IT’S a smart move from Nicola Sturgeon to effectively rebrand the contemporary Yes campaign as “Scotland’s democracy movement” – though I’d argue it always has been just that.

The UK’s democratic deficit was, for those with a less nationalist bent, one of the most compelling reasons to make a swift exit from the clutches of Westminster. With a broken voting system, the sticky fingerprints of unelected lords and barons across our legislation and a monarch with more influence than would be proper to admit, the concept of the United Kingdom as a fully-fledged democracy was laughable.

Since 2014, the situation has only deteriorated further. Not only have the Conservatives sought to limit the right to protest and organise, but new voter ID systems designed to disenfranchise the poor and marginalised further will continue to diminish Britain’s self-appointed status as a bastion of democracy.

With the Supreme Court ruling that a legal independence referendum is dependent on London’s approval, Britain’s status as a democracy is as mangled as its economy.

READ MORE: Cases of Scotland and Quebec are significantly different

After all, had we not been repeatedly told we were a family of nations? A voluntary joining of wills to better distribute wealth and power between hospitals, schools and the bank accounts of Tory donors?

The so-called broad shoulders of the United Kingdom has remained a core tenet of the case for dependence since 2014 – even while successive Conservative governments seemed set on leaving very little behind worth sharing, albeit that it’s also an argument that came much later during the last referendum than some may care to remember.

The No campaign’s bastardised version of solidarity only really rolled to the forefront in the final days of 2014’s vote, having mostly taken a backseat to fear, coercion and the occasional warning of threats from outer space courtesy of the then defence secretary Philip Hammond.

The UK may not be what you would consider a fascist or autocratic state (though God knows some in Westminster dream of making it so) but through an objective lens it could hardly be called a wholly democratic union either.

Westminster now seems to view devolved legislation as more of a fanciful hindrance than a constitutional line that cannot be crossed, while forcing us to live under successive Conservative governments that Scotland has rejected at the ballot box since the 1950s.

Recent trends would suggest we’ll have gone through several more Conservative prime ministers before another General Election is in sight. The UK’s democratic report card might as well come with a scribbled “we need to talk” in the corner.

The Yes campaign was always about bringing power and decision-making to a more local level and the Supreme Court’s decision, coupled with the Conservative government’s steadfast refusal to entertain the idea of a referendum only entrenches the notion of Scotland as a nation treated with contempt. While we are told that “now is not the time” and painted as Trumpian by the likes of Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton, the truth is that the real opposition to a second referendum does not come from truly believing the constitutional question is settled or that the United Kingdom’s political framework is functioning well.

It comes from a little voice deep in the gut that tells opponents of a democratic vote on the future of Scotland that they will lose. And if we really want to talk about Trumpian politics, there can be no greater example of that than trying to block, undermine and rail against a legitimate vote because you know you won’t like the outcome.

While Cole-Hamilton drones on about having been elected to oppose a referendum, he seems wholly blind to the successive elections and council ballots that have returned a pro-independence majority. There is a mandate, if not for independence itself, then to have the right to take that question back to the people.

READ MORE: Nigel Farage holds secret meeting with northern English Tory MPs

It seems to me that opposition to such a principle should sit uneasily with anyone who would use the words “liberal” and “democrat” to describe themselves.

Big picture – Scotland’s independence movement has always concerned itself with questions on the legitimacy of the United Kingdom’s political structure that have been less “who” and “where” and more of a “how”. How did you come to be making these decisions? How were you elected to that position? How much did you spend on golden wallpaper and how did you get the money?

The “family of nations” schtick is kaput. We can’t pretend the United Kingdom is a big, happy family while any part of it is told in no uncertain terms that it will not be allowed to even consider leaving. We have something more akin to a bully repeatedly screaming “stop hitting yourself” than to a relationship built on trust and respect.

I do not believe that there is any level of support for independence that will ever be enough for the Conservatives – or other hardline Unionists – that would lead to them agreeing to a referendum. If every man, woman and non-binary person in Scotland stood together and spoke in a single voice that we wanted independence, our undemocratic overlords would still find an excuse to deny us a vote on our future.

And that alone is a good enough reason to say that the push for independence is a movement for democracy in Scotland … just as it was in 2014.