͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

Trying to figure out WTF is going on

The wrong kind of 'unity'

Peter A Bell

Apr 3

READ IN APP

If it were possible for the separate political parties to 'unite', they wouldn't be separate. Duh! They are separate because they are different. They are separate because they are incompatible in too many ways for them to be 'united'. Calling for the separate political parties to come together as one demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of the way politics works in the real world. A failure to comprehend the very nature of politics. This may be forgivable in those who take their lead from politicians such as Ash Regan MSP, but not in the politicians doing the misleading.

Politics is the management of power relationships. All human interactions are negotiated transactions conducted in the currency of power. We tend to call it politics only when it is practiced in the area of public policy. But we are all 'doing politics' all the time, even before we're born. Mother and child are effectively host and parasite respectively. It is only by constant negotiation that the two organisms achieve a form of symbiosis.

The kind of 'unity' being suggested by Ash Regan and others involves a far more complex ongoing negotiation than that betwixt mother and child. Extraordinary political skill on the part of numerous politicians would be required if the amalgamation were to persist. Maintaining this 'unity' in the period of an election campaign when everything conspires to drive apart the contesting parties would demand skill beyond the extraordinary. And a huge measure of good fortune!

Bear in mind that the politicians Ash Regan hopes will maintain this 'unity' during an election campaign have difficulty holding their own parties together at the best of times. In government, coalitions of as few as two parties are notoriously frangible. To expect that these same politicians might maintain cohesion among several parties - having first ended the day-to-day feuding amongst them - seems a triumph of hope over evidence and experience.

The form of 'unity' Ash Regan is talking about is so extremely unlikely that we might as well regard it as an impossibility. Achieving it would be difficult enough when there isn't even a basis on which the parties can talk to each other. Even if we can imagine an agreement being reached, who among us can realistically suppose that agreement would survive longer than minutes in the heat of an election campaign?

What almost certainly is achievable is unity of purpose. It is achievable because it doesn't even require that the parties talk to one another. It is sustainable because it involves a common purpose set apart from all the matters which are the subject of dispute among parties. This purpose must be singular and specific and immutable, the better to exclude all contentious issues.

Better Together worked because the parties involved had a single common purpose that stood apart from all the things that give each of the parties a jealously guarded distinct identity. We may dispute the distinctiveness of those identities. We cannot deny that they are jealously guarded. Unity of purpose allowed the British parties to simultaneously work towards achieving that purpose without compromising their distinct identities.

There is no reason, other than than the self-serving and partisan stupidity of the politicians, that the nominally pro-independence parties can't achieve similar unity of purpose. All that is required is a suitable purpose. 'Independence' falls far short of being as specific as the purpose needs to be. The purpose must be as narrowly defined as possible so it can be isolated from all the issues on which parties compete in an election battle.

In addition, the purpose should be defined by a third party. In theory, the political parties might negotiate an agreed purpose. In practice, it is not going to happen, for the same reasons simply 'unity' is not going to happen. (Or cannot be relied on. Which comes to the same thing.)

This is where the Manifesto for Independence comes in. As a process by which to restore Scotland's independence, the Manifesto for Independence is something any genuine pro-independence party should be able to associate themselves with quite comfortably. It is a radical process, that is true. But it has to be. Nothing else works.

The parties don't have to meet. They don't have to talk to each other. There is no negotiating involved. So, there is no opportunity to fall out or to so burden the purpose with compromises, caveats, and conditions as to make it meaningless. All the parties need do is take the Manifesto for Independence as is and publish it as the first page of their election manifesto. Thus, a vote for any of these parties is a vote for that commitment and we have the binary factor that is required for a plebiscite. A further benefit is that it removes party-politics from the constitutional issue.

Ash Regan is on a fool's errand if she continues to pursue any kind of 'amalgamation' of the nominally pro-independence parties. Politicians only ever want negotiations when they find reason to suppose there is benefit to be gained by the individual and/or advantage for their party. If they were prioritising Scotland's cause they would have found unity of purpose long before now. They have maybe six months to sort themselves out. You can give them some 'encouragement' by signing and sharing the Manifesto for Independence Petition.

(Note that although the petition is hosted on the New Scotland Party website, it is inherently and self-evidently non-party-political. New Scotland Party has no plans to stand candidates in the 2026 Scottish Parliament Election. New Scotland Party will only stand candidates where doing so clearly serves Scotland's cause.)

Take back our government! Take back our parliament! Take back our nation!

Start here -