CAN we learn anything from the far-right gains in Spain? That the traditional “old” political parties across Europe are both in a state of flux and being challenged has been shown to be true yet again with the results of the very recent Spanish elections.
For Spain it seems the traditional centre-left, socialist PSOE have gained, but still not sufficient to govern without left-wing, so-called “populist” parties such as Podemos.
Spain saw the emergence of Podemos, meaning “We Can”, about five years ago as an anti-austerity group, fuelled by social media, that quickly transformed into a political party. And a tad successful it was too, until it got power and had to face the reality of creating policies, and attempting to deliver those catchy sound bites.
As the bright young thing on the political landscape, however, they appear to have been replaced by Vox, albeit the opposite end of the spectrum, a truly far-right party in their beliefs and statements.
Their gains mean that for the very first time since the death of the dictator Franco, way back in 1975, and the return to democracy, those far-right views will be represented legitimately and centre stage, en masse, through the ballot box.
As the conventional right/left party systems continue to destabilise and fragment, whether that is over national politics, policies relating to issues such as immigration or – dare I say – the EU, is it any wonder that right and left extremism, and middle-ground “populism” is drawing down votes from the old-style parties? Could that sound a bit familiar as we head towards EU elections and the emergence of “Change” who are fielding candidates, and Farage’s Brexit Party, a Ukip Mark 2, in even more frightening ways?
Does that matter to us? I think it does since the likes of Vox are a form of “one nation”, very anti the separate nation Catalonia, a highly persuasive theme they openly used in the recent elections. Petty nationalism in the guise of unity.
We know that in all probability Labour and the Tories will take a beating in the imminent local rUK elections followed by the same for the EU elections. Scotland, if we get the vote out, will surely continue to be pro-EU, with predicted loses for Labour and Tory and gains for the SNP.
Just imagine the scenario then, post those elections: the fear on the part of the Unionists, already agitated by the recent pro-indy polls here and that stonking SNP conference with debates and announcements, not least the launch of the Social Justice and Fairness Commission which will “set out how the proceeds of economic growth in an indy Scotland can be shared much more fairly”.
What’s not to like, what’s not to help energise the pro indy movement in the months to come? So, we can imagine what will be thrown at us then, not least, the far-right mantras of “control”, “unity”, more promises of a “great future” out of Europe, but only if we are “together”, in some mythical fantasy union, both political and financial. Aye, that’ll be right!
Whatever informed and respectful campaigning we undertake to ensure our future, it isn’t that petty, inward-looking nationalism that appears to be destined for rUK. And what better way to carry the recent progress forward other than demonstrate the “appetite” with a wee march of hundreds of thousands of us this coming Saturday?
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
LETTERS regularly appear in these pages of The National urging an early second referendum, many propounding arguments supporting “the time is now”.
The only right time to hold a referendum is when you are absolutely sure you can win (look at the shambles caused by Mr Cameron as a result of not doing his homework). Failure, apart from the embarrassment, will have serious consequences such as repeal of the Scotland Act.
A majority of Tories have always been against devolution and Labour has not benefited from it either. At the very least, losing means the subject really would be closed for 30 years.
Mike Underwood
Linlithgow
I HAVE never understood the hurroosh anent an economic case for independence.
Very recently the National Audit Office produced a report stating that Scotland held 33% of the natural resources of this island. As we know, Scotland’s has 9% of the population of this island. Anyone with a modest knowledge of mathematics would say: quod erat demonstrandum.
While I realise things are more complex than this, I would have thought that anyone without a vacuum between the ears would be able to see that Scotland is just as economically viable as any other small country in similar circumstance.
R Mill Irving
Gifford, East Lothian
THERE was a large SNP conference in Edinburgh last weekend attended by well over 2,000 delegates. However, this seems to have escaped the notice of the BBC.
The SNP are the party of government in Scotland with the largest number of MSPs and the second-largest membership in the UK, and are the third-largest party in Westminster. Despite this, the BBC appears to consider snooker coverage to be more important.
There was more than 20 hours of snooker over Saturday and Sunday on BBC Two and BBC Scotland. Compare this to a miserable 1.5 hours of the conference on BBC Scotland on Sunday afternoon. I noted that these two channels were also simultaneously broadcasting the snooker: why?
What is the point of the new BBC “Scotland” channel if it cannot cover an event like a major conference in Scotland, in our capital city, especially at a time of UK-wide political and constitutional crisis?
Sorry BBC, once again you have failed the people of Scotland !
Angus Ferguson
Glasgow
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