Scottish independence and progressivism
Scottish independence and progressivism
PATRICK Harvie has ruled out the Scottish Greens taking part in an independence convention with Alba ...
Any Scottish users on board yet? I'm curious to discuss Scottish issues but maybe setting out my stall on a UK instance and community already poisons the conversation!
Anyway my question is whether the link between left leaning and progressive politics and Scottish independence can persist. My YES voting friends and relatives see indy as a way to see meaningful policy change because Westminster has failed to deliver progressive governments (not clear exactly how they square away the Corbyn near miss but assume here they view Blair/Starmer as "red tory"). But elsewhere in the west nationalism is closely tied to right wing economics and regressive social policy. With the rise of the Alba party are we seeing cracks in this leftist perception of indy or will it die down?
You're viewing a single thread.
I’m Scottish, and my answer to your question would be yes. Scottish people tend to be more progressive than English, and one of the primary driving forces behind the Scottish independence movement is because the UK Parliament is considerably more conservative than Scottish people would like, and therefore it holds back progress.
I don’t think that support of Scottish independence automatically makes one a nationalist.
Westminster is obviously deeply flawed and I can’t see any way for it to change, it’s a two party system entirely captured by the ruling class and basically functions as some sort of democracy theatre. That’s why I support Scottish independence, because I would like to live in a more equitable society.
Couldn't agree more, I always hear people try to frame it as some sort of hatred for the English but I've never felt this way. I'm not nationalistic at all, not a flag waver for anybody but I'd like a government that acts in the interest of the public and not in their donors interests. We have a choice between the tories who have presided over a long period of austerity, stripping public services and labour who don't seem to know who they are anymore, any progressive policy seems to be walked back for fear of upsetting the right wing voters.
Agree, I didn't have high expectations for Starmer and he's falling short of them. Just wish we'd been given a chance to see a Corbyn government.
Thanks for your 2c. I have scottish family who would agree with all of that. It's an interesting one for me, because progressive change in the intact UK and a prosperous progressive independent Scotland are both just hypotheticals, and I've seen either side call the other naive for believing them respectively.
For me what keeps me pro-union is that I believe the outcome for rUK matters too, despite living in Scotland and planning to try to stay post indy. If the chance of progressive change in the UK seems remote now it would be surely vanishing without Scotland.
I note your answer didn't acknowledge the existence of rightwing nationalism in Scotland or any impact it might have. I hope (but doubt) it indeed doesn't need mentioning.
I mean, you’re right in that any future outcomes aren’t known, but one only needs to look at recent events to get an idea of the differences between Scottish and UK politics - Scottish Parliament passed legislation to allow transgender people to change the gender on their birth certificate without the need for a GRC, with cross-party support. And then that legislation was blocked by the UK Parliament because of transphobia. The UK government has outlawed protest. I mean, come on.
I absolutely agree that the outcome for the whole of the UK matters, I really have great sympathy for other British people who would still be subject to Westminster after Scotland becomes independent, but I can’t ethically hold the same position as you do. It’s clear to me that there is no way to change the system from within the system - due to two party politics, FPTP, media influence and regulatory capture, etc. - so the only way to change the system would be revolution which is probably decades away, and if Scotland leaves the UK, that isn’t going to delay that - if anything, having a neighbouring nation doing better as a reference may make that process happen sooner.
Additionally, if you have the option to reduce the suffering of over 5 million people and the trade off is that those 5 million people wouldn’t be able to vote in a system that would never represent their wishes, I think that choosing to continue that suffering is unjustified.
Of course right wing nationalism exists in Scotland, as it does everywhere, but right now, right wing nationalists control the UK government, and right wing nationalists in Scotland are a complete minority with little or no influence. Alba party has less support than even the Scottish Green Party. I don’t see why anyone should assume the worst when there is plenty of evidence that an independent Scotland would be significantly more progressive. It already uses a proportional voting system which puts it light years in front of Westminster imo.
I can't agree that revolution is the only possibility for change. The Corbyn platform included lords reform and they were seriously contending a GE. Totally agree with your diagnosis of the problem with Westminster though.
If anything, the whole chain of events around Corbyn assured me completely and utterly of the fact that revolution is the only way forward.
Here was an honest and trustworthy politician with years of experience and many dedicated supporters, with very popular policies (polling showed that people supported the policies) in opposition to one of the least popular governments at the time.
If it was possible for change to happen, that’s when it would have happened.
Instead, he was torn down and sabotaged by his own party and subjected to outrageous propaganda in the press.
Wake up. Democracy is a smokescreen for the ruling class. The outcome of our elections are determined before the first vote is cast.