nationalists'? pic.twitter.com/vD3KD5zL1B
— Ross Colquhoun (@rosscolquhoun) July 5, 2018
"I hate the SNP. I want a right wing scottish nationalist party" said one. Is this who Rowling thinks is representative of the Yes movement?
The other is even more revealing of Rowling's laziness in fact-checking.
"I loathe the SNP" and "For the live [sic] of God Nigel, lead UKIP again", they've tweeted. Perhaps she also missed the Union flag in the account's bio?
Before telling her 14 million followers that the Yes movement was xenophobic, did Rowling even check the Twitter bios?
We could brush this off as just another Unionist celeb daftly bashing the Yes movement and ignore it, but Rowling's fame has brought her a wide audience. A massive part of that audience is from the United States.
Later this month, Donald Trump is likely to visit Scotland. He will be met with widespread protests. As her Twitter evidences, the author despises Donald Trump. Which side of the Yes/No divide do you think will be better represented at those protests?
How many "Scottish nationalists" do you see on Twitter supporting Trump, relative to the number of Unionists who do? Which side's politicians are loudest in condemning him?
Scottish nationalism is nothing like that of Donald Trump. One of our most popular and well-received articles this month was members English Scots for Yes sharing their stories.
And we'll leave you with one of our most widely shared front pages. In the fight against racism, is the Yes movement really the side you want to align yourself against?
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel