The key to winning a long-term political battle is to
control the narrative. In this language is crucial. Scottish nationalists know
this, for which reason they continually strive to avoid being called
nationalists. They hate being described as trying to break up the UK. They
don’t even want to say that they hope that Scotland will leave the UK. All of
these things are perceived as negative, for which reason the whole SNP emphasis
is on something positive. Independence.
There are limits to how much we can change the words
in a debate. If I could do one thing it would be to take away from Scottish
nationalism the word independence. When we leave school, get a job, marry, and
set up home, we become independent. It’s a positive step in our development.
But independence was part of the referendum question
in 2014 “Should Scotland be an independent country?” I have always thought the
question grotesquely unfair. Not only did the SNP have the advantage of
campaigning for Yes. It had the advantage of campaigning for Scotland being a
country, which almost everyone thinks it already is and being something
positive “independent”.
It may be too late to completely kick the word
“independence” out of the debate, but we can try to modify the use of this word
and others.
Above all never adopt language which our opponents
have invented to portray us in a negative light.
Muscular Unionist
This term was obviously invented by people hostile to
the Pro UK argument. It is supposed to remind us of Muscular Christianity.
Muscular Unionist is similarly a term of ridicule. The aim is to make Pro UK
people appease Scottish nationalism and to prevent us arguing that the UK is a
unitary nation state just like any other. Any attempt to assert the unity of
the UK or to limit the powers of devolution is portrayed as Muscular Unionism.
Winning elections against the SNP is indeed too muscular. We must be weak
instead.
Unionist
I never describe myself as a unionist. The term
unionist in British politics invariably referred historically to the union with
Ireland. This was contentious for which reason parties in Northern Ireland call
themselves unionist. The Conservative party sometimes referred to itself as
unionist too, but this was about Ireland not about Scotland. The term unionist has the negative
connotations of men in bowler hats and orange sashes and the Troubles. This has
nothing to do with me.
Union
I never describe the United Kingdom as a Union or the
Union. The Act of Union of 1707 created the Kingdom of Great Britain. This was
a merger of England and Scotland, just like the merger of Castile and Aragon
and any number of other mergers in Europe. To call the UK a Union rather the
result of a union implies that the parts that were united still exist and are
held together by a union. This is to concede the argument to the Scottish
nationalist. It says that the UK is a sort of confederation like the EU made up
of countries. But in that case these countries would already be independent,
which again concedes the argument. To describe the UK as a union is to conflate
the union (marriage of England and Scotland) with the result of the union (the baby,
the Kingdom of Great Britain). The UK is not an equal union, because it is not a union at all.
Four nations
Don’t describe the UK as being made up of four nations
or four countries. No one is doubting that Scotland is commonly called a
country, but its true status is that of a region of the UK. Real countries are sovereign
nation states like France. If Scotland is like France, then it already is
independent. Instead, the UK is made up of places that used to be independent
countries, which happen to be still called countries and which happen to play
international sport. But none of this changes the reality. Formerly independent
countries being part of countries is commonplace in Europe. All of these places
are regions. Only members of the UN and other international bodies are really
countries.
Yoon
This term gets an immediate and automatic block from
me on Twitter. It is an attempt to come up with an equally negative equivalent
of “Nat”. I am not a unionist. I don’t believe there is a union, and I won’t
allow myself to be referred to by a misspelled abbreviation of this term. Above
all don’t adopt this term about yourself.
Brit Nat
The concept of British nationalism is an attempt to
come up with an equally negative equivalent of Scottish nationalism. It is
applied to all Pro UK people. So, it refers to Mr Tomkins even if he thinks he
is moderate and is friendly with people who support the SNP. There is nothing
nationalistic about wishing to maintain the territorial integrity of the nation
state in which you live. If that were the case then the word nationalist would
refer to the inhabitants of every country, which would make it cease to be
useful. The only context in which British nationalism makes sense is when it is
applied to the far right. So, they are calling us fascists when they call us
this. There are two varieties of nationalism. One wishes to secede (Scottish)
while another wishes to join with someone else (Irish). British people want to
do neither so to call us nationalists is either false or offensive.
Yes
There is no Yes movement. Nor are there Yes supporters
or Yessers. Don’t keep giving them the benefit of Yes. There is no reason to suppose
that a future referendum would have a Yes/No question. It would have a
Remain/Leave question or something similar. Even the nationalists accept this
by arguing for a de facto referendum that wouldn’t have a Yes/No question
because it wouldn’t have a question at all.
rUK
Scotland leaving the UK would destroy the UK. There would
be no Kingdom of Great Britain if Scotland left, so there could not be a United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So don’t say rest of the United
Kingdom (rUK) instead say former United Kingdom, like former Yugoslavia.
Independence
Wherever possible use words like secession, separation
and leaving the UK rather than gaining independence. It may not be possible to
cease using independence completely, but always make clear that it involves
breaking up the UK. It brings home the destructiveness of the SNP’s aims.
Scotland
Don’t be negative about Scotland. We believe in
Scotland just as much as the SNP does. We love Scotland, its symbols and its flag
just as much as the nationalists. We simply prefer Scotland to be part of the
UK. Indeed, this is the only Scotland any of us know. To suppose that the SNP
uniquely believes in Scotland is to suppose that Bavarians disbelieve, dislike
or hate Bavaria, because they are happy for it to be part of Germany.
Nazi
The SNP are not Nazis, nor are independence supporters
fascists. Using these sorts of terms and other forms of abuse makes our side
look bad. Winning the narrative involves us being more polite, more reasonable
and more pleasant than our opponents.
The UK is almost uniquely threated by sub national
nationalism and by the irredentism of a neighbouring state. The reason for this
is as much linguistic as it is historical.
There is no reasonable distinction between the
formerly independent states of Germany and Italy and those in the UK, except
the UK allowed sub national identity to continue long after Scotland, Wales and
England ceased to exist.
Instead of asserting that the UK is a single unitary
nation state, successive British Governments have attempted to appease
nationalists with devolution and the bizarre idea that the UK is in some weird
way a union of four nation states.
No one else in Europe has this problem as the formerly
independent parts that make up European countries are not allowed to maintain a
separate identity as countries from the whole. This invariably enables European
countries to make secession and referendums on the issue illegal without this
being described as undemocratic.
So too the British Government has appeased Irish
nationalism by uniquely in Europe offering Ireland the chance to annex UK
territory by means of referendums. No one thinks that it would be legitimate
for Russia to seize Crimea by means of a referendum. No one thinks that
formerly German Silesia could be given back to Germany by means of a
referendum.
Try reuniting Old Mexico with New Mexico to form a
United Mexico and see what happens.
The UK is unique in the world in allowing its
territorial integrity to be subject to referendums. The reason for this is that
we appeased nationalists rather than asserting that the territorial integrity
of the UK was indivisible, which is what every other country in the world does.
We did this because we accepted the nationalist’s own
language and story about the UK.
It’s very easy to change this. Parliament is
sovereign. Pass a law that forbids both referendums and secession. Make the
existence of devolved parliaments subject to their not being used to further
the destruction of the UK. Tell foreign powers that they will have to win a war
to gain our territory.
If that is too muscular for you, then you no doubt prefer appeasement and weakness, which is the very reason we have a problem with sub national nationalism that no one else does.
I am not a muscular unionist, because I am not a unionist at all.
If you liked this article, then cross my PayPal with silver and soon there will be a new one. See below.
