What’s at stake in Scotland?
People in Scotland will vote September 18 on a simple question--"Should Scotland be an independent country?"--with far-reaching implications and effects. The possibility of a "yes" vote for Scotland to become independent of the United Kingdom, which is currently made up of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, seemed distant only a few months ago. But opinion polls show an even split among voters ahead of the election.
The political establishment in England--the ruling Conservative Party of Prime Minister David Cameron; its coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats; and the Labour Party--has pulled out all the stops to persuade and threaten the people of Scotland into voting "no." The Yes campaign is led by the Scottish National Party (SNP), whose leader Alex Salmond is the First Minister of Scotland. The SNP is committed to a neoliberal agenda, but has pledged to protect social welfare programs and challenge militarism if Scotland becomes independent. A vibrant Yes campaign has developed the left of the SNP, viewing the referendum as an opportunity to expand democracy and improve the possibilities for future struggles.
Here, we republish two articles from the Revolutionary Socialism in the 21st Century website. The first, by Pat Smith of the International Socialists Scotland and the Radical Independence Campaign in Edinburgh, was written for the autumn 2014 issue of the rs21 magazine. The second, by Nicholas Cimini, challenges arguments for a "no" vote coming from the left.
Something's going on in Scotland
By Pat Smith | Something quite remarkable is happening in Scotland. Most active socialists in Scotland, outside of the Labour Party, have been involved in the Yes campaign and are re-energized by the mood of hope and optimism. Large numbers of people are engaged in politics in a way we have not seen for a long time.
Of course, independence would not automatically deliver equality and social justice, but I believe that it would give us a better chance to fight for those things.
Westminster governments, both Labour and Tory, have shown the utmost contempt for the poorest and most vulnerable members of our society. Over the last four decades, they have been systematically redistributing wealth from poor people to the rich. We have a chance to reverse this, but this means socialists need to argue for the kind of Scotland we want to see after independence.
Most importantly, Scottish independence would begin the break-up of the UK. Independence would reduce the UK's significance as a world power and its support for U.S. imperialism.
We could stop subsidizing the arms industry, which spreads misery around the world. The SNP is already committed to removing Trident from the Clyde. Scotland would become nuclear-weapon free and save much expenditure in the process. Socialists argue that this has to backed up by also leaving NATO.
Within a few years, Scotland can become self-sufficient in a set of diverse renewable energy sources, and have enough to spare to export. At the same time, Scotland could get rid of its dependence on future imported fossil fuels, and reduce its carbon footprint.
Self-determination and the control of taxation, benefits and government expenditure is an essential condition for creating the more compassionate, fairer, more prosperous, healthier and greener society that the people living in Scotland want for themselves. We don't think that the Scotland we hope to achieve will be won without a struggle. Whatever the result of the referendum the fight for a better Scotland and a better world will continue.
First published at the rs21 website.
Confidence against pessimism
By Nicholas Cimini | In support of a No vote in tomorrow's independence referendum, there are some Labour supporters and others on the left who warn against the dangers of identity politics and Scottish nationalism, stressing the need for unity and solidarity with people in England and Wales. This is an emotionally powerful argument, but not one that stands up to much scrutiny.
This argument turns a blind eye to the ongoing dangers of British nationalism and assumes that a government based in London is some kind of guarantee of international working-class solidarity. The argument also assumes that the working classes in Scotland will inevitably struggle to express their solidarity with people in England and Wales, and presumably also people from elsewhere, from Greenwich to Gaza and Birmingham to Brasilia, unless they have government which is based in London.
These arguments coming from some on the left fit well with the generally pessimistic and cynical tone of much of the rest of the unionist campaign. As Irvine Welsh has suggested, there is more to Scottish people expressing their international solidarity than trudging along to a polling booth once in every five years in order to send a careerist politician down to London, only for them to the cut public services and entrench the kind of anti-trade union laws which have so damaged the ability of the working class to express genuine solidarity.
A related left-wing No argument says that people in Scotland should oppose independence so that people England and Wales aren't lumbered with the Tories. In the absence of Scottish MPs, and in the highly unlikely event that all other things remain the same, it is true that Labour will find it more difficult to get elected in the UK.
Even so, this argument contains several misleading assumptions. First, it assumes there is a practical or theoretical gulf between Labour and the Tories which makes it worthwhile for people in Scotland to forego independence to ensure future Labour victories. Instead of voting for independence, Scottish voters should sit back and wait (for however long) for a left-wing Labour Party to rescue the union. Second, it assumes that voters in Scotland will play a vital role in determining the outcome of UK general elections. In fact, precisely the opposite has historically been true, and most of the time voters in Scotland play no role at all. Getting to grips with this democratic deficit is yet another reason to vote Yes. Third, and perhaps worst of all, the argument also assumes that voters in England and Wales can't be trusted to vote as they should. "England needs saving from itself," seems to be the message. Left to their own devices, the argument suggests that people of England and Wales will fritter-away their futures by voting Tory forevermore. The argument says as much about the pessimism and cynicism of those who make it, and the contempt they have for voters in England and Wales, as it does about electoral system in the UK.
Left-wing No voters are correct insofar as they recognize that independence will not inevitably pave the way towards a socialist utopia. They are also correct insofar as socialists should not place their hope in the SNP. The international working class movement must never forget its true enemy.
However, this mass movement for change has gone beyond what the SNP are able to offer. It's not about passports or ancestral roots--it never really was. It's about political empowerment and ripping up the status quo. No matter how genuinely exciting and encouraging it will be to smash the British state and vote for an alternative to the austerity union, it seems unlikely that independence on the SNP's terms will quench this widespread thirst for change. It's not the SNP's White Paper which has inspired the masses. Nor is it Alex Salmond's commitments to currency union or his business-friendly tax policies. Voters in Scotland have been enfranchised. They've been given a taste of what it feels like to shape their own political futures, and they're hungry for more. The movement for independence has unlocked a widespread sense of political confidence that even "Big Eck" will struggle to control.
Far from sowing the seeds of division and damaging the international working class movement, an independent Scotland has the potential to be a beacon of hope and an inspiration for millions across the globe. This won't be easy, and no sensible Yes voter believes that we'll have socialism, or even a meaningful social democracy, by Friday this week (or any time soon after). What we will have, however, is a widespread sense of political empowerment and a belief that ordinary people can enact change. Anyone who has ever bemoaned a perceived lack of voter engagement would surely welcome this turn of events--and should be extremely anxious about the alternative.
First published at the rs21 website.