Allan Massie: Beware resorting to scoundrelly patriotism

According to Dr Johnson, Cameron and Salmond may be 'scoundrels.' Picture: PA

Published on Wednesday 8 February 2012 12:28

Both sides of the referendum debate would do well to heed the good doctor’s famous warning, writes Allan Massie

Dr JOHNSON’S observation that “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” is often quoted and almost as often misunderstood. Johnson was not decrying patriotism itself. That would have been ridiculous. He was a proud Englishman who loved his country. What he deplored was the tendency of politicians to stir up patriotic feeling for their own ends. When all else failed for a scoundrelly politician, he could always fall back on patriotism, and abuse his opponents for their lack of it. As a 20th-century politician put it: “Anyone who interferes with the mission of a man who feels it his duty to assume the leadership of the people is an enemy of the people.” To oppose the patriotic leader was therefore unpatriotic, or, as the scoundrelly speaker – Adolf Hitler – might have put it, anti-German.

It is the action of a scoundrel to claim a monopoly of patriotism for himself, his own party and those who share his views. The SNP is by its nature a patriotic party but it has not – so far – claimed a monopoly on patriotic feeling.. Its reason for existence is the belief that Scotland is a nation which should govern itself as an independent state. For most of its history, this was the view of only a small minority of Scots, most of us being content with our membership of the United Kingdom. Nevertheless the SNP doggedly argued its case, and did so in restrained and moderate language. Scottish nationalism has been unusual and admirable in its refusal to countenance violent action. Partly because of this restraint, partly because it has made the argument for independence in a calm manner, appealing more to reason than emotion, it has gradually attracted support in ever-greater numbers, and may secure a majority at the referendum on independence.

It is already in office and in power at Holyrood. The majority secured last May offers the opportunity to demonstrate its competence in government, and, by doing so, to attract more support. To demonstrate competence does, however, require ministers to concentrate on the business of government, which is administration, rather than spending their time engaged in a non-stop referendum campaign.

This is the first danger for the SNP: that they will neglect their administrative duties and put off desirable measures, which might be unpopular in the short term, in favour of the perpetual campaign. The second danger is that they fall victim to the common malady of power, which is arrogance and intolerance of opposition. This danger is particularly acute in the present circumstances, and we have already seen disturbing signs. When a minister or MSP accuses political opponents of being “anti-Scottish”, we hear the tone of the scoundrel patriot.

There is a division of opinion and a division of sentiment in Scotland today.

Nationalists believe that independence is in Scotland’s best interests. Unionists believe that, for a variety of reasons, many of which were set out by George Robertson in this newspaper yesterday, it is in our best interests to remain part of the United Kingdom. The debate about “interests” is about practical questions. It is not an easy debate, and it is not one which will lead to conclusive answers. This must always be the case when an argument is concerned with things as they are now on the one hand, and things as they might be on the other. Nevertheless, it is an argument which it should be possible to conduct in a calm and rational manner.

The division of sentiment is clear, at the margins anyway. On the one hand there are Scots who have disengaged themselves emotionally from the United Kingdom and acknowledge no British identity. On the other hand there are Scots who are comfortable with a dual Scottish-British identity. At certain times they are vigorously Scottish, for Unionism has, and has always had, its own nationalistic strain; yet they remain happy to identify themselves as British too, and experience no sense of the two loyalties being incompatible. They recognise that, for more than three centuries now, Scottish history has been part of British history , and British history has itself been Scottish. Neither side has a monopoly of patriotism and only a scoundrel can pretend otherwise. A scoundrelly Unionist, believing that independence is not in the interest of Scotland or the Scottish people, might claim that – “objectively”, as the Marxists used to say – the SNP was anti-Scottish. This would be absurd and offensive, but it is no less absurd and offensive for scoundrelly nationalists to condemn anyone who disagrees with them, or voices doubts about their policies, as anti-Scottish.

At present almost all the inflammatory language is coming from the nationalist side. It’s true that they complain when Unionists call them separatists and speak of separatism, and one understands why they object to these terms, even if it may fairly be argued that the achievement of independence would indeed separate Scotland from the other constituent parts of the present United Kingdom, just as the Republic of Ireland is a separate state. Nevertheless Unionists have mostly been restrained in their language. It is nationalists who have been accusing their opponents of being anti-Scottish and who have been throwing around words like Quisling and Gauleiter that recall the Nazi era. Smearing opponents in his way is distasteful. The SNP would do well to watch their language, and not only because the atmosphere in the country will be intolerable if the referendum campaign turns bitter; not only, either, because such bitterness will breed a resentment which would continue to fester in an independent Scotland. They should guard their tongues because it is in their interest to do so. The more they play the patriotic card and denounce their opponents for their anti-Scottish lack of patriotism, the more scoundrelly they appear, and the more likely to fail to win the support of the moderate and presently uncommitted which they need if they are to win the referendum.

Join the debate. A Question of Independence: How will the referendum work?, 9th March Edinburgh.

Book now for a highly charged and thought provoking event.

Comments

There are 81 comments to this article

Order by:

Page 1 of 6

1
2
3
4
5
6
Next >
Show all

stellarbluesky

Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Allan Massie - I regret the lateness of this entry to the 'debate' prompted by your excellent article - a debate apparently dominated by about half a dozen SNP zealots. May I simply compliment you on your even-handed, articulate attempt to bring a degree of objectivity and, frankly, sanity to a subject which is of such important, far-reaching consequence for all of us as Scottish people - and more vitally - for our Scottish children, grandchildren and indeed all our descendants.

Allan Massie: Beware resorting to scoundrelly patriotism

Comments

stellarbluesky

samcoldstream

neoloon

JPJ2

allymax

amicus alba

footdee

footdee

footdee

footdee

Kinghob

allymax

Ron Greer

Ron Greer

amicus alba

Your view

Top stories

News

Looking for...

Featured advertisers

Jobs

Search for a job

Motors

Search for a car

Property

Search for a house

Weather for Edinburgh

Home

Services & Offers

Send to a friend

Report

Weather for Edinburgh