Trying to figure out WTF is going on It is a foolish generalisation to suggest as the comment in The National pictured above and quoted below does, that all those "clamouring for UDI as a route to Scottish Independence" ignore the need to demonstrate majority support. Those supporting the #ScottishUDI plan certainly don't discount the need for democratic legitimacy. As anyone who has taken the minimal trouble to inform themselves will be aware, the main purpose of the #ScottishUDI process is to enable the full and proper exercise of our right of self-determination in a proper constitutional referendum. It is the nominally pro-independence parties who have no proposals for a proper constitutional referendum.
Another benefit of the #ScottishUDI plan is that it will all but certainly bring about a sustained increase in support for the restoration of independence as indicated by polls. To see why this is, one requires a much more sophisticated understanding of the situation than is in evidence among Scotland's nominally pro-independence politicians. Or, for that matter, among most of those commenting on the constitutional issue. The 'received wisdom' is that there is a pool of 'soft NOs' out there who will be won over to YES by selling post-independence Scotland as if it was a holiday destination. All that is required is more 'gentle persuasion'. The theory goes that, if the Scottish Government is perceived to be making devolution work well for Scotland, this will convince more people that devolution needs to end, and independence be restored. If that seems illogical, it's because it is. But this is electioneering rhetoric we're talking about. It doesn't have to make sense in a real-world context. It just has to sound good. The theory goes that, if the Scottish Government is perceived to be making devolution work well for Scotland, this will convince more people that devolution needs to end, and independence be restored. If that seems illogical, it's because it is. The reality is that there is no pool of 'soft NOs'. There may be a few scattered around. But not sufficient mass to be a viable target of a political campaign. All the 'soft NOs' were captured in the campaign for the 2014 referendum. It was a campaign strategy designed to pluck the low-hanging fruit. The trouble is, there was no second or third phase strategy. Or to be more precise, there was such a phased strategy formulated by the Yes Scotland team led by Ian Dommett. But the SNP leadership - Nicola Sturgeon - chose to ignore the experts they'd hired to manage the campaign. We know how that worked out. (Ex-Yes Scotland director: SNP were biggest contributor to our failure - The National, 14 May 2023) The 5 to 10 points the YES side needs to gain will have to come from elsewhere. The hard-line Unionist faction can be discounted. There is nothing that will bring them into the light. Which leaves two broadly defined groups:
Neither of these groups is susceptible to the 'gentle persuasion' favoured by the nominally pro-independence parties. The disenchanted have heard it all literally thousands of times but have seen no progress towards that delightful holiday destination. The destination sounds great. But since the spivs selling it can't explain how they'll get there, people have simply lost interest. What will get them interested is action. Or at least, a commitment to action. Not some vague promise of something maybe coming along sometime in the future. A solid commitment to specific action within a defined timeframe. Conveniently, this same strategy of walking the walk and not just talking the talk will also be effective as part of a strategy to engage the disaffected - who are disaffected largely because they feel they can't change anything. A commitment to decisive action may not be enough on its own to persuade the disaffected they should participate in the democratic process. But it is certain that no strategy with this aim can succeed if the disaffected don't see it demonstrated that participation can have an effect. An additional line of attack will be needed if the disaffected are to supply some of those 5 to 10 points. Bold action may seize their attention. But they will still need motivation. They will not be motivated by smooth words or politicians' promises. They will need to be given something to react against (the Union) as well as reason to believe that it is possible to effect change. They will have to be roused to anger. The campaign must seek to wake the rebel that slumbers in their minds. The Manifesto for Independence being adopted by the nominally pro-independence parties could be the action need to recover the disenchanted. The Manifesto for Independence Petition could be the demonstration of 'people power' that encourages the disaffected to believe they can make a difference. The combination of the two, when combined with a well-designed communication campaign, will bring in the needed points. You're currently a free subscriber to Peter A Bell. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment