I JOINED the SNP in the 1970s, back when Billy Wolfe was chairman, and also not long after the death of the renowned nationalist wit Oliver Brown. I hope many of Brown’s humorous and wise remarks are known to at least some of your readers but I would like to highlight one, published in his column in the Scots Independent in 1968, which I think is pertinent in the context of some of the sentiments I see expressed in the pages of The National.
“No Scottish Nationalist is fighting hard enough for the cause in which he professes to believe if he has enough energy left to abuse his fellow nationalists – for any reason.”
I hope I manage to stay within the bounds of Brown’s advice with the observations I am about to make.
READ MORE: Russell Findlay claims SNP use Loch Ness Monster to 'brainwash school pupils'
In the years preceding the independence referendum Social Attitudes Surveys conducted by Prof John Curtice showed that Scotland was divided in three: 25% committed to Yes, 35% committed to No, and in the middle 40% whose votes would be determined by the economic prospects of independence. Therefore the Yes movement faced a campaign in which victory could be achieved by persuading five-eighths of those middle voters that they would be better off with independence.
In my opinion, in 2014 we lost a winnable referendum. Yet after nearly eight years I have still to see what I would consider a serious assessment of why we lost. I think too many appear to have fallen for a comforting myth which says the referendum was unwinnable and therefore 45% was a great result. Unjustified self-congratulation is not the best way to become prepared for a second independence referendum.
READ MORE: Scottish Labour in danger of 'withering on the vine', says Len McCluskey
This is not to say that obtaining 1.6 million Yes votes was not impressive. It indeed was, but in the interests of balance and realism should we not also be asking where two million No votes came from? A large number, possibly as many as 600,000, were habitual non-voters who did not vote in any elections before 2014 and did not vote in any after. Yet in the referendum they made the effort to vote, and did so to stop independence from happening. I think it should be a cause of concern to Yes supporters that the No campaign was able to motivate 600,000 habitual non-voters. Does anyone on the Yes side know what these voters are likely to do next time?
I am impressed by the efforts of The National in combination with Believe in Scotland to raise awareness of the details of the economic arguments. Yet the good work of some could be undermined by the divisive comments of others who seem to be caught in a Salmond versus Sturgeon clash. I could join in and express my disappointment with either of these individuals. However, if I did that I would be failing to heed the sage advice of Oliver Brown.
Ewen Cameron
Glasgow
THOSE that occupy the very small area of the extremist independence section (under 2%) are still peddling their Trump-like views and still doing everything in their power to split up the more than 98% of Yes voters that are happy with the SNP and Scottish Greens manifestos.
These fundamentalists have been at it now for over a year and as such we can rule out poor research of topic by them and rule in deliberate and calculated attempts to undermine the independence movement.
READ MORE: Being forced to hold a UK passport does not ‘make us British’
Salmond and his lieutenants have had ample time to tone it down but have instead decided to continue with their wrecking campaign. Time for them to be called out, and for them to scuttle back into their stagnant pond.
Scotland’s independence movement has moved on, the majority seeking independence has spoken and what has been voiced as the preferred route has nothing to do with Salmond and his band of extremists.
Cliff Purvis
via email
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