Prof Lindsay Paterson is in the Sunday National today with research presumably rejected by his usual chums at the Herald, Scotsman or Times but reported by Judith Duffy.
Scottish independence ‘not going away’ according to major analysis
It’s good, really really good and most encouraging for the Yes movement.
With Alasdair Galloway (below) I read it with a confused mind. Regulars will know I have debunked Paterson’s always critical analysis of educational affairs such as attainment data and gaps therein. His reading of the data is always very gloomy and blames SNP ministers for that. He’s a numbers guy who arrived in an Education Faculty as a bean counter but then worked his way up to Education prof despite never having worked in schools, colleges or in higher education teaching. That gap in his experience may explain his inability to contextualise properly the beans he counted.
Anyhow over to Alasdair Galloway:
Lindsay Paterson often gets a hostile press on Talking Up Scotland, but, perhaps on the basis that even a stopped clock is right twice a day, reading the article in this morning’s National about his latest piece of work (Scottish independence ‘not going away’ according to major analysis | The National) will bring a positive return, even if only to make you feel more optimistic about the longer term.
Perhaps the key takeaway is this
““long-term trends suggest that the level of support for independence, and of opposition to it, are unlikely to be affected strongly or permanently by the transient fortunes of the SNP” and that “there will be a stable majority for independence which will go above 60% by the early 2030s”
What leads Paterson to argue this way? There are several reasons.
First he disputes the idea that Scottish Nationalism is another version of the populism of which Trump is a prime example. That it is “ it is a rebellion by what is sometimes called the ‘left behind’ against elites”. Paterson is clear we have to look elsewhere for the explanation. Instead he argues (perhaps not surprisingly) that the explanation lies in the expansion of education in the second half of the 20th century, specifically that “the core of the independence supporting electorate now are well-educated, liberal-minded graduates and that makes quite a different sort of social movement from, say, the National Rally party in France.”
A more educated population tends to be more liberal and tolerant of diversity, and therefore the trend in the Scottish parliament for an emphasis on protection of minorities and human rights generally is notable, as it suggests “more educated electorate seem to see the way forward for that more liberal agenda as being an independent Scottish state rather than continuing within the British Union.” Therefore, an independent Scotland and a better, fairer Scotland are linked with each other – support for independence is founded in it producing the kind of society we want to live in, but see little prospect of remaining in the UK.
One of the claims set against this by the Unionist side is that, as people get older they become more conservative and that their support for independence will wane. This isn’t Paterson’s finding, which is that “if you look at people certainly born since the 1970s, there is no evidence at all that as they got older their support for independence has declined.”
On this basis, Paterson expects the current trend to produce a majority for independence above 60% within the next decade. Of course, these statistical trends are not the only game in town, and in particular how politics plays out will be an issue. For instance if Labour win the General Election, what will its relationship be to Holyrood? If it works to put it at a disadvantage (in order to increase Labour’s chances of success at the 2016 Holyrood election) how might the Scottish electorate react to this? If the sheen comes off a Westminster Labour government within its first two years, how might this influence a trend toward independence? Will Scotland be disappointed by a Starmer government which seems to be getting closer to the Tories every day – this morning the Telegraph reports that Rachel Reeves (Shadow Chancellor) has promised “no wealth tax”.
This morning the National also runs a report of a new SNP strategy proposed by such as Pete Wishart that if independence supporting parties achieve more than 50% of the vote and “if the UK Government does not “meaningfully engage” with the Scottish Government over negotiations within 90 days, MPs will be withdrawn from Westminster and a National Assembly will take forward the establishment of Scotland as an independent nation”.
Therefore developments (or in the case of Labour Party policy, non-development) such as this will influence when independence might take place. In particular, while I support the above strategy, of and by itself it will not achieve independence as if there are no negotiations there is something of an impasse. Either Scotland can accept political imprisonment or seize its independence by something like UDI, which may create problems with the international community and membership of international organizations such as the EU. It’s about politics as well as votes.
Perhaps the most encouraging thing – particularly just now – is that the fortunes of independence are not closely coupled to the fortunes of the SNP, which is being justified just now by support for independence remaining pretty constant, even as support for the SNP declines. None of this means we can expect independence to come in the post, but it does suggest that the trends are behind us.
ENDS
Alasdair Galloway
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
UDI need not create problems with the international community if it is done in the correct way. I refer to this as #ScottishUDI. It works because it does not confront the international community with a straightforward unilateral declaration of independence. The appeal is not for recognition of independence but of our right of self-determination.
The process involves using a plebiscitary election not as a referendum on independence but as a referendum on the power of the Scottish Parliament to authorise a constitutional referendum. With a significant vote in favour, the Scottish Government then proposes that the Scottish Parliament assert its competence in matters relating to the constitution of Scotland. It does so in order to facilitate the exercise of our right of self-determination – there being no other way it can happen. As confirmed by the British state.
This puts the British government on the back foot. It cannot deny that we have a right of self-determination as this would contradict a raft of statements. Any arguments the British might offer in a legal challenge would require it to say things it desperately doesn’t want to say.
At this point, the Scottish Government must hold its nerve. It is likely that the British will seek to regain control of the situation by offering a Section 30 referendum. THIS MUST NOT BE ACCEPTED.
All of this has been on the table for about three years now. None of our politicians have the imagination and courage to even look at it. A de facto independence referendum is a simple idea that can easily be fashioned into an election slogan. And that is all they are interested in.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Peter how I wish you were right, but the fact is that the UK is not the only state at risk of being broken up by nationalist movements. Belgium has been drifting apart most of my adult life. Even the French have had nationalist movements in their fringe regions, most notably Brittany.
But of course the region with the greatest momentum is Catalonia. This has two points of relevance. The first is that Spain will not want to be seen to be standing to one side if another part of another state seeks to break away. Pretty much the entire Spanish political spectrum holds this view from the PP right to the Socialist left. To be fair, there is little the Spanish could do directly to prevent our independence. I mean who cares if they withold recognition? Well we would if they took this forward into keeping Scotland out of international organizations that we want to join – such as perhaps the EU. Again there is a fairly consistent Spanish view – if Scottish independence is achieved by agreement with the rest of the UK they will do nothing, but I dont see this extending to UDI.
The second point of relevance is the reaction of the international community to the reaction of the Spanish state to the Catalan referendum in 2017. My recollection of even the EUs reaction which could have expelled Spain (membership of the EU brings ECHR obligations) was little more then “oh dear, tut tut”. Somehow i dont see them riding to our rescue either. As Craig Murray wrote after the Catalan vote, the independence movement needs to get its head round the fact that the UK would employ what he called the Madrid strategy of closing off all the legal routes to leaving the UK, which of course is what they did do.
My problem with what you suggest is that wm seems quite likely to ignore it all – “oh you’ve had a vote, how nice”, or declare the whole thing illegal. Indeed the Supreme Court has gone some of the way to doing exactly this already.
My own solution is to seek international support, allied to a programme of peaceful opposition (think Ghandi) to make Scotland as ungovernable as possible. If we are successful with the former, then a process might be internationally agreed leading to independence (do you believe the Good Friday Agreement was WM’s idea?). To the extent the latter is successful, WM might even be happy to see the back of us.
LikeLike
Absolutely, the SNP conference is going to be interesting and will potentially inform us and the party leadership of just how much unrest there is amongst my fellow SNP members.
LikeLike
It will be up to 60% long before 2030. It is over 50%+ now. 55%? Enough to win a Referendum. That is why the unionists are trying to stop a Referendum. The voters need to go out and vote for it. Vote for Independence supporting Parties to get rid of unionist opposition. Then there is no way to stop it.
Under International Law (UN) people can vote for self governance and self determination. When people vote for it by a higher turnout. Get out and vote for Independence supporting Parties and stop moaning, endlessly. It gets tedious. Use it or lose it.
Paterson states nonsense about the education system. Constantly. Using false figures. Not including mature students (over 21) in the figures. Life long learning.
States the obvious about Independence. Unionist Parties are so afraid of it. Afraid of losing Scottish revenues and resources. The Westminster corrupt, lying unionist cabal. Promoted above capabilities. The Tories the next ones to go. Scotland shielded by Devolution needs Independence.
LikeLike
I sympathise with your view about education. Scotland is hardly significantly more educated than most other countries. Much more than England which seems to be going in the opposite direction.
That said, I think he’s right about the development of independence views as time goes on. My parents generation were much less likely to support independence – for one thing had the UK not stood alone against the Nazis and won (leaving to one side US industry and the vast numbers of Russian dead). But this is a waning influence, increasingly of less influence, so the key thing from his argument is the difference in views between Scotland and the UK. Is Scotland really more liberal, more tolerant, and will such views survive old age?
In this regard, we have to observe the differences between the English electorate which while it recognises increasingly the bourach of Brexit, remains much more xenophobic than its Scottish counterpart which is very unlikely to elect a Conservative government any time, again unlike England. There is, it seems to me not just a gap or a difference between the two, but a growing one. i wonder for how much longer that can be accomodated without either an increasingly authoritarian action by WM in Scotland (something like what we have just now, just minus the subtlety:-) ) or independence, perhaps achieved if an existential crisis (eg Irish reunification) provokes the collapse of the UK. Even in Wales which voted with England on Brexit, c.35% support an independence referendum.
LikeLike
Devolution and the internet increased support for Independence. The facts and figures could be accessed more easily and shared. People power. Devolution helped protect Scotland from Westminster corruption and lies. Independence would be even better Scotland have more control over the economy, revenues and resources. To better affect than Westminster total incompetence and inequality prevailing. Westmibster lies keot secret under the Official Secrets Act (30 years) can now be exposed. For what they are. The ruination of the Scottish economy and society. Misusing Scottish resources and revenues. To benefit London S/E poor bad policies.
Too many people who support Independence vote for unionist parties. Or do not vote. The mystery is why they vote for unionist parties or do not vote when they support Independence. Then moan and complain when it does not happen. If they support it vote for it. By voting for Independence supporting Parties. A higher turnout. Every election. Instead of moaning and complaining. Especially about others.
LikeLike
Catalonia has more autonomy as a Provence if Spain. It can make its own Laws, raise taxes etc. Catalonia did not vote for a referendum. A low turnout. 40%. Or Independence, They have an increased say in the Spanish Parliament. A higher quota. 7.5million. 40million+ population. A contribution to help the poorer provinces. Catalonia one of the richest provinces. The hous8ng crash etc happened on the Costas. Catalonia required to make €4Billion contribution. Ended up not making it. 5million electorate. 1.5million did not have a vote. Eu citizens residents? They would have voted No? EU resident citizens in Spain not allowed to vote in GE or Referendum. Only allowed to vote in local elections and EU elections. A different demographics. Too different to compare without qualification. Scotland a country in a so called union with less rights and not being treated equally. Outvoted 10 to 1. Breaking Democracy and International Law.
LikeLike
One significant factor that those from the Pro UK side have difficulty in trying to counter is the one where the younger generation do not identify with and thus have an apathy with in that which is commonly refereed to as the supposed “shared history”….. which is something that is presented as a time when all citizens in all nations in their Britain supposedly unified …..especially in the example Pro UK individuals cite as in via the first and second World wars….the pro UK side rely very heavily on promoting those specific times as if definitive evidence and justification for the continuation of their (not so ) Great Britain surviving……yet they, funnily enough, neglect to give the same significance and unification message to the illegal war in Iraq …..which saw us dragged into a war that was not justified indeed one where a LABOUR PM lied to parliament and also to the citizens of his Britain (UK) …..and yet where that same now ex PM is given a prominent platform by the media to try to STILL manipulate and control what happens in his Britain (UK)….as is another EX PM Gordon Brown afforded this same prominent media platform…..who himself was also complicit during the time of the Iraq war as the British (UK) Chancellor…
Also now in what is recognised as a very much digital age we see younger people rely more on social media than traditional media for their information and communication….and although social media has been embraced as an alternate source for both MSM and political parties it is I think not , for younger people, a first or only option for them to rely upon….if at all…
The above are two factors that are perhaps reasons why independence as an option is higher now with the younger generation and going forward I think it will increase further, as an option, for them. Indeed most young people’s (bad) experience of being a part of Britain (UK) NOW sees them, as young people, suffering the same hardships as other generations do who are being (over) ruled by UK governments that have imposed policies that have had negative impacts on their lives …..Brexit for one…but not unique to ONLY Brexit as being a policy that has had a detrimental and significant effect for them in being a part of the fake country Britain (UK)….
The reliance for Tories upon SOME of the older generation consistently voting for them…..while simultanously neglecting to appeal to the younger generation will eventually greatly impact their success in subsequent elections …and I think in New New Labour adopting a more Tory like set of policies and rhetoric then they too will be discarded as an option for the younger generation in Scotland as a party that they, as young people, will vote for going forward…..
British patriotism is a switch that they try to turn on when it suits them as Pro UK parties….but that particular patriotism is always switched off when their own more dominant country within the UK , via sporting events and also on occasions where they confuse us with talk of THE country and THE nation when clearly they are speaking of ENGLAND alone , and where they celebrate their Englishness in any over promoted successes. In doing so they expose who they truly are and what and who they really represent ….as in England alone in their being English nationalists….and that is something that younger people in Scotland will definitely recognise as such and thus see through their hypocrisy ……having said all of the above about the younger generation I also recognise, like others , that there is also a few of the older generation who too see through the spin and spiel that they are subjected to via Pro UK parties and their media…….Britain is a fake country and the UK is very much a disunited state and too for some a KINGDOM that many would prefer to be a republic…..so what hope for THEM, as a state (a right state…. in more ways than one) and too as a Kingdom in lasting much longer when tis younger people who will ultimately decide their future…..and too the lack of future for Britain (UK) lasting…..disnae look good for the, Brits, does it ?
LikeLike
Not in the least surprised to see yet another article from the anti independence media using the same insidious trope as Dugdale and Corbyn. It’s not new, it’s the same rubbish nonsense used by westminster. When the time is right, when enough of you want this we’ll let you have another referendum, S30 included. Corbyn even went so far as to say that the PM shouldn’t be able to veto a referendum, which is telling you that as far as Corbyn is concerned the PM has the power to veto a referendum. It’s insidious and it should be called out for what it is, gaslighting.
What it isn’t and never will be is some kind of glacial movement towards acceptance of an independent, territorially intact, ancient nation state of Scotland.
They can’t afford to, the reparation due to Scotland for the unlawful breaches of the Treaty of Union, including the ‘ theft ‘ of our resources will be enormous and even part payment will only be achieved through the international courts and even then only if we have asserted our rights as a sovereign people and not as colonial subjects of the English crown. It’s not as if they haven’t explained this in detail to you, Gallagher and Boyle’s opinion, rubbish though it is, on the legal status of Scotland tells you clearly and emphatically just how they intend to treat Scotland after a Yes vote achieved under UK/English law.
It is therefore an imperative that the people of Scotland take back constitutional control.
LikeLike
All of those who are currently proclaiming the professor’s research, findings and views, need to take Occam’s razor to them. And in doing so you will find that it is no Damascene epiphany. Rather he simply maintains his hostility to Scottish independence from a different tack. His eloquent report could have been more simply written as:-
“Just hod on a wee bity, an you’ll possibly have an Independence majority of at least 60%, in at the very least a decade or a bit more”
Another unionist attempt to kick it down the road into the long grass.
By extending the time scale on what we already know to be a highly probable statistical situation. FAILED AGAIN BOYO’s, next contestant please.
LikeLike
Exactly! ‘Beware the wine of the Athenians.’
LikeLike