The View from No Man’s Land
Do your care more about beating nationalists or beating nationalism?
There is a pretty redundant argument in progressive politics about how win elections. We’ve heard it on both sides of the Atlantic. One group of activists say the way to win is to mobilise people who do not normally vote but who are inclined to agree with you. The other side believe you get twice the value from converting undecided voters who are won by you and lost to your opponents. Of course, electoral coalitions are made up of both a ‘core’ vote and a ‘swing’ vote. Good electoral strategy is about deciding the right division of campaign resources between these groups.
Across the world, with the creation of partisan echo chambers online, parties and campaigners have found it more difficult to build strategy around the people in the middle. This is especially true in the Scottish constitutional debate. Two noisy tribes are shelling each other on identity issues while, in between, trapped in no man’s land, the undecided voters and the issues they care about are lost in the smoke.
I made this point in an interview this week to Times Radio about what we got right and what we got wrong in the Better Together campaign.
In 2014 we knew from in-depth polling, and frankly from talking to anyone at a bus stop, that the core voters on each side were both extremely likely to vote and extremely unlikely to change their minds. That meant the trade off between core and swing voters didn’t exist. In Better Together we put all our effort into talking to the voters in the middle. At the risk of torturing the metaphor, it meant that we took friendly fire from some who didn’t understand why we weren’t dug-in with them, talking about the identity issues they cared about.
The question anyone who wants to remain in the UK needs to ask themselves is are you more interested in pounding away at your opponents than you are winning the territory in the middle? It’s important to answer this honestly because it determines who wins the argument.
They Created a Monster
Two things made me think about this over the last few days.
The first is watching the SNP being devoured by the online monsters they created. For those of us who begged that party for years to do something about the hate and misinformation spewing from their activists, it is infuriating to see SNP politicians suddenly care about abuse when they are on the receiving end.
In the week when the SNP civil war reached the pages of the New York Times, we saw much handwringing from the pro-Sturgeon camp about typically appalling content from the Bath-based blogger Wings Over Scotland. For years he has aimed the most appalling abuse against pro-Union figures until, like Donald Trump, he was permanently banned from Twitter, reportedly for repeated violations of its Hateful Conduct Policy.
Every political party has its ugly fringes. All of us have shared news items from sources whose politics we don’t agree with. However, it is important to understand that those who now condemn the hatred consciously created it. Scores of SNP politicians promoted Wings Over Scotland for years, turning a blind eye to the abuse and misinformation. The entire SNP machine promoted it and the official Yes campaign devoted human and financial resource to directing millions of voters to the site labelling it a more trusted source of news than mainstream media. The SNP’s Chief Whip even went door to door delivering materials for the site, while wearing a silver pin badge with the site’s logo.
There is no question that SNP created this monster, they have a responsibility to fix the damage it has wrought.
If you doubt that this matters consider that the site is now the main source of news for civil servants in Scotland! Given the enormous effort her party went to create this platform for disinformation and hatred, Nicola Sturgeon should go on the record to say clearly that the site not a credible source of news, and that nobody who shares or endorses its bile is welcome in her party. Her bi-annual pledges to get tough on online abuse, followed by complete inaction, aren’t good enough. Like Labour and anti-Semitism, the test is whether she is willing to expend political capital on putting the offenders out of your party en mass. And like Keir Starmer, she should apologise to those who have been on the receiving end of the hatred coming from within her ranks.
As we watch what should be the series finale of the Cybernats, we should view it as a warning of what happens when you start to see your opponents as enemies. The SNP choose not to see the ugliness, or worse they simply thought it justified because they see us as traitors. Far too late the SNP realised the damage that an ugly and aggressive fringe does to their cause. Those who care about staying in the UK shouldn’t make the same mistakes.
There’s an element of ‘when they go low, we go high’ to this. Even if, when confronted with abuse and disinformation, you feel like responding in kind, it is smarter politics not to. Being the reasonable and rational ones is a tactical advantage that we should hold onto. When the screeching fury chimps (copyright Euan McColm) start throwing their faeces, picking it up and throwing it back only leaves you covered in filth too.
I’ve taken flak for challenging sexist language used to attack Nicola Sturgeon; or for distancing the official No campaign from fringe groups; or for fighting racism in my own party. I do this because it’s wrong, but it’s also because it’s stupid. Those undecided voters judge your cause not just on what you say but on how you say it. In 2014 our voter research found undecided voters were weary of the atmosphere of hostility that surrounded the referendum. Those of us who oppose dividing people shouldn’t act in a divisive manner.
If you see members of your political party engaged in abusive language, take responsibility and report them. Even if they’re not members of your party, you should still challenge bad behaviour when you see it. And take responsibility for your own behaviour: with every engagement, ask yourself whether you are more interested in fighting nationalists or defeating nationalism.
Dey Terk Er Fleg!
The other thing that brought these issues to mind this week is the story that the SNP have issued guidance that the Union flag should only be flown around Remembrance Sunday. This story is so obviously a trap. It is an attempt to get us to stop talking about the things that win the constitutional debate for those that want to remain in the UK (the economy) and to fight about the things that lose it for us (choosing identity). We see similar tactics from the Conservatives in their transparent War on Woke, which is about trying to lure the Labour Party down a dead-end alley.
Like all traps the important thing is not to spring it. It is worth noting though that the SNP have given up on the pretence that feeling British is compatible with an independence Scotland. The attempt to co-opt British identity into the Yes narrative had hilarious results in 2014, most of all from political Bungalow Pete Wishart. From ranting that:
“as Scotland moves forward to become a normal independent nation, all vestiges of Britishness will go… I have never felt British in my life. I do not even know what Britishness is.”
…he then went on a completely sincere and not at all forced-march to the position that:
“Britishness is one of our many identities and one that will be forever cherished in an independent Scotland.”
Today the pretence has been dropped and they are back talking to their core vote. Stripping flags from poles, banning them from beef, and complaining about seeing them on their telly.
The return to a more exclusive nationalism probably speaks of the need to throw red meat to their own ranks as part of the SNP civil war rather than any smart strategy. Nevertheless, it is a change that distances the SNP from those voters in the middle.
Rather than engaging in British v Scottish identity wars, we should simply point out that it doesn’t need to be a choice. One of the attractive things about the UK is that we are a multi-racial, multinational, tolerant state where people’s identities can be complex and plural. Only a minority in Scotland do not feel at least partly British as well as Scottish. Reducing Britishness to Boris Johnson is as stupid as reducing Scottishness to Alex Salmond. Identity is personal, not political. It should be something beautiful that we define for ourselves rather than bludgeon each other with. Nationalist politicians seek to force a singular and more narrow definition of who we are. A verse from a wonderful poem by Jenny Joseph says it better than I can:
I hope that you will love whatever place you live in
Because you love it, not because commanded
By joyless people gritting their teeth for power;
Welcomed everywhere, and safe enough
To welcome others and like them for their strangeness.
Don’t dig in for the identity wars. The nationalists look ridiculous prioritising flags on mince in the middle of a pandemic, so don’t lower yourself to their level. Point out we don’t need politicians to tell us how to feel, then get back to work calling out the con: they want to fight about flags because they can’t answer basic questions about how we would fund the NHS, what currency we would use, and how the new border with England will cost jobs.
In short: don’t become the thing you’re fighting against.
I said at the outset of this newsletter that I was writing this to organise my own thoughts rather than in the expectation that anyone was especially interested in what rattles around inside my head. So thanks to everyone who has subscribed to and shared this newsletter. It’s been an amazing surprise in a pretty rotten year.
More good stuff from Blair with the sound advice to fight on your territory not your opponents
Can I ask why there is not a published list of failures of a SNP Government? Why is the 15 Billion Deficit not discussed, why is the double figure GDP not discussed, why is not highlighted Scotland has NO Bank or Currency , why is it not highlighted workers in Scotland pay more tax while a long list of freebies are given to people not working ? , why is it not highlighted the real cost to separate and set up an independent Country-,welfare, health, education, how will our pensions be protected, what financial reserve does Scotland actually have. The EU situation is clear to me that Scotland will never meet the requirements to be considered as a member with a 15 Billion deficit and a double figure GDP, also Spain will never vote Scotland in as it has its own internal independence situation... so once again I ask why is this list not published every day before the May Elections??? A final thought, without the UK Furlough payments how would Scotland survive.... jobs , homes, cars, will be lost and bankruptcy is guaranteed