Indyref the 5th Anniversary; The Way Forward For Scotland's People Progress or Regress?
On the 18th of September 2014, I was part of something amazing In Scotland. I felt amazing. In the weeks leading up to the vote there was a festival atmosphere everywhere - the streets of Glasgow had people smiling, laughing, dancing and singing as if we were enjoying a permanent party. I had never seen anything like it before in my entire life.
It was a political awakening for many of us in Scotland. And I will never forget it.
And yet, the 5 year anniversary of this meaningful movement came and went, and I, well I had nothing to say on it. I didn't look back at the day with any reverence, or optimism, or hope. To be honest, I didn't look back at it at all.
What happened in those 5 years to change me from one of the most yessiest yessers you'd ever meet (as most people who met or knew me in 2014 can attest) to someone so apathetic about it?
Well, the YES movement changed, or maybe I did, or maybe both of us did. Honestly, I'm not quite sure.
In 2014 we all stood together as one group with one common goal- we wanted an independent Scotland.
But what does that mean exactly? What did it mean in 2014? and what does it mean now?
I know that we all have our different ideas on what YES meant, and on what independence is, who it's for and why it's necessary. But I believed the common goal we stood together for was the common good.
In 2014 I saw us as a movement that championed the underdog: the working people, the communities, the marginalised, the oppressed, the poor, the disabled, the BAME, the LGBTQ+ and all the people who are affected by inequality.
I believed what we stood together for was to fight for the power to empower people. I never believed YES was about independence for its own sake. When I crossed the YES box on that ballot paper with zero hesitation in my mind, all of these people are who I crossed it for.
I believed then, as I do now, that YES and independence meant we want a Scotland which best fitted with who we are as people - the champion of the underdog.
And yet, I now feel that is exactly what at least some in the YES movement appear to be actively fighting against.
I have discussed this a lot online in the last few years, I've had a lot of replies and comments when I do - many of which are abusive and many of which nod in agreement - but this one comment from a few weeks ago stuck with me because of how problematic it is,
"yes is suffering from minority interest groups doing their level best to make the whole independence debate about them. It isn't top of most folks list of concerns".
Forgive me for my possible naivety here, but, I thought the yes movement which I was a part of in 2014 was precisely about people.
I thought it was precisely about the inequalities and challenges those group people face in a Scotland which, at the time, had almost no power to change.
I never thought the YES movement was "suffering" anyone. I thought it was for everyone; the people in our communities, the neighbours in our closes, the kids in our schools, the people who are affected by inequalities, the marginalised, the disenfranchised, the minorities.
I truly believed those people and their experiences were the "top concern" of YES in 2014.
Personally, I feel this comment dehumanises and villainises people in a way that the YES of 2014 would be ashamed by. It categorises thousands of individual and marginalised people as some kind of organised reprobates out to harm the movement. And, in no uncertain terms, it says that they are people who are easily pushed to the back of people's minds for other "concerns".
This says people are an inconvenience and challenge to the YES movement rather than the focus and center of the YES movement.
As I said, I have had lots of these discussions online, and a few people have echoed this sentiment, that somehow the YES movement should only focus on 'independence' and all other people and all other goals are considered a distraction or inconvenience,
"Nothing should be more important to the Scottish independence movement than achieving independence for Scotland"
"Movements pursuing an aim shouldn't get distracted from it".
In a recent article on Common Space by Robin McAlpine I was surprised to see what appears to be this sentiment echoed.
The comment in this article which stood out for me was Robin stating "...endless series of reasons why some proxy must be the focus before the ultimate goal can be pursued"
I feel it's important to ask, what are these proxies Robin talks of? or rather, who are these proxies? They are, after all, human beings. That is what we are talking about, isn't it? Human beings lives, experiences and the ways in which society marginalises them?
To my mind, people, their marginalisation, inequalities and oppression are not 'proxies' to any 'ultimate goal', they are the ultimate goal (for lack of a better description). Bettering the lives of people is what I voted yes for, it's what I believe we were told voting yes would achieve, that is the ultimate goal. And we can begin to achieve this goal right now. We don't have to have independence to do that.
If the YES movement is such a 'broad church' - as is constantly said to remind us how many different views and goals we have - then surely it should be representative of and listening to all of those people and their views and goals?
How can any movement profess to be about the people if it only represents a small section of those people in it, and actively excludes those who aren't represented by way of dehumanisation, alienation, villinasation and being considered 'distractions' or 'proxies'?
Independence for Scotland absolutely cannot be about oil, or money, or a new bank, or powers over benefits, or tax without UK government interference, or the economy.
These things are not people.
They are important, but they are not people.
If independence is not about people, what is it about?
Any movement for independence has to be about ensuring the people in Scotland have a better life. And sure, financial security is an important aspect of that, but it's not the fundamental aspect of YES or independence. At least I didn't believe it was.
Out of all of the comments I've quoted, I'm disappointed to see Robin say something like this, something which effectively reduces human beings to things in the way of some perceived 'ultimate end goal' - presumably independence.
Should those within the YES movement, like Robin McAlpine - who have both prominence and a platform - not be using those privileges to speak out against such comments, rather than being seen to echo them?
In 2014, the YES movement made me feel that I was part of a countrywide fight against regressive politics. A fight against a right-wing ideology which was making a comeback pushing its way back into our lives and society, and against the dehumanisation of human beings - whether in any marginalised or minority group or not.
Whether we are or are not a member of any marginalised group we should be standing in solidarity with them. I am not a person of colour, but I stand with them, I am not a trans or non-binary person, but I stand with them.
That is what any left movement has to be, people in different groups standing together, fighting together. It has to be intersectional, it has to be aware of and concerned with the oppressions and inequalities other groups face, right now. That is, in my view, a core difference between left ideology and right ideology. Left ideology cares about other people outside of their own clique. Left ideology centers those people in any discussion, in any campaign, in any activism, it listens to those people.
You may not be able to fully understand their oppressions, but you can stand in solidarity beside them as they fight. And you can certainly fight alongside them. Because we are all fighting the same fight, just at different angles, imagine if we all fought from one?
More importantly, we should stand in solidarity with them because we care about them, whether we are or are not in their group, that is what it is to be left. Compassion and empathy for all in the extended community. This is what I have believed being left to mean.
Not being affected by a specific inequality or oppression is not a good enough reason for anyone who holds left values to either stay out of the fight or, worse yet, stand directly in the way of it.
YES was once said to be a "peaceful revolution" (*see video at end). And what is a revolution for? banks? taxes? No! A revolution is for the people by the people. People are the fundamental aspect of any movement; not the ideology itself, but an ideology put into practice by people for people.
Where do we stand on that right now? What ideology for and by people is being put into practice in regard to yes? 'And then' seems to be the current YES campaign's only promise.
The people have taken a back seat to an idea. An idea which appears to be in an independent Scotland 'and then' we can 'fix the rest afterwards'.
In a way I believed 'and then' myself in 2014, because at the time I didn't understand, I didn't see - maybe didn't want to see - the problems within the left and within the YES movement itself.
However, I don't recall 'indy first then you LGBT lot, and BAME lot, and women will get what you want, just pipe down and focus on the goal' being promoted as a slogan in 2014.
Does it sound like a catchy people pleaser?
No, it doesn't.
Because it's not.
It's not a catchy slogan, because it's a terrible position.
And it's not remotely encouraging for anyone who lives with inequalities right now; anyone who doesn't have the privileges and luxuries enabling them to push inequalities and oppressions they experience aside for this one main goal.
If we care about an independent Scotland we have to care about what that means.
Let's 'fix all this after indy' is therefore meaningless, because those issues are indy. Those people are indy.
Otherwise, what are we fighting for but a bit of land with a bit of paper saying 'mine' and some tax powers to boot? And that was never what I was fighting for. What about you?
Not being affected by a specific inequality or oppression is a privilege that can and should be used to the benefit of those marginalised groups.
Those who have had a prominent voice, a platform and privilege who have not been speaking up and calling out the hate, abuse and bigotry from within the YES movement, in my view, either need to speak up now , or move aside so that those who can, will take over and succeed where they have failed.
And it is a failure. They have failed YES, they have failed those of us who gave our time, our energy and our heart to YES, they have failed every person who has been targeted with abuse and harassment by anyone within the YES movent, they have failed those marginalised people. Every group and every individual with little power and little voice have been failed.
Let's be clear here, this isn't just about trans and non-binary people's rights, it's not just about the GRA, it's not just about LGBTQ+, It's not just about misogyny.
This is about the very heart and soul of YES.
This is about what the YES movement was, who it was for and its shared values and shared goals; the common good.
This is about human beings who need and deserve progressive and inclusive change.
I believed this in 2014. I still believe it now.
If we cannot extend our movement, our activism, our compassion, empathy and solidarity to other people, to minority groups, to those who don't have the luxury of waiting for indy 'and then' but need change now, what the hell are we actually fighting for?
Scotland "is not a place, never was" - for any of you other marvel fans out there!
The people make Scotland what it is. The very quote "people make Glasgow" (*see photo below - photograph my own) is literally what this means, that Glasgow isn't a city at all without the people.
If we want to have a truly progressive Scotland, we have to have truly progressive Scots. These two things are interdependent. One cannot exist without the other.
People make Scotland what it is. If we have racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, that is what our 'progressive' Scotland will look like - independence or not.
The vision we have for our independent Scotland not only has to include people, it has to center people. People have to be the ultimate goal.
Fighting for indy literally means fighting for the Scottish people, fighting for all who have chosen Scotland as their home, this means immigrants, it means LGBTQ+ it means, it means BAME, it means women, it means EVERYONE.
ALL of us first, remember?
Not independence first
Not one group at a time
All of us first
Is that just a slogan too?
Or is it an ideology that needs to be put into practice.
Solidarity with every group at every time, that's what I take from all of us first, not selective solidarity when you can be bothered and when you got what you wanted.
That's not how solidarity works
And in any case, surely standing together, fighting together with minority groups strengthens not only the case for the left, not only the case for YES, but the fight itself, for independence. Strength in numbers. Any independence movement in the future has to be an intersectional movement for all of these reasons, in my view.
Without the people in all these groups, there is no 'YES movement'. Those people are yes.
This is on us. Every single one of us. Some of us have more privilege, some of us have more opportunities, some of us have less, but we have to work together to make the progressive Scotland we have talked about for the last 5 years.
YES proclaimed itself to be for hope, for people, for equality for all. Yes centered people, the heart and soul of YES were human beings. Not an economic ideology.
YES of 2014 was a truly inspirational movement, the people championed and expressed hope, inclusivity, tolerance.
YES stood up against oppression and inequality which affected ALL groups, it was brave, it was admirable and it was the right thing to do.
The song below, to me, was not a song about the economy; it wasn't a song about independence for its own sake, or independence as an end goal. It was a song about someone telling their son they voted yes for him, for all the people around who needed a better life.
This is the sentiment we should be carrying over into the next Scottish independence movement.
TL;DR
It may be hard to understand how and why someone can be pushed and alienated so far from a movement they once felt was home.
But its really quite simple,
Some people within that movement are unwelcoming and alienating.
Ultimately, I don't recognise the YES of 2019 as the same YES of 2014. This is why I felt nothing on the 5th anniversary.
However,
I truly believe a majority of people do center human beings in the YES movement, I believe the majority of people do care about people outside of their group, people who are marginalised and oppressed. And I believe there is a way forward for YES, if those prominent voices would champion the underdog, if they would center people, rather than ideas.
I understand how difficult this all is, I remember how hard it was when we lost in 2014 and I know how much we need change and progress. But, I'm also very conscious of the fact that everything happening now affects people, it happens to people. And it's happening now.
We cannot continue to push marginalised people even further into the margins because we would prefer to focus on one thing at a time, our own thing.
These are real human beings, I feel sometimes it's easy to forget this when we are so busy fighting our own inequalities, surviving our own lives and focusing on our own goals. But this should be the focus of anything we do, that we do it for people. For every kind of person from every kind of group 'and then' we can focus on fighting and winning independence, and we could do it far more effectively by standing in solidarity, standing together;
as we did in 2014.
I wrote this wee poem last year
I will leave you with two simple questions: what does independence mean to you? What do you believe in?
It was a political awakening for many of us in Scotland. And I will never forget it.
And yet, the 5 year anniversary of this meaningful movement came and went, and I, well I had nothing to say on it. I didn't look back at the day with any reverence, or optimism, or hope. To be honest, I didn't look back at it at all.
What happened in those 5 years to change me from one of the most yessiest yessers you'd ever meet (as most people who met or knew me in 2014 can attest) to someone so apathetic about it?
Well, the YES movement changed, or maybe I did, or maybe both of us did. Honestly, I'm not quite sure.
In 2014 we all stood together as one group with one common goal- we wanted an independent Scotland.
But what does that mean exactly? What did it mean in 2014? and what does it mean now?
I know that we all have our different ideas on what YES meant, and on what independence is, who it's for and why it's necessary. But I believed the common goal we stood together for was the common good.
In 2014 I saw us as a movement that championed the underdog: the working people, the communities, the marginalised, the oppressed, the poor, the disabled, the BAME, the LGBTQ+ and all the people who are affected by inequality.
I believed what we stood together for was to fight for the power to empower people. I never believed YES was about independence for its own sake. When I crossed the YES box on that ballot paper with zero hesitation in my mind, all of these people are who I crossed it for.
I believed then, as I do now, that YES and independence meant we want a Scotland which best fitted with who we are as people - the champion of the underdog.
And yet, I now feel that is exactly what at least some in the YES movement appear to be actively fighting against.
I have discussed this a lot online in the last few years, I've had a lot of replies and comments when I do - many of which are abusive and many of which nod in agreement - but this one comment from a few weeks ago stuck with me because of how problematic it is,
"yes is suffering from minority interest groups doing their level best to make the whole independence debate about them. It isn't top of most folks list of concerns".
Forgive me for my possible naivety here, but, I thought the yes movement which I was a part of in 2014 was precisely about people.
I thought it was precisely about the inequalities and challenges those group people face in a Scotland which, at the time, had almost no power to change.
I never thought the YES movement was "suffering" anyone. I thought it was for everyone; the people in our communities, the neighbours in our closes, the kids in our schools, the people who are affected by inequalities, the marginalised, the disenfranchised, the minorities.
I truly believed those people and their experiences were the "top concern" of YES in 2014.
Personally, I feel this comment dehumanises and villainises people in a way that the YES of 2014 would be ashamed by. It categorises thousands of individual and marginalised people as some kind of organised reprobates out to harm the movement. And, in no uncertain terms, it says that they are people who are easily pushed to the back of people's minds for other "concerns".
This says people are an inconvenience and challenge to the YES movement rather than the focus and center of the YES movement.
As I said, I have had lots of these discussions online, and a few people have echoed this sentiment, that somehow the YES movement should only focus on 'independence' and all other people and all other goals are considered a distraction or inconvenience,
"Nothing should be more important to the Scottish independence movement than achieving independence for Scotland"
"Movements pursuing an aim shouldn't get distracted from it".
In a recent article on Common Space by Robin McAlpine I was surprised to see what appears to be this sentiment echoed.
The comment in this article which stood out for me was Robin stating "...endless series of reasons why some proxy must be the focus before the ultimate goal can be pursued"
I feel it's important to ask, what are these proxies Robin talks of? or rather, who are these proxies? They are, after all, human beings. That is what we are talking about, isn't it? Human beings lives, experiences and the ways in which society marginalises them?
To my mind, people, their marginalisation, inequalities and oppression are not 'proxies' to any 'ultimate goal', they are the ultimate goal (for lack of a better description). Bettering the lives of people is what I voted yes for, it's what I believe we were told voting yes would achieve, that is the ultimate goal. And we can begin to achieve this goal right now. We don't have to have independence to do that.
If the YES movement is such a 'broad church' - as is constantly said to remind us how many different views and goals we have - then surely it should be representative of and listening to all of those people and their views and goals?
How can any movement profess to be about the people if it only represents a small section of those people in it, and actively excludes those who aren't represented by way of dehumanisation, alienation, villinasation and being considered 'distractions' or 'proxies'?
Independence for Scotland absolutely cannot be about oil, or money, or a new bank, or powers over benefits, or tax without UK government interference, or the economy.
These things are not people.
They are important, but they are not people.
If independence is not about people, what is it about?
Any movement for independence has to be about ensuring the people in Scotland have a better life. And sure, financial security is an important aspect of that, but it's not the fundamental aspect of YES or independence. At least I didn't believe it was.
Out of all of the comments I've quoted, I'm disappointed to see Robin say something like this, something which effectively reduces human beings to things in the way of some perceived 'ultimate end goal' - presumably independence.
Should those within the YES movement, like Robin McAlpine - who have both prominence and a platform - not be using those privileges to speak out against such comments, rather than being seen to echo them?
In 2014, the YES movement made me feel that I was part of a countrywide fight against regressive politics. A fight against a right-wing ideology which was making a comeback pushing its way back into our lives and society, and against the dehumanisation of human beings - whether in any marginalised or minority group or not.
Whether we are or are not a member of any marginalised group we should be standing in solidarity with them. I am not a person of colour, but I stand with them, I am not a trans or non-binary person, but I stand with them.
That is what any left movement has to be, people in different groups standing together, fighting together. It has to be intersectional, it has to be aware of and concerned with the oppressions and inequalities other groups face, right now. That is, in my view, a core difference between left ideology and right ideology. Left ideology cares about other people outside of their own clique. Left ideology centers those people in any discussion, in any campaign, in any activism, it listens to those people.
You may not be able to fully understand their oppressions, but you can stand in solidarity beside them as they fight. And you can certainly fight alongside them. Because we are all fighting the same fight, just at different angles, imagine if we all fought from one?
More importantly, we should stand in solidarity with them because we care about them, whether we are or are not in their group, that is what it is to be left. Compassion and empathy for all in the extended community. This is what I have believed being left to mean.
Not being affected by a specific inequality or oppression is not a good enough reason for anyone who holds left values to either stay out of the fight or, worse yet, stand directly in the way of it.
YES was once said to be a "peaceful revolution" (*see video at end). And what is a revolution for? banks? taxes? No! A revolution is for the people by the people. People are the fundamental aspect of any movement; not the ideology itself, but an ideology put into practice by people for people.
Where do we stand on that right now? What ideology for and by people is being put into practice in regard to yes? 'And then' seems to be the current YES campaign's only promise.
The people have taken a back seat to an idea. An idea which appears to be in an independent Scotland 'and then' we can 'fix the rest afterwards'.
In a way I believed 'and then' myself in 2014, because at the time I didn't understand, I didn't see - maybe didn't want to see - the problems within the left and within the YES movement itself.
However, I don't recall 'indy first then you LGBT lot, and BAME lot, and women will get what you want, just pipe down and focus on the goal' being promoted as a slogan in 2014.
Does it sound like a catchy people pleaser?
No, it doesn't.
Because it's not.
And it's not remotely encouraging for anyone who lives with inequalities right now; anyone who doesn't have the privileges and luxuries enabling them to push inequalities and oppressions they experience aside for this one main goal.
Let's 'fix all this after indy' is therefore meaningless, because those issues are indy. Those people are indy.
Otherwise, what are we fighting for but a bit of land with a bit of paper saying 'mine' and some tax powers to boot? And that was never what I was fighting for. What about you?
Not being affected by a specific inequality or oppression is a privilege that can and should be used to the benefit of those marginalised groups.
Those who have had a prominent voice, a platform and privilege who have not been speaking up and calling out the hate, abuse and bigotry from within the YES movement, in my view, either need to speak up now , or move aside so that those who can, will take over and succeed where they have failed.
And it is a failure. They have failed YES, they have failed those of us who gave our time, our energy and our heart to YES, they have failed every person who has been targeted with abuse and harassment by anyone within the YES movent, they have failed those marginalised people. Every group and every individual with little power and little voice have been failed.
Let's be clear here, this isn't just about trans and non-binary people's rights, it's not just about the GRA, it's not just about LGBTQ+, It's not just about misogyny.
This is about the very heart and soul of YES.
This is about what the YES movement was, who it was for and its shared values and shared goals; the common good.
This is about human beings who need and deserve progressive and inclusive change.
I believed this in 2014. I still believe it now.
If we cannot extend our movement, our activism, our compassion, empathy and solidarity to other people, to minority groups, to those who don't have the luxury of waiting for indy 'and then' but need change now, what the hell are we actually fighting for?
Scotland "is not a place, never was" - for any of you other marvel fans out there!
The people make Scotland what it is. The very quote "people make Glasgow" (*see photo below - photograph my own) is literally what this means, that Glasgow isn't a city at all without the people.
If we want to have a truly progressive Scotland, we have to have truly progressive Scots. These two things are interdependent. One cannot exist without the other.
People make Scotland what it is. If we have racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, that is what our 'progressive' Scotland will look like - independence or not.
The vision we have for our independent Scotland not only has to include people, it has to center people. People have to be the ultimate goal.
Fighting for indy literally means fighting for the Scottish people, fighting for all who have chosen Scotland as their home, this means immigrants, it means LGBTQ+ it means, it means BAME, it means women, it means EVERYONE.
ALL of us first, remember?
Not independence first
Not one group at a time
All of us first
Is that just a slogan too?
Or is it an ideology that needs to be put into practice.
Solidarity with every group at every time, that's what I take from all of us first, not selective solidarity when you can be bothered and when you got what you wanted.
That's not how solidarity works
And in any case, surely standing together, fighting together with minority groups strengthens not only the case for the left, not only the case for YES, but the fight itself, for independence. Strength in numbers. Any independence movement in the future has to be an intersectional movement for all of these reasons, in my view.
Without the people in all these groups, there is no 'YES movement'. Those people are yes.
This is on us. Every single one of us. Some of us have more privilege, some of us have more opportunities, some of us have less, but we have to work together to make the progressive Scotland we have talked about for the last 5 years.
YES proclaimed itself to be for hope, for people, for equality for all. Yes centered people, the heart and soul of YES were human beings. Not an economic ideology.
YES of 2014 was a truly inspirational movement, the people championed and expressed hope, inclusivity, tolerance.
YES stood up against oppression and inequality which affected ALL groups, it was brave, it was admirable and it was the right thing to do.
The song below, to me, was not a song about the economy; it wasn't a song about independence for its own sake, or independence as an end goal. It was a song about someone telling their son they voted yes for him, for all the people around who needed a better life.
This is the sentiment we should be carrying over into the next Scottish independence movement.
TL;DR
It may be hard to understand how and why someone can be pushed and alienated so far from a movement they once felt was home.
But its really quite simple,
Some people within that movement are unwelcoming and alienating.
Ultimately, I don't recognise the YES of 2019 as the same YES of 2014. This is why I felt nothing on the 5th anniversary.
However,
I truly believe a majority of people do center human beings in the YES movement, I believe the majority of people do care about people outside of their group, people who are marginalised and oppressed. And I believe there is a way forward for YES, if those prominent voices would champion the underdog, if they would center people, rather than ideas.
I understand how difficult this all is, I remember how hard it was when we lost in 2014 and I know how much we need change and progress. But, I'm also very conscious of the fact that everything happening now affects people, it happens to people. And it's happening now.
We cannot continue to push marginalised people even further into the margins because we would prefer to focus on one thing at a time, our own thing.
These are real human beings, I feel sometimes it's easy to forget this when we are so busy fighting our own inequalities, surviving our own lives and focusing on our own goals. But this should be the focus of anything we do, that we do it for people. For every kind of person from every kind of group 'and then' we can focus on fighting and winning independence, and we could do it far more effectively by standing in solidarity, standing together;
as we did in 2014.
I wrote this wee poem last year
I will leave you with two simple questions: what does independence mean to you? What do you believe in?
Comments
Post a Comment