*Headline modified in light of Twitter comment:
As in Mackay 2020, these two images are in no way connected
IMPORTANT: This controversial thesis by Professor Sandy Nista does not represent the views of the Talking-up Scotland Collective but has been given space here in recognition of our commitment to free speech.
Sandy Nista:
Will the media feeding frenzy on Alex Salmond strengthen the Independence movement?
Last year, when the accusations against Alex Salmond were first publicised, there were clear expectations in the establishment media, that this would weaken support for the SNP and even for the wider movement. In the opinion polls which followed, support seemed unaffected with a run of around 10 polls suggesting support holding solid at 40 to 43%. Then, as time passed and the December 2019 election loomed, support climbed into the 45 to 50% range. The result can hardly be characterised as having been damaged by the events around one man, the former leader.
The scandal around the Finance Secretary in early 2020 also seemed to have no negative effect and perhaps some signs of increasing support in polls.
Is it possible that the media bombardment of, especially, popular leaders, can actually strengthen support far less weaken it? We’ll see evidence we can trust in upcoming polls and, of course in the Holyrood 2012 Election.
A theoretical basis for this kind of thinking might be found in events perhaps less obviously comparable.
Now, just as referring to Hitler or the Nazis is considered a sign of defeat, so comparing the character assassination of Alex Salmond to the actual assassination of Osama bin Laden is a risky one. However, I can find no academic source on the effects of mere character assassination of democratic leaders but two papers on the effects of real assassination of leaders, on the popularity and survival of terrorist movements. Bear with me.
In Why Terrorist Groups Survive Decapitation Strikes by Jenna Jordan:
Applying a theory of organizational resilience, I examine why targeting al-Qaida’s leadership is not an effective counterterrorism strategy and, indeed, is likely counterproductive. A terrorist group’s ability to withstand attacks is a function of two factors: bureaucratization and communal support.
Bureaucratized terrorist groups are diversified, have a clear division of administrative responsibilities and functions, follow rules and procedures, and are thus more likely to withstand the sudden removal of a leader or leaders
Terrorist organizations with high levels of both bureaucracy and communal support should be able to survive attacks on their leadership and carry out retaliatory attacks in response to decapitation. Leaders matter less in these cases, and it is easier for an organization to regroup and rebuild after having undergone such attacks.
https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ISEC_a_00157
In Attacking Leaders Directly from the Rand Corporation:
Indeed, experience shows that direct leadership attacks are usually unsuccessful and, even when successful, rarely produce the effects intended. Moreover, some leadership attacks can be catastrophically counterproductive.
Ed: Readers with superior research skills to Sandy are asked to find and to suggest more relevant studies of the effects of character assassination of democratic leaders on movements.
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
I’m not sure of any literature on the results of character assassination, or real assassination, but it is always a risk that those that are picked on will reach martyrdom – Julian Assange has certainly suffered at the hands of character assassination, treated like a dangerous criminal – with no charges against him – how could you get away with such a thing? The court of public opinion allows it? Will he reach martyrdom? I suspect the results are not always what might be desired anyway.
Here is an interesting campaign – to pardon and apologise to all the Scottish witches condemned in centuries past. A good demonstration of how laws are not always in the citizens’ best interests:
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/news-and-events/legal-news/qc-launches-justice-campaign-for-scotlands-witches/
The first few paragraphs:
“A campaign seeking justice for thousands of people in Scotland who were convicted of witchcraft in past centuries and executed, has been launched by a senior advocate to mark International Women’s Day.
Claire Mitchell QC wants a legal pardon to be given to those, predominantly women, who were condemned under the Witchcraft Act 1563, and a national monument in their memory. She is appealing to the public to support her “Witches of Scotland” campaign, and to help bring about an apology like that given to the victims of the trials in the 1690s in Salem, Massachusetts.
The Witchcraft Act remained in force until 1736, and an estimated 3,837 people – about 84% of them women – were accused of witchcraft, a capital crime. Around 2,600 people are thought to have been executed, by being strangled and then burned at the stake, so as to leave no body for burial. People were locked up awaiting trial and tortured, often in public, to confess.
Public feeling was heightened by King James VI of Scotland, who was obsessed with witchcraft and attended witch trials. ”
On a completely separate note, having been keeping an eye on live Twitter reporting on the Salmond trial, it appears the defence is coming at it from the stance of there may be ulterior motives to bringing forward the allegations – establishing ambition and possible political motivation from the first witness. I’m not judging anyone or anything on this, and these sort of trials are fairly awful (not that any criminal trial is pleasant!), but I was fairly surprised, after a hint and an accident, by realising who one witness might be.
LikeLike
Who? Who!!??
LikeLike
Hah, you should have been paying attention then eh? It’s only a guess anyway as I was skim reading, and see below!
LikeLike
Did I get my email address wrong in the last reply? My device is playing up again, and I can’t see what I type!
LikeLike
Please note that I fully support all witnesses and alleged victims remaining anonymous in trials of a sensitive nature: they are not truly anonymous within the court, and there is no reason we need to know identities when they could be at risk from various kinds of abuse. Even if it can appear on the surface that there might be alternative motivations for making allegations, we can’t know that or presume the effect isn’t real.
LikeLike
Do you support revealing the accusers names if the accused is not found guilty ?
LikeLike
No.
See my reply to your other question on the article Terence.
LikeLike
Jesus of Nazareth was persecuted and reviled by the state before his execution. Look what happened to the movement then for 2000 years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh. It’s okay, it’s just disappearing my comments randomly. Bl**dy technology. Or is that; maybe its about I upgraded my OLD technology?! I could rant for hours about our throwaway society, and how we are forced into consumerism, then blamed for wrecking the planet – governments need to bring in regulations! They need to force companies to ensure minimum 10 to 50 year lifespans on any hardwear.
LikeLike
Woah! Wot! Slow down! Emai you say? Looking now
LikeLike
No email there
LikeLike
No, sorry, just meant putting my name in to post comment – it you that’s going too fast, my device is disappearing comments that I have just posted & stuff. That was swift and relevant headline writing you did there!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Swift yes relevant maybe
LikeLike