Why saying No Thanks is the progressive option.
This is a golden time for democracy in Scotland. The media, the airwaves are full of political debate but more than that, the whole nation is debating what we should do next. Who wouldn’t want that new democratic passion to be spread wider than Scotland’s borders?
That’s a real question. It appears that many progressive people will be satisfied by a vote that would result in our turning our backs on much that is wrong in the UK and being thus unable to help put it right. How much more progressive to grasp the momentum and press for change in the whole of the UK.
It is good that we debate whether we are a caring society. It is good that there are people in Scotland interested in addressing the plight of the poor. However, progressive people don’t just exist on one side of this argument and those in need don’t just exist on one side of the border. There is a pressing case for staying together as a country and using the energies of this referendum debate to fuel new political movements to address all that is wrong in society. I care as much about the poor in Carlisle as I care about the poor in Carluke. I care as much about the NHS in Preston as I do about the NHS in Perth. I care as much about job creation in Sunderland as much as I care about job creation in Stirling. I want all to prosper and want my MP to fight not only for my interests but for the common good of all in the UK, forming alliances with other progressive politicians to bring about a fairer, better and more economically stable society.
But just because I’m going to vote No, that doesn’t mean I don’t want change. I long for change – real change for the whole of the UK and the only way to still be able to influence the change I hope for is to say No Thanks to separation.
I want a more federal UK. Lots of people do. The only way to be sure it will never ever happen is to say Yes to separation from the rest of the UK.
It isn’t simply more devolution that is needed for Scotland – we need something much more radical. If devolution has been good for Scotland then it will be good for England too. A federal system within a strong, united economy would bring not only the best for me but also the best for those most in need. Separation will not bring about devo-max – it is a rejection of that. Separation would bring about austerity-plus, damaging economic recovery not only in Scotland but throughout the other parts of the UK. And when austerity is the dominant theme of the economic cycle it seems to me that those who are poor and vulnerable tend to come out of things worse that those at the top of the pile, no matter who is in government.
I want a renewed democracy that is UK-wide. I want a new commitment to the vulnerable that is UK-wide. I want progressive people to be running a progressive economy that is UK-wide. And the greatest risk to what I hope for comes from those who believe it can never happen. As someone who was involved close to the beginning of the recent campaign to allow gay couples to get married, I know that the greatest trouble comes not from opponents but from those who say, “I’m on your side but it will never happen”. Real change in society is desirable and possible. The energy of the referendum campaign shows, like the energy surrounding the gay marriage campaigns, just how passionate people can become over things that they care about.
As a priest, I care about people and I care about society. For me, I can’t see those who are vulnerable anywhere in Scotland doing well in a society that has such an unstable economic beginning as that proposed by the Yes campaign who still can’t answer even the most basic questions about currency and long term debt.
Those who are arguing for a Yes vote sometimes speak as though it is the only option for political progressives. I want change in the UK and the changes I want can only be achieved by saying Thanks, but No Thanks – my ambition for reform is far greater than what is currently proposed.
Who wouldn’t want real progressive change in society to be for everyone in the UK? Who would want to turn their back on being able to bring positive influence to bear for the many and not just the Caledonian few.
For all these reasons – it is No Thanks from me.
Spot on, Kelvin. Well said.
The Referendum Debate is a YES NO option and whilst I fully agree with your aspirations I totally disagree with you as to how we acheive them. I beleive that the best way to sort this country and make it a better place for everyone is for the people of Scotland to vote YES for independence. That dosent mean we turn our backs on the rUK rather it means we can lead by example, show that there is a better fairer way. Its a YES please for me.
It’s a hard call. I’m voting YES. All our politicians will be nearer to get at. It also gives the work of the likes of commonweal, and other think tanks the opportunity to be put into practice. I want to support the many thoughtful and energetic young people, who are engaged in matters of social justice and political process, to put their vision into practice.
When new pillar boxes appeared bearing EIIR, there was much scraping of the extra 1. Scraping cast iron pillar boxes was but a symbolic gesture, but at least now all pillar boxes have only ER inscribed on them.
Here’s to a more just and creative future
My MSP and MP share an office 5 minutes from where I live. I don’t find either of then difficult to get hold off even if they are in far off Edinburgh or London.
The NHS in Perth is already not the same NHS as that in Preston. I, for one, am quite glad that, should I need blood plasma, it would not to have to be bought back from a foreign private equity firm.
It’s all very well wanting the best for everyone on the island but the evidence is that Westminster does not reciprocate (“desolate wasteland”), is not the way to achieve it (ignorance in parliamentary debate and increasing bias toward the already-rich) and is getting worse by the quarter (fracking); further, significant political change proceeds slower when it takes the form of a UK-wide choice (proportional representation).
It’s a game of pin the appropriate government form on the scale and position of the entity. It’s also a chance to vote now for an opportunity. It is not the case that England will be left out, but rather, the nature of crossing the border changes from an issue of sovereignty to one of trade – which seems to me an improvement.
Couln’t agree more, Kelvin.
I have been vacillating between, obviously, YES/NO. I lived in London for 30 years, returning to Inverness initially, in 2009, I have moved to Dingwall, as I was doing an access course in theology. The one thing that gets me is that everyone is convinced by the “free” education. However in England I did pay a bit, and I could enrol on as many courses as I wanted to. This is just one of the confusing aspects of the different ways the two countries do something. Adult Education is a very important part of people’s lives.
God’s blessings to everyone
Totally right, Kelvin, totally right.
Nothing’s going to change for people in England or Scotland if we just sit on our hands and wait for milliband to save us.
Our UK is in a terrible state, poverty and hatred are on the rise, and we have a chance to cause the biggest disruption to the British State since the empire disintegrated in the twentieth century.
And the people you are aligning yourself with on this one Kevin? The tories, the orange lodge, the plutocrats, the BNP, the UKIP, the so-called “Scottish” Labour Party, John Barrowman…
Are you sure you’re on the right side here?
So, are you saying Kelvin should rather align himself with Brian Souter and Rupert Murdoch? Are you sure you are on the right side?
It really is not on to generalise yes and no voters. Yes, there are porpgressives who will vote yes. But there are progressives who will vote no, just like Kelvin and I. And I for one believe we are on the right side.
Scotland’s twin problems of alcoholism and class-based language politics are enabled by a national low self-esteem caused in turn by the very paternalist colonial mindset (and accompanying material culture) which this blog post does nothing to challenge and everything to promote. Colonialism is structural sin and should be repented of, not encouraged. Ironically, one of the roots of the English conflation of England/Britain is the successful Welsh propaganda which served to establish the royal House of Tudor and another the Union of Crowns. So I am asked by my English cousins whether Scotland will join the Commonwealth, forgetting the historical fact that the UK monarchy is firstly Scottish. Unionist parties have ever shown their twisted crummochs North of the border around election time to demonstrate their commitment to the status quo, supported by Scottish votes, then it’s British (English) big business as usual when they’re elected. We want Trident out, we want our children proud of all three official languages of this nation and we want them to know why we resisted being compared to another English county by forces of reaction in need of consciencization. Saor Alba a nis! I’m voting AYE.
I agree with Cliff Piper. This is a good post, but I believe it lacks the attainable vision I have voted for. And you don’t mention Trident, and the subs that sail past my window and against which I have campaigned for over 30 years.
OK. I don’t think that Trident would be any different morally if it were in Portsmouth than in the Clyde. Is that any help?
But all the signs are that the good people of Portsmouth and Devonport don’t want the subs in their backyards ‘cos they’re too dangerous. There’s a fighting chance (sorry!) that we’d get rid of the things altogether. I have to hope that, and that’s what my vote is in hope of.